Skip to main content

Full text of "The expositor's Greek Testament;"

See other formats


Copy \ 


> J ^ 2 8 1327' 



























VOL. iL 


The Author of the Book. Whoever wrote the Acts wrote 
also the Gospel which bears the name of St. Luke. We find 
writers far removed in standpoint from each other, e.g., H. 
Holtzmann, Einleitung 3 , p. 391, and Zockler, Gr elf sw alder Studieu, 
p. 128, agreeing in this conviction, and appealing to the same work, 
Friedrich's Das Lukas Evangelium und die Apostelgeschichte, Werke 
desselben Verfassers (1890; see commentary), in support of it. In 
recent years the philologist Gercke seems to be almost the only 
convert to the opposite view who, with Sorof, regards the author 
of Acts as the reviser of the Scim-pos \6yos of Luke ; but his efforts in 
promulgating his views cannot be said to have met with any success 
(see Zockler, u. s. ; Theologische Rundschau, pp. 50, 129: 1899: and 
Wendt, Apostelgeschichte, p. 4, 1899). 

Friedrich's pamphlet, which contains a useful summary of the 
whole evidence on the subject, much of which had been previously 
collected by Zeller and Lekebusch (although their readings, like those 
too of Friedrich, sometimes require careful testing), gives instances 
of language, style, and treatment of various subjects which place the 
identity of authorship beyond reasonable doubt (see instances noted 
in commentary). 1 At the same time it would be misleading to say 
that recent critics have been unmindful of the linguistic differences 
which the two books present, although a candid examination shows 
that these differences are comparatively slight (cf. Hawkins, Horce 
Synopticcz, p. 140; Zahn, Einleitung, ii., p. 381, 1899). In earlier 
days Zeller had not lost sight of those peculiarities which are 
entirely linguistic, and he maintains that they are not of a nature 
to prove anything against the same origin of the two writings, Acts, 
vol. ii., p. 243, E.T. 

1 Amongst recent writers, Blass, in his Index ii., Acta Apostolorum, marks 
fifty-six words as peculiar to St. Luke's Gospel and the Acts ; cf. also the list 
in Plummer's St. Luke, Hi., liii. The instances of words and phrases characteristic 
of St. Luke's Gospel in Sir J. Hawkins' Horce Synopticce, 1899, pp. 29-41, will enable 
any one to see at a glance by the references how far such words and phrases are 
also characteristic of, or peculiar to, Acts ■ see also in commentary. 


Who is the early Christian writer thus able to give us not only 
such an account of the Life of our Lord that Renan could describe 
it as the most beautiful book in the world (Les Evangiles, p. 283), 
but also an account of the origines of the Christian Church which 
Jiilicher regards as an ideal Church history, Einleitung, p. 270, 
and of which Blass could write " hunc libellum non modo inter 
omnes Novi T. optima compositione uti, sed etiam earn artem mon- 
strare, quae Graeco Romanove scriptore rerum non indigna sit"? 
One thing seems certain, that the writer, whoever he was, represents 
himself in four passages, xvi. 10-17, xx. 5-15, xxi. 1-18, xxvii. 1-xxviii. 
16 inclusive, cf. also Acts xi. 28, Codex D (on which see below, and in 
loco), as a companion of St. Paul. If we examine the phraseology 
of these sections (ninety-seven verses in all), we find that it is in 
many respects common to that employed in the rest of the book 
(Klostermann, Vindicice Lucance, p. 46 ff. ; Nosgen, Apostelge- 
schichte, pp. 15, 16; Blass, Acta Apostolorum, p. 10; Vogel, Zur 
Charakteristik des Lukas nach Sprache und Stil, p. 41 ; Hawkins, 
u. s., p. 149; Spitta, Apostelgeschichte, pp. 235, 257). 1 

Those who deny this identity of authorship are not only obliged 
to face the difficulty of accounting for this similarity of style and 
language, but also to account for the introduction of the " We " 
sections at all. If the writer of the rest of the book had wished to 
palm himself off at a later period as a companion of St. Paul, he 
would scarcely have sought to accomplish this on the strength of the 
insertion of these sections alone, as they stand. It may be fairly 
urged that he would at least have adopted one of the unmistakable 

1 Sir J. Hawkins not only gives us, p. 151, seventeen words and phrases 
found only in the " We " sections and in the rest of Acts ; twenty-seven words 
and phrases found in the "We" sections and Luke, with or without the rest 
of Acts also; thirty-seven words and phrases found in the "We" sections, and 
also used predominantly, though not exclusively, in the rest of Acts or Luke or 
either of them; but he remarks that out of the eighty-six Matthaean words and 
phrases, ten, or rather less than one eighth occur in the " We " sections ; out of the 
thirty-seven Marcan words and phrases, six, or about one sixth; out of the 140 
Lucan words and phrases, less than one third, p. 14, ff. : " Is it not utterly impos- 
sible," he asks, p. 150, " that the language of the original writer of the ' We ' sections 
should have chanced to have so very many more correspondences with the language 
of the subsequent compiler than with that of Matthew or Mark ? " The expressions 
peculiar to the " We " sections are for the most part fairly accounted for by the 
subject-matter, p. 153, e.g., tv(h>, KaT<ryco-0ai,, -rrXoos, viiroirXeta. 
Part iii., C, Section iv., of the same book should also be consulted where the identity 
of the third Synoptist with a friend and companion of St. Paul is further confirmed 
by the similarities between his Gospel and St. Paul's Epistles. 


methods of which a Thucydides, a Polybius, a Josephus availed 
themselves to make their personal relation to the facts narrated 
known to their readers (Zahn, Einleitung, ii., pp. 387, 426, 435). 

This unknown author of Acts, moreover, whoever he was, was a 
man of such literary skill that he was able to assimilate the " We " 
sections to the rest of his book, and to introduce cross references 
from them to other parts of his work, e.g., xxi. 8 and vi. 5 ; and yet, 
with all this, he is so deficient in literary taste as to allow the first 
person plural in the " We " sections to remain, a blunder avoidable by 
a stroke of his pen. 

The German philologist, Vogel, who cannot be accused of speaking 
with a theological bias, states the common-sense view of the matter 
in pointing out that when an author of such literary skill as the 
author of Acts undoubtedly possessed passes without a break from 
the third to the first person in his narrative, every unprejudiced 
reader will explain it on the ground that the author thus wished 
modestly to intimate his own personal presence during certain events. 
This is the one natural explanation, and to this Vogel determines to 
adhere, until it is shown to be untenable ; and he justly pours ridicule 
upon the notion that the author of Acts would have interwoven into 
a work .written in such a delicate and finished style the travel-diary 
of some other person without altering the pronouns (Charakteristik 
des Lukas nach Sprache und Stil, pp. 12, 13). 

If we are asked to believe that this first person plural was intro- 
duced from time to time merely for the purpose of giving an air of 
verisimilitude to the narrative (or in imitation of certain passages 
in Ezra and Nehemiah, or Tobit), 1 why should we not find it in the 
account, e.g., of St. Peter's escape from prison, chap, xii., where 
Wendt maintains that the author probably had possession of a 
narrative full of details, derived probably from John Mark himself ? 
There can be no doubt that the " We " sections are introduced for 
the definite purpose of marking the writer's presence with St. Paul ; 
we cannot, e.g., conclude that there is any other reason for the circum- 
stance that the " We " section of chap. xvi. breaks off at Philippi, 
and that the following " We " section, chap, xx., commences again 
at Philippi. But if this is so, how again could a later unknown 
writer have gained possession of a document of such high value as 
that comprising or embodying these " We " sections ? A day-journal 

1 See Weiss, Einleitung, p. 583, and Overbeck (De Wette, 4th edition), p. xliv., 
who both point out that the cases are not analogous, although, on the other hand, 
Hilgenfeld and Wendt have recently pressed them into service. 


left behind by an intimate companion of St. Paul must have been 
preserved long enough for this unknown writer to have incorporated 
it, or at least some of it, into his own work, and it must then have 
vanished altogether out of sight, although one would have supposed 
that a treasure so valuable would have been preserved and guarded 
in some Christian circle with the greatest care. 1 

But if we further ask who amongst the companions of St. Paul 
speaks to us in these " We " sections, the testimony of critics of vari- 
ous schools — of critics who draw a distinction between the author- 
ship of the " We " sections and the rest of the book — may be quoted 
in favour of St. Luke as the author of the former, if not, as we be- 
lieve, of the latter also. Thus Holtzmann, Einleitung 3 , pp. 394, 395, 
examines the question, and decides in favour of St. Luke as against 
the claims of Timothy, Silas, or Titus (so Overbeck (De Wette, 4th 
edit.), pp. 1., li. ; Mangold, Einleitung (Bleek), p. 445 ; Spitta, u. s., 
p. 312). Acts xx. 5, 6 may be fairly quoted as decisive against 
Timothy, to say nothing of the impossibility that the author of Acts 
should assume the character of a person in the " We " sections, and 
by naming this same person elsewhere should thus distinguish him 
from himself (Overbeck). For Silas nothing can be said, and the 
advocacy of his claims is the most groundless of any of the three. 
He appears nowhere in the third missionary journey, an absence 
which would be fatally inconsistent with his presence in the " We " 
sections, and he is nowhere named in any of the letters of the First 
Imprisonment, whereas the narrator of xxvii. 1-xxviii. 16 would 
naturally be found amongst the companions of the Apostle during 
that period (of course, if xi. 27, 28 in j3-text be taken into account, 
both Timothy and Silas are thereby excluded, Zahn, Einleitung, 
ii., p. 425). The same objection may be made to Titus, since there 
is no hint that he was with St. Paul at Rome (even if we allow that 
he may have been included in the ^jiets at Antioch, xi. 27, and that, 
as he is not mentioned at all in Acts, the difficulties which are 
presented by the names of Timothy and Silas do not occur in his 
case). Moreover, the travel-journey of Silas would have commenced 
rather with xv. 1, as Holtzmann urges; nor is there any reason to 
suppose that Silas was at Philippi during the time required (Holtz- 

1 This; no doubt, presents less difficulty to advanced critics who find it apparently 
easy to credit that the Pastoral Epistles contain fragments of genuine letters of St. 
Paul, and that these letters having supplied the fragments to the Pastorals were 
themselves no longer cared for or regarded (McGiffert, Apostolic Age, pp. 407, 408, 
and, on the other hand, Dr. Salmon. Introd., p. 408). 


mann, u. s., p. 395). See further Zahn, u. s., pp. 351, 388, 425; 
Lightfoot, B.D. 2 , i., 32. 

But if the author of these sections is to be found amongst the 
intimate companions of St. Paul, and amongst those who were with 
him in Rome, no one fulfils the conditions better than St. Luke. 
Even Jiilicher, who declines to decide positively which of the four 
companions, Silas, Timothy, Titus, Luke, was the author, considers 
that, if it was St. Luke, we have in that fact the best explanation 
that his name remained attached to the Third Gospel and Acts alike, 
Einleitung, p. 269. The writer of Acts xxvii. 1-xxviii. 16 evidently 
accompanied St. Paul to Rome, and that St. Luke was with the 
Apostle at the time of his first captivity we learn on the authority 
of two Epistles which very few of the best critics would now care 
to dispute, Col. iv. 14, Philem. ver. 24. 

But the writer of Acts has not felt the need of using the Epistles 
of St. Paul as sources for his work, although they were the most 
weighty documents for the history which he professes to describe. 
There are numbers of undesigned coincidences between the letters 
and the history, and Paley, in his Horce Paulinos, has done invalu- 
able service in drawing attention to them. But still Acts is written 
independently of the Epistles, and it cannot be said that any one 
letter in particular is employed by the writer. Yet this would be 
inconceivable if the former work was composed 100-120 a.d., especi- 
ally when we remember the knowledge of the Epistles displayed 
by the writer of the Epistle of Barnabas, by St. Ignatius or St. Poly- 
carp (Harnack, Chron., i., 249). Moreover the writer, whoever he 
was, was beyond all doubt intensely interested in St. Paul, and it is 
strange that he should not have made use of his letters, when we 
remember the impression which they made upon those contemporary 
with the great Apostle, cf. 2 Cor. x. 10, 2 Pet. iii. 15 (Zahn, u. s., p. 

But this relation between Acts and the Pauline Epistles not only 
shows that the former was written before the close of the first 
century, but that the author stood sufficiently near to St. Paul to 
be able to write without enriching his knowledge by references to 
the Apostle's letters. This, however, becomes natural enough on the 
supposition that the writer was a Timothy, or a Titus, or a Luke. 
If, however, the two former are excluded, probabilities again point to 
Luke (Zahn). (For recent writers who deny the acquaintance of 
the author of Acts with St. Paul's Epistles we may refer to Wendt, 
Felten, McGiffert, Harnack, Zahn, Jiilicher, Rackham.) And we thus 
come into line with early Church tradition which referred the third 


Gospel and the Acts to Luke, the beloved physician, the friend of 
St. Paul, cf. Frag. Murator., and Iren., Adv. Hcer., iii., 14. 

But Luke, we have been recently reminded, was not an uncom- 
mon name, and many Christians may have borne it in the latter part 
of the first century (McGiffert, Apostolic Age, p. 435). But not only 
is the above tradition precise in its mention of Luke as a physician ; 
the writings attributed to him bear upon the face of them indications 
of the hand of a medical man. No reference, however, to the possi- 
bility of this is made by Dr. McGiffert. He tells us, p. 239, that 
nowhere is the source used by the author of Acts marked by anything 
like the vividness, preciseness, and fulness of detail that characterise 
the "We " sections. 1 The writer of these sections was not Silas or 
Timothy, but "the unknown author of the 'We' passages," p. 239. 
This unknown author was evidently the intimate companion of St. 
Paul, and of his other companions in Rome none is more likely to have 
written the personal notes of travel than Luke, who seems indeed to 
have been the nearest and dearest to the Apostle of all his friends (pp. 
434, 435). The inference from all this, coupled with the tradition of 

1,1 If there is one narrative of the N.T. which more than another contains internal 
proof of having been related by an eye-witness, it is the account of the voyage and 
shipwreck of St. Paul," Salmon, Introd., p. 5, and this judgment based upon the 
valuable monograph of James Smith (himself a Fellow of the Royal Society) ot 
Jordan Hill, Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul, 4th edit., revised and corrected, 
1880, has received fresh and remarkable confirmation, not only from English but 
from German and French sources of a technical and professional kind : e.g., Dr. 
Breusing, Director of the Seefahrtschule in Bremen, published in 1886 his Die 
Nautik der Alien with a close examination verse by verse of the narrative in Acts 
xxvii., and he has been followed precisely on the same lines by J. Vars, Professor in 
the Lycee of Brest in his L'Art N antique dans Vantiquite, 1887. Both writers make 
constant reference to Smith's work, although they often differ from him in technical 
details, and references to Breusing will be found in Blass and Wendt (1899). The 
latter writer also refers to a thoughtful article with a similar testimony to St. Luke's 
accuracy by Von Goerne in the Neue Kirchliche Zeitschrift, p. 352, 1898, and allu- 
sions will be found to this, as to the above-mentioned works, in the commentary. 
Breusing's testimony is very striking, p. xiii. : " The most valuable nautical docu- 
ment of antiquity which has come down to us is the account of the voyage and 
shipwreck of the Apostle Paul. Every one can see at a glance that it could only 
have been composed by an eye-witness." The strangest exception perhaps to this 
almost universal recognition of the value of the narrative in Acts xxvii.-(c/., e.g., the 
remarkable testimony in its favour by Weizsacker, Apostolic Age, ii., p. 126 ff., E.T.) 
is Mommsen's attack upon it in Sitzungsber. d. bcrl. Ak., 1895, p. 503 ; but, as Zahn 
justly remarks, Mommsen has not increased his reputation by alleging that "Luke 
speaks of the Adriatic Sea by Crete and of the barbarians of Malta " ; see answers 
to these objections in Zahn, Einleitung, ii., p. 42T, and also in commentary, Acts 
xxvii. 27, and xxviii. 2. 


the Church, would seem to be quite plain, but Dr. McGiffert declines 
to draw it, and falls back upon the belief that some other person 
named Luke was the writer of the third Gospel and Acts, p. 433. 
But if there had been such a person there would have been no need 
for tradition to identify him with Luke the beloved physician, since 
his own intrinsic merits as an author and historian would have 
been amply sufficient to secure him an undying recognition. 

Here comes in the value of the argument from the medical 
language employed in the third Gospel and the Acts. The Church 
in identifying the writer with St. Paul's beloved friend was not 
following some fanciful or unreliable tradition, but a tradition amply 
supported by an examination of the language of the books, in 
question ; language which not only witnesses to the truth of the 
tradition, but also to the unity of Acts, since this medical phraseology 
may be traced in every part, and not in the "We" sections alone. 
The present Introduction, which must of necessity be brief, does 
not allow of any lengthy examination of this important subject (to 
which the writer hopes to return), but in a large number of passages 
in the commentary notes are given with special reference to indi- 
cations of medical phraseology. But one or two remarks may be 
added here. In the first place, it is well to bear in mind that St. 
Luke's medical phraseology was fully recognised before Dr. Hobart's 
interesting and valuable book, The Medical Language of St. Luke, 
1882 [cf., e.g., Dr. Belcher's Our Lord's Miracles of Healing, 1st 
edit., with Preface by Archbishop Trench, 1871, 2nd edit., 1890). 
The Gentleman's Magazine, June, 1841, containing a short article of 
some two and a half pages, pp. 585-587, is often referred to as a kind 
of starting-point for this inquiry, but it should not be forgotten that 
the great names of Wetstein and Bengel may be quoted as fully 
recognising the hand of a medical writer; thus in commenting not 
only on Luke xiv. 2, but also on Acts xxviii. 8, Wetstein makes the 
same remark : " Lucas qui medicus fuerat morbos accuratius de- 
scribes solet," cf. Bengel on Acts iii. 7, " Proprie locutus est medicus 
Lucas," and Luke viii. 43, where the disputed reading does not 
interfere with the force of the comment : " Lucas medicus ingenue 
scribit ". Indeed it is not too much to say that the main position 
taken up by Hobart has been abundantly recognised both in Frapce 
and Germany, and not always in quarters where such a recognition 
might have been anticipated, cf., e.g., Renan, Saint Paul, p. 133, 
12th edit. ; J. Weiss, Evangclium des Lukas, 1892, with reference 
to Dr. Hobart's book, and with quotations from it, although with 
the qualification that many of the instances require careful sifting, 


p. 274 ff. More recently the German philologist Vogel, 1897, Zur 
Charakteristik des Lukas nach Sprache und Stil, p. 17, draws 
attention to the fact that a large number of words peculiar to the 
Acts are found in Luke's contemporary, the physician Dioscorides 
of Anazarbus in Cilicia, not far from Antioch, and he speaks of the 
use of Dioscorides by the Evangelist as highly probable. But the 
fullest recognition of Dr. Hobart's work comes to us even more 
recently by Zahn : " Dr. Hobart has proved for every one for 
whom anything can be proved, that the author of the Lucan work 
(by which Zahn means both the third Gospel and Acts) is a Greek 
physician, acquainted with the technical terms of the medical art," 
Einleitung, ii., pp. 427, 435 (1899). The language is strong, and 
it may perhaps be fairly contended that some of the instances 
cited by Dr. Zahn may well have been subjected to the cross- 
examination instituted so carefully and fully by Dr. Plummer, St. 
Luke, pp. Hi., lxiii.-lxvi., in his inquiry into the validity of Dr. 
Hobart's position. 1 The evidence in favour of this position must 
be cumulative, but it depends not merely upon the occurrence 
of technical medical terms in St. Luke's writings, but also upon 
his tendency to employ medical language more frequently than 
the other Evangelists, upon the passages in his Gospel in which 
we come across medical terms which are wanting in the parallel 
passages in St. Matthew and St. Mark, upon the account which he 
gives of miracles of healing not only in comparison with the other 
Evangelists, but also of the miracles peculiar to his own narratives; 
upon the way in which he abstains from using in a medical sense 
words which medical writers abstain from so using, although em- 
ployed in this sense elsewhere in the Gospels ; upon the frequency 
with which he uses medical language and phraseology in a secon- 
dary sense. Illustrations of some of these characteristic peculiar- 
ities are noted in the commentary, and a passing reference (space 
allows this only) may be made to two others. Each of the Synop- 
tists gives our Lord's comparison between the passage of a 
camel through the eye of a needle and the entrance of a rich man 
into the kingdom of heaven, St. Matt. xix. 24, St. Mark x. 25, St. 
Luke xviii. 25. St. Matthew and St, Mark have the same word for 

"' Whatever strictures may be passed upon Dr. Hobart's book, it must not be 
forgotten that the following authorities amongst others are persuaded that the 
author's main thesis has been abundantly proved: Bishop Lightfoot, "Acts," 
B.D. 2 , i., p. 31 ; Dr. Salmon, Introd., p. 129 ; Professor Ramsay, St. Paid, p. 205 ; 
Dr. Plummer, St. Luke, u. s. (cf. Sir J. Hawkins, Hora Synoptica, p. 154, 1899) ; 
and it is significant that Dr. B. Weiss in the 3rd edit, of his Einleitung refers to 
the book, and no longer speaks of the argument as mere " trifling ". 


needle pcufnSos : 8id Tpu-n-^pvaTos pa<|H8os, Matt., T.R. ; but W. H 
TprjfAaTOS in text, TpuTrr]p,aTos in margin, 8id (tyjs) Tpup-aXias (ttjs) paifiiSos. 
Mark. But when we turn to St. Luke, he introduces at least one 
different word (if we adopt W.H. for St. Matt.), and a combination 
peculiar to himself, 8id Tpr)p.aTos |3e\6i/r]s (W.H. and R.V.). It cannot 
be said that the words used by St. Luke occur in LXX, since neither 
of them is found there (although St. Mark's Tpup.a\£a occurs in LXX 
possibly six and at least three times). But both words used by St. 
Luke were in technical medical use, Tprjfj.a being the great medical 
word for a perforation of any kind, {3e\6eY] being the surgical needle ; 
and not only so but the two words are found combined as here by 
Galen : Sid tou kcit& ti]v fie.\6vy)v Tprjixaros and again tou 8iaTpTJp.aTos 
i-f}s PeXonrjs (cf. Hobart, p. 60, J. Weiss, u. s., p. 567, Zahn, it. s., p. 
436, and Nestle, Einfuhrung in das G. N. T., p. 228). 

Dr. Plummer points out that Tprjp.a is not peculiar to St. Luke 
(see W.H. above), but the combination is peculiar to St. Luke, and 
the force of this fact and of the combination of undoubted medical 
terms is not lessened by Grimm's description of fcXoVr) as a more 
classical word than pa<|>is. 

Once again : St. Luke's characteristic medical style shows itself 
in abstention as well as in employment. In three passages, e.g., 
jxaXaKia is used by St. Matthew to denote disease, but in medical 
language it is used as in its primary classical sense of delicacy, 
effeminacy, and St. Luke never uses it in St. Matthew's sense, 
although he employs the cognate adjective jxaXaicos of "soft' 
raiment in vii. 25. But this non-usage of the noun by the 
medical Luke is all the more significant, since in the LXX it is 
found at least a dozen times to denote sickness and disease. 

In St. Matt. iv. 24, viii. 6, both fiava.vLtfii.v and fSdcraeos are used of 
bodily sickness, but in medical writers the words are not employed in 
this sense, and St. Luke refrains from so employing them (Hobart, 
p. 63, and Zahn, u. s., p. 435). But here again significance is added 
to this non-usage by St. Luke when we remember that 0d<rako9 is 
not only used of the torments after death in Wisd. iii. 1, 4 Mace, 
iii. 15, cf. Luke xvi. 23, 28, but also of the pain of bodily disease, 
1 Mace. ix. 56. 

The Aim of the Book. Not only the aim but the purpose and 
contents of the book are set forth, according to Lightfoot, in the 
Preface, chap. i. 1-8. The prophetic words of the Lord in ver. 8 
implicitly involve a table of contents : " Ye shall receive power 
when the Holy Ghost," etc., ii. 1-13; "witnesses unto me" (1) "in 
Jerusalem," ii. 14-viii. 1, and (2) "in all Judaia and Samaria," viii. 
2-xi. 18, (3) "and to the uttermost part of the earth," xi. 19-xxviii. 


31 (on the latter expression see comment, in loco and reference to 
Psalms of Solomon, viii. 16). The writer closes with the event 
which his aim required, the preaching of the Gospel in Rome, the 
capital of the world, the metropolis of the human race, without 
hindrance ; and the fulfilment of the third section mentioned above 
is thus given, not actually, but potentially, while an earnest is 
afforded of its ultimate accomplishment ; Philippians, p. 3 ; B.D. 2 , 
i., p. 26 ; cf. also Weiss, Einleitung, p. 562, Blass, Acta Apost., 
Proleg., p. 3: "At hie liber non est imperfectus, cum longi cursus 
evangelii Roma terminus sit". But starting from the distinction 
which Lightfoot himself thus draws between the potential and 
actual, is it not quite possible that there may thus be room for the 
Tpi-ros Xoyos for which Lightfoot, it is true, saw no conceivable place, 
cf. Harnack, Chron., i., p. 248, but for the purpose of which Pro- 
fessor Ramsay, St. Paul, p. 380, and others, notably Zahn, Einlei- 
tung, ii., p. 380, have so strongly argued (see list of earlier advocates 
in Bleek-Mangold, Einleitung, p. 462, and note in comment, on xxviii. 
31) ? It is perhaps worth noting that Bengel, to whom we owe the 
oft-quoted words, Victoria verbi Dei, Paulus Romce, apex evangelii, 
Actorum Finis, reminds us on the same page of the words of Estius : 
" Fortasse Lucas meditabatur tertium librum, in quo repeteret acta 
illius biennii; sicut, Act. i., quaedam exposuit tacita ultimo capite 
evangelii". Moreover, if we take Acts i. 8 as giving us in outline 
the programme of the book, it seems that its purpose would have 
been fulfilled not so much in the triumph of the Gospel, but in the 
bearing witness to Christ in Jerusalem, Samaria, and to the end of 
the earth : the Apostles were to be witnesses, i. 8 ; St. Paul was 
told that he was "to bear witness" in Rome, (j-ap-rupTjom xxiii. 
11, cf. xxviii. 23; the triumph would succeed the witness, and the 
keynote of victory is struck in the word cLkuXutw?. 

Nothing, it is true, is said in Acts of the beginnings of Christianity 
in Rome, or as to how the Church was first founded in that city ; 
but when we consider the importance that St. Paul plainly attached 
to his seeing for himself the metropolis of the world, cf. xix. 21, and 
when his Epistle addressed to the Roman Church indicates how 
clearly he foresaw the importance which that Church would have 
for Gentile Christianity in the future, it is quite conceivable that 
the universalist Luke would draw his second treatise to a fitting 
close by showing that blindness in part had happened to Israel that 
the fulness of the Gentiles might come in. "We are not told," 
says Holtzmann, quoting Overbeck, "how the Gospel came to 
Rome, but how Paul came to Rome": but this objection, which 


Overbeck considered the greatest against the view that the con- 
tents of Acts were summed up in chap. i. 8, is obviated by the 
above considerations; St. Paul was to bear witness in Rome as he had 
at Jerusalem, but the result of his final witness in Jerusalem, xxiii. 
1 ff., resulted in a division among the Jews, and a similar result 
followed his first testimony in Rome. The Gospel had come to 
Rome already, but those who accepted it were only a sect everywhere 
spoken against ; now its foremost representative gains it a hearing 
from the Gentiles, and that too without interruption or prohibition. 

But this recognition of the importance of St. Paul's witness and 
work in Rome, and of their subsequent development, by no means 
excludes other purposes which may have been present to the mind 
of St. Luke. "No other N.T. writer," says Zahn, "mentions a 
Roman emperor by name," and he proceeds to point out the sig- 
nificance of this fact in connection with the whole design of St. 
Luke to show that Christianity was an historical religion ; how the 
edicts of Augustus, Luke ii. 1, and of Claudius, Acts xviii. 2, had 
their influence on the new faith (cf. Luke iii. 1), how in comparison 
with the other Evangelists St. Luke constantly introduces the 
names of those who were connected indirectly as well as directly 
with political events (Einleitung, ii., p. 375, and cf. Ramsay, St 
Paul, p. 385, Friedrich, u. s., p. 53 ff.). Not only would notices of 
this kind impress a reader of the type of Theophilus with a sense of 
the certainty of those things in which he had been instructed, but 
they are also of importance in that they indicate that a writer, who 
thus took pains to gain accurate information with regard to events 
in the Roman world, would naturally be interested in tracing care- 
fully the relations between the empire and the infant Church, and 
all the more so if it was important to show his readers that Christi- 
anity stood in no hostile relationship to the imperial government (cf. 
Zahn, u. s., p. 379). 

But it is one thing to describe one of the objects of the book in 
this way, viz., as an attempt to reassure those who had been already 
instructed in the origines of the Christian Faith, and to emphasise 
its evident power and rectitude at the bar of the rulers of this world, 
and to maintain that all this was done with a political-apologetic 
aim, regardless of truthfulness to fact, and only concerned with 
representing Christianity in a favourable light before magistrates 
and kings. No doubt we are repeatedly told how St. Paul took 
shelter in an appeal to Roman law and Roman authority, and how 
much more justly and calmly the Roman authorities judged of his 
case than the fanatical and insensate Jews ; " but," says Wendt with 


admirable candour (Apostelgeschichte, p. 17), ''there is no reason to 
doubt that this representation simply corresponded to historical truth" 
(see the whole paragraph in Wendt, 1899, and cf. Weiss, u. $., p. 569 
as against Overbeck and Mangold, u. s., p. 427, following Schnecken- 
burger and Zeller). Moreover, when we remember that the writer 
of Acts deliberately enters upon a field of history " where perhaps 
beyond all others there was room for mistake and blunder, the 
administration of the Roman Empire and its provinces," nothing is 
more surprising than the way in which his accuracy is confirmed by 
every fresh and searching investigation. 1 

But if there is no reason to attribute a political tendency (see 
further below) to the writer, still less is there room for the attribu- 
tion of a doctrinal tendency. The earlier representatives of this 
latter view of the book, Baur and Zeller, started with insisting upon 
the fundamental opposition which prevailed between the view of 
the relationship of St. Paul with the primitive Apostles as set 
forth in those Epistles which these critics accepted, and in the 
Acts : to St. Paul a Judaising tendency was ascribed in the latter 
which was not in harmony with his statements in his own writings, 
whilst, on the other hand, to St. Peter especially a liberal stand- 
point was ascribed, which was not to be expected in view of the 
utterances of St. Paul in his Epistles, a standpoint which would 
make Peter, not Paul, the originator of Gentile Christianity. On 
the whole the Acts represented an idealised and harmonising view 
of the relation of parties in the primitive Church, and its object 
as the work of a Pauline Christian was to reconcile the Jewish and 
Pauline parties. Schneckenburger had previously emphasised the 
supposed parallel in Acts between Peter and Paul (see further 
below), and had represented the book as written with the apologetic 
aim of defending Paul against the misrepresentation of the Juda- 
isers ; but it must always be remembered that Schneckenburger, 
although emphasising the apo logetic tendency of St. Luke, never denied 

1 Cf, e.g., the notes on xvii. 6, xxviii. 7, etc., the references to the invaluable 
and epoch-making works of Professor Ramsay, and Vogel, Zur Charaktcristik des 
Lukas nach Sprache und Stil, p. 28, 1897, on the remarkable degree of confidence 
with which military, political, and judicial terms are employed in Acts. Professor 
Schmiedel in his review of Professor Ramsay's St. Paul describes it as the work on 
the whole not of the historian or archaeologist, but of the narrow apologist, Theolo- 
gische Literaturzeitung, 1897, No. 23, and more recently, Professor H. Holtzmann. 
characterises Professor Ramsay's description and illustration of the scene, Acts xvi. 
25-34, as "humbug"! Theologische Literaturzeitung, 1899, No. 7 ; such remarks 
are ill calculated to promote candid and respectful criticism. 


his historical truthfulness, whilst Baur fastened upon Schnecken- 
burger's view, and further developed his own previous attack on the 
historical character of Acts (Zahn, u. s., p. 393, Lightfoot, B.D. 2 , i., 
41). -But Baur's theory in its extreme form could not maintain its 
ground, and various modifications of It took place within his own 
school. Certainly, to take an illustration, it must always remain a 
strange fact that, if Acts was written with the conciliatory tendency 
alluded to, only one indirect mention in it is found, xxiv. 17, of the 
collection for the poor Saints at Jerusalem, which played so promi- 
nent a part in St. Paul's work and writings, and which was in itself 
such a palpable proof of the Apostle's love for his Jewish brethren. 
The tendency view adopted by some of the writers succeeding Baur, 
€.g., Reuss, Keim, Weizsacker, regards the author of Acts as not 
intentionally departing from the historical relations between the two 
parties, but as forming his judgment of the relations between them 
from the standpoint of his own time. One of the most recent 
attempts to represent the conciliatory tendency of Acts as an apo- 
logy for the Christian religion before Gentiles, i.e., before a heathen 
public, against the charges of the Jews, and to show how Judaism, 
through Christianity, broke up into its world-wide mission, is that of 
J. Weiss, Uber die Absicht und den literar. Charakter der A. G., 1897 
(see further below) ; but whatever amount of correctness there may 
be in this view we may frankly adopt, without committing ourselves 
to the very precarious explanations and deductions of the writer ; 
St. Luke's own prologue, and the dedication of his two writings to 
the Gentile Theophilus, are in themselves sufficient to lead us to 
expect that the design accentuated by J. Weiss would not be alto- 
gether absent from his mind in composing his history (see the 
remarks of Zahn, u. s., ii., p. 393). 

But if there is no satisfaction in the more recent attempts to 
represent Acts as written mainly with a conciliatory " tendency," 
still less can satisfaction be found in the view, older in its origin, of 
a supposed parallelism between St. Peter and St. Paul, drawn out 
by a writer who wished in this way to reconcile the Petrine and 
Pauline parties in the Church, by placing the leaders of each in a 
position of equal authority. That there are points of similarity in the 
life and work of the two Apostles may be readily admitted, but these 
likenesses are of the most general kind, and only such as we might 
expect in cases where two men work in the same calling at the same 
period and under the same conditions, cf. to this effect Clemen, Die 
Chronologie der Paulinischen Briefe, pp. 17, 18, and Feine, Bine 
vorkanonische. Uberlieferung des Lukas, p. 214. The parallel can 


only be extended to a few instances such as the healing of the lame 
man by Peter at Jerusalem, iii. 2, and by Paul at Lystra, xiv. 8, but 
there is no real ground for the institution of a parallel between the 
worship paid to Peter by Cornelius, x. 25, and by the inhabitants of 
Lystra to St. Paul, xiv. 11, or between the judgment inflicted on 
Ananias and Sapphira by Peter, v. 1, and on Elymas by St. Paul, 
xiii. 6. The position thus advocated by Clemen is taken up by B. 
Weiss, Einleitung, p. 540, 3rd edit., 1897, no less than by earlier 
writers like Lekebusch and Nosgen (cf. too Sanday, Bampton Lec- 
tures, p. 327, and Salmon, Introduction, p. 310). But whether we 
consider that the parallel was instituted to place Paul on an equality 
with Peter, or, as Van Manen has recently urged, Paulus I. : De 
Jiandelingen der Apostelen, p. 126, 1890, that the writer wished to 
represent Peter in accordance with the delineation of Paul, there is 
one fact fatal to both points of view, viz., that if either of these pur- 
poses had been in the mind of the author of Acts, we cannot account 
for his omission of the crowning point to the parallel between the 
two Apostles, viz., their martyrdom in the same city, and in the same 
persecution. An already discredited theory can scarcely survive the 
ridicule of Dr. Blass, Proleg., p. 8, and of Dr. Salmon, u. s., pp. 310, 
311 : in all true history we may expect to find parallelisms, and these 
parallels exist in the lives of nations no less than of individuals. 
When we consider the various attempts which have been made 
to describe the aim of Acts, it is something to find that a critic 
who does not hesitate to regard the book as written to some extent 
with an idealising and harmonising purpose, should nevertheless be 
constrained to reckon it, on account of its many trustworthy 
traditions, as an historical work of invaluable worth, see Wendt, 
Apostelgeschichte, p. 33, 1899. 

Sources. If St. Luke is acknowledged as the writer of Acts, 
we can understand the remark of Blass that in this case the question 
of sources for the greater part of the book need not be raised, Blass, 
Acta Apost., Proleg., p. 10; cf. Zahn,«. $., pp. 404, 412; Knabenbauer, 
Actus Apostolorum, p. 8, 1899. It is plain from the narrative that 
a man in St. Luke's position would be brought into contact with 
many persons from whom he could have obtained rich and varied 
information, and in many cases the details of his narrative point 
unmistakably to the origin of the information. A good example 
may be seen in chap. xii. (see commentary), in which the vivid and 
circumstantial details of St. Peter's escape from prison are best 
accounted for on the supposition that the narrative comes from John 
Mark: to the house of the mother of Mark St. Peter makes his 


way, ver. 12, and not only does later history associate St. Mark with 
St. Peter, but also with St. Luke and St. Paul, inasmuch as he is 
with the latter in Rome, Col. iv. 10, Philem., ver. 24 {cf. 2 Tim. iv. 11), 
to say nothing of an earlier association, cf. Acts xiii. (Ramsay, St. 
Paul, p. 385 ; Blass, u. s., p. 11 ; Belser, Theologische Quartalschrift , 
p. 62, 1895) ; and even Wendt, p. 31 (1899), sees no other way of 
accounting for the contrast between the brief notice of the death of 
St. James, xii. 1, and the lengthy account of the liberation of St. 
Peter than the probability that the latter was derived from John 
Mark, whilst more exact information was wanting for the former. 

But John Mark was not the only member of the Jerusalem 
Church from whom, or through whom, St. Luke could have obtained 
information as to the origin of the Christian community. Barnabas, 
the cousin of John Mark, was in a position to know accurately the 
same events, in some of which he had shared, iv. 36, and if St. Luke 
was a member of the Church at Antioch when Barnabas settled 
there (cf. note on xi. 28) he would have learnt from the lips of 
Barnabas the early history of the Jerusalem Church ; and it would 
have been strange if amongst the men of Cyprus and Cyrene who 
fled from Judaea to Antioch, xi. 19, there had been none who were 
baptised at the first Christian Pentecost, cf. ii. 10, 41 (Zahn, u. s., 
p. 414). 

For the same series of events St. Luke had access also to the 
information preserved by Mnason, a disciple dpxalos, i.e., from the 
first Pentecost, cf. xi. 15, xxi. 16, from whom likewise he may have 
learnt the account given in ix. 31-43. In chap. xxi. we are also told 
how Luke was a guest for several days in the house of Philip the 
Evangelist, vv. 8-12, an intercourse which could have furnished him 
with the information narrated not only in viii. 4-40, but in vi. 1-viii. 
3, x. 1-xi. 18. And from Jerusalem itself, no less than from Caesarea, 
information might have been acquired, for Luke, xxi. 18, had inter- 
course not only with the elders but with no less a person than St. 
James, the head of the Church at Jerusalem, and at an earlier 
period he must have shared at Philippi, xvi. 19 ff., the company of 
Silas, who is mentioned as one of the chief among the brethren of 
the mother city, xv. 22. In this connection we may note that St. 
Luke alone gives us two incidents connected with Herod Antjpas, 
Luke xiii. 31-33, xxiii. 6-12, 15, cf. Acts iv. 27, which are not 
narrated by the other Evangelists, but this intimate acquaintance of 
St. Luke with the court of Herod is in strict harmony with the 
notice of Manaen the foster-brother of Herod, Acts xiii. 1, cf. Luke 
viii. 3, a teacher of the Church at Antioch when St. Luke may 
VOL. II. 2 


himself have been there, and from whom the Evangelist may at all 
events have learnt much of the information about other members of 
the Herodian family which comes to us from him only (Plumptre, 
Zahn, Belser, Feine). It may no doubt be contended, with con- 
siderable plausibility, that St. Luke must have had at his command 
written documents as well, e.g., in his account of the speeches 
of St. Peter and St. Stephen, and it is quite possible that he 
might have obtained such documents from the Church at Jeru- 
salem. One thing is quite certain, that these addresses like all 
others throughout the book are in striking harmony with the 
circumstances and crises to which they relate (see further below) : 
"quo intentius has orationes inspexeris," writes Blass, "eo plura 
in eis reperies, quae cum sint temporibus personisque egregie 
accommodata, ad rhetoricam licentiam scriptoris referri se vetent " 
(Proleg., p. 11). But at the same time it requires no great 
stretch of imagination to conclude with Zahn (ii., p. 412) that 
such a man as Luke required no other sources of information 
for the composition of Acts, or at least for a great portion of 
that work, than his own recollections, partly of the narratives 
of St. Paul, partly of the events in which he himself had shared, 
cf. vi. 8-viii. 3, ix. 1-30, xiii.-xxviii. There is abundant proof 
in St. Paul's Epistles that the Apostle must have constantly 
referred to his earlier experiences in way of conversation, or in the 
delivery of his discourses, cf. 2 Cor. i. 8-10, xi. 22, xii. 9, Gal. i. 11- 
ii. 14, Phil. iii. 3-7, Rom. xv. 16-32, xvi. 7, and during periods of 
enforced inactivity, while Luke was with him at Caesarea, or during 
the winter months at Malta, or later in Rome, nothing was more 
natural, as Zahn urges, than that the great missionary should com- 
municate to his beloved friend the records of his work and experience 
in great heathen centres of commercial or intellectual life, like 
Corinth, Ephesus, Athens. After his return from his travels, and 
on many other occasions, Zahn points out that it was St. Paul's 
habit to relate minutely ica8' ev ZKcurrov, xxi. 19, what God had 
wrought by him, xiv. 27, xv. 3, 12, 26, Gal. ii. 2, 7-9, and there is no 
reason whatever to suppose that such recitals were withheld from 
St. Luke. No doubt it may be urged that the style in the second 
part of the book is less Hebraistic than in chaps, i.-xii., but this 
may be fairly accounted for if we remember that St. Luke would 
often obtain his information for the earlier events from Jewish 
Christians, and on the soil of Palestine, and that he may have 
purposely retained the Hebraistic colouring in his embodiment of 
these narratives, cf. Plummer, St. Luke, p. xlix. ; Zahn, u. s., ii., 


pp. 414, 423; Dalman, Die Worte Jesu, p. 31, 1898. 1 If it be main- 
tained that the earlier chapters of Acts, i.-v., were incorporated from 
some earlier document, it is admitted that this was of Jewish- 
Christian origin, derived from the Jewish Church through an 
eye-witness (cf. B. Weiss, Einleitung, p. 549, 3rd edit. ; Feine, u. 
s., p. 233). Thus in these chapters, e.g., the Sadducees appear 
as the chief opponents of the new faith, cf. note on iv. 1, and the 
members of the hierarchy are represented as in the main members 
of the same sect, a fact which strikes us as strange, but which is 
in strict accordance with the testimony of Josephus. A careful con- 
sideration of the speeches and of their appropriateness to their 
various occasions tends more and more surely to refute the notion 
that they are fictitious addresses, the work of a writer of the second 
century. The testimony of Dr. McGiffert may be cited as bearing 
witness to the primitive character of the reports of the speeches of 
St. Peter in the early chapters of Acts, and for the truthful manner 
in which they represent a very early type of Christian teaching (see 
comment., p. 119), and cf. also the remarks of Schmiedel, Enc. 
Bibl., i., 48, 1899. 

At the delivery of St. Stephen's speech Paul himself was present, 
xxvi. 10, cf. vi. 12, and there is good reason for thinking that the 
speech made a deep impression upon him (see, e.g., Felten, Apos- 
telgeschichte, p. 31), while the many Lucan expressions and turns 
of thought which it contains (cf. Zeller, Acts, ii., p. 313, E.T., 
and Overbeck, Apostelgeschichte, p. 93) are natural enough' if the 
address comes to us through the medium of a translation (see 
commentary for the speech and its meaning). 

For the second part of the book we perceive that St. Luke might 
have easily obtained accurate reports of the speeches even in cases 
where he was not present ; e.g., the speech at the Pisidian Antioch, 
chap, xiii., gives us what we may well regard as a familiar example 
of St. Paul's teaching on many similar occasions (cf. also in com- 
mentary the striking resemblances recently noted by Professor 
Ramsay between this speech and the Galatian Epistle). The ad- 
dresses at Lystra and at Athens delivered to heathen, so wonder- 
fully adapted to the audience in each place, in the one instance 
appealing to a more popular and ruder, in the latter to a more 
learned and philosophic class of hearers (" ita sunt omnia et loco et 

1 Dr. Dalman's sharp distinction between Aramaisms and Hebraisms should be 
noted, p. 16 ff., whilst he allows that the pure Hebraisms in the Gospels are almost 
exclusively peculiar to that of St. Luke, and that by these peculiarities of diction 
Acts is also marked, p. 29 ; see further in commentary. 


audientibus accommodata," says Blass) ; in both cases starting 
from truths which some of the Greek philosophers might themselves 
have pressed home, but in each case leading up to and insisting 
upon the need and necessity of repentance for wise and simple 
alike ; were eminently characteristic of a man who became as a 
Jew to the Jews, as without law to those without law, as a Greek 
to the Greeks, and such discourses in the brief form in which they 
have reached us in Acts may well have expressed the actual teach- 
ing delivered by St. Paul in Lystra and in Athens (see for these 
speeches especially Ramsay, St. Paul, p. 146 ff., and for the speech 
at Athens, Curtius, " Paulus in Athen," Gesammelte Abhandlungen , 
ii., pp. 527-543, and references in commentary l ) : " there is no 
reason," writes McGiffert, " for questioning the trustworthiness of 
the discourse at Athens as a whole ... in fact such a discourse 
as that ascribed to Paul is exactly what we should expect from him 
under the circumstances" (w. 5., p. 260). 

The speech to the Ephesian elders at Miletus, xx. 18-35, is 
constantly marked by St. Paul's characteristic words and phrases, 
and its teaching is strikingly connected with that of the Ephesian 
Epistle (see notes in commentary, and cf. Page, Acts, p. xxxvi. ; 
Lock, " Ephesians," Hastings' B.D. ; Cook, Speaker's Commentary, 
p. 342, and also Lekebusch, Apostelgeschichte, pp. 336-339; Nosgen, 
u. s., p. 53 ; Felten, u. s., p. 33). No one has affirmed the historical 
truthfulness of this address more strongly than Spitta, and in this 
instance also we may again conclude with McGiffert, p. 339, that 
" we shall be safe in assuming that the account of Paul's meeting 
with the elder brethren of Ephesus, and the report of the words 
which he uttered are substantially accurate ". We may well feel 
this security when we recall that St. Luke would be himself a hearer 
of St. Paul's pathetic farewell. 

The three remaining speeches contain three diroXoyiai of St. 
Paul, one before the Jews and the chiliarch in Jerusalem, xxii. 
1-21, the second before Felix, xxiv. 10-21, and the third before 
Festus and Agrippa, xxvi. The first reaches us through the 
medium of a Greek translation, and it is noticeable that the 
speech in this form contains no Pauline words or expressions, 
although some words remind us of him, e.g., d-iroXoyia, diroXouciw, irapa- 

1 Hilgenfeld blames Curtius because he has not explained the source of infor- 
mation for St. Paul's address, since the Apostle was at Athens alone, but Kna- 
benbauer writes, Actus Afostolorum, p. 308, " Probabilissime is cum aliis id plane 
superfluum reputavit, quia Paulus post earn orationem neque memoriam neque 
loquelam amisit ; unde ipse potuit narrare quid Athenis egerit ". 


S^xo/acu, cTriKa\et(r9ai and to oVofia (Nosgen, Felten), while it contains 
several peculiar to St. Luke. But if the Evangelist was present at 
the delivery of the defence, he would have been able to reproduce the 
speech himself, or at least its substance, and we have an explanation 
of the fact just mentioned (see Salmon, Introd., pp. 317, 318 ; Page, 
Acts, p. xxxvi. ; Alford, Proleg., pp. 13-15). 

The vivid description, xxi. 30-40, and especially the local 
details, vv. 34, 35, point to the presence of an eye-witness, who was 
in possession of information which he could use with accuracy, and 
at the same time with discrimination, limiting himself to the re- 
quisites of his narrative (Bethge, Die Paulinischen Reden, p. 174). 
It is difficult to understand why Blass should say that although 
Luke may have heard the speech, it is doubtful if he understood it. 
In his Prcef. to his Evangelium secundum Lucam, pp. xxi.-xxiii., he 
not only adopts Nestle's theory that an Aramaic document underlies 
the first part of Acts, i.-xii., but amongst the few Aramaisms from 
chap. xiii. onwards he notes especially, p. xxi., two from the chapter 
before us, xxii., viz., ver. 19, ^pp 4>u\aKi£wy " periphrasis ilia aramaica 
imperfecti futurique, quae fit per participium et verbum rjpn' («," 
and ver. 14, <j>(i>eT)y ck toG oro/ia-ros au-roG, cf. i. 16, iii. 18, 21 for <rr6fxa. 
We must also bear in mind the strictures of Dalman upon Blass in 
this connection: cf. Die Worte Jesu, p. 28, 1898. 

In the apology before Felix, xxiv. 10-21, we have traces of St. Paul's 
diction (see commentary, and cf. Nosgen, u. s., p. 54, Felten, u. s., 
p. 34), and although it would be rash to affirm that St. Luke was 
present at the delivery of this defence, yet, if he was with St. Paul 
during any of the time of the Apostle's imprisonment at Caesarea, 
it is surely not difficult to suppose that he would have received from 
the prisoner's own lips a summary of his d-iroXoyia before Felix. 
The same remark might account for St. Luke's information as to 
the longer diroXoyia before Agrippa, chap, xxvi., and it is specially 
noteworthy that in this speech, which may easily have been repro- 
duced exactly as it was delivered, cf. Blass, Grammatik, p. 5, and 
Proleg., p. 13, we have Greek phrases and words of a more cultured 
and literary style, such as would be more suited to the most distin- 
guished audience before which the Apostle had yet pleaded (see 
commentary). At the same time we may note that while the speech 
has many points of contact with St. Paul's peculiar language and 
favourite words, there are other expressions which may be described 
as Lucan, to which we may appeal as justifying the belief that if 
St. Luke was present at the hearing, he reproduced the speech not 
immediately, but after an interval, when it had passed through his 


own mind, Bethge, Die Paulinischen Reden, pp. 259, 260. That 
the speeches in Acts bear the impress of St. Luke's own style and 
revising hand is freely admitted by conservative critics (cf. Lightfoot, 
B.D. 2 , i., p. 36 ; Headlam, " Acts," Hastings' B.D., i., p. 34 ; Salmon, 
Introd., p. 317), and we may thus unhesitatingly account for the 
combination in them of peculiar Pauline expressions with those 
which may be classed as Lucan or Lucan-Pauline. These linguistic 
phenomena by no means destroy the substantial accuracy of the 
report ; rather they are exactly what we should expect to find. It 
is admitted on all sides that by comparing the language of St. 
Paul's speeches in Acts with the language of his Epistles a striking 
amount of similarity is evident. But if the writer of Acts was not 
acquainted with St. Paul's Epistles, we cannot account for th«s 
similarity of diction on the ground of literary dependence. If, 
however, the writer of Acts was a constant and frequent companion 
of St. Paul the explanation is easy enough, and we can readily 
believe that whilst in his report or revision of a speech words of 
the disciple might sometimes be found side by side with those of 
the master, yet the influence of the latter would nevertheless make 
itself felt in the disciple's thoughts and language (cf. Salmon, u. s., 
p. 315 ff., and Felten, u. s., p. 32). In many cases it is perfectly ob- 
vious that the account of the speeches in Acts is an abridged account 
— the longest of them would not take more than some five or six 
minutes in delivery — and therefore, as a matter of necessity, such an 
abridgment would bear upon it, in a sense, the impress of St. Luke's 
own style. Blass, Acta Apostolorum, p. 191, in speaking of St. Paul's 
address at Athens expresses the belief that it has come down to us 
"fideliter etsi brevissime: ita sunt omnia et loco et audientibus 
accommodata," and he adds a remark applicable to all the Apostle's 
speeches : " Turn quilibet qui paullo recentiore aetate orationes Pauli 
conficturus esset, usurus erat Pauli epistolis ; quarum in hac non 
magis quam in ceteris orationibus (c. 13, 20, 22, 24, 26) ullus usus 
comparet ". 

It cannot be said that the recent and frequent attempts to 
multiply and differentiate sources in Acts, to assign them to various 
revisers or redactors, have met with any degree of real success. 
If Holtzmann and Wendt (see also a description of these attempts 
in Theologische Rundschau, Feb., March, April, 1899) contend that 
they have done so, and that with regard to the first few chapters of 
Acts some consensus of opinion has been gained, we may set against 
such contentions not only the opinion of Zahn, Einleitung, ii., 
pp. 414, 424, who maintains that none of these repeated attempts 


has attained any measure of probability (so too Zockler, Apostel- 
geschichte, p. 154, 2nd edit., and Knabenbauer, Actus Apostolorum, 
p. 9 ff., 1899), but also the opinion of Wendt, who, after a careful 
and on the whole sympathetic review, is obliged to confess that 
one must limit oneself in any attempt to discover the sources 
of the book to what is attainable and provable in the circumstances, 
and that the more complicated the hypothesis suggested, the more 
difficult it is to make it intelligible to others, Apostelgeschichte, 
p. 17, 1899. In his own examination of the problem he limits 
himself to one great source, p. 30, and plainly declares that it does 
not seem to be possible to discover others, although he enumerates 
various passages in which old and trustworthy traditions were 
combined ; but whether these were derived from written documents 
or from one and the same source he declines to say, and he is 
evidently inclined to admit that in many cases oral tradition may 
also have been at work. Thus whilst iv. 1-22, v. 17-42, are regarded as 
parallel pieces of information of what was in reality the same event, 
or whilst again the liberation of St. Peter in chap. xii. is a parallel 
to the release of the Apostle in chap. v. 18-20, the work of St. 
Philip and the death of St. James rest upon good and trustworthy 
tradition. The source to which Wendt attaches such importance 
includes the " We " sections, and the whole of the book from xiii. 
onwards, with the exception of xv. 1-33, the source continuing with 
ver. 35, whilst it can be traced further back to xi. 19, 27, and to viii. 
1-4. But this large source is full of traces of revision and redaction, 
which mark not only the narratives but also the addresses. Its 
interest centred chiefly in the person of St. Paul and in his work, 
and it gave no history of the origines of the Church or of the 
missionary journeys of the other Apostles, although it introduced its 
account of St. Paul by tracing the foundation of the Church in 
Antioch from the mother Church in Jerusalem as a result of the 
death of St. Stephen and the subsequent persecution, and by 
showing how that same Church of Antioch became the starting-point 
for St. Paul's missionary labours. 

This view of the sources adopted by Wendt contrasts favourably 
with some of the extraordinary and complicated theories which from 
time to time have been advocated in Germany, more especially during 
the last few years. 

As early as 1845 Schleiermacher's published lectures referred 
the authorship of the " We " sections not to Luke but to Timothy, 
and some two years before this E. M. Mayerhoff had suggested that 
the same hypothesis might be extended to all parts of Acts, not 


however without the opposition of Bleek and Ulrich, the former of 
whom supported Schleiermacher. But Schleiermacher's view of the 
part played by Timothy had already met with the strong opposition of 
Schneckenburger, 1841, and Swanbeck, 1847, attacked it by means 
of his own more complicated and more hazardous attempt to solve 
the sources of Acts. According to Swanbeck, the book is made up 
of a biography of Peter, a source containing the death of Stephen, 
a biography of Barnabas, the memoirs of Silas including the 
" We " sections. But the theory gained no acceptance, and most 
critics will probably agree with Lekebusch (Apostelgeschichte, p. 188) 
that Swanbeck in his attempt to avoid the misleading theory as to 
Timothy involved himself in a still greater error by his advocacy of 

For the Tubingen school the question of sources occupied a 
less important place than the question of " tendency," and more 
weight was attached to the imaginative power of the author than 
to the possibility of his possession of any reliable tradition ; and 
consequently for a time the attempts to discriminate and estimate 
various sources sank into abeyance. It was, however, supposed by 
some critics that in the first part of Acts either a pentateuch source 
or an Hellenistic history of Stephen had been worked up (Zeller, 
Overbeck), or that some old irpd&is riauXou formed a foundation for 
the narrative. Hilgenfeld (see also below) maintained the probable 
existence of this latter document, and Holsten thought that he could 
discover traces of a Judaistic source in the speeches of the first part 
of the book. B. Weiss, as long ago as 1854, had referred the 
speeches of St. Peter to a written source, but the speeches were 
closely connected with the historical episodes, and so in his Einlei- 
tung, 2nd and 3rd editions, Weiss has attempted to trace throughout 
the whole first part of the book, i.e., from i. 15-xv., a Jewish-Christian 
source, whilst Feine, 1891, has maintained that the Jewish-Christian 
source already employed in the third Gospel was also the source of 
the history of the Jerusalem Church in Acts i.-xii., and he gives, n. 
s., p. 236 ff., many verbal likenesses between this source in St. Luke's 
Gospel and in the earlier portion of Acts. Feine's handling of the 
whole question is much more conservative than that of the other 
attempts to which allusion will be made, especially as he regards 
St. Luke as the author of the third Gospel and the Acts, and claims 
a high historical value for the episodes and speeches in the source. 

But the interest in the hypothesis of a source or sources chiefly 
centres around the second rather than the first part of Acts. For 
here the " We " sections are concerned, and when the view was 


once started that these sections, although not the work of St. Luke, 
were the work of an eye-witness (since their vividness and circum- 
stantiality could not otherwise be accounted for), and so derived 
from a source, the whole question of the authorship of this source 
was revived, and the claims of Timothy, Silas, Titus, again found 
advocates ; and not only so, but the further question was debated as 
to how far this source extended. Was it limited to the " We " 
sections only ? But the view which prevailed (and which still pre- 
vails, cf., e.g., Holtzmann, Einleitung 3 , p. 393, and see above) makes 
Luke the author of the "We" sections, although not of the whole 
book, which was referred to the close of the first, and even to the 
second century. This latter date (amongst the supporters of which 
may be included H. Holtzmann, Pfleiderer, Julicher (100-105), 
Weizsacker, to say nothing of earlier critics, or of those mentioned 
below) finds no support in the general character of the book, and it 
depends upon other very precarious arguments, e.g., the dependency 
of the author upon Josephus. But if it cannot be substantiated, it 
is in itself fatal to the partition theories put forward by Van Manen 
(125-150), Clemen (60-140), and Jiingst (110-125). 

With Van Manen we mark one of the earliest of the many 
complicated attempts, to which reference has been already made, 
in proof of the use of sources throughout the whole of Acts. 
According to him, Acta Petri and Acta Pauli form the two sources, 
of which the final redactor, writing about the middle of the second 
century, availed himself. In the Acta Pauli, H. Pa., which fill 
the second half of the canonical book of Acts, with the exception of 
xv. 1-33 and some other passages due to the reviser (although some 
of the incidents of these Acta which refer to Barnabas, Stephen, 
Paul, find a place in the first half of the book), a Gentile Christian, 
the first redactor, writing at the end of the first, or beginning of the 
second century, has embodied the Lucan Travel- Document, probably 
written by Luke himself, consisting of the " We " sections and the 
bare recital of one of Paul's voyages from Jerusalem to Rome. 
This document is, however, much revised, and according to it the 
Apostle travels to Rome not as a prisoner, but as a free man. The 
final redactor, moreover, seems to have forgotten that such a docu- 
ment had ever existed, and to have depended upon the Epistles of 
St. Paul and the notices of Josephus. The second source, Acta 
Petri, H. Pe., chaps, i.-xii., is of very small historical value; it was 
composed later than the Acta Pauli, and aimed at placing Peter on 
a level with Paul. It is not perhaps to be wondered at that Van 
Manen himself seems to hesitate about the exact details of h;s 


partitions, that even Heitmiiller cannot give anything hut modified 
commendation to his theory, Theol. Rundschau, p. 87, 1899, and that 
a still severer condemnation is inflicted by Zockler, Greifswalder 
Studien, p. 114, cf. Knabenbauer, p. 11. 

In the same year, 1890, Sorof published his Die Entstehung der 
Apostelgeschichte. He too has his two written sources. Of the first 
the physician Luke was the author ; this source runs through the 
book, and has for its purpose to represent the missionary spread of 
Christianity from Jerusalem to Rome, making prominent the figure 
of Paul. But this source was revised by another disciple of Paul, 
Timothy, who as the son of a Jewish mother stood nearer than 
Luke to Jewish-Christian interests. Timothy, to magnify Peter, 
introduced much legendary matter relating to him in the first 
portion of St. Luke's account, and also revised and corrected the 
record of St. Paul's missionary activity on the strength of his 
authorship of the "We" sections and his own eye-witness. (It is 
no wonder that Heitmiiller, «. 5., p. 85, again welcomes this theory 
with qualified praise, and considers the division of the parts of the 
book assigned to Luke and Timothy as improbable, if not impossible.) 
Another attempt in the succeeding year by Spitta gained much 
more notice than that of Sorof. He also has his two sources — A, 
an older source including the " We " sections, probably the work of 
Paul's companion, Luke: a very valuable and erudite source con- 
taining the speeches of the book (see references in commentary) ; 
and B, a secondary source, unhistorical, depending on popular 
traditions, with a great tendency to introduce miraculous embellish- 
ments. B is the work of a Jewish Christian who writes with a 
desire to magnify Peter by miracles which equal those of the great 
Gentile Apostle. Spitta has further to suppose that these two 
sources, the one Pauline-Lucan and the other Jewish-Christian, 
were combined by a Catholic-Christian redactor R, with some 
additions of his own. Here again Heitmiiller, p. 91, sees no hope 
of a satisfactory solution of the problem under investigation, and 
can only wonder at the manner in which two sources of a directly 
opposite tendency can be so simply interwoven by the redactor ; the 
part played by the latter is altogether unsatisfactory, as he does 
little else than effect this combination of the two sources, with an 
occasional interpolation of his own. Spitta's attempt was also sharply 
criticised by Julicher, Einleitung, p. 270, and by Von Soden, Theolo- 
gische Liter aturzeitung, 26, 1892, and its value will be seen by 
references in the commentary. 

The most complicated of all these recent attempts at the 


reconstruction of Acts is that of Dr. C. Clemen. His three chief 
sources (with which he closely connects other shorter sources, e.g., 
a source for vi. 1-6) are named (1) Historia Hellenistarum, H.H., 
vi. 9, 10, vii. 1-36, 35-58 a , 59 b , viii. l b , xi. 19-21, 24", 26: this 
source Clemen regards as very old and trustworthy; (2) Historia 
Petri, H.Pe., consisting chiefly of i.-v., and of some passages in- 
serted in H.H., viz., vi. 7, 8, 11-15, vii. 37, 60, viii. 2, viii. 4-13, 
18-24, the account of Simon Magus; viii. 26-40, the conversion of 
the Ethiopian; (3) Historia Pauli, H.Pa., xiii. 1-xxviii. 30, 31, a 
source which may have originated in a diary kept by Luke on a 
journey to Rome called (4) Itinerarium Pauli, I. Pa., containing the 
"We" sections, and combined with (3) by the first of the three 
redactors. The first redactor is simply R., and to him are attributed 
other additions besides the "We" sections to the Historia Pauli, 
although no "tendency" can be assigned to him, cf., e.g., xiv. 8-18, 
xvi. 23 b -34, xvii. 19-33, the Athenian discourse, etc. The two other 
redactors are much more pronounced: one, Redactor Judaicus, 
R.J. , writing 93-117 a.d., compiled and revised the above sources, 
making many additions, e.g., the miracles at Lydda and Joppa, 
ix. 23-43, and for the most part the Cornelius history, x. 1-xi. 18; 
xvi. 1-3, xxi. 20 b -26, etc. ; and finally, the third redactor, Redactor 
Antijudaicus, R.A., writing probably in the time of Hadrian, with 
the object of counterbalancing the wrong tendencies of his pre- 
decessor; to him we owe, before all, ix. 1-31, Paul's conversion, 
xii. 1-25, xv. 5-12, 19, 23-33, 41, and additions to the speech at 
Miletus, xx. 19 b , 25-35, 38». Other instances will be found in the 
commentary of the manner in which the additions of " these two 
antipodes," R.J. and R.A., are given precisely by Clemen, even to 
parts of verses, and it is no unfriendly critic (Heitmuller, u. s„ 
p. 128) who points out that of the five journeys of Paul to Jeru- 
salem mentioned in Acts no less than four are referred by Clemen 
to his redactors, which is fatal to the historical character of these 
visits : ix. 26, R.A. ; xi. 30, R.A. ; xv. 1-33, R.J. and R.A. ; and xviii. 22 b , 
R. ; the last journey, xxi., is found in the source H.Pa., and this 
according to Clemen is a journey identical with Gal. ii. 1. There is 
indeed no occasion to look to a conservative critic like Zdckler for 
a sharp criticism of the ingenious but purely subjective theory of 
Clemen ; the latter's immediate successor in the same attempt to 
split up Acts into its component parts not only describes Clemen's 
theory as over-ingenious, but speaks of the somewhat mechanical 
way in which his Redactor Judaicus brings Paul into the synagogue, 
only to allow the Apostle to be at once expelled therefrom by the 


Redactor Antijudaicus, Jiingst, Die Quellen der Apostelgeschichte, 

p. 9. Whether we view it from its critical or from its chronological 

standpoint, Clemen's theory has not gained favour in England; for 

the former, see Ramsay, St. Paul, p. 11, and for the latter, Sanday 

and Headlam, Romans, p. xxxviii. But further, it cannot be said 

that Jungst's own theory is likely to find wider acceptance than that 

of his predecessor. To say nothing of the difficulties of the date 

which he proposes, and his advocacy of St. Luke's dependence on 

Josephus, in which he is at one with Clemen (see further below), 

we find ourselves, as in dealing with Spitta's theory, face to face with 

two sources, A and B. The Paulinist of the second half of Acts is A, 

and the simplest and most natural view, according to Jiingst himself, 

is to identify this A with the beloved physician Luke, Col. iv. 14, 

Philem. ver. 24, 2 Tim, iv. 11, who was with Paul during his 

imprisonment at Caesarea and Rome ; B represents the Petrine- 

Jewish Christian mainly of the first half, but whose hand may be 

seen in xiii. 40 f., xv. ver. 13 dircKpi6irj to ver. 19 Kpivw, and in ver. 

20 emcrretXai to atjjiaTos, whose name and date remain unknown, and 

whose narrative is full of miraculous events and legendary stories. 

Jungst's redactor has an important part to play, and whilst on the 

one hand he advocates the abrogation of the Mosaic law (Jiingst does 

not hesitate to attribute to him ver. 39, xiii.), on the other hand he 

allows Paul to circumcise Timothy, xvi. 2, to undertake a Nazarite 

vow, xxi. 20 b -26, and to acknowledge himself a Pharisee, xxiii. 6. 

The redactor's aim was to represent Christianity as a religio licita, 

and he thus endeavours to bring it by a conciliatory process into 

close connection with the Jewish religion. It would be difficult to 

find in the range of criticism anything more purely arbitrary than 

Jungst's arrangement of his sections chronologically, see Table, 

p. 225, at the end of his book (and notes in commentary), and the 

instances given above are sufficient to show how he does not hesitate 

to split up a verse amongst his various sources: we cannot be 

surprised that Clemen retorted upon him the charge of over- 

ingeniousness with which Jiingst had greeted Clemen's own subtle 


In the same year as Jungst's publication, the veteran Hilgenfeld 
explained his own views of the sources of Acts, Zeitschrift fur 
wissenschaftliche Theologie, 1895, 1896, following partly the lines 
upon which he had previously worked twenty years before in his 
Einleitung, but also taking into account either adversely or with 
different degrees of agreement, the theories since propounded. 
According to him the sources are three in number : (1) irpd|eis ru'rpou, 


A, a Jewish-Christian source, i. 15- v. 42, describing the origin and 
development of the mother-Church ; from it were also derived ix. 
31-42, xi. 2, Cod. D, a passage relating a missionary circuit, xii. 
1-23; (2) Trp<££ei$ iw itrrd, a Jewish-Christian document hellenised, 
commencing with vi. 1, and continuing to viii. 40, including the 
choice of the Seven, and describing what was known of two of them, 
St. Stephen and St. Philip ; (3) irpc^eis riauXoo : this C source 
commences with (vii. 58 b , viii. l a , 3) ix., and includes nearly the 
whole of that chapter, xi. 27-29, and the greater portion of xiii.- 
xxviii., with the " We " sections. But it will be noticed that, 
according to Hilgenfeld, we owe this source C probably to one of the 
early Christians of Antioch (xi. 28 D), and that it affords us a trust- 
worthy account, and partly that of an eye-witness, of the missionary 
work of St. Paul begun at Antioch and spread over the heathen 
world. Each of the three sources is revised and added to by the 
"author to Theophilus," who as a unionist- Pauline makes it his 
chief aim to represent the origin of the Gentile Church as essentially 
dependent upon the mother-Church of Jerusalem, and Paul as in 
full agreement with the primitive Apostles, and as acting after the 
precedent of St. Peter ; thus to C is referred the whole episode of 
Cornelius and the account of the Church in Antioch, x. 1-xi. 18 
(except xi. 2 B text), xi. 19-26, 30, xii. 24, 25. Hilgenfeld is not only 
often greatly dependent upon the Western text (see below and in 
commentary), but it will be seen that the reference of large sections 
to his " author to Theophilus " is often quite arbitrary {cf. notes 
in comment.). 

One more well-known name follows that of Hilgenfeld — the name 
of J. Weiss. In 1893, Studien und Kritiken, Weiss had already 
to some extent given in his adhesion to Spitta's theory, and had 
treated Clemen's redactors R.J. and R.A., one of whom always 
follows the other to undo the effects of his working, with little 
ceremony; but in opposition to Spitta he sees in i.-v. only source B, 
a strong Jewish-Christian document, and in this respect he ap- 
proaches more nearly to B. Weiss and Feine, although he does not 
attach equal weight to the historical value of the document in 
question. Unlike Spitta, he refers the speech of Stephen (upon the 
unity of which Spitta so strongly insists) not to A, but to B. In 
1897 J. Weiss admits only A as the source for the second half of Acts, 
except in some passages in which he cannot refrain from introducing 
a redactor, Uber die Absicht und den liter arischen Charakter der 
A. G., 1897, p. 38. The view taken by J. Weiss certainly has the 
merit of appearing less complicated than that of Jungst and Clemen; 


Heitmiiller, u. s., pp. 94, 139, highly commends the service rendered 
by J. Weiss in insisting upon the fact that, even if it is derived from 
sources, the book of Acts forms a whole, written with a definite 
purpose and aim, and it is no doubt true that the more we recognise 
this, the more readily shall we recognise parts or sources which are 
inconsistent with a unity of aim, whether we derive them from oral 
or written traditions. But what kind of man must the final reviser 
have been in that he was entirely unaware of the discrepancies and 
difficulties which the sharp eyes of modern critics have discovered, 
and allowed them to remain instead of dismissing or explaining 
them with a few strokes of his pen ? Or if he was so skilful as to be 
able to combine together sources often so unlike, how is it that he 
was notwithstanding so unskilful as to leave such patent and glaring 
discrepancies ? And if the final revision took place in the second 
century, how is it that we have no colouring, not even in the 
speeches, of second-century ideas ? (See especially Ramsay, St. Paul, 
p. 10.) In other respects it will be noticed that these theories, far 
from possessing even the recommendation of novelty, are nothing 
but a rehabilitation of the exploded " tendency " theories of Baur 
and Zeller, or of the discredited " parallelism " between Peter and 
Paul (see above) ; in numberless cases one critic flatly contradicts 
another in the details of his confident partition of sources into 
verses, or even portions of verses. At the same time hardly any 
of the writers in question seem able to separate themselves entirely 
^ from the traditional view that Luke, the companion of Paul, was 
more or less concerned in the composition of the book, which, as we 
believe, is so justly ascribed to him. 

Before we pass from this question of sources, a few words must 
be said as to the alleged dependence of St. Luke upon Josephus. A 
century and a half ago points of contact between the two historians 
were collected by Ott and Krebs (see Wendt, u. s., p. 36, and Krenkel, 
Josephus und Lucas, p. 1). But only in comparatively recent times 
has the question been seriously discussed as to whether the author 
of the third Gospel and of Acts was dependent in a literary sense 
upon Josephus. At the outset it is well to bear in mind that both 
men were historians, writing at the same period, and often of 
necessity referring to the same events. A certain amount, therefore, 
of parallel description and even of similarity of diction might fairly 
be expected. 1 But that the author of Acts often showed a know- 

1 Amongst recent critics who have rejected the idea of St. Luke's dependence 
on Josephus may be mentioned Reuss, Schiirer, Gloel, Harnack, Belser, Bousset, 
and in England, Salmon, Sanday, Plummer (in his review of the latter's St. Lukt 
Weiss, however, now i nclines to the opposite view). 


ledge of independent tradition is admitted even by those who main- 
tain the dependence in question ; see, e.g., Krenkel, u. s., p. 207, 
Clemen, Die Chronologie der Paulinischen Briefe, p. 68 (see further 
in commentary, v. 36, xii. 19, xxi. 38, and Zahn's instances of this 
independent knowledge of events and persons, Einleitung, ii., p. 416). 

But more extraordinary than the variations of certainty and 
uncertainty in these critics is the position taken up by Wendt in his 
latest edition (1899) of Meyer's Commentary. In his former edition 
(1888) he maintained that the points of contact between Josephus 
and Luke were too general in their character to justify the notion 
of literary dependence, and that the author of Acts would naturally 
possess independent knowledge of contemporary events and person- 
alities, and he still admits this general similarity and the want of 
proof in many of the dependencies alleged by Krenkel in his lengthy 
examination of the question : e.g., the fact that both writers speak of 
Porcius Festus as the SidSoxos of Felix is no proof of literary 
dependence (Acts xxiv. 27, Jos., Ant., xx., 8, 9). But Wendt 
fastens on the one passage, v. 36, cf. Jos., Ant., xx., 5, 1, as proving 
a real dependence (see notes in commentary), and argues that if this 
is so, the same dependence may be naturally expected in other 
places. Thus, in what appears to be quite an arbitrary manner, he 
asserts that some notices in Acts are dependent upon Josephus, 
whilst some may be taken by the author of the book out of his own 
chief source, e.g., the account of the Egyptian, xxi. 38, and of the 
high priest Ananias, xxiii. 2, xxiv. 1, etc. But having said all this, 
Wendt proceeds to point out that we must not measure too highly 
the influence of Josephus on Acts; even the passage v. 36, in 
which that influence is most marked, proves to us at the same time 
the nature of the influence in question : it did not consist in an 
exact familiarity with the words of Josephus, and in a careful 
employment of his material, but in a superficial reminiscence of an 
earlier reading of the Jewish historian ; thus the deviations side by 
side with the likenesses are explained. But the most conservative 
critic might allow as much as this. 

Wendt further admits that this dependence cannot extend to the 
later works of Josephus, c. Apion. and his Vita. This last work, 
which must have been written after the year 100 a.d. (see " Josephus " 
(Edersheim), Diet, of Chr. Biog., iii., p. 448), contains the expression, 
c. 29, Qavelv pev, ei SiKatoe iariv, ou, and Krenkel maintains 
that there is a clear trace of dependence upon this in the words 
used in Acts xxiv. 1 1 (pp. 255, 256, so Holtzmann and Steck). But 
in the first place the supposed dependency is not admitted by Wendt, 


and not only may parallels be found to a similar use of the verb 
■jrapcuToopai in other Greek writers (Wetstein), but it is also notice- 
able that in the same speech of St. Paul Krenkel discovers, xxv. ver. 
9, what he calls "the most striking reference" to the language of 
Josephus in the phrase xaptra, X^P lv KaTaTi0ea0<u tiki (cf. also xxiv. 
27, Jos., B.J., vi., 3, and commentary, in loco). But the phrase 
is distinctly classical, cf. Thuc, i., 33, 138, and if Josephus was 
acquainted with Thucydides (see Kennedy, Sources of N.T. Greek, 
p. 56) why not St. Luke ? (Cf. Belser, Theol. Quartalschrift, p. 653, 

But what can we think of these supposed dependencies upon 
a book of Josephus written in the early years of the second 
century, when we read further that St. Paul's account of his 
dream, xxiii. 11, is modelled upon the dream in Josephus, 
Vita, 42 ? In the former passage we read <re 8ei icai els z ?<a\ir\v 
fiapTuprjaai, and in the latter on kcu 'Pwpaiois 8ei ac iroXcpfjorai, in 
each case the dream takes place in the night, and in each case 
some one stood over the dreamer (cmords) (see Bousset's review of 
Krenkel, Theol. Literaturzeitung, p. 392, 1895, No. 15). The alleged 
similarity between the introduction to the third Gospel and the 
Acts, and the introduction to the Ant. of Josephus and to his 
book, c. Apionem, is of the slightest when compared with the 
likeness between the language of St. Luke in his preface to his 
Gospel and the introduction of Dioscorides of Anazarbus to his 
Materia Medica, cf. Bousset, u. s., Vogel, Zur Charakteristik des 
Lukas, p. 17, and J. Weiss, Meyer's Commentary, Evangelium des 
Lukas, p. 286 ; indeed much more might be said for an imitation by 
St. Luke in his preface of the introduction to the history of Thucy- 
dides {cf. Belser, u. s., pp. 642, 658, 659, etc.). It would have been 
very advantageous if Krenkel in his long list of words common to 
Josephus and Luke, p. 304 ff., had not only given us references in 
classical writers to the use of the words which he adduces (e.g., 
the phrase irupe-rw owexccrOai, Luke iv. 38, Ant., xiii., 15, 5, finds 
frequent parallels in Plato and Thucydides), but also to the authors 
whose books form the Apocrypha, and especially to 1 Mace, and 2 
Mace. It is also noteworthy that no mention whatever is made of 
Polybius (Zahn, u. s., p. 414). The whole list requires revision, and 
it is preposterous to class amongst literary dependencies technical 
terms like avQu-naros, KoXcwia, vewK<Spo<;, yauKXrjpos, aiKapios, orpaToircS- 
apX^S' TeTpapxe'w, or ordinary words which since Homer had been 
common to all Greek literature, e.g., Ixeiac, poyis, irXous, irapoi' r 
irapairXew. So far as language is concerned, what is more improbable^ 


as Zahn points out, than that the man who wrote Luke i. 1-4 should 
go to school and learn from Josephus ? (C/. C. Apion., i., 9 ; Ant., xx., 
12.) But again what can we expect from an author who can find a 
parallel between Luke ii. 42 and Jos., Vita, 2 ? (See Gloel, Die jiingste 
Kritik des Galaterbriefes, p. 65.) The "We" sections equally with 
the other parts of the book contain many points of contact with 
Josephus, and Krenkel is somewhat puzzled to explain this, p. 281 ; 
but when we consider that Josephus has given us a long description 
of his own voyage to Rome, and of his shipwreck on the way, Vita, 
3, it was only to be expected that similar nautical terms would be 
found in the two narratives, and some similarity of description, and 
the two accounts help to show us how easily and naturally two 
writers narrating the same experiences would express themselves in 
the same style and language. 

But this question of the author's relation to Josephus is also 
important in its bearing upon the date of Acts. 

The Antiquities of Josephus are placed at 93, 94 a.d., and if it 
could be proved that traces of dependence on the Jewish historian 
may be found in the third Gospel, those who maintain that a 
considerable period of time elapsed between the writing of that book 
and of Acts would be obliged to place the latter work some few years 
later still. But here again we may see the uncertainty which 
prevails when conclusions are built upon such data. Wendt (p. 
40) can find no sure traces of any acquaintance with Josephus in 
the third Gospel, and so he inclines to date Acts in the interval 
between 95 and 100 a.d. (although he admits the possibility of a 
later date still). But 95, 96 a.d. would place the book under 
Domitian, and the question arises as to whether it can be said with 
any certainty that Acts was composed at a time when the Christians 
had gone through such a period of persecution as marked the close 
of that emperor's reign. Harnack decides without hesitation in the 
negative, Chron., i., pp. 248-250, and whilst he gives 93 as the 
terminus ad quern, it is satisfactory to find that he holds that the book 
may have been composed between 80 and 93 a.d. The limit which 
he thus fixes Harnack regards as in approximate agreement with 
his other argument (see above) against the later date of Acts, viz. , 
its non-use of St. Paul's Epistles, a fact which alone would prevent us 
from dating the book in the second century (p. 249). So far as date 
is concerned, Ramsay would seem to occupy to some extent the same 
position, at least approximately, for he maintains that the book could 
not possibly have been written as late as the reign of Trajan, when 
the Church had long suffered persecution from the State, or even by 
VOL. II. 3 


a writer who had passed through the reign of Domitian, St. Paul, 
p. 387, and he dates its publication in the year immediately following 
81 a.d., i.e., in the early years of Domitian. But whilst Harnack's 
language might be employed by one who even dated the book before 
the persecution of Nero, Ramsay maintains that there runs through 
the entire work a purpose which could hardly have been conceived 
before the State had begun to persecute on political grounds (p. 388). 
But when did this kind of persecution begin ? The evidence for the 
origin of a definite State policy against the Christians points pre- 
sumably to Nero, and not to Vespasian, cf. Hardy, Christianity and 
the Roman Government, p. 80 (1890), Mommsen's letter, Expositor, 
July, 1893, Hort, First Epistle of St. Peter, p. 3, Pullan, Early Chris- 
tianity, p. 106 ff., 1898. Professor Ramsay speaks of the Flavian 
policy as declaring Christianity illegal and proscribing the Name, 
but the first of the three Flavian emperors was Vespasian, and there 
is no positive evidence to refer the adoption of a definite State policy 
against the new religion to him {cf. Ramsay, Church in the Roman 
Empire, p. 256). 

But if, from this point of view, there is nothing in the book itself 
to militate against an earlier date even than that mentioned by 
Ramsay and Harnack, are we justified in placing it, with Blass, before 
the fall of Jerusalem ? Blass indeed would place it as early as 
57-59 a.d., following St. Jerome, and the Gospel in 56, Evangelium 
secundum Lucam, p. lxxix., Philology of the Gospels, p. 33 ff. But 
however this may be, Blass has done invaluable service by pointing 
out that there is nothing in St. Luke's words, Luke xxi. 20 ff., which 
can give colour to the theory which regards them as a mere vati- 
cinium post eventum, by showing that Daniel ix. 36 ff. already con- 
tained much which Luke is alleged to have added from his own 
knowledge of events already fulfilled, and by adding from modern 
history at least one remarkable prophecy and its fulfilment. Savona 
rola foretold as early as 1496 the capture of Rome, which happened 
in 1527, and he did this not merely in general terms but in detail ; 
his words were realised to the letter when the sacred Churches of 
St. Peter and St. Paul became, as the prophet had foretold, stables 
for the conquerors' horses. The difficulties of foreseeing this capture 
of the Holy City at all by an army which would not have refrained 
from such an act of sacrilege are vividly depicted by Blass, Philology 
of the Gospels, p. 42 ff. 1 

1 Cf. Evangelium secundum Lucam, p. via., where he adds: "Major utique 
Christus propheta quam Savonarola; hujus autem vaticinium longe difficilius fuit 
quam illius ; nam hostis Romanus praevideri poterat, exercitus Lutheranus non 


But if on other grounds, e.g., on account of the prologue to St. 
Luke's Gospel (Harnack, u. s., p. 248, Sanday, B.L., p. 278, Page, 
Acts, p. xviii.), we are asked to place that book after the destruction of 
Jerusalem, it is further maintained by Harnack that some consider- 
able interval must have elapsed after that event before Acts was 
written ; for if it had been composed immediately after the destruc- 
tion, the writer would have mentioned it as useful for his aim ; and 
so the book must have been composed at a time, c. 80, when the 
overthrow of the Holy City no longer stood, as it were, in the fore- 
ground of events. But it may be doubted if this is a very convincing 
argument, for the Epistle of Barnabas, written, as Harnack holds, 
between the wide limits of 80 and 132 a.d., does refer to the 
destruction, and for the writer of this Epistle equally as for the 
writer of Acts the event would have been a fait accompli. It is 
doubtful whether, in fact, anything can be gained as to the fixture 
of date from this omission of any reference to the fate of the Holy 
City ; if anything, the omission would point to the years before the 
destruction for the composition of the book, as Harnack himself 
allows, if we were not obliged, according to the same writer, by the 
date of the Gospel to place Acts also after the overthrow. Both in 
England and in Germany representative writers can be named in 
support of the earlier and of the later date, Dr. Salmon maintaining 
that Acts was written a little more than two years after St. Luke's 
arrival in Rome (cf. also Rackham, Journal of Theol. Studies, i., 
p. 77), whilst Dr. Sanday would apparently place Acts about 
80 a.d., and the Gospel 75-80, B. L., p. 279, so too Dr. Plummer, 
St. Luke, p. xxxi., both being influenced to a great extent by the 
presumption that the Gospel followed the fall of Jerusalem. In 
this the English critics are in interesting agreement with Zahn in 
his recent volume, Einleitung, ii., pp. 433, 434, so far as date is 
concerned, in that he too regards 80 a.d. as the terminus ad quern 
for both Gospel and Acts, assigning them probably to 75 a.d., but 
unable to find a place for them before the fall of Jerusalem. 1 

1 Sir J. Hawkins in his valuable Hora Synoptica, p. 143, has recently drawn 
attention to the difference of vocabulary between the third Gospel and Acts, and 
whilst maintaining that it is quite insufficient tb destroy the argument for the 
identity of authorship, he thinks that it points to a considerable lapse of time 
between the two works. But we are dealing with a versatile author acquainted 
apparently with many writers, Vogel, Zur Charakteristik des Lucas nach Sprache 
tend SHI, pp. 15, 17, 38, and the differences in question cannot have weighed with 
Blass, inasmuch as he places the completion of Acts three years after the Gospel, 
and still less with Zahn, who still maintains that the two books were published 


It would appear then that the date of Acts must be determined 
to a great extent by the date assigned to the third Gospel ; and this 
apparently was the view of Bishop Lightfoot {cf. Plummer, St. Luke, 
p. xxix., and Zockler, Apostelgeschichte, p. 163, 2nd edit.), inasmuch 
as he leaves the question of the date of Acts undetermined, and 
refers for its solution to the date assigned to St. Luke's Gospel ; 
although it should be noted that he does not attach any weight to 
the argument which finds in Luke xxi. 20-24 a proof that the Gospel 
was written after Jerusalem had fallen (cf. also Headlam, " Acts," 
Hastings' B.D., p. 30, and Wendt, Apostelgeschichte, p. 40, for 
various dates). 

As in the case of the Gospel, so in that of the Acts, it is impossible 
to say at what place it was written. The traditional view since the 
days of St. Jerome, De Vir. Illust., 7, has favoured Rome (although 
elsewhere Jerome refers the writing of the Gospel to parts of 
Achaia and Boeotia, Prczf. to Cotntn. in Matt.), cf. Schneckenburger, 
Lekebusch, Godet, Felten, Blass, amongst others (Wendt, 1899, 
although rejecting the traditional account of St. Jerome, adds that 
he knows of no decisive grounds against Rome, p. 40). Lekebusch, 
Apostelgeschichte, pp. 393, 429, in supporting the claims of Rome 
argues for the probability that St. Luke, like many medical men at 
the time, would be likely to find in Rome a good field for his pro 
fessional work. Achaia, Macedonia, Asia Minor, Alexandria have all 
been mentioned, and Lightfoot also mentions Philippi. Pfleiderer 
has supported Ephesus on the ground that the writer manifests 
a special interest in that city, whilst Zockler thinks that something 
may be said for Antioch in Syria, owing to St. Luke's traditional 
connection with the place, Eus., H. E., iii., 4; Jerome, De Vir. 
Illust., 7, cf. Acts xi. 28, D., if there was the slightest ground for 
supposing that Luke at the period when the book was written had 
any residence in the Syrian town. On the whole it seems best with 
Nosgen, Apostelgeschichte, p. 42 ; Lightfoot, u. s., p. 40 ; Zahn, Ein- 
leitung, ii., pp. 337, 439, to leave the locality undetermined ; see 
especially the latter as to the bearing on the question of the mention 
of insignificant places such as Tres Tabernse, Appii Forum, in the 

in the same year, 75. It is remarkable no doubt that re is used so often in Acts 
in all parts of the book : nevertheless it occurs also in the third Gospel nine or 
ten times, but in St. Mark not at all, and in St. Matthew and St. John only three times 
in each ; \>.iv ovv, although no doubt frequent in Acts, does not occur at all in St. 
Matthew and St. Mark, although it is found once in St. Luke, iii. 18 (twice in St. 
John) ; and xai a.vr6$, although occurring very frequently in the third Gospel, is not 
dropped in Acts, although proportionately it is rarely found (eight times). 


neighbourhood of Rome, and on the evident ignorance of Theophilus 
as to the localities of Palestine, and apparently also in some respects, 
and in comparison with the author, of Macedonia and Greece (cf. xvi. 
12; xvii. 19, 21). 

If we turn to external testimony in favour of the book we find it 
full and satisfactory {cf. Zockler, Apostelgeschichte, 2nd edit., p. 
160, Headlam, "Acts," Hastings' B.D., i., p. 26, and Gore on the 
points of contact between the earlier chapters and the Didache ; 
see Church and the Ministry, p. 416). To Wendt in his latest 
edition, p. 41 (1899), we again owe much that is of value, both 
in what he allows, and in what he declines to recognise. One very 
important point calls for determination at the outset. The likeness 
between the language of Acts xiii. 22 and Clem. Rom., Cor., xviii., 1, 
in relation to Ps. lxxxviii. 20 (LXX) cannot, as both Clemen and 
Wendt admit, be accidental. Indeed Wendt is of opinion that it is 
no more probable that Clement depends upon Acts than Acts upon 
Clement, while at the same time he holds that a third alternative is 
possible, viz., that both writings may be dependent on some common 
third source But there is no evidence forthcoming as to the existence 
of this common source, and Lightfoot rightly presses the signifi- 
cance of the threefold coincidence between the language of Acts 
and Clement, which cannot easily be explained away («. s., p. 120). 
In Acts we have three features introduced which are not found in 
the original of the Psalm, viz., the mention of the "witness," and the 
addition (a) of " a man after my heart," cf. 1 Sam. xiii. 14, and (b) of 
" the son of Jesse," but all these are also found in the passage in 
St. Clement. So again Wendt with many other critics would ex- 
plain the words yj&iok SiSocTes r\ XafiBdeoKTes, Clem. Rom., Cor., ii., 
1, cf. Acts xx. 35, not by dependence upon Acts, but by a common 
tradition of the words of the Lord. But Wendt admits, although 
very guardedly, the use of Acts in Polycarp, Phil., i., 2, cf. Acts 
ii. 34, Ignat., Ad Smyrn., 3, Acts x. 41, and he does not deny the 
connection between Ignat., Ad Magn., 5, and Acts i. 25, whilst he 
admits that in Justin Martyr the references become more clear 
and frequent (see, for a full and good estimate of the references 
to Ignatius and Polycarp, Headlam, "Acts," Hastings' B.D., i., 
p. 26). 

But it is most important to observe that Wendt fully recognises 
the influence of the Canonical Acts upon the Apocryphal Acts of 
the second century, although he points out that of this literature we 
only possess a small portion, and he expects great things from the 
recently discovered fragments of the Acta Pauli of the middle of 


the second century; cf. Acta Pauli et Theclce (apparently a part of 
the Acta Pauli), which are frequently dependent upon our Acts for 
their notices of persons and places, and also Acta Petri dependent 
again upon our Acts, as in the notice of the meeting of Peter and 
Simon Magus, cf. Zockler, Apostelgeschichte, p, 159, and Harnack, 
Chron., i., pp. 498 and 554 (although Harnack places the Acta Petri 
as late as the middle of the third century, whilst Zahn takes 170 as 
the terminus ad quern). From other writings and documents of the 
second century the testimony to our book is clear, cf. Epist. ad 
Diognetum, 3, cf. Acts xvii. 24 ; the Epistle of Vienne and Lyons, 
cf. Acts vii. 59 ff. (Euseb., H.E., v., 2; Didache, iv. 8, Acts iv. 
32), and two other references to St. Paul's address at Athens, 
in Tatian, Orat. ad Grac, 4, and Athenagoras, Legat., 13 (Wendt) 
(cf. possibly Dionysius of Corinth, Euseb., H.E., iv., 23) ; so too in 
Justin Martyr, references to the book are found in Apol., i. and ii., 
and Dial, cum Tryph., cf, e.g., Acts i. 8, 9, ii. 2, Apol., i., 50; Acts 
xvii. 23, Apol., ii., 10; Acts xxvi. 22 f., Dial., 36 (Wendt, Zockler, 
Headlam) ; and not only so, but it is definitely assigned to St. Luke 
and treated as Scripture in the Muratorian Fragment, /. 34 ; cf. Iren., 
Adv. Hcer., iii., 14, 15, Tertull., C. Marcion., v., 2 ; De Jejun., 10 ; 
Clem. Alex., Strom., v., 12. Moreover, we must not lose sight of the 
fact that "all the evidence which testifies to the authorship of 
the third Gospel is available also for Acts, and conversely, and 
that the early testimony in favour of St. Luke as the author of the 
third Gospel is absolutely unbroken and undisputed for nearly 
eighteen centuries," Lightfoot, u. s., p. 30; Plummer, St. Luke, 
pp. xiv., xvi. 

Space forbids us to enter into the many vexed questions which 
surround the chronology of Acts, but an attempt is made to discuss 
some of them in the pages of the commentary. A glance at the 
various tables given us in Meyer-Wendt (1888), p. 31, or in Farrar's 
St. Paul, ii., p. 624, is enough in itself to show us the number and 
complexity of the problems raised. But fresh interest has been 
aroused not only by Professor Ramsay, but by the recent return of 
Harnack and O. Holtzmann (cf. also McGiffert, Apostolic Age, 
p. 359 ; Blass, Proleg., p. 22) to the earlier chronology of Eusebius 
(although O. Holtzmann does not mention him, N eutestamentliche 
Zeitgeschichte, pp. 128, 132), formerly advocated by Bengel. Ac- 
cording to Eusebius the recall of Felix must be dated between 
October 55 and 56. Harnack places the entry of Festus upon office 
in the summer of 56, since Paul embarks for Rome some few months 
after the arrival of Festus in the autumn, Chron., i., p. 237. The 


Apostle would thus arrive in Rome in the spring of 57, and his 
release follows in 59. (O. Holtzmann from other data places the 
arrival of Festus in Palestine in the summer of 55, and both he and 
McGiffert place Paul's arrival in Rome in 56, and his imprisonment 

This chronology has been severely criticised by Wendt, Apostel- 
geschichte, p. 57 (1899), and it fails to commend itself to Ramsay, 
Expositor, March, 1897, as also more recently to Zahn, Einleitung , 
ii., p. 626. It has been objected to it, inter alia, that its supporters, 
or at all events Harnack and O. Holtzmann, place the conversion 
of Paul so soon after the death of our Lord that it is doubtful 
whether sufficient time is allowed for the events recorded in Acts 
i.-vi. (cf. xxvi. 10), although Holtzmann, p. 133, sees no difficulty in 
placing the conversion in 29, the date of the death of Jesus, as the 
events in Acts i.-viii. in his view follow quickly upon one another. 
(Ramsay thinks that the interval before Stephen's murder was short, 
but he allows two and a half or three years for the event after the 
great Pentecost ; see notes in commentary for the difficulties con- 
nected with the martyrdom.) Harnack places the date of the con- 
version in 30, i.e., according to him, either in the year following, or 
in the year of, the death of Jesus. On the other hand the chronology 
in question allows some considerable time for Paul's release from 
his first captivity (a release admitted by Harnack and Spitta, as 
earlier by Renan), and for his subsequent journeys east and west, if 
Mr. Turner, "Chronology," Hastings' B.D., i., 420, is right in placing 
the death of both Peter and Paul in 64-65 (Harnack placing the death 
of St. Paul in 64 and of St. Peter in 67, Eusebius, however (so Blass), 
from whom Harnack here departs, placing the former event in 67 
(68)). The received chronology, making 60, 61 , the date for the arrival 
of Festus in Judaea, allows but little interval between the close of 
St. Paul's first imprisonment and his death, if his martyrdom 
was in 64. The difficulty is met by Mr. Turner, u. s., p. 421, by 
assigning 58 (Ramsay 59) as the precise year for the accession 
of Festus to office, placing the close of the Acts, after the two 
years' captivity in Rome, early in 61, and so allowing an interval 
of three years between St. Paul's first and second imprisonment. 
Unfortunately it must be admitted that we cannot positively fix ,58 
as the year for the event in question, and this uncertainty sadly 
interferes with the adoption of any precise chronology for Acts, 
although on all sides the importance of the date of Festus' arrival 
is recognised — " the crucial date," Mr. Turner calls it ; ail depends 
upon ascertaining it, says Harnack (cf. also Wendt, u. 5., p. 56; 


Page, Acts, xxxviii. ; Zahn, Einleitung, ii., p. 639; Lightfoot, B.D. 2 , 
i., 42). 

If we adopt Mr. Turner's date for Festus — a date intermediate 
between the earlier and later dates assigned above — and work back, 
we get 56 as the date for St. Paul's arrest in Jerusalem and im- 
prisonment in Caesarea, 55 for his leaving Ephesus, 52 for the 
commencement of his third missionary journey (for he stayed at 
Ephesus considerably over two years; Lewin, Fasti Sacri, p. 310, 
says three), 50 for his reaching Corinth (late in the year), where he 
sojourned eighteen months, 49 for Council at Jerusalem and second 
missionary journey. But if we identify the Council at Jerusalem, 
Acts xv., with the second visit to Jerusalem according to Gal. ii. 1, 
but the third visit according to Acts, the question arises as to whether 
the notices in Gal. i. 18 and ii. 1 involve seventeen years as an 
interval between the Conversion and the Council (with Lightfoot, 
Harnack, Zahn), or whether the fourteen years, Gal. ii. 1, should be 
reckoned from the Conversion, i.e., eleven years from the first visit 
of St. Paul to Jerusalem, including the three in the fourteen (with 
Ramsay, Turner, McGiffert). 1 

Against the former view Mr. Turner urges the objection that in 
this case the first visit to Jerusalem would be carried back to 35-36, 
whereas in all probability Aretas was not ethnarch of Damascus 
until 37 (2 Cor. xi. 32, Acts ix. 25, 26 ; see commentary), and he 
therefore includes the three years in the fourteen, and thus gets 
35-36 for the conversion, and 38 (under Aretas) for the first visit. 
As Mr. Turner places the Crucifixion 29 a.d., his scheme is thus 
free from the objection referred to above as against Harnack 
and O. Holtzmann, since it allows some six or seven years for 
the events in the early chapters of Acts (see further on the 
whole question of chronology Mr. Turner's full and valuable article 
already mentioned ; Zahn, u. s., ii. ; Excursus, ii. ; Professor Ram- 
say, " Pauline Chronology," Expositor, March, 1897 ; Professor 
Bacon (Yale), " Criticism of the New Chron. of Paul," Expositor, 
February, 1898; Wendt, u s. (1899), p. 53 ff . ; Biblical World, 
November, 1897 ; Mr. Vernon Bartlet's article on "■ Pauline Hist. 

1 But Professor Ramsay, it must be remembered, identifies Gal. ii. with Acts xi. 
30, xii. 25 (see notes in commentary), and an interval of fourteen years between St. 
Paul's conversion and the famine would be more probable than an interval of 
seventeen, which would throw the conversion back too early, and Dr. McGiffert 
identifies the accounts of both visits in Acts xi. and xv. — the former for famine 
relief and the latter for the settlement of the controversy with the Judaisers — with 
the visit mentioned in Gal. ii. 1, Apostolic Age, p. 208. 


and Chron.," Expositor, October, 1899, written too late for more 
than a brief mention here, as also Professor Bacon's more recent 
contribution, Expositor, November, 1899). 

But although there are so many points of contact between 
secular history and the Acts, it seems that we must still be content 
with what Harnack describes as a relative rather than an absolute 
Chronology. We cannot say, e.g., that we can fix precisely the date 
of the famine, or the edict of Claudius, or the proconsulship of 
Gallio, or the reign of Aretas, to take the four events mentioned by 
Lightfoot, "Acts," B.D. 2 , i., p. 4, as also by Harnack, Chron., i., p. 
236, cf. 2,2hti, u. s., ii. ; Excursus ii. But in this respect no blame 
attaches to St. Luke as an historian. His object was to connect 
the history of the rise and progress of the Christian Faith with the 
course of general imperial history around him, and if his chronological 
sense seems deficient to modern judgment, it was a deficiency in 
which he was by no means peculiar, but which he shared with his 
contemporaries and his age, cf. Ramsay, St. Paul, pp. 18, 23, and 
Was Christ born at Bethlehem ? pp. 204, 256. 

State of the Text. It is not too much to say that during the last 
fifteen years chief interest has centred around the Western text 
and its relative importance {cf. Blass, Studien und Kritiken, p. 86 ff., 
1894; Acta Apostolorum, 1895, and Acta Apostolorum, 1896, also 
Evangelium secundum Lucam, 1897, both edited secundum form am 
quce videtur Romanam ; see also Draseke, Zeitschrift filr wissen- 
schaft. Theol., p. 192 ff., 1894). 1 

Codex D, its most important representative, contains an un- 
usually large number of variations from the received text in Acts 
(see for the number Zockler, Apostelgeschichte, 2nd edit., p. 165 ; 
he reckons, e.g., some 410 additions or interpolations), and it is no 
wonder that attempts should have been made to account for this 
diversity. Bornemann's endeavour some half-century ago (1848) to 
represent D as the original text, and the omissions in the common 
text as due to the negligence or ignorance of copyists, found no 
acceptance, and whilst in one sense Blass may be said to have 
returned to the position of Bornemann, he has nevertheless found 
his predecessor's solution totally inadequate, Philology of the Gospels, 
p. 105. Joannes Clericus, Jean Leclerc, the Dutch philologist 
(born 1657), had already suggested that St. Luke had made two 

1 The main division of MSS. of Acts into three groups, with references to W. H. 
and Blass, is well given in Old Latin Biblical Texts, iv., pp. xvii., xviii. (H. J. 
White, Oxon., 1897). 


editions of Acts, and is said by Semler to have published his opinion,, 
although under an assumed name (Zahn, Einleitung, ii., p. 348 ; see 
also on the same page Zahn's interesting acknowledgment that he 
was himself in 1885-6 working on much the same lines as Blass). 
Meanwhile Tisch., W. H., B. Weiss have sought to establish the 
text of Acts essentially on the basis of fc$ABC, and it was left for 
Blass to startle the world of textual criticism by boldly claiming a 
fresh originality for Codex D. But this originality was not exclusive ; 
St. Luke has given us two originals, first a rough copy 6, R(omana), 
in Blass, and then a fair copy a, and A(ntiochena), for the use of 
Theophilus ; the rough copy remained in Re me and became the 
foundation of the Western text, copies of it having reached Syria 
and Egypt in the second century, while the latter abridged by Luke 
reached Theophilus in Antioch (so Blass), and was thence propa- 
gated in the East. 1 

But Codex D is by no means the sole witness, although a very 
weighty one, upon which Blass depends for his text. He derives- 
help from Codex E (Laudianus), from the minuscule 137 (M) in 
Milan, especially for the last chapters in which D is deficient, and 
in some passages also from Codex Ephraem, C ; from the Philox- 
enian Syriac version with the marginal annotations of Thomas 
Harkel (unfortunately we have no Old Syriac text as for the 
Gospels), the Sahidic version, the Latin text in D, d, and E, e, the 
Fleury palimpsest (Samuel Berger, 1889), Flor. in Blass; the so- 
called "Gigas" Latin version in Stockholm (Belsheim, 1879), Gig. 
in Blass; the Codex Parisinus, 321 (S. Berger, 1895), Par. in Blass; 
a Latin version of the N.T., fifteenth century, in Wernigerode r 
Wernig., w., in Blass, and a Latin version of the thirteenth century, 
"in linguam provincial Gallicae Romanae facta," Prov. in Blass. 2 

In addition to these MSS. and versions Blass also appeals to the 

* On the difference between the circulation of the two copies in the case of the 
third Gospel see Philology of the Gospels, p. 103. In England Bishop Lightfoot had 
previously conjectured that the Evangelist might himself have issued two separate 
editions of both Gospel and Acts, On a Fresh Revision of the N.T., p. 29. For 
similar instances of the issue of a double edition in classical and other literature see 
Draseke, u. s., p. 194 ; Zockler, Greifswalder Studien, p. 132, and Blass, Proleg., 
p. 32. 

2 To these may be added fragments of an old Latin translation of Acts in the 
Anonymi de prophetis et prophetiis containing six passages, notably Acts xi. 27, 28, 
in agreement with Codex D, cf. Miscellanea Cassinese, 1897, and Harnack, TheoU 
Literaturzeitung, p. 171, No. 6, 1898 ; the Greek Codex Athous, derived according 
to Blass, Philology of the Gospels, p. 250, from an old and very valuable original, 
and taken into some account by Hilgenfeld, Acta Apostolorum, p. ix. (1899), and cfi 


text employed by Irenaeus, which contains many resemblances to D ; 
to the text of St. Cyprian, which shows the same peculiarity; to the 
text of St. Augustine, especially in his treatises against the Mani- 
cheans, containing Acts i.-ii. 13, x. 13, 15, parts which are not found 
in the Fleury palimpsest : cf. also Tertullian, whose text, although it 
contains few quotations from Acts, resembles that of Irenaeus (add 
to these the work De promissionibus et prcsdicationibus Dei, referred, 
but wrongly, to Prosper, Prom, in Blass ; and the Contra Varima- 
dum of Vigilius, Vigil, in Blass : works not valued so highly by 
Hilgenfeld in his list of authorities for the Western text, Acta 
Apostolorum, p. xiii., 1899). By these aids Blass constructs his 
p text, even for those portions where D is wanting, viz., from viii. 29, 
irpocreXOe to x. 14, c^ayo^ ; from xxi. 2, £mj3aiT6s to ver. 10, diro ttjs ; 
xxii. 10, S>v T^raKToi to ver. 20, oweuSoxwK, and from xxii. 29, oi piKkovres 
to the end of the book, and his aim is to restore the Western text 
as it existed about the time of Cyprian, cf. Evangelium secundum 
Lucam, p. xxxi. The merit of his work in showing how widespread 
and interesting was the Western form of text is acknowledged even 
by those who do not accept his conclusions, see, e.g., Wendt, Apostel- 
geschichte (1899), p. 46, and Bousset, Theol. Rundschau, p. 413, 1898, 
although both object that Blass does not rightly estimate his 
different witnesses. 

But Blass is able to refer in support of his use of some of the 
authorities mentioned to the important investigation of Dr. P. 
Corssen in his Der Cyprianische Text der Acta Apostolorum, 26 pp., 
1892. This Latin text carries us back at least to the middle of the 
third century (and earlier still according to Harris, Four Lectures, 
etc., p. 53 ff., who thinks that the text might be called Tertullianic 
equally as well as Cyprianic ; but see on the other hand Blass, Acta 
Apost., edit, m., p. xxxi.), as Corssen shows by comparing the 
readings of the Fleury palimpsest (sixth century) (1) with St. 
Cyprian's quotations from Acts, (2) with similar quotations in the 
works of St. Augustine referred to above, De Actis cum Felice 
Manichceo and Contra epistolam Manichcei, (3) with the quotations 
in the work mentioned above as that of Prosper (Harris, u. s., p. 53). 
Behind these various texts Corssen concludes that there was a 
common Latin primitive, i.e., the Cyprian text, as he calls it., 
Moreover, this Cyprian text is a Western witness superior in value 

Acts xv. 20, 29. Hilgenfeld also adds to the Latin versions, Codex Vindobonensis 
s. (probably sixth century), cf. xxviii, 20, and see Old Latin Biblical Texts, br. 
(H. J. White, Oxon., 1897). 


even to the Greek of Codex Bezae, since it has in Corssen's opinion 
an internal unity and sequence wanting in the latter, although it 
agrees in many peculiarities with the Greek of that Codex (Harris, 
u. s., p. 53 ; Salmon, Introd., p. 594). Corssen thus helps materially 
to prove the antiquity of the Western Latin. 

But Dr. Blass further acknowledges that Corssen has done most 
valuable service in proving the composite nature of Codex D, and 
that in it we have not in its purity, but in a state of frequent 
mixture and conflation with a. Whilst, however, Blass regards the 
text as the older, Corssen regards a in that light, and as reveal- 
ing the character of a later revision (Gottingische gelehrte Anzeigen, 
pp. 433, 436, 446: 1896); in he somewhat strangely maintains 
that we have the hand of a Montanist reviser at work (cf. Blass's 
strictures, Evang. secundum Lucam, p. xxiv. ff.), a theory formerly 
adopted by Professor Harris, but afterwards abandoned by him. 

But how far do the variations between the two forms of text 
justify the hypothesis of Blass that both may be referred to one 
author, as the primary, a as the secondary text ? l 

In the apparatus criticus of the following pages, in which the 
variations for the most part in the two texts are stated and examined, 
it cannot be claimed for a moment that any definite conclusion is 
reached, simply because the matter is one which may be said to call 
for suspension of judgment. Certainly there are many difficulties in 
the way of accepting the theory of Blass in its entirety. There are 
passages, e.g., of which it may be said that the more detailed form 
is the original, which was afterwards shortened, while it may be main- 
tained often with equal force that the shortened form may well have 
been the original ; there are passages where a local knowledge or an 
exact knowledge of circumstances is shown, e.g., xii. 10, xix. 9, xx. 
15, xxi. 1, but such passages do not prove the priority of the text, 
for if both a and are referred to the same author, the same hand 
which omitted in a revision could also have added, although such 
instances may be cited for the originality of the text in comparison 
with a (see notes in loco for each passage). To these may be added 
the famous addition in xi. 28 (see in loco), which Blass makes the 
starting-point for his inquiry, and to which Hilgenfeld, Zahn, 
Zockler, Salmon, as against Harnack and B. Weiss, attach so much 
importance. There are again other passages in which it may be 

1 Blass still maintains, as against Corssen, that the language of the additions, 
and generally in the variants of 0, is Lucan, Philology of the Gospels, p. 113 ff„ 
and Evangelium secundum Lucam, p. xxvii. ff. 


maintained that if a is original we can understand the smoothness of 
0, but not vice versa, and it must always be remembered that this love 
of paraphrase and simplification has been urged on high authority 
as a marked characteristic of the Western readings in general, cf. 
W. H., p. 122 ff., and B. Weiss, Der Codex D in der Apostelge- 
sckichte, pp. 52, 105: 1897. There are, moreover, other passages in 
which Blass seems to assimilate a and 0, although the witnesses 
would differentiate them, cf. v. 28, 34, xv. 33, or in which there is a 
manifest blunder, not only in D but in other Western witnesses, 
which Blass corrects by a, although such blunders really belong to 
the text, cf. v. 31, xiii. 48, xv. 15. There are cases in which D 
affords weighty support to readings otherwise testified to only by 
B, e.g., xix. 8, xxi. 25, or only by N, cf. ii. 20 (Wendt). 

But a careful consideration of the whole of the instances justi- 
fies the attachment of far greater importance to the Western text 
than formerly (cf, e.g., Holtzmann's review of Blass's edit. min. of 
Acts, Theol. Literaturzeitung, p. 350, 1897, No. 13), and goes some 
way to break down the former prejudice against Codex Bezse : not 
only is it allowed that one revising hand of the second century may 
be the main source of the most important readings, but that these 
readings may contain original elements, since they must be based 
upon a text which carries us back very near to the date of the 
composition of the book of Acts (Wendt, u. s., p. 52 ; Bousset, Theol. 
Rundschau, p. 414, 1898). The same tendency to attach more 
importance to the Western text is observable in Professor Ramsay, 
for although he regards the most vivid additions of the Western 
text in Acts as for the most part nothing but a second-century 
commentary, and while he refuses to introduce xi. 27, 28, D, into 
his own text, yet he speaks of the high value of D in that it preserves 
with corruptions a second-century witness to the text, and he 
places the home of the revision on the line of intercourse between 
the Syrian Antioch and Ephesus, arguing from xi. 28 that the 
reviser was acquainted with Antioch (Church in the Roman Empire, 
p. 151 ; St. Paul, p. 27, and review of Professor Blass, Expositor, 
1895, and cf. Zockler, Greifswalder Studien, pp. 131, 140). 

On the other hand the most thorough advocates of Dr. Blass's 
theory support his view of the priority and originality of ,by 
reference to three classes of passages : (1) those in which the later 
a has abbreviated the reading of 0, cf. iii. 1, iv. 1, 3, 24, 32, vii. 29, 
ix. 5-8, x. 23, xi. 2, xiv. 1-20, xvi. 19, xvii. 12, 15, xxi. 39, xxii. 26 ; 
(2) those in which contains exact and specific notices of time 
which are wanting in a, cf. xv. 30, xvi. 11, xvii. 19, xviii. 19, xix. 9, 


xx. 18, xxvii. 1, etc.; (3) those in which exact information appears 
to characterise the references of 6 to places, circumstances, persons, 
cf., in addition to passages of this character already noticed under 
(1), xi. 28, xii. 1, 10, xvi. 35, xviii. 18, 27, xix. 14, xx. 15, xxi. 16, 
xxiv. 27, xxviii. 16, 19 (see for these passages Zockler, Greifswalder 
Studien, p. 134 ff., and notes in apparatus criticus, and in opposition 
to the view of Zockler Mr. Page's detailed list of passages in D, 
all of which he regards as bearing traces of being subsequent cor- 
rections of the text by a second-rate hand, Classical Review, p. 319, 
July, 1897, and Blass's reply, Philology of the Gospels, p. 123). 1 

If an examination of these passages, which vary considerably in 
value and importance, and the proofs of the existence of a second- 
century Latin text convince us that the readings in |3 are not to be 
hastily rejected as the glosses of a careless or blundering scribe, it 
cannot be said that we are in a position to account for the origin of 
the Western readings, or that a solution of the problem is yet 
attained. The hypothesis of Blass, tempting as it is, and simple as 
it is, wants verification, and the very simplicity which commends it 
to its supporters is often a sore stumbling-block to its acceptance, 
inasmuch as it does not seem to account for all the facts of the case. 
But at the present stage of the controversy it is of interest to note 
that the honoured name of Theodor Zahn, Einleitung, \\., 340, 1899, 
may be added to those who accept in the main Blass's position, 
amongst whom may be mentioned Nestle, Belser, Zockler, Salmon. 2 
Zahn makes some reservations, e.g., with regard to xv. 29 (see in 

1 In 1891 Professor Harris regarded the readings of Codex D (see Blass, edit, 
min., p. xx.) as the result of their adaptation to the Latin version of a bilingual MS. 
which carries us back to the middle of the second century, a view which he has 
somewhat modified in 1894, Four Lectures, etc., p. viii., although still maintaining 
a certain amount of Latinisation. Schmiedel, Enc. Bibl., i., 52, 1899, recently sup- 
ports Harris, and maintains that the Greek of D rests partly on retranslation from 
the Latin. In his later book Dr. Harris examines the theory of Dr. Chase, that the 
peculiarities of Codex D are due to retranslation from an old Syriac version, pp. 
14, 68, and maintains that whilst Dr. Chase's position is justified in so far that we 
possess evidence of an old Syriac text of Acts, yet his explanation of the 
Western variants as due to a Syriac glossator cannot be sustained, see also Zockler, 
«. 5., p. 131, and Headlam, " Acts," Hastings' B.D. 

8 Amongst the keenest attacks upon the theory may be noted that of B. Weiss 
in Codex D in der Apostelgeschichte, 1897 ; Page, Classical Review, July, 1897, and 
more recently, Harnack, see notes on xi. 28 and xv. 29 ; Schmiedel in Enc. Bibl., 
50-56, 1899. Wendt's examination of the question, Apostelgeschichte (1899), pp. 43-53, 
should also be carefully considered, whilst Blass has replied to the strictures of 
Harnack and Zahn in Studien und Kritiken, i., 1900. , 


£oeo,and Harnack, Sitzungsberichte d. konigl.Preuss.Akad. d. Wissen- 
schaften zu Berlin, xi., 1899), whilst he lays stress upon xi. 28, and 
maintains the genuine Lucan character of the words used, e.g., 
dyaWiaais, <ru<rrp£$€iv. 

Still more recently Hilgenfeld, Acta Apostolorum, 1899, has 
again, and more fully, expressed his conviction of the priority of the 
£ text (although he differs from Blass and Zahn in not referring a 
and to the same original author 1 ), and he has reconstructed it 
much on the same lines as Blass, and somewhat more boldly. Re- 
ferences to the text adopted by Hilgenfeld will be frequently found 
in the apparatus criticus (as also to his annotations which deal 
largely with the criticisms of B. Weiss in his Codex D). In his 
Proleg. Hilgenfeld divides the authorities for the Western text as 
against fc^ABC into various groups : (1) Graeco-Latin MSS. : Codex 
D and E; (2) Latin versions: Flor., Gig., Par., Wernig., Prov., as 
Blass calls them, see above on p. 42 ; (3) Oriental versions : 
especially the marginal readings of Thomas Harkel in the Philox- 
entan Syriac ; also the Sahidic version ; (4) the Fathers : especially 
Irenaeus, Cyprian, Tertullian (with reference to Corssen's pamphlet, 
see above) ; (5) some readings even in the four great MSS. NABC. 
Hilgenfeld evidently attaches some weight (as Blass) to 137 (M), 
and to Codex Athous Lauras, p. ix. (see Blass, Philology of tlie 
Gospels, p. 250; and further, Studien und Kritiken, i., 1900). 

For Literature bearing on Acts see the valuable lists in Headlam, 
<l Acts," Hastings' B.D., pp. 34, 35, and Wendt, Apostelgeschichte, 
pp. 1-4, 1899. The present writer would venture to add to the for- 
mer: {\)Commentaries : Felten, Apostelgeschichte, 1892; Knabenbauer, 
Actus Apostolorum (Paris, 1899), two learned and reverent works by 
Romanists, the latter dealing with the most recent phase of modern 
problems of text, chronology and sources ; Wendt, Apostelgeschichte 
(Meyer-Wendt), 1899, with a full Introduction, pp. 1-60, discussing 
all recent problems, with constant reference in the text to Professor 
Ramsay's writings, and altogether indispensable for the study of 
Acts; Matthias, Auslegung der Apostelgeschichte, 1897, a compen- 
dium useful in some respects, based chiefly upon Wendt's earlier 
edition; Zockler, Apostelgeschichte, 2nd edit., 1894; to these con- 
stant reference is made. (2) Introductions : Zahn, Einleitung, ii., 

1 " Blassio debemus alterum Actorum app. textum non ortum ex jam fere 
recepto, sed hinc ab ipso Actorum app. auctore postea breviante et emendante in 
chartam puram scriptum esse minime demonstravit, lima ita potitus est, ut etiam 
genaina et necessaria non pauca sublata sint," p. xiv. 


1899; B. Weiss, Einleitung, 3rd edit., 1897; Julicher, Einleitung, 
1894; (3) Special Treatises: Hilgenfeld, Acta Apostolo rum, Graece 
et Latine, 1899; J. Weiss, Uber die Absicht und den liter arischen 
Charakter der Apostelgeschichte, 1897 ; Bethge, Die Paulinischev 
Reden der Apostelgeschichte, 1887, a reverent and in many respects 
valuable treatment of the text and sources of St. Paul's addresses ; 
Bishop Williams of Connecticut, Studies in Acts, 1888; Gilbert, 
Student's Life of St. Paul, 1899: with appendix on Churches of 
Galatia ; Luckock, Footprints of the Apostles as traced by St. Luke 
in the Acts, 1897; (4) Early Church History : McGiffert, Apostolic 
Age ; Hort, Ecclesia ; Nosgen, Geschichte d. Neut. Offenbarung, 
ii., 1892; (5) Monographs on Special Points : E. H. Askwith, Epistle 
to the Galatians, 1899 (an enlargement of the Norrisian Prize Essay 
on The Locality of the Churches of Galatia) ; Vogel, Zur Charak- 
teristik des Lukas nach Sprache und Stil, 1897 ; Nestle, Philologica 
Sacra (Bemerkungen uber die Urgestalt der Evangelien und A.G.), 
1896, and his Einfiihrung in das Griechische N.T., 2nd edit., 1899, 
frequently referred to by Zahn and Dalman ; Blass, Philology of the 
Gospels, and Praf. to Evangelium secundum Lucam, 1897; Klos- 
termann, Probleme im Aposteltexte, 1883, and Vindicia Lucanx, 1866; 
Hawkins, Horce Synoptical, pp. 140-158, on the Linguistic Relations 
between St. Luke's Gospel and Acts ; Bousset, Der Text des N.T., 
1898 (Theol. Rundschau, p. 405 ff.) ; B. Weiss, Der Codex D, 1897, 
dealing with the hypothesis of Dr. Blass ; Harnack, Sitzungsberichte 
der koniglich Preussischen Akad. der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, xi. and 
xvii., 1899 ; Curtius, " Paulus in Athen " (Gesammelte Abhandlungen , 
ii., pp. 528-543, 1894); see also Ramsay, various articles of great 
value in Hastings' B.D., i., ii., " Ephesus," " Galatia," "Corinth," etc., 
and Schmiedel, "Acts," in Enc. Bibl., 1899, which appeared too late 
for more than a few references here. For literature connected with 
special points, and the text and sources of Acts, see above, pp. 8, 
22, 41, and for grammatical questions and syntax see references in 
commentary to Simcox, Language of the N.T. ; Blass, Grammatik 
des N eutestamentlichen Griechisch, 1896; Viteau, Le Grec du N.T., 
1893 and 1896 ; and to the numbers of Winer-Schmiedel, Grammatik 
des N eutestamentlichen Sprachidioms, now in course of publication. 1 

* In the preparation of the textual criticism my best thanks are due to the *?:*! 
and valuable help of the Rev. Harold Smith, M.A., St. John's College, Cam- 
bridge, sometime Lecturer in King's College, London. 


I. I. TON pev irpaiTOi' Xoyoi' eiroit]CTdfjnr]k' irepl -n&VTwv, & 0edt|>i\€, 
ur T)p£aTo 6 2 'Itjctous ttoiciV tc Kal SiSdcnceii', 2. axpi tJs Tjp,e'pas 

1 B and also the subscription of ^ ; so Lach., W.H., Wendt. D has irpa|is 
airoo-ToXwv. fr$ merely irpa|€Ls, so Tisch. irpa^is tuv airoo-ToXwv 31, 61 ; so 
Griesb., Meyer, whilst tuv a-yuov before ottoo-toXuv is found in subscription of 
EGH. Clem. Alex., Strom., v., 12, has irpagcis to>v airoo-T. Tertullian, Adv. Marc, 
v., 1, 2, has Acta Apostolorum. Cf. Iren., Adv. Hcer., iii., 13, 3, and also lat. title as 
in Clem. Alex., Adumbr., 1 Pet., v., 13, Actus Apostolorum ; sometimes simply Acta 
or Actus; see further Zahn, Einlcitung in das N. T., ii., 334, 388 (1899). 

2 6 fc^AE, Orig. and Blass in (J, so also Weiss. Omit. BD, W.H. (see Blass, 
Grammatik, p. 148). 

Chapter I. — Ver. 1. rbv piv -irpw-rov 
\6yovy a reference beyond all reasonable 
doubt to St. Luke's Gospel. Not merely 
the dedication of both writings to Theo- 
philus, but their unity of language and 
style is regarded by critics of all schools 
as convincing proof of the identity of 
authorship of Acts and the third Gospel ; 
see Introd. and Zockler, Greifswaldcr 
Studien, p. 128 (1895). In the expres- 
sion irpwros X070S Ramsay finds an 
intimation from St. Luke's own hand 
that he contemplated a third book at 
least, otherwise we should have had 
irpoi-cpos Xoyosj St. Paul the Traveller, 
pp. 23, 27, 28 ; see to the same effect 
Zahn, Einleitung in das N. T., ii., 371 
(i8gg), Rendall, Acts of the Apostles, 
in loco, and cf. comment, on Acts xxviii. 
31. So, too, primus is used in Latin not 
simply as former but as first in a series, 
Cicero, De Invent., ii., 3. On the other 
hand, Blass, Grammatik des N. G., p. 34, 
Acta Apost., p. 16, and more recently 
Philology of the Gospels, p. 38, maintains 
that TrpoiTOS simply = irpdrepos (so also 
Holtzmann and Felten). But Ramsay, 
whilst pointing out instances in which St. 
Luke apparently uses irpwTos differently 
from this, p. 28 (cf. also Zahn, u. s., p. 
389), admits that we cannot attain to any 
absolute certainty in the passage before 
us, since no instance occurs of the use of 
VOL. II. i 

irporepos by St. Luke. — X^-yov: frequently 
used by classical writers in the sense of 
a narrative or history contained in a 
book ; see instances in Wetstein. The 
passage in Plato, Phado, p. 61, B., is 
valuable not only for the marked contrast 
between Xoyos and pt)0os, iroieiv p.vdovs 
dXX' ov Xo-yovs, but also for the use of 
iroieiv (Wendt). Amongst other instances 
of the phrase iroi€iv Xo-yov cf. Galen, De 
Usu Part., ii., irepi 7rpuT(dV Ttuv SaKTuXwv 
eiroiT|<rap,T|v tov X670V. St. Chrysostom 
sees in the phrase a proof of the unassum- 
ing character of the author : St. Luke 
does not say " The former Gospel which 
I preached". For the anomalous p.e'v, 
" solitarium," without the following Be, 
frequent in Luke, see Blass, Grammatik 
des N. G., p. 261, cf Luke viii. 5, Acts 
iii. 21, xxviii. 22, etc., and several times 
in St. Paul. p,ev occurs thus six times 
in the Acts without ovv — on p,«v ovv see 
ver. 6. — u 6Eo<f>iXe : the interjection used 
here simply in address, as common in 
Attic Greek, cf. xviii. 14, xxvii. 21, 1 Tim- 
vi. 11 ; without the epithet KpaTurre, as 
in Luke i. 3, and without S>, 0e6<j>. alone 
would have seemed too bold, Winer- 
Schmiedel, p. 258. It has been suggested 
that the omission of the epithet tepd-nore, 
Luke i. 3, denotes that St. Luke's friend- 
ship had become less ceremonious, just 
as a similar change has been noted 




€VT€i\d(Aei'os tois dirooroXois Sid ElfcufxaTos 'Ayiou, oos eleXelaro, 
dfeXrj^OY]. 1 3. ots kou TrapeffTrjaey eauTOf £wpto, ficTa to iraOe:!' 

1 aveXrj<j>eTi B 8 and probably all cursives, but -XT!p.<J>eT| fr$AB*CDE, so Tisch.,W.H„ 
Weiss (see Blass, Gram., pp. 24, 55). o-xpi tjs . • . aveAT)<j>. Aug., Vig. read " in 
die quo Apostolos elegit per Spiritum Sanctum," omitting aveXi)<}>. altogether, 
and continuing with D, Lux., Syr. Hard, mg., Sah. kou eKeXevorev KTjpvaaeiv 
to evayyeXiov (et pracepit pradicare evangelium). This reading of Aug. Blass 
adopts (so Corssen, Der Cyprianische Text der Acta Apost., p. 18, and Graefe, 
Stud, mid Krit., p. 136 (1898)) and therefore refers the day mentioned to Luke vi. 12, 
the day of the choice of the Apostles. But Belser well points out that St. Luke's 
Gospel (quite apart from chaps, i. and ii.) does not begin with the choice of the 
Twelve, but with the public appearance of the Baptist and that of Jesus Himself, and 
with His public teaching. Nor is there anything said, as Blass himself admits, in 
St. Luke's account of the choice of the Twelve, vi. 12, as to any commission given 
to them at that time to preach the Gospel (although in his edition of St. Luke's 
Gospel Blass compares Mark iii. 14, but even then the expression used, Kijpvo-o-euv 
to tuo/yveXiov, cannot be called Lucan, see Weiss on Codex D, p. 53). Further, D 
contains aveXtj^OTi, after T)p.€pa$, apparently to simplify the structure ; there is no 
Greek authority for its omission, and it is contained in Codex Parisinus (which in 
many respects approaches so closely to D), where we find it at the end of the verse : 
assumptus est. Blass, Philology of the Gospels, p. 132 ff., contends for the reading 
which he had previously adopted in p% and sees in it the original draft of Luke who 
in a "has encumbered the clause in order to bring in the Ascension without leaving 
out the choice of the Apostles" (p. 136). 

in the dedication of Shakespeare's two 
poems to the Earl of Southampton ; 
cf. also Zahn, Einleitung, ii. 360. The 
way in which the epithet KpaTio-Te is 
employed elsewhere in the book in ad- 
dressing Roman officials, xxiii. 26, xxiv. 
3, xxvi. 25, has been thought to indicate 
that Theophilus held some high official 
post, or that he was at least of equestrian 
rank (Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller, pp. 
388, 389, and his inferences as to the date 
of Acts). Ramsay is of opinion that the 
name was given at baptism, and that it 
was used or known only among Christians, 
and he infers that this baptismal name is 
used in Acts because the book was pro- 
bably written at a time when it was 
dangerous for a Roman of rank to be 
recognised as a Christian. But Theo- 
philus was by no means uncommon as a 
Jewish name; cf. B. D. 2 , i., p. 25, and also 
article "Theophilus," B. D. 1 (see also 
Deissmann, Bibelstudien, p. 19). The 
epithet KpaTiaros was peculiarly appro- 
priated to Romans holding high office, 
and actually became during the second 
century a technical title to denote eques- 
trian rank ; and from its use here Zahn 
maintains not only that Theophilus was 
/ a man of some social position, but that 
I he was, when Luke wrote his gospel, 
^ not a nember of the Christian Church, 
since there is no instance in the first two 
centuries of a Christian addressing his 
fellow-Christians in a title corresponding 

as it were to " your Excellency " [Ein- 
leitung in das N. T., ii., 360, 383). The 
instance of the address of the Epist. ad 
Diognetum, KpaTurrc AioYvrjTe, is alleged 
by Blass as an instance that the epithet 
is not always used in the technical sense 
mentioned ; but to this Ramsay replies 
that if Diognetus was the friend and 
teacher of Marcus Aurelius, the emperor 
might well raise his teacher to equestrian 
rank ; Septimius Severus raised his sons' 
tutor to the high dignity of the consul- 
ship. Ramsay discusses KpaTio-Tos at 
length in Was Christ born at Bethlehem ? 
(1898), pp. 65, 71, 72, as against Blass, 
Philology of the Gospels, p. ig. Blass 
fully recognises that Theophilus held 
a high position, and that the title in 
question would naturally occur in a book 
dedicated to a patron ; but it must be 
borne in mind that Blass regards Theo- 
philus as of Greek extraction, possibly 
a fellow-citizen with Luke of Antioch, 
whilst Ramsay sees in him a citizen ot 
Rome and a resident in the imperial city. 
Theophylact asks why Luke should have 
cared to write to one man only and to 
value him so highly, and makes answer 
that it was because the Evangelist was a 
guardian of the words spoken by the Lord : 
" It is not the will of my Father that one 
of these little ones should perish ". There 
seems no great reason to doubt that 
Theophilus was a real personage, and 
the epithet tcpo/nore, at all events in its 




<xutoV, iv iroWois T€K|iTjpiois, 81' ■pfxepaii' Teao-apaxorra 1 oirrafop.ei'os 
auTois, teal \4y(t>v ra irepl ttjs (3aai\cias tou 0eou. 4. Kal owaXi^o- 

1 Te<r<rapaKovTa, so B 3 E 1, 13, Meyer; but TeaacpaKovTa ^AB*CD 61, so Tisch., 
W.H., Weiss. D omits 81a, so Blass in (J. 

technical significance, is hardly consistent 
with any other supposition (see Sanday, 
Inspiration, p. 319, note). The recent 
attempt to identify Theophilus with 
Seneca, referred to by Zbckler, Apostel- 
geschichte, p. 163, must be dismissed 
as equally groundless and fanciful as 
the former conjecture that he was no 
other than Philo. — irepl irdvrojv wv : the 
use of iras (mostly after a prep., as here) 
followed by an attracted relative may 
be classed amongst the mannerisms of 
St. Luke (Simcox, Writers of the N. T., 
p. 24, where other instances are given) ; 
see also Friedrich, Das Lucasevangelium, 
pp. 1, 2. — wv: in St. Luke's Gospel and 
in the Acts the frequency of the attraction 
of the relative again specially characterises 
him amongst the N.T. writers, Friedrich, 
u. s., pp. 36 and 100. — rjp|aTO : often re- 
garded as simply pleonastic, but sometimes 
as emphatic, to intimate that the work 
which Jesus began on earth He continued 
in heaven, or that He began the work of 
the Gospel and committed its continuance 
to His followers ; Zahn, u. s., p. 366 ff. 
In Winer's view to regard apx«o-0ai as 
pleonastic is a mere subterfuge to avoid 
a difficulty, and he renders the passage 
" what Jesus began both to do and to teach, 
and continued to do until," etc (see also 
Grimm-Thayer, sub v.), treating it as 
an example of breviloquence (Winer- 
Moulton, lxvi., 1). On the whole it is 
perhaps best to consider the phrase tjp|. 
iroieiv with Bengel (in loco) as equivalent 
to fecit ab initio, although no doubt there 
is a sense in which, with every Christian 
for nineteen centuries,. St. Luke would 
regard the whole earthly life of Jesus as 
a beginning, a prelude to the glory and 
mighty working to be revealed and per- 
fected in the ascended Lord. The verb 
is of frequent use in St. Luke's writings 
(Friedrich, Zeller, Lekebusch), although 
in St. Mark's Gospel it is also constantly 
found. In the LXX it is often found like 

7>7n hi., and also in Apocr. iroiciv 

Te Kal 8i8a<rKEiv, " Scilicet prius fecit, 
deinde docuit ; prius docuit exemplo, 
deinde verbo. Unde prius non docuit, 
quod prius ipse non fecit" (Corn, a Lap.). 
Ver. 2. axpi ^s -fip-tpas. In Matt. 
axpt occurs once or twice, in Mark and 

and John not at all, in Luke four times, 
and in Acts sixteen ; whilst the commoner 
|a«XP l is found only once in the Gospels 
and twice in the Acts (Winer-Schmiedel, 
p. 227, and on the use of the form axpt 
or axpis see Grimm-Thayer, sub v.). It 
is seldom used in the LXX, but in 2 
Mace. xiv. it occurs twice, vv. 10 and 
15 ; cf. also Symm., 2 Kings xxi. 16 ; 
Theod., Job xxxii. 11. — 81a irvevpaTOs 
G.710V. The older commentators, and 
Wendt, Holtzmann, Zockler, Hilgenfeld, 
amongst moderns, connect the words with 
€§e\c£aTo, the reference to the choice 
of the Apostles through the Holy Ghost 
standing significantly at the opening of a 
book in which their endowment with the 
same divine power is so prominent. On 
the other hand, it is urged that there is 
no need to emphasise further the divine 
choice of the Apostles (cf. Luke vi. 13, 
and see below on ver. 25), but that it was 
important to show that the instructions 
to continue the work and teaching of 
Jesus were a divine commission (Weiss), 
and to emphasise from the commencement 
of the Acts that Jesus had given this com- 
mission to His Apostles through the same 
divine Spirit Whom they received shortly 
after His Ascension (Felten). Spitta (who 
refers i. 1-14 to his inferior source B), 
whilst he connects 81a. irvevp,. 0.7. with 
lvT€iXd|i.€vos, curiously limits the latter to 
the command to the Apostles to assemble 
themselves on the Mount of Olives (so too 
Jungst). For other connections of the 
words see Alford in loco. — efeXe'Sa-ro, 
always in N.T. ItcX^yopai, middle (except, 
perhaps, in Luke ix. 35, but see R.V. 
and W.H.). Another verb very frequent 
in LXX, used constantly of a divine 
choice : of God's choice of Israel, of 
Jacob, Aaron, David, the tribe of Judah, 
Zion, and Jerusalem. The verb is also 
found in the same sense in the middle 
voice in classical Greek. — av€Xtip.4>0T} : 
the verb is used of Elijah's translation' to 
heaven in the LXX, 2 Kings ii. 9-1 1, also 
in Ecclesiasticus xlviii. 9 and 1 Mace. ii. 
58, and perhaps of Enoch in Ecclesiasticus 
xlix. 14 (A, (MTeWOtj). In addition to the 
present passage (cf. w. 11, 12) it is also 
used in Mark xvi. 9 and 1 Tim. iii. 16 
(where it probably forms part of an early 
Christian Hymn or confession of faith) 


itcfos * iraprnyYeiXci' auTOis diro 'lepocroXupoji' jxtj x w P l i e<7 ^ ai ' dXXd 
ircpiueceic ty^ eirayyekiav tou iraTpos, rjf TJKOuaaTe p.ou 2 ■ 5- ° Tl 

1 <ruva\i£op,cvos, some good cursives <rvvav\x?opevos. Aug. prefixes us to o-uvaX. ; 
so 3 (see also Belser). D reads o-vvaXio-Kopevos (-o-yop. D 2 ). D, Gig., Par. 1 , Sah. 
add u.«t' avTuv, perhaps explanatory addition, Syriac (Chase), or Latin, to bring 
out force of trvv. retained by Blass in 0. R. V. omits pei-' avrwv ; so W.H., Wendt, 
and Weiss. 

8 i\v t]Kova-are pov ; in place of this, D, Par. 2 , Vulg. (Clem.), Hil., Aug. read tjv 
tiKoverare <j>T)<riv Sia tow o-TopaTos pov, so Blass in and Hilgenfeld (see also Belser), 
may be mere amplification of pov in T.R., possibly assimilated to xv. 7 (Chase). 
Harris ascribes it to a Montanist. T)Kowa in D 1 . 

of our Lord's Ascension ; cf. also Gospel of 
Peter, 19, in a doubtfully orthodox sense. 
It is to be noted that the word is here 
used absolutely, as of an event with which 
the Apostolic Church was already familiar. 
On the cognate noun dvdX-r|\|/is, used only 
by St. Luke in N.T., and absolutely, with 
reference to the same event, in his Gospel, 
ix. 51, see Psalms of Solomon, iv., 20, 
ed. Ryle and James, p. 49. In the latter 
passage the word is apparently used for 
the first time in extant Greek literature, 
but its meaning is very different from its 
later technical use with reference to the 
Assumption of the Blessed ; see instances, 
p. 49, ubi supra. St. Irenaeus, i., 10, 1, 
whilst using the noun of our Lord's 
Ascension, is careful to say ttjv evcrap- 
kov els tovs ovipavovs dvdXT|\|/iv ; see 
especially Swete, The Apostles 1 Creed, 
pp. 70-72, and below on verse 11. 

Ver. 3. 01s Kal irapeo-TTjo'ev, " he 
also showed himself," R.V., but margin 
" presented himself" (cf. ix. 41), praebuit 
se, Vulg. In ix. 41 monstravit, h. 1. 
magis demonstravit (Blass). The verb 
is used thirteen times in Acts (once 
in a quotation, iv. 26), both transitively 
and intransitively. St. Luke in his 
Gospel uses it three times, and as in 
Acts both transitively and intransitively. 
In this he is alone amongst the Evan- 
gelists. In the Epistles it is found only 
in St. Paul, and for the most part in a 
transitive sense. — p«Ta to iroOeiv, "after 
his passion," so in A. and R.V. ; post 
passionem suam, Vulg. ; " too sacred a 
word to be expunged from this the only 
place where it occurs in the Bible," 
Humphry, Commentary on R.V. ; cf. 
iii. 18, xvii. 3, xxvi. 23. — ev iroXXots 
T€Kp/r|piois — ■ T€Kpi]piov only here in 
N.T. — twice in Wisdom v. 11, xix. 
13, and 3 Mace. iii. 24. The A.V. 
followed the Genevan Version by insert- 
ing the word "infallible" (although the 
latter still retained "tokens" instead of 
"proofs"). But R.V. simply "proofs" 

expresses the technical use of the word 
TEKpijpiov, convincing, certain evidence. 
Although in a familiar passage, Wisdom 
v. 11, T€Kpi]piov and o-qpelov are used as 
practically synonymous, yet there is no 
doubt that they were technically dis- 
tinguished, e.g., Arist., Rhet., i., 2, t£v 
o~i]pci(i>v to pev dvo/yKatov TCicp. This 
technical distinction, it may be observed, 
was strictly maintained by medical men, 
although St. Luke may no doubt have 
met the word elsewhere. Thus it is used 
by Josephus several times, as Krenkel 
mentions, but he does not mention that 
it is also used by Thucydides, ii., 39, to 
say nothing of other classical writers. 
Galen writes to pev «k TTjpTJoreus o*Tjpetov 
to 8e e| lvSci|€(i>s TtKpijpiov, and the 
context states that rhetoricians as well as 
physicians had examined the distinction ; 
Hobart, Medical Language of St. Luke, 
p. 184. The word also occurs in the 
Proem of Dioscorides to his De Materia 
Medica, p. 3, which Vogel and Meyer- 
Weiss hold that Luke imitated in the 
Prologue to his Gospel (but see Zahn, 
Einleitung, ii., 384). — 8i' T|pep£v rt<r- 
crapaKovTa. St. Chrysostom comments 
oxi yap tl-n-e Teo"0"apaKOVTa T|pcpas, dXXa 
8i' ^pepiv T£O"o"apaK0VTa • Ic^icTaTO ^yap 
icai d<{>io*Ta,To irdXiv. To this interpreta- 
tion of the genitive with Sid Blass refers, 
and endorses it, Grammatik des Neutcsta- 
mentlichen Griechisch, p. 129, following 
the Scholiast. The meaning, if this 
interpretation is adopted, would there- 
fore be that our Lord did not remain with 
His disciples continuously (ov Sitjvckus, 
Schol.) as before, but that He appeared 
to them from time to time ; non perpetuo, 
sed per intervalla, Bengel. But cf. also 
Simcox, Language of the N.T., p. 
140. Men have seen in this period of 
forty days, mentioned only by St. Luke 
in N.T., what we may reverently call 
a symbolical fitness. But in a certain 
sense the remark of Blass seems justified : 
Parum ad rem est quod idem (numerus)- 




'iwdwrjs 1 [iey ifiaLTTTurev u&cm, ufiel? 8e |3cnrn.o-0r| create iv 
'Ayiw, ou ficra iroMas Tauras •pjiepas- 2 6. Oi p,ef ouv oweXOorrcs 

1 Iwavvijs ; in D almost throughout la>avT]s, see W.H., Notes on Orthography, p. 
166, on authority of B and D. Nestle (Expository Times, Nov., 1897, P- 93) points 
out that in D w prevails in Matt., Mk., John (vv 66, v 7), while in Luke and Acts 
the reverse is the case (vv 3, v 48) ; but see also Winer-Schmiedel, p. 57. 

2 After Tjpcpas D, Sah. insert eo>s t»]s it€vtt)koo-tt|s. Blass sees in the addition an 
intimate knowledge of the facts (see also Belser) ; cf. ii. 1, but cf. on the other hand 
Weiss on Codex D, p. 54. 

alias quoque occurrit. The parallels in 
the histories of Moses and Elijah to which 
Holtzmann and Spitta refer are really no 
parallels at all, and if it be true to say that 
there was nothing in contemporary Jewish 
ideas to suggest our Lord's Resurrection 
as it is represented as taking place, it is 
equally true to maintain that there was 
nothing to suggest the after sojourn of 
the forty days on earth as it is represented 
as taking place ; see Edersheim, Jesus 
the Messiah, ii., 624. — 6-7rTa.vdp.evos : if we 
could call this a frequentative verb with 
some scholars, it would in itself give the 
meaning " appearing from time to time," 
but it is rather a late Hellenistic present, 
formed from some parts of opav ; Blass, 
Gratnmatik des N. G., pp. 57, 181. But 
it certainly does not mean that our Lord's 
appearances were merely visionary. The 
verb is found only here in N.T., but also 
in LXX 1 Kings viii. 8 and in Tobit xii. 
ig (not in S.). In these two passages 
the word cannot fairly be pressed into 
the service of visionary appearances. 
In 1 Kings the reference is to the staves 
of the ark which were so long that the 
ends were seen from the holy place 
before the oracle, but they were not 
seen from without, i.e., from the porch 
or vestibule. In Tobit it is not the 
appearance of the* angel which is repre- 
sented as visionary, quite the contrary ; 
but his eating and drinking are represented 
as being only in appearance. But even 
if the word could be pressed into the 
meaning suggested, St. Luke's view of 
our Lord's appearances must be judged 
not by one expression but by his whole 
conception, cf. Luke xxiv. 39-43 and Acts 
x. 41. That he could distinguish between 
visions and realities we cannot doubt ; 
see note below on xii. 12. — to. irep! t^s 
(3acriXeias tov 0. : "speaking the things 
concerning," R.V., not " speaking of the 
things," A.V., but speaking the very 
things, whether truths to be believed, 
or commands to be obeyed (Humphry, 
Commentary on R.V.). On St. Luke's 
fondne&6 for to, trcpi tuvos in his writings 

see Friedrich, Das Lucasevangelium, pp. 
10 and 89 (so also Zeller and Lekebusch). 
The exact phrase is only found in Acts, 
where it occurs twice (in T.R. three 
times) ; cf. xix. 8 (viii. 12), and see also 
xx. 25 and xxviii. (23), 31. The expression 
■t] (3acr. tov 8., instead of twv ovpavwv ol 
the Hebrew Evangelist St. Matthew, is 
characteristic of St. Luke's writings, 
although it is found frequently in St. 
Mark and once in St. John. In St. 
Luke's Gospel it occurs more than thirty 
times, and six times in Acts (only four 
times in St. Matt.). Possibly the phrase 
was used by St ivuke as one more easily 
understood by Gentile readers, but the two 
terms v\ (3ao-. tov 8. and twv ovp. were 
practically synonymous in the Gospels 
and in Judaism in the time of our Lord 
(Schiirer, Jewish People, div. ii., vol. 
ii., p. 171 ; E. T. and Taylor, Sayings of 
the Jewish Fathers (second edit.), p. 
67 ; Edersheim, Jesus the Messiah, i., 
267 ; and Dalnrnn, Die Worte Jesu, p. 76 
ff.). Dr. Stanton, Jewish and Christian 
Messiah, p. 226, draws attention to the 
important fact that the preaching of the 
original Apostles after the Ascension is 
not described as that of the preaching of 
the kingdom of God, but that the phrase 
is only used of the preaching of St. Paul, 
and of St. Philip the associate of St. 
Stephen. But in view of the fact that 
the original Apostles heard during the 
Forty Days from their Master's lips to 
Trepl ttjs (JouriX. tov Gcov, we cannot 
doubt that in deed and in word they 
would proclaim that kingdom. On the 
question as to whether they conceived of 
the kingdom as present, or future, or both, 
see Wendt, Teaching of Jesus, i., 409, 
E. T., and Witness of the Epistles (Long- 
mans), p. 309 ff., and on the conception 
of the kingdom of God in the Theology 
of A. Ritschl and his school see Orr, 
Ritschlian Theology, p. 258 ff. For the 
relation of the Church and the Kingdom 
see also Moberly, Ministerial Priesthood, 
pp. 28, 36 ff., " Church," Hastings, B.D., 
p. 425 ; Hort, Ecclesia, p. 5 ff. 


eirnpwTaJi' auTOf \eyovres, Kupi€, el £v tw XP° l ' w toutw d-rroKaGicr- 
TdVeis TT)f PaciXeiac tw 'lo-parjX; 7. ctire 8e irpos ciutous, Oux ufxoii' 

Ver. 4. crvvaX^opevos . a str0 ng array 
of modern commentators renders " eating 
with them," following the Vulgate con- 
vescens Mis (so both A. and R.V. in 
margin, and Wycl. and Rhem.). It is 
thus rendered by Overbeck (as against 
De Wette), Wendt, Holtzmann, Felten, 
Weiss, Matthias, Knabenbauer.and Blass, 
who adopts the reading (Ls <ruvaX., and 
regards the particle as showing that 
the recapitulation is continued of the 
events already mentioned in Luke xxiv. 
42 ff. It is evidently taken in the same 
sense by Spitta, Feine, Jiingst. If we so 
translate it, we must derive it from SXs 
(salt), so Schol. koivwvwv dXwv, rpaire^Tis, 
in the sense given to the expression by 
Chrys., Theophyl., CEcum. In Ps. cxl. 4 
LXX, to which Wendt refers, |at| arvv- 
Svdcra) (although the reading is somewhat 
doubtful — the word is used by Symmachus, 
1 Sam. xxvi. 19) is also rendered omva- 
Xia9w (Alius) as an equivalent of the 

Hebrew DITT"^, FH <rv|w|>aYoi|i,i, Sym- 
machus. Blass gives no classical re- 
ferences, but points out that the word 
undoubtedly exists in the sense referred 
to in Clem. Horn., xiii., 4 (but see 
Grimm - Thayer, sub v.). Hilgenfeld 
(Zeitschrift fur wissenschaft. Theol., p. 
74 (1894)) contends that the use of the 
word in the psalm quoted and in the 
passage from the Clementines refers 
not to the use of salt at an ordinary 
meal, but rather to the sacrificial and 
symbolical use of salt in the Old and 
New Testaments. Thus in the passage 
Clem. Horn., xiii., 4, totc avTois cruvaXi- 
£op.e6a, t6t« means " after the Baptism " ; 
cf. also Ignatius, ad Magnes., x., dXi<r- 
@t]re €v avTai, " be ye salted in him ". 
Wendt takes the word quite generally as 
meaning that the sharing in a common 
meal with His disciples, as on the evening 
of the Resurrection, was the habitual 
practice of the Lord during the Forty 
Days ; cf. Acts x. 41 and Luke xxiv. 
36 ff. Feine similarly holds that the 
word presupposes some such incidents 
as those mentioned in Luke xxiv., and 
that Luke had derived his information 
from a source which described the final 
instructions to the disciples as given at 
a common meal. On the other hand it 
must be borne in mind that in classical 
Greek, as in Herodotus and Xenophon 
(Wetstein) (as also in Josephus, B. J., iii., 
9, 4), o-uvaXiJa) = to assemble, cf. Hesy- 

chius, <ruvaXi£. = cruvaXi<r0€is, «njvax6«is, 
o-waOpoiaOeis, and it is possible that the 
preceding present participles in the im- 
mediate context may help to account for 
the use of the same participle instead ot 
the aorist cvvaXurOcis. The verb is then 
derived from <ruv and aX^s (a), meaning 
lit., close, crov/ded together. Mr. Rendall 
(Acts of the Apostles, p. 32) would derive 
it from 'AXitj (-a), a common term for a 
popular assembly amongst Ionian and 
Dorian Greeks, and he supposes that the 
verb here implies a general gathering ot 
believers not limited to the Twelve ; but 
the context apparently points back to 
Luke xxiv. 49 to a command which was 
certainly given only to the Twelve. — 
irap'rJYYeiXev, " he charged them," R.V., 
which not only distinguishes it from other 
verbs rendered " to command," but also 
gives the emphatic meaning which St. 
Luke often attaches to the word. It is 
characteristic of his writings, occurring 
four times in his Gospel and ten or eleven 
times in Acts, and it is very frequent in St. 
Paul's Epistles (Friedrich, Lekebusch). — 
'lcpo<roXvp.a>v : a neuter plural (but cf. 
Matt. ii. 3 and Grimm sub v.). St. Luke 
most frequently uses the Jewish form 
'lepovo-aX-qp. — twenty-seven times in his 
Gospel, about forty in Acts — as against 
the use of 'Upo<r6Xvp.a four times in his 
Gospel and over twenty in Acts (Friedrich, 
Lekebusch). Blass retains the aspirate 
for the Greek form but not for the Jewish, 
cf. in loco and Grammatik des N. G., pp. 
17, 31, but it is very doubtful whether 
either should have the aspirate ; W.H., 
ii., 313; Plummer's St. Luke, p. 64; 
Winer-Schmiedel, p. g3- Grimm points 
out that the Hebrew form is used in the 
N.T. : " ubi in ipso nomine tanquam 
sancta vis quaedam reponitur ut, Gal. iv. 
25 ; ita in compellationibus, Matt, xxiii. 
37, Luke xiii. 34 ; " see further sub v. 
'lepocr6\v|Aa. — p,tj x<opi£. : it was fitting 
that they should not depart from Jeru- 
salem, not only that the new law as the 
old should go forth from Zion and the 
word of the Lord from Jerusalem, Isa. ii. 3 
(Felten), but that the Apostles' testimony 
should be delivered not to men unac- 
quainted with the facts, but to the 
inhabitants of the city where Jesus had 
been crucified and buried. EL 8e €v8vs 
€X(opi<r0i]<rav 'UpoaoXvp.iov, teal tovtuv 
ovSev «TrtiKoXoi56Tj<r€v, •S-iroirTOs ov t| avder- 
tcktis -inrTJplev, GEcumenius, in loco ; see 
also Theophyl. — ircptpiveiv : not else- 




eori yvwcu \povous tj Kcupous ou$ 6 riarrip IOcto e** ttj iSia e^oucria- 
8. aXXa Xi](J/6CT0€ Su'vafuv, eireXOovros tou 'Ayi'ou nv€u'p.a,Tos ecp' u>as, 

where in N.T. (but see x. 24, D), but used 
in classical Greek of awaiting a thing's 
happening (Dem.). The passage in LXX 
in which it occurs is suggestive : tt|v 
cruTqpiav Trepifxe'vojv icvpiov, Gen. xlix. 
18 (cf. Wisd. viii. 12). On the tradition 
that the Apostles remained in Jerusalem 
for twelve years in obedience to a com- 
mand of the Lord, and the evidence for 
it, see Harnack, Chronologie, i., p. 243 ff. 
Harnack speaks of the tradition as very 
old and well attested, and maintains that 
it is quite in accordance with Acts, as the 
earlier journeys of the Apostles are there 
described as missionary excursions from 
which they always returned to Jeru- 
salem. — t-tjv eiraY-yeXuav : Bengel notes 
the distinction between ■ and 
€7rayye'X\op,ai, the former being used of 
promises in response to petitions, the 
latter of voluntary offers (Ammonius) : 
" quae verbi Grasci proprietas, ubi de 
divinis promissionibus agitur, exquisite 
observanda est ". It is therefore remark- 
able that in the Gospels the word liro/y- 
v«A.ia is never used in this technical sense 
of the divine promise made by God until 
Luke xxiv. 49, where it is used of the 
promise of the Holy Spirit, as here. But 
in Acts and in St. Paul's Epistles and in 
the Hebrews the word is frequent, and 
always of the promises made by God 
(except Acts xxiii. 21). See Sanday and 
Headlam on Romans i. 2, and Lightfoot 
on Gal. iii. 14, and Psalms of Solomon, 
xii., 8 (cf. vii., 9, and xvii., 6), ed. Ryle and 
James, p. 106. " The promise of the 
Father," cf. Luke xxiv. 49, is fulfilled in 
the baptism with the Holy Ghost, and 
although no doubt earlier promises of 
the gift of the Spirit may be included, cf. 
Luke xii. 11, as also the promise of the 
.Spirit's outpouring in Messianic times 
(cf. Joel ii. 28, Isaiah xliv. 3, Ezek. xxxvi. 
26), yet the phraseology may be fairly 
said to present an undesigned coincidence 
with the more recent language of the 
Lord to the Twelve, John xiv. 16, xv. 
26, xvi. 14. On the many points of con- 
nection between the opening verses of 
Acts and the closing verses of St. Luke's 
Gospel see below. 

Ver. 5. ev irvevpan : the omission of 
ev bef jre v8o.ti and its insertion before 
irvevp,. may be meant to draw a distinction 
between the baptism with water and the 
baptism in the Spirit (R.V. margin "in"). 
But in Matt. iii. 11 we have the prepo- 
sition ev in both parts of the verse ; cf. 

John i. 31. On ev with the instrumental 
dative see Blass, Grammatik des N. G., 
p. 1 14, and Grotius, in loco ; cf. the 

Hebrew jl, — ov ucto, iroXXds tovtis 
T|p.e'pas : not after many, *.*., after few. 
This use of ov with an adjective or adverb 
is characteristic of St. Luke, cf. Luke xv. 
13, Acts xxvii. 14, in which places ov 
iroXvs = oXiyos as here ; cf. ov p.eTpia>s, 
Acts xx. 12 ; ov |j.atepav, Luke vii. 6, Acts 
xvii. 27 ; ovk acrr)p.os, Acts xxi. 39 ; ov\ 
6 ti»xo»v, Acts xix. ii, xxviii. 2, cf. Haw- 
kins, Hora Syn., p. 153. No doubt 
p,eT' ov would be more correct, but the 
negative is found both before and after 
the preposition, so in Luke xv. 13 ; cf. 
Josephus, Ant., i., 12, and xiii., 7, 1, 
for similar changes of allocation in the 
same words. to.vto.s closely connects 
the days referred to with the current 
day; cf. also Winer-Schmiedel, p. 221. 
011 p.erd iroXXds, cprjo-lv iva p.T) els d0vp.iav 
ifx-rrtcruHTiv • «!>pio~p.e'v(t>s SI it<Jt€,ovk elirev, 
iva del eKypTjyop&criv eicScxopevoi, Theo- 
phylact, in loco. 

Ver. 6. ot ulv ovv : the combination 
p.ev ovv is very frequent in Acts in all 
parts, occurring no less than twenty- 
seven times; cf. Luke iii. 18. Like the 
simple uev it is sometimes used without 
8e' in the apodosis. Here, if 8e* is omitted 
in ver. 7 after elirev, there is still a con- 
trast between the question of the Apostles 
and the answer of Jesus. See especially 
Rendall, Acts of the Apostles, Appendix 
on p,ev ovv, p. 160 ff. ; cf. Weiss in loco. 
— o-vveXOovTes : the question has often 
been raised as to whether this word and 
p-ev ovv refer back to ver. 4, or whether 
a later meeting of the disciples is here 
introduced. For the former Hilgenfeld 
contends (as against Weiss) and sees 
no reference to any fresh meeting : the 
disciples referred to in the civtois of ver. 
4 and the vp.eis of ver. 5 had already come 
together. According to Holtzmann there 
is a reference in the words to a common 
meal of the Lord with His disciples already 
mentioned in ver. 4, and after this final 
meal the question of ver. 6 is asked on the 
way to Bethany (Luke xxiv. 50). The 
words 01 |*ev ovv crvveXO. are referred by 
Felten to the final meeting which formed 
the conclusion of the constant intercourse 
of ver. 3, a meeting thus specially empha- 
sised, although in reality only one out of 
many, and the question which follows in 
ver. 6 was asked, as Felten also suppose* 



ical eaeaOe pu u-dp-rupes If tc 'lepouo-aXrjp. icai iv irdarj rfj 'louSauj 
ical lajxapeia * icai fws eaxdrou rrjs y»JS. » 9. Kai Taura ernw, 

1 lajjiapeia, but fr^ADE lap-apia. (but Blass in p\ -euj.) ; so Tisch., W.H. although 
-eia is given as alternative ; see also Winer-Schmiedel, p. 45. 

(see too Rendall on w. 7 and 8), on the 
way to Bethany. But there is no need 
to suppose that this was the case (as 
Jiingst so far correctly objects against 
Holtzmann), and whilst we may take 
<rvve\9. as referring to the final meeting 
before the Ascension, we may place that 
meeting not in Jerusalem but on the 
Mount of Olives. Blass sees in the word 
o-weX.9. an assembly of all the Apostles, 
cf. ver. 13 and 1 Cor. xv. 7, and adds : 
" Aliunde supplendus locus ubi hoc fac- 
tum, ver. 12, Luke xxiv. 50". — k-rtr\pdi- 
tcdv : imperfect, denoting that the act of 
questioning is always imperfect until an 
answer is given (Blass, cf. iii. 3), and here 
perhaps indicating that the same question 
was put by one inquirer after another (see 
on the force of the tense, as noted here 
and elsewhere by Blass, Hcrmathena, xxi., 
pp. 228, 229). — el: this use of ei in direct 
questions is frequent in Luke, Blass, 
Grammatik des N. G., p. 254; cf. vii. 1, 
xix. 2 (in Vulgate si) ; it is adopted in the 
LXX, and a parallel may also be found 

in the interrogative J"l in Hebrew (so 

Blass and Viteau). — ev t£ xp6vo> tovtu : 
such a promise as that made in ver. 5, 
the fulfilment of which, according to 
Joel ii. 28, would mark the salvation of 
Messianic times, might lead the disciples 
to ask about the restoration of the king- 
dom to Israel which the same prophet had 
foretold, to be realised by the annihilation 
of the enemies of God and victory and 
happiness for the good. As in the days 
of old the yoke of Pharaoh had been broken 
and Israel redeemed from captivity, so 
would the Messiah accomplish the final 
redemption, cf. Luke xxiv. 21, and set 
up again, after the destruction of the 
world-powers, the kingdom in Jerusalem ; 
Weber, "jfitdische Theologie, pp. 360, 361 
(1897). No doubt the thoughts of the 
disciples still moved within the narrow 
circle of Jewish national hopes : " totidem 
in hac interrogatione sunt errores quot 
verba," writes Calvin. But still we must 
remember that with these thoughts of 
the redemption of Israel there mingled 
higher thoughts of the need of repentance 
and righteousness for the Messianic king- 
dom (Psalms of Solomon, xvii., xviii. ; ed. 
Ryle and James, p. lvii.), and that the 

disciples may well have shared, even if 
impertectly, in the hopes of a Zacharias 
or a Simeon. Dr. Edersheim notes 
" with what wonderful sobriety " the 
disciples put this question to our Lord 
(ubi supra, i., p. 79) ; at the same time 
the question before us is plainly too primi- 
tive in character to have been invented by 
a later generation (McGiffert, Apostolic 
Age, p. 41). — airoKaOHTTdveis : airoKaBio-- 
Tava>, a form of airoKa6i<rnf](n which is 
found in classical Greek and is used of 
the restoration of dominion as here in 
1 Mace. xv. 3 ; see also below on iii. 21 
and Malachi LXX iv. 5. On the form of 
the verb see W.H., ii., 162, and on its 
force see further Dalman, u. s., p. 109. 
" Dost thou at this time restore . . . ? " 
R.V. ; the present tense marking their ex- 
pectation that the kingdom, as they con- 
ceived it, would immediately appear — an 
expectation enhanced by the promise of 
the previous verse, in which they saw the 
foretaste of the Messianic kingdom. 

Ver. 7. \povovs T K<"poi5s : Blass re- 
gards the two as synonymous, and no 
doubt it is difficult always to maintain 
a distinction. But here xp° vov s may 
well be taken to mean space of time as 
such, the duration of the Church's history, 
and xaipox/s the critical periods in that 
history . 6 y.\v tempos StjXoi iroioTTiTo. 
Xpovov, xpovos he irocroTirjTa (Ammonius). 
A good instance of the distinction may 
be found in LXX Neh. x. 34 : els icaipovs 
airo xpovuv, " at times appointed" ; cf. 1 
Thes. v. 1. So here Weiss renders : ,, zu 
kennenZeiten undgeeigneteZeitpunkte". 
In modern Greek, whilst icaipos means 
-weather, xpoVos means year, so that " in 
both words the kernel of meaning has 
remained unaltered ; this in the case of 
Kaipoijs is changeableness, of xP° vt,,v 
duration" (Curtius, Etym., p. no sq.) ; 
cf. also Trench, N. T. Synonyms, ii., p. 27 
ff. ; Kennedy, Sources of N. TV Greek, p. 
153; and Grimm-Thayer, sub' v. Kcupds. 
— e£ov<ria, authority, R.V. — either as 
delegated or unrestrained, the liberty of 
doing as one pleases (e|eo-Tt) ; Svvapis, 
power, natural ability, inherent power, 
residing in a thing by virtue of its nature, 
or, which a person or thing exerts or puts 
forth — so Svvapis is ascribed to Christ, 
now in one sense, now in another, so also 

9 — io. 



GXcttoitcji' auTwc eiTiqp0Tj, Kal vefyekit) uTTeXajSev auTov diro tui' 
6<f>0a\fAoiy auTcii'. 1 IO. Kal u>s dTeei^oires r\<rav els Toy oupayoV, 

1 For T.R. Kai TODTa . . . o<j>8. avTwv D, Sah., Aug., with var. icai ravra eiirovTos 
ovtov v€<|>. vireX. avrov Kai aTrt)pOT| air' avTuv. Chase explains from Syriac, but itai 
aTrijp. k.t.X. may be an assimilation to Matt. ix. 15. Omission of (3\eir. mtov and 
airo twv o(j>0a\. in Western texts curious ; may to some extent support Blass's view 
or may have been intentional omissions. Vulg. and Flor. retain both omissions. 
Weiss regards the whole in D as secondary; Hilgenfeld follows D. 

to the Holy Spirit as in ver. 8 ; cf. x. 38, 
Luke iv. 14, Rom. xv. 13 ; Bengel, Luke 
iv. 36, and Grimm-Thayer, Synonyms. 
Sub v. 

Ver. 8. eo-ecrOe (lov uapTvpes. " my 
witnesses," R.V., reading p.ow instead of 
p,oi, not only witnesses to the facts of 
their Lord's life, cf. i. 22, x. 39, but also 
His witnesses, His by a direct personal 
relationship ; Luke xxiv. 48 simply speaks 
of a testimony to the facts. — ev re 'lepov- 
o-aXtjp. k.t.X. : St. Luke on other occa- 
sions, as he^e, distinguishes Jerusalem as a 
district separate from all the rest of Judaea 
(cf. Luke v. 17, Acts x. 39), a proof of in- 
timate acquaintance with the Rabbinical 
phraseology of the time, according to Eder- 
sheim, Sketches of Jewish Social Life, pp. 
17, 73. In this verse, see Introduction, the 
keynote is struck of the contents of the 
whole book, and the great divisions of 
the Acts are marked, see, e.g., Blass, p. 
12 in Prologue to Acts — Jerusalem, i.-vii. ; 
J udaea, ix., 32 ; xii., ig ; Samaria, viii. ; and 
if it appears somewhat strained to see in 
St. Paul's preaching in Rome a witness 
to " the utmost parts of the earth," it is 
noteworthy that in Psalms of Solomon, 
viii., 16, we read of Pompey that he came 
air' itrxdrav ttjs VHS, i.e., Rome — the 
same phrase as in Acts i. 8. This verse 
affords a good illustration of the subjective 
element which characterises the partition 
theories of Spitta, Jungst, Clemen and 
others. Spitta would omit the whole 
verse from his sources A and B, and 
considers it as an interpolation by the 
author of Acts; but, as Hilgenfeld points 
out, the verse is entirely in its place, and 
it forms the best answer to the " particu- 
larism " of the disciples, from which 
their question in ver. 6 shows that they 
were not yet free. Feine would omit the 
words I(i>9 iayvrov ttjs yy\9 because 
nothing in the conduct of the early 
Church, as it is described to us in the 
Jewish-Christian source, Acts i. -xii., points 
to any knowledge of such a commission 
from the Risen Christ. Jungst disagrees 
with both Spitta and Feine, and thinks 
that the hand of the redactor is visible in 
prominence given to the little Samaria. 

Ver. 9. €ir»jp8T| : the word in ver. 2 is 
different, and lirr|p0T) seems not merely 
to denote our Lord's first leaving the 
ground (as Weiss, Overbeck), but also 
to be more in accordance with the calm 
and grandeur of the event than airT)p0T) ; 
this latter word would rather denote a 
taking away by violence. — Kal ve^eXi] 
vire'Xape : the cloud is here, as elsewhere, 
the symbol of the divine glory, and it 
was also as St. Chrysostom called it : to 
6xT)p.a to (3ao-iXiKOv ; cf. Ps. civ. 3. In 
1 Tim. iii. 16 we read that our Lord was 
received up Iv 8o|tj, " in glory," R.V. 

Ver. 10. o.t€vi£ovt€s rjo-av : this peri- 
phrasis of rjv or rjo-av with a present 
or perfect participle is very frequently 
found in St. Luke's writings (Friedrich, 
pp. 12 and 89, and compare the list in 
Simcox, u. s., pp. 130-134). The verb 
is peculiar to St. Luke and St. Paul, and 
is found ten times in Acts, twice in St. 
Luke's Gospel, and twice in 2 Cor. ; it 
denotes a fixed, steadfast, protracted gaze : 
" and while they were looking steadfastly 
into heaven as he went," R.V., thus ex- 
pressing more clearly the longing gaze 
of the disciples watching the Lord as He 
was going (7rop€vop.evov oaitov, the pre- 
sent participle denoting that the cloud was 
still visible for a considerable time), as if 
carrying their eyes and hearts with Him 
to heaven : " Ipse enim est amor noster ; 
ubi autem amor, ibi est oculus et cor " 
(Corn, a Lapide). The word is also 
found in LXX 1 Esdr. vi. 28 and 3 
Mace. ii. 26 (cf. Aquila, Job vii. 8), and 
also in Josephus, B. J., v., 12, 3, and 
Polybius. Ramsay, St. Paul, 38, 39, 
gives a most valuable account of the use 
of the word in St. Luke, and concludes 
that the action implied by it is quite 
inconsistent with weakness of vision, and 
that the theory which makes Paul a per- ( 
manent sufferer in the eyes, as if he could 
not distinctly see the persons near him, 
is hopelessly at variance with St. Luke ; 
cf. too the meaning of the word as used by 
St. Paul himself in 2 Cor. iii. 7,13, where 
not weak but strong sight is implied in the 
word. The verb thus common in St. Luke 
is frequently employed by medical writers 



iropeuojxeVou auTOu, ica! ISou uvhpes 8uo TrapcioTrJKeio-ai' l aurois eV 
ea0TJ-i Xcuktj, 2 II. ot Kal clitov, "AcSpes TaXiXaioi, ti e<rrY)KaT€ 
€Lip\ciroi'T€s ets tcv oupayoe ; outos 6 'ItjctoGs 6 ayaXTjepfieis a<t> 
iiu.Qu' €is toc oiipavoV, outcus eXeucreTai, ov Tpanw eOedo-acrGe auTOK 
iropeuop.ei'Oi' eis Toy oupaf6V. 12. totc uireo-rpevj/av' els McpouaaXrjp. 

1 •jrap€KrT'qK€i(rav ; W.H. read irapio-., but see also Winer-Schmiedel, p. ioo. 

2 e<rdr\Ti Xeviqi C 3 DE Syr. Hard., Aeth., Orig.-int., Chrys., so Hilgenfeld ; but in 
R.V. £<rQi)(re<ri Xevitais fc^ABC and good cursives, Vulg., Syr. Pesh.. Arm. 
Boh., Tisch., W.H., Weiss; so also Blass in p. 


to denote a peculiar fixed look (Zahn) ; so 
in Luke xxii. 56, where it is used for the 
servant-maid's earnest gaze at St. Peter, 
a gaze not mentioned at all by St. 
Matthew, and expressed by a different 
word in St. Mark xiv. 67 ; Hobart, 
Medical Language of St. Luke, p. 76. 
In LXX, as above, it is employed in a 
secondary sense, but by Aquila, u. s., in 
its primary meaning of gazing, beholding. 
— Kal ISov : koI at the commencement of 
the apodosis is explained as Hebraistic, 
but instances are not wanting in classical 
Greek; cf. Blass, Grammatik des N. G., 
p. 257, and see also Simcox, ubi supra, 
p. 160 ff. For the formula koi ISov cf. 

the Hebrew HSiT), and on St. Luke's 
employment of it in sudden interpositions, 
see Hort, Ecclesia, p. 179. The use of 
icai (which in the most Hebraic books of 
the N.T. is employed much more exten- 
sively than in classical Greek) is most 
frequent in Luke, who also uses more 
frequently than other writers the formula 
icat ISov to introduce an apodosis; cf 
Friedrich, ubi supra, p. 33. — irapeurrn- 
Kcio-av ovtois : in the appearance of 
angels which St. Luke often narrates 
there is a striking similarity between the 
phraseology of his Gospel and the Acts ; 
cf. with the present passage Acts x. 30, 
xii. 7, and Luke xxiv. 4, ii. 9. The de- 
scription in the angels' disappearances is 
not so similar, cf. Acts x. 7 and Luke ii. 
15, but it must be remembered that there 
is only one other passage in which the 
departure of the angels is mentioned, 
Rev. xvi. 2 ; Friedrich, ubi supra, pp. 45, 
52, and Zeller, Acts ii., p. 224 (E. T.). 
For the verb cf Luke i. 19, xix. 24, Acts 
xxiii. 2, 4, and especially xxvii. 23. — Iv 
Io-9tjti Xevxfj : in R.V. in the plural, see 
critical notes and also Deissmann, Neue 
Bibelstudien, p. 90. 

Ver. 11. avSpes Ta\. : the avSpes in 
similar expressions is often indicative of 
respect as in classical Greek, but as ad- 

dressed by angels to men it may denote the 
earnestness of the address (Nosgen). St. 
Chrysostom saw in the salutation a wish 
to gain the confidence of the disciples : 
" Else, why needed they to be told of 
their country who knew it well enough ? " 
Calvin also rejects the notion that the 
angels meant to blame the slowness and 
dulness of apprehension of Galilaeans. 
At the same time the word TaX. seems 
to remind us that things which are de- 
spised (John vii. 52) hath God chosen. 
Ex Galilaa nunquam vel certe raro fuerat 
propheta ; at otnnes Apostoli (Bengel) ; see 
also below. — ovtos 6 Mt]o-ovs : if the 
mention of their northern home had re- 
minded the disciples of their early choice 
by Christ and of all that He had been to 
them, the personal name Jesus would 
assure them that their master would still 
be a human Friend and divine Saviour ; 
Hie jfesus: qui vobis fuit eritque semper 
Jesus, id est, Salvator (Corn, a Lap.). 
— irop€vopevov : on the frequency of the 
verb in St. Luke as compared with other 
N.T. writers, often used to give effect 
and vividness to the scene, both Frie- 
drich and Zeller remark; St. Peter uses 
the same word of our Lord's Ascension, 
1 Peter iii. 22. As at the Birth of Christ, 
so too at His Ascension the angels' mes- 
sage was received obediently and joyfully, 
for only thus can we explain Luke xxiv. 52. 
Ver. 12. totc : frequent in Acts and 
in St. Luke's Gospel, but most frequent 
in St. Matthew; on its use see Grimm- 
Thayer, and Blass, Gramm. des N. G., 
p. 270. — vireo"Tpe\|/av : a word charac- 
teristic of Luke both in his Gospel and 
in Acts, occurring in the former over 
twenty times, in the latter ten or eleven 
times. Only in three places elsewhere, 
not at all in the Gospels, but see Mark 
xiv. 40 (Moulton and Geden, sub v.) ; 
Friedrich, ubi supra, p. 8. On the 
Ascension see additional note at end of 
chapter. — tov kcX. 'EXaiuvos : ubi capitis 
et vinctus fuerat. Wetstein.. Although 

II— I J. 



diro opous tou KaXoujieVou 'EXaiawos, o ianv lyyus 'lepouaaX^fi, 
cra(3pdTou eyov 6&6V. 

13. Kal oTe €t<rf]X9of, afeprjcrav eis to uirepwoy ou r\<rav KaTafie- 
forres, o Te rierpos Kal MaKwfios Kal 'iwdi'^Yjs l Kal 'AfSpe'as, <t>iXi.Tnros 

1 laicu>f3os Kai laiavvT]?, so E, Syr. Hard., Arm. Zoh., Chrys., Theodrt. ; but in 
inverse order in J^ABCD 61, Vulg. and good versions, so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Wendt. 

St. Matthew and St. Mark both speak 
of the Mount of Olives they do not say 
tov KaX. (neither is the formula found in 
John viii. 1). It is therefore probable 
that St. Luke speaks as he does as one 
who was a stranger to Jerusalem, or, 
as writing to one who was so. Blass, 
ubi supra, pp. 32, 84, contends that 
'EXaiwvos ought to give place to IXaiwv, 
which he also reads in Luke xix. 2g, xxi. 
37 (W.H. 'EXaiiv, and in Luke xix. 37, 
xxii. 39, rdv 'EXaiwv, in each case as 
genitive of eXcua), the former word being 
found only here and in Josephus, Ant., 
vii., g, 2. But it is found in all the MSS. 
in this passage, although /also D. cum 
cat., says Blass. Blass would thus get 
rid of the difficulty of regarding 'EXaiuv 
as if used in Luke xix. 29, xxi. 37 as an 
indeclinable noun, whilst here he would 
exchange its genitive for cXaiuiv. Deiss- 
mann, however, is not inclined to set 
aside the consensus of authoritities for 
'EXaiuvos, and he regards IXaiwv in the 
two passages above as a lax use of the 
nominative case. As the genitive of 
IXaiuv it would correspond to the Latin 
Olivetum (so Vulgate), an olive-orchard ; 
cf. iaireXos and dpireXuv in N.T., the 
termination wv in derivative nouns in- 
dicating a place set with trees of the 
kind designated by the primitive. For 
instances cf. Grimm-Thayer, sub 'EXaiwv, 
but see on the other hand Deissmann, 
Neue Bibelstudien, p. 36 ff. With regard 
to the parallel between our verse and Jose- 
phus, Ant., vii., 9, 2, it is evident that even 
if St. Luke had read Josephus he was not 
dependent upon him, for he says here 
tov KaX. just as in his Gospel he had 
written to KaX., probably giving one or 
more popular names by which the place 
was known ; Gloel, Galaterbrief, p. 65 
(see also on the word W.H., ii., Appendix, 
p. 165 ; Plummer, St. Luke, p. 445 ; and 
Winer-Schmiedel, p. 93). — o-a(J(3a.TOv e\ov 
6S6v, not direxov : the distance is repre- 
sented as something which the mountain 
has, Meyer-Wendt ; cf. Luke xxiv. 13. 
There is no real discrepancy between this 
and the statement of St. Luke's Gospel 

that our Lord led His disciples ews irpbs 
Br\Qaviav, xxiv. 50, a village which was 
more than double a sabbath day's journey, 
fifteen furlongs from Jerusalem. But if 
the words in St. Luke, /. c, mean "over 
against Bethany," Iws irpds (so Feine, 
Eine vorkanonische Uberlieferung des 
Lucas, p. 79, and Nosgen, Apostel- 
geschichte, p. 80; see also Rendall, Acts, 
p. 171 — Blass omits lus and reads only 
irpos and remarks neque vero irpds est 
els ; cf. also Belser, Theologische Quar- 
talschrift, i., 79 (1895)), tne difficulty is 
surmounted, for St. Luke does not fix the 
exact spot of the Ascension, and he else- 
where uses the Mount of Olives, Luke 
xxi. 37, as the equivalent of the Bethany 
of Matthew (xxi. 17) and Mark (xi. 1). 
Nor is it likely that our Lord would lead 
His disciples into a village for the event 
of His Ascension. It should be remem- 
bered that Lightfoot, Hor. Heb., says 
that " the Ascension was from the place 
where that tract of the Mount of Olives 
ceased to be called Bethphage and began 
to be called Bethany". The recent 
attempt of Rud. Hoffmann to refer the 
Ascension to a "Galilee" in the Mount 
of Olives rests upon a tradition which 
cannot be regarded as reliable (see 
Galilaa auf dem Oelberg, Leipzig, 1896), 
although he can quote Resch as in agree- 
ment with him, p. 14. On Hoffmann's- 
pamphlet see also Expositor (5th series), 
p. 119 (1897), and Theologisches Litera- 
turblatt, No. 27 (1897). This mention 
of the distance is quite characteristic of 
St. Luke ; it may also have been intro- 
duced here for the benefit of his Gentile 
readers; Page, Acts, in loco, and cf. 
Ramsay's remarks, Was Christ born at 
Bethlehem? pp. 55, 56. 

Ver. 13. to virepJiov : " the upper cham- 
ber," R.V., as of some well-known place, 
but there is no positive evidence to identify 
it with the room of the Last Supper, al- 
though here and in Mark xiv. 15, as also in 
Luke xxii. 12, the Vulgate has ccenaculum. 
Amongst recent writers Hilgenfeld and 
Feine see in this definite mention of a room 
well known to the readers a reference to 



Kal ©wads, Ba.p0oXojj.aios *al MaTOaios, 1 'ldKG)|3os 'AX<J>aiou 2 *al 
Iiuwy 6 ZtjXwti^s, *al 'louSas 'laKoij3ou. 14. outoi irdvTes r\<rav 

1 MaT0aios AB 3 CE, Boh. Ma98aios ^B*D, Sah. ; so Tisch., W.H., Weiss; see 
Winer-Schmiedel, pp. 60, 61. For lax. AX^xxiov D, Sah. read Io,k. o tov AX<j>., may 
be assimilation to Matt. x. 3 and Mc. iii. 18 (not Lc.) ; Chase explains by Syriac 
idiom ; retained by Blass in 6. 

2 Kot tt) Serjo-ei C 3 , Chrys. Omitted by ^ABC*DE 61, and others, Vulg., Sah., 
Boh., Arm., Aeth., Chrys. ; so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Wendt, Weiss, Hilgenfeld. <rvv 
-ywaigiv, D adds koi tckvois, so Hilgenfeld, but rejected by Blass ("male D "), for 
which see criticism of Weiss, Codex D, p. 54 ; probably occasioned by mention of 
the women, cf. xxi. 5. ovtoi iravTts omit. Aug., Cypr. Mapi<j. J^ACD, Boh., Chrys. 

the author's first book, Luke xxii. 11, 12. 
But the word used in St. Mark and in St. 
Luke's Gospel is different from that in 
the passage before us — dvd-yaiov, but 
here iircpwov. If we identify the former 
with the KaraXvp-a, Luke xxii. 11, it 
would denote rather the guest-chamber 
used for meals than the upper room or 
loft set apart for retirement or prayer, 
although sometimes used for supper or 
for assemblies (virepuiov). Both words 
are found in classical Greek, but only the 
latter in the LXX, where it is frequent. 
In the N.T. it is used by St. Luke alone, 
and only in Acts. Holtzmann, follow- 
ing Lightfoot and Schottgen, considers 
that an upper room in the Temple is 
meant, but this would be scarcely pro- 
bable under the circumstances, and a 
meeting in a private house, ii. 46, iv. 23, 
v. 42, is far more likely. — o Te n. : in a 
series of nouns embraced under one cate- 
gory only the first may have the article, 
Winer-Schmiedel, pp. 154-157. In com- 
paring this list of the Apostles with that 
given by the Synoptists we notice that 
whilst St. Peter stands at the head in 
the four lists, those three are placed in 
the first group who out of the whole 
band are prominent in the Acts as also 
in the Gospels, viz., Peter, John, and 
James ; all the Synoptists, however, place 
St. James as the elder brother before St. 
John. In St. Luke's first list, as in St. 
Matthew's list, the brothers Peter and 
Andrew stand first, followed by another 
pair of brothers James and John ; but in 
Acts Andrew gives place, as we might 
expect, to the three Apostles who had 
been admitted to the closest intimacy 
with Jesus during His earthly life, and 
St. John as St. Peter's constant com- 
panion in the Gospel narrative makes a 
pair with him. The list in Acts agrees 
with that given by St. Luke in his 
Gospel in two particulars (see Friedrich, 
ubi supra, p. 50, and so too Zeller) : (1) 
Simon the Zealot is called not 6 Kavav- 

alos, as in Matthew and Mark, but a 
ZiiXcdTTJs, cf. Luke vi. 15 ; (2) instead ol 
Thaddaeus (or Lebbasus) we have "Judas 
of James," cf. Luke vi. 16. — 'lovSas 
MaKupov, "the son of James," R.V. (so 
too above MaKto^os 'AX<J>aiov, " James 
the son of Alphasus"), placing the words 
"or, brother, see Jude i.," in the margin, 
so too in Luke vi. 16. The rendering of 
the words as Jude the brother of James 
was probably caused by Jude i., and it is 
difficult to believe, as Nosgen argues (see 
also Winer-Schmiedel, p. 262), that in 
the same list and in such close prox- 
imity these two meanings "the son of" 
and "the brother of" should occur for 
the genitive, although no doubt it is 
possible grammatically ; see Nosgen and 
Wendt, in loco. On the other hand, see 
Felten, note, p. 66. But Winer, to whom 
the latter refers, is by no means positive, 
and only expresses the opinion that 
&8e\4>6s is perhaps to be supplied here 
and in Luke vi. 16 if the same Apostle is 
referred to in Jude i. (Winer-Moulton, 
p. 238). But the identification with the 
latter is very improbable, as he was most 
likely the brother of James, known as 
"the Lord's brother" (see Plummer on 
Luke, vi., 16, and Salmon, Introduction to 
N. T., pp. 473, 474, fifth edit.). It is also 
noteworthy that St. Luke uses dSeXcfxSs 
where he means " brother," cf. Luke iii. 
1, vi. 14 ; Acts xii. 2. Blass, Grammatik 
des N. G., gives the same reference to 
Alcipkr., ii., 2, as Winer, Tip.oKpdr»]s o 
MijTpoSwpov, sc. aSeXcjxfe, but at the 
same time he declines to commit himself 
as to the passage in Acts and Luke vi. 
The list, it has been thought, is given 
here again by St. Luke to show the re- 
covery of the Apostolic band from their 
denial and flight — so St. Chrysostom 
remarks that Luke did well to mention 
the disciples, for since one had betrayed 
Christ and another had been unbelieving, 
he hereby shows that, except the first, all 
were preserved (so to the same efiect 




irpoaKapTepoGi'Tcs opoOupaoof Ttj irpo o-euxt) teal ttj Serjo-ei, <riiv 
Yuvai|l Kal Mapia 1 ttj fXTjTpl tou 'Itjctou, Kal ow tois &8e\(pois auToO. 

1 Mapiap BE (some very good cursives), Sah., Aeth., Chrys. ; so Tisch., W.H., 
Weiss — the latter is said to be put always for the Virgin, but here evidence seems 
equally divided (see Winer-Schmiedel, pp. go, 91). 

CEcumenius, in loco). There may also 
have been the desire of the author to 
intimate that although only the works 
of a few on the list would be chronicled, 
yet all alike were witnesses to Christ and 
workers for Him (Lumby). 

Ver. 14. icai rjo-av irpocrKapTepovvTes : 
on the construction see ver. 10. In N.T. 
found only in St. Luke and St. Paul 
(except once in St. Mark iii. 9) ; most 
frequently with the dative of the thing, 
of continuing steadfast in prayer ; cf. vi. 
4, Rom. xii. 12, Col. iv. 2, and cf. also ii. 
42 or ii. 46 of continuing all the time in 
(ev) a place; in Acts viii. 13, x. 7, it is 
used with the dative of the person, and 
in Rom. xiii. 6 with eis ti. It is found 
in Josephus with the dative of the thing, 
Ant., v., 2, 6, and in Polybius, who also 
uses it with the dative of the person. In 
LXX it is found in Numbers xiii. 21 and in 
Susannah ver. 6, Theod., also in Tobit v. 8, 
S. — 6po0vpaS6v, a favourite word of St„ 
Luke : Lucaz in Actis in deliciis est (Blass) 
— used ten or eleven times in Acts, only 
once elsewhere in N.T., Rom. xv. 6, 
where it has the same meaning, Vulgate 
unanimiter. In the LXX it is oftener 
found as the equivalent of Hebrew words 
meaning simply " together," and Hatch, 
Essays in B. G., p. 63, would limit it to 
this meaning in the N.T., but the word 
cannot be confined to mere outward 
assembling together ; cf. Dem., Phil., iv., 
147, 6p.o0vp.aS6v €k pias "yvup/qs (Meyer - 
Wendt) ; so Luther einmiltkig. It was 
very natural that St. Luke should lay 
stress upon the absolute unanimity of the 
early believers, and the word is used with 
reference to the Twelve, to the hundred- 
and-twenty, to the whole number of 
believers; truly the Holy Ghost was 
" amator concordias " (Corn, a Lapide). 
— ttj Trpoo-evxTJ Kal rfj Setjo-ei : the latter 
noun cannot be supported by MS. author- 
ity ; the two words mark the difference 
between general and specific prayer; cf. 
Bengel on 1 Tim. ii. r, and cf. Lnke,\.,^7,. 
It is very doubtful whether we can confine 
irpocrevxij here to the Temple prayers ; 
rather the article, cf. vi. 4 and ii. 42, seems 
to point to a definite custom of common 
prayer as a bond of Christian fellowship 
(Hort, Ecclesia, p. 43, so Speaker's Com- 
mentary, in loco). As in his Gospel, so 

here and elsewhere in Acts, St.- Luke lays 
stress upon frequency in prayer, and that 
too in all parts of the book (Friedrich, 
pp. 55-60). — <rvv yovai|l : it is natural to 
include the women already mentioned in 
St. Luke's Gospel, cf, e.g., viii. 2, 3. xxiii. 
55, "with the women," R.V., or the ex- 
pression may be quite indefinite as in 
margin R.V. In this mention of the 
presence of women, as in the stress laid 
upon prayer, there is another point of 
unity between the book and the third 
Gospel, " The Gospel of Womanhood " 
(see also Ramsay, Was Christ born at 
Bethlehem? p. 50). (The mention of 
women would certainly indicate a pri- 
vate house rather than the Temple.) 
Erasmus and Calvin both interpret the 
words cam uxoribus, probably not without 
desire to make a point against celibacy. 
J. Lightfoot allows that this meaning 
may be correct, since the Apostles and 
disciples who had wives took them 
with them, "but," he adds, "it is too 
strait ". — Mapidp. (for Mapia), so always 
according to W.H. of the Blessed Vir- 
gin, nominative, vocative, accusative, 
dative, except twice in a few of the best 
MSS. (Matt. i. 20, and Luke ii. 19). Cf. 
Appendix, p. 163. See also Simcox, 
Language of the N. T., p. 28, and Winer- 
Schmiedel, p. 91, note. The koi may be 
taken either to comprehend her under the 
other women, or as distinguishing her 
from them. This is the last mention of 
her in the N.T., and the Scripture leaves 
her "in prayer". — trvv tois aSe\cf>ois 
airov : they are previously mentioned as 
unbelieving (John vii. 5, and compare 
Mark vi. 4), but not only the Resurrec- 
tion of the Lord but also that of Lazarus 
may well have overcome their unbelief. 
St. Chrysostom (so too CEcumenius) con- 
jectures that Joseph was dead, for it is 
not to be supposed, he says, that when 
the brethren had become believers Joseph 
believed not. As the brethren are heVe 
distinguished from the Eleven, it would 
seem that they could not have been 
included in the latter (see, however. 
" Brethren," B.D. 2 pp. 13, 14). But 
whatever meaning we give to the word 
"brethren" here or in the Gospels, 
nothing could be more significant than 
the fact that they had now left their. 



15. KAI If Tats Tjuepais Tairrais araoras PIcTpos ef u&ru tu>v 
u.aQt]Tu>v J eiirei' (r\v re oxXos oyouaTwc em to auTo ws cicaTo^ elKoaiv), 

1 fiae^Tuv; but fc$ABC*, Vul g-> Tisch., W.H., R.V., so Weiss, Wendt a8eX<J>wv. 

settled homes in Galilee to take part in 
the lot of the disciples of Jesus, and to 
await with them the promise of the 
Father (Felten). It may have been that. 
James, "the Lord's brother," was con- 
verted by the Resurrection, 1 Cor. xv. 
5, and that his example constrained 
the other " brethren " to follow him. 

Ver. 15. ieai ev Tats T)u.t'pais Ta-urais : 
St. Luke often employs such notes of 
time, used indefinitely like similar ex- 
pressions in Hebrew — e.g., 1 Sam. xxviii. 
1, both in his Gospel and in Acts. Fried- 
rich, p. 9, Lekebusch, p. 53. — avao-Tas : 
it is very characteristic of St. Luke to 
add a participle to a finite verb indica- 
ting the posture or position of the 
speaker. This word is found in St. Luke's 
Gospel seventeen times, and in Acts 
nineteen times, only twice in Matthew, 
six or seven times in Mark ; cf. also his 
use of o-Ta0ei$j three times in Gospel, 
six times in Acts, but not at all in the 
■other Evangelists. — rUVpos : that St. 
Peter should be the spokesman is only 
what we should naturally expect from 
his previous position among the Twelve, 
but, as St. Chrysostom observes, he does 
everything with the common consent, 
nothing imperiously. The best fruits of 
his repentance are here seen in the ful- 
filment of his commission to strengthen 
his brethren, ev u£cru> : another favourite 
expression of St. Luke both in his Gospel 
and in the Acts, in the former eight 
times, in the latter five times (four times 
in St. Matthew, twice in St. Mark). 

Blass compares the Hebrew IpjnSl, 

Grammatik des N. G., p. 126, and in loco. 
— jj.a0T)TcJv : Blass retains and contends 
that a.SeX.<|>. has arisen from either ver. 
14 or ver. 16 ; but there is strong critical 
authority for the latter word ; cf. vi. 1. 
In LXX it is used in three senses ; a 
brother and a neighbour, Lev. xix. 17 ; a 
member of the same nation, Exod. ii. 14, 
Deut. xv. 3. In the N.T. it is used in 
these three senses, and also in the sense 
of fellow-Christians, who are looked upon 
as forming one family. The transition 
is easily seen : (1) member of the same 
family ; (2) of the same community 
(national), of the same community (spirit- 
ual). Kennedy, Sources of N.T. Greek, 
PP- 95> 96- On its use in religious as- 

sociations in Egypt see Deissmann, 
Bibelstudien, i., 82, 140, 209. — re: 
here for the first time solitarium. On 
the frequent recurrence of this word 
in Acts in all parts, as compared with 
other books of the N.T., see Blass, 
Grammatik des N. G., pp. 257, 258. — 
ovojiaTcov : R.V., " persons ". Light- 
foot compares the use of the word in 
Rev. iii. 4, xi. 13 (so too Wendt), where 
the word is used to signify any persons 
without distinction of sex, so that the 
word may have been used here to include 
the women also. But he considers that 
it rather means men as distinct from 
women, and so, as he says, the Syriac 
and Arabic understand it here. Its use 
in the sense of persons reckoned up by 

name is Hebraistic ]Tiftt!J LXX, Numb. 

i. 2, 18, 20 ; iii. 40, 43 ; xxii. 53 
(Grimm-Thayer, sub v.), but see also for 
a similar use on the Egyptian papyri, 
Deissmann, Neue Bibelstudien, p. 24 
(1897). — eiri to av-ro, "gathered to- 
gether," R.V. ; cf. Matt. xxii. 34, Luke 
xvii. 35, Acts ii. 1, 44, 47 (so W.H., 
R.V., see in loco, Wendt, Weiss), 1 Cor. 
xi. 20, xiv. 23. Holtzmann, in loco, de- 
scribes it as always local, and it is no 
doubt so used in most of the above pas- 
sages, as also in LXX Psalm ii. 2 (cf. 
Acts iv. 26), 2 Sam. ii. 13, 3 Mace. iii. 1, 
Sus. v. 14, and in classical Greek. But 
when we remember the stress laid by St. 
Luke in the opening chapters of the Acts 
upon the unanimity of the believers, it 
is not unlikely that he should use the 
phrase, at all events in ii. 44, 47, with 
this deeper thought of unity of purpose 
and devotion underlying the words, even 
if we cannot render the phrase in each 
passage in Acts with Rendall (Acts, p. 
34), " with one mind," " of one mind ". — 
u>s etca-rov €ikoo~iv. Both Wendt and 
Feine reject the view that the number is 
merely mythical (Baur, Zeller, Overbeck, 
Weizsacker), and would rather see in it 
a definite piece of information which St. 
Luke had gained. It is quite beside the 
mark to suppose that St. Luke only used 
this particular number because it repre- 
sented the Apostles multiplied by 10, or 
40 multiplied by 3. If he had wished to 
emphasise the number as a number, why 
introduce the ws ? 

15— 17« 


i6. w Ai'8pes &8e\<|>oi, cSei 1 TrXTipwGTJmi ttjv ypa<J>V TauTTjk, fy irpoeiirc 
to rii'eup.a to "Ayioi' Sid oTojxaTOS Aa|3i8, irepl 'lou'Sa tou Yerop-eVou 
68t)you tois cruXXa(3oGai toi' Itjctouv • IJ. oti KaTT|pi.vp.T}p.eVos i)v ow 

1 eSet NABCD 2 E, Origen, Eus., Ath., W.H., Weiss. Sei D*, Vulg., Boh.; 
so Gig., Par., Aug. (Iren., Vig.), Hilgenfeld. Blass, p. xvii., in his Preface to p, 
argues that as Irenasus omits 173-20 and elsewhere seems to be ignorant of the 
death of Judas, so his text also omitted from ica-n^p. €v tjp.iv to ycvtjOtjtw. In his 
revised edition Luke added 173-20 and also substituted eSet for the original Sci: " ut 
significaretur ex parte jam esse ratum factum vetus vaticinium, exitu nempe Judaa ". 
But the omission of Irenaeus may be accidental, or it has been suggested that he too 
may have regarded 173-20 as a parenthesis and not actually part of Peter's speech. 
Aap\8; but in ^BD, so W.H., Weiss AavetS. ACE read AAA; see Winer - 
Schmiedel, p. 65, Blass, Proleg. (Acta Apost.), p. 34. 

Ver. 16. "AvSpes aSeX<j>oi : a mode of 

address indicating not only respect but 
also the solemnity of the occasion and 
the importance of the subject. There is 
nothing unclassical in this use of the vo- 
cative without u at the beginning of 
speeches. Demosthenes, at least on 
some occasions, used the phrase "AvSpes 
*A0Tjvaioi without St. Simcox, ubi supra, 
p. 76, note, and see also Winer-Schmie- 
del, p. 25S, note. — eSei: very frequent in 
St. Luke's Gospel and the Acts ; in the 
former nineteen, in the latter twenty- 
five times, and in all parts of the book, 
Friedrich, ubi supra, p. 22 (Lekebusch). 
It expresses a divine necessity, and is 
used by all the Evangelists, as by St. 
Peter here, and by St. Paul (1 Cor. xv. 
2s), of the events connected with and 
following upon the Passion. — Set, opor- 
tet, expresses logical necessity rather 
than personal moral obligation w^eiXev, 
debuit, or the sense of fitness, $irpcirev, 
dccebat. The three words are all found 
in Heb. ii. 1, 17, 10, on which see West- 
cott, Hebrews, p. 36, and Plummer's St. 
Luke, p. 247. St. Peter's speech falls 
into two parts, one introduced by eSei, 
and the other introduced by hei, ver. 21. 
— ttjv ypa^rjv: the reference is undoubt- 
edly to the particular passages in the 
O.T. which follow, cf. Luke iv. 20, Acts 
viii. 35 ; see Lightfoot on Galatians iii. 22. 
There is no reference to Psalm xli. 9, 
or this passage would have been quoted, 
but to the passages in ver. 20. — irX-r|p<i>- 
0TJvai, cf. Luke xxiv. 44, 45. irX-r]p6io 
(which is very frequently used by St. Luke, 
Friedrich, ubi supra, p. 40) means more 
than " fulfil " in the popular acceptation 
of the word; it implies "to fill up to 
the full " ; " Not only is our Lord the 
subject of direct predictions in the Old 
Testament, but His claims go to the full 
extent of affirming that all the truths 
which are imperfectly, and frequently very 

darkly shadowed forth in the pages, are 
realised in Him as the ideal to which they 
pointed " (Row, Bampton Lectures, pp. 
202, 203). — to irvc\lp.a to a-yiov. St. Luke 
uses this, or a similar expression, irvevp,a 
a-yiov or to ayiov Trv€vp,a, about forty times 
in Acts alone, whilst in St. Luke's Gospel 
alone it is used about as many times as 
in the three other Evangelists together 
(Lekebusch, Apostelgeschichte, p. 65, and 
Plummer, St. Luke, p. 14). — oStjyov 
tois o-vXX. t6v Mtjo-ovv. St. Peter simply 
states a fact, but does not heap scorn or 
abuse upon Judas (Chrysostom, Horn., 
iii., cf. Theophylact). St. Matthew, 
St. Mark, St. John simply say of Judas 
6 irapaSiSovs, " he who delivered Him 
up," or employ some similar expression ; 
he is never called " the traitor " (St. 
Luke vi. 16, €Y«veTO irpoSoTTjs. " became 
a traitor," see Plummer, in loco). This 
self-restraint is remarkable on the part 
of men Who must have regarded their 
Master's Death as the most atrocious 
of murders (see Row, Bampton Lectures, 
pp. 179, 180, note). At the same time the 
word 68t)yo$ seems to bring before us the 
scene in Gethsemane, how Judas went 
before the multitude, and drew near to 
Jesus to kiss Him (Luke xxii. 47), and to 
show us how vividly the memories of the 
Passion were present to St. Peter ; cf. 
1 Peter ii. 21 ff.). 

Ver. 17. oti KaTT)pi6p.T]p,cvo$ tjv k.t.X. 
For the construction see ver. 10. oti intro- 
duces the ground upon which the Scripture 
to be cited, which speaks of the vacancy 
in the Apostolic office, found its fulfilment 
in Judas; "he was numbered," " triste 
est numerari non manere," Bengel. — k<xi 
eXayev tov KXrjpov : lit., " and obtained by 
lot the lot " : kXtjpo?, a lot, that which is 
assigned by lot, the portion or share so 
assigned ; so amongst the Greeks, and 
somewhat similarly in English, cf. in 
LXX Wisdom ii. 9, v. 5, Ecclesiasticus 

6 4 



r\\, Kal e'Xaxe tov kXtjpov tt)s SiaKovias Taurn;. 1 8. OUT09 fxer 
ouv €KTr|(jaTo -^wpiov * K T0 " * fiitrOou tt]s dSiKias, Kal Trpr^^s yevo- 

1 tov om. J^ABCDE, Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt, Hilgenfeld. After 
aSiKias D inserts avrov ; so Syr. Hard., Sah., Aug., so Blass in |3, and Hilgenfeld. 
Blass added at first, but see Hilg., note, p. 4, ko.i KareS^crev outov tov TpaxT]Xov. 

xxv. 19. The word is used elsewhere in 
Acts three times, i. 26, viii. 21, xxvi. 18 ; 
cf with the last passage its use by St. 
Paul elsewhere, Col. i. 12. Here the 
word no doubt may be used by St. Peter 
with reference to the actual selection by 
lot which was about to follow. The 
same word is used elsewhere by the same 
Apostle, 1 Peter v. 3, " neither as lording 
it over the charge allotted to you," tg>v 
tcXtipuv. Tyndale and Cranmer render 
the word here "parishes," which really 
gives a good interpretation of it = the 
" lots " assigned to the elders as their 
portions in God's heritage ; and so we 
have by an easy transition clerici = clergy, 
those to whom such " lots" are assigned: 
Humphry, Commentary on R. V., p. 446, 
Lightfoot, Pliilippians, p. 246 ff. — IXo-xev: 
here and in 2 Peter i. 1 with an accusa- 
tive, as in classical Greek, " received his 
portion " R.V. On the construction of 
the verb with the genitive, cf. Blass, 
Grammatik des N. G., pp. 100, 230, and 
Plummer's St. Luke, p. 11 ; with Luke 
i. g, cf. 1 Sam. xiv., 47. In classical 
Greek it is used as the opposite of x 6l P°- 
TOVTjO-fjvai, to be elected, more commonly 
with the infinitive. — SiaKovias: " Apostle- 
ship the highest form of ministration is 
repeatedly designated thus," Hort, Ec- 
clesia, p. 204, e.g., ver. 25, xx. 24, xxi. 
19, 2 Cor. iv. 1, v. 18, vi. 3, Rom. xi. 13, 
and see further on the word, chap. vi. 
below. It would be difficult to find in 
such a general term, or in any part of the 
speech, any reference to a hierarchical 
constitution of the Church (Zeller, Over- 
beck). Jiingst cannot derive any such 
view from this verse, although he sees in 
the description of SiaKovia as airoo-ToXi], 
ver. 25, the mark of a later period than 
that of the delivery of the speech (so too 

Ver. 18. ovtos p-cv ovv k.t.X. This 
verse and the next are regarded in 
R.V. as a parenthesis (compare also 
W.H.), p.£v ovv making the transition 
from St. Peter's own words to the ex- 
planatory statement of St. Luke ; see 
Rendall's Appendix on p.ev ovv, although 
he would place ver. 20 also in a paren- 
thesis, Acts, p. 160 ff. For this frequent 
use of p.«v ovv in Acts, see also Blass, 
who regards |x^v as used here, as in other 

places, without any following antithesis 
expressed by Si, Grammatik des N. G., 
pp. 261, 267, see also Hackett's note in 
loco. Spitta, Feine, Weiss, see in these 
two verses an editorial interpolation. — 
€KTTJo-aTo ya>piov. To harmonise this with 
Matt, xxvii. 5, an explanation has been 
often used to this effect, that although 
Judas did not purchase the field, it was 
purchased by his money, and that thus 
he might be called its possessor. This 
was the explanation adopted by the older 
commentators, and by many modern. 
Theophylact, e.g., describes Judas as 
rightly called the xvpios of the field for 
the price of it was his. It is no doubt 
quite possible that St. Peter (if the words 
are his and not St. Luke's) should thus 
express himself rhetorically (and some 
of his other expressions are certainly 
rhetorical, e.g., eXaicr]o-e jteo-os), or that 
Judas should be spoken of as the pos- 
sessor of the field, just as Joseph of 
Arimathasa is said to have hewn his own 
tomb, or Pilate to have scourged Jesus, 
but possibly Dr. Edersheim's view that 
the blood-money by a fiction of law was 
still considered to belong to Judas may 
help to explain the difficulty, Jesus the 
Messiah, ii., 575. Lightfoot comments, 
" Not that he himself bought the field, 
for Matthew resolves the contrary — nor 
was there any such thing in his intention 
when he bargained for the money," and 
then he adds, "But Peter by a bitter 
irrision showeth the fruit and profit of 
his wretched covetise : " Hor. Heb. (see 
also Hackett's note). Without fully 
endorsing this, it is quite possible that 
St. Peter, or St. Luke, would contrast 
the portion in the ministry which Judas 
had received with the little which was 
the result of the price of his iniquity. 
— Ik tov p.icr0oO ttjs aSiKias pro tov 
olSikov (aio-Oov, a Hebraism, Blass, in loco, 
see also Winer-Schmiedel, p. 26S. The 
phrase only occurs again in 2 Peter ii. 
x 3» -5 ; on this use of Ik see Simcox, 
".anguage of the N. T., p. 146. Com- 
binations of words with dSiKia are 
characteristic of St. Luke (Friedrich). 
In the other Evangelists the word is 
only found once, John vii. 18. — Kal 
irpT)VT)s -yevdu.. Wendt (following Zeller 
and Overbeck) and others maintain 

18— 19. 


*5'os iXdKTjae (icctos, koi elcxuOt] Trdrra Ta <nrXdYx>'a aurou • 19. 
xai yvtocrrbv cyeVeTO Traai tois KaToiKoucri,i> 'lepoucraXTjfi,, cucrre 
kXyjOt^cu to \(>)piov eitetyo ttj 181a oiaXexTU) auiw 'AKeXSap.a, 1 

1 AiccXSajjia, so C, Syr. Hard., Chrys., Vulg. ; AxcXSapax fr$A 40, 61, Tisch. ; 
AKe\8a{iax B, so W.H., Weiss ; D (Blass in |3 -8ep,ax), so Hilg., and other 
variants ; in Gig., Par. -emac(h). Final x (- ait ) seems certain — see comment below. 

that St. Luke here follows a different 
tradition from St. Matthew, xxvii. 6 ff., 
and that it is only arbitrary to attempt 
to reconcile them. But Felten and 
Zockler (so too Lumby and Jacobson) 
see in St. Luke's description a later stage 
in the terrible end of the traitor. St. 
Matthew says icai aireXOwv a.irt\y^ : if 
the rope broke, or a branch gave way 
under the weight of Judas, St. Luke's 
narrative might easily be supplementary 
to that of St. Matthew. Blass, in loco, 
adopts the former alternative, and holds 
that thus the narrative may be harmon- 
ised with that of St. Matthew, rupto 
fune Iudam in terram procidisse. It is 
difficult to see (as against Overbeck) why 
•n-prjvtjs ytv. is inconsistent with this. 
The words no doubt mean strictly " fall- 
ing flat on his face " opposed to vittios» 
not " falling headlong," and so they do 
not necessarily imply that Judas fell over 
a precipice, but Hackett's view that Judas 
may have hung himself from a tree on 
the edge of a precipice near the valley of 
Hinnom, and that he fell on to the rocky 
pavement below is suggested from his 
own observation of the locality, p. 36, 
Acts of the Apostles (first English edition), 
see also Edersheim, ubi supra, pp. 575, 
576. At all events there is nothing dis- 
concerting in the supposition that we 
may have here " some unknown series 
of facts, of which we have but two frag- 
mentary narratives " : " Judas," B.D. 2 , 
and see further Plummer sub v. in Hast- 
ings' B.D. !XdKT]<rc : here only in the 
N.T. Xao-Ku: a strong expression, signi- 
fying bursting asunder with a loud noise, 
Horn., Iliad, xiii., 616 ; cf. also Acta 
Thoma, 33 (p. 219, ed. Tdf.) : 6 Spdicwv 
<j)va"i]0€ls IXaKTjcre Kal airc'Oavc seal 
!£exw0T] 6 16« ovtov Kai r\ x°M» f° r tne 
construction cf. Luke xxiii. 45. 

Ver. 19. Kal yvuxnbv . . . iracrt.v tois 
Ka-roiKovaiv 'Icpovo*. : the words have 
been taken to support the view that we 
have here a parenthesis containing the 
notice of St. Luke, but if St. Peter was 
speaking rhetorically he might easily ex- 
press himself so. But many critics, who 
refuse to see in the whole of the two 
verses any parenthetical remarks of the 

historian, adopt the view that rfj SiaXeK-rw 
oiptuv and tovt' «f<rTiv x w P^ 0V atp-aTOS 
are explanations introduced by St. Luke, 
who could trust to his Gentile readers to 
distinguish between his words and those 
of St. Peter (Wendt, Holtzmann, Zockler, 
N6sgen,Jungst. Matthias). — xfj SiclXektw: 
only in Acts in the N.T., where it is used 
six times in all parts ; it may mean dia- 
lect or language, but here it is used in 
the latter sense (R.V.) to distinguish 
Aramaic from Greek (cf. its use in Poly- 
bius). — avTiSv, i.e., the dwellers of Jeru- 
salem, who spoke Aramaic — unless the 
whole expression is used rhetorically, it 
would seem that it contains the words, 
not of St. Peter, who himself spoke 
Aramaic, but of the author (see Blass, in 
loco). — 'AKeX8a|*d: the Aramaic of the 

Field of Blood would be N£H *?,Tf, 

and it is possible that the x may be added 
to represent in some way the guttural £<$, 

just as Iipax = t^*T , D> c f- Blass, in loco, 
andGrammatik des iV. G.,p. 13. W.H. (so 
Blass) read c AKcX8ap.dx (and 'AxeX8anax> 
Tisch. and Treg.) ; see also on the word 
Winer-Schmiedel, pp. 60 and 63. A 
new derivation has been proposed by 
Klostermann, Probleme in Aposteltexte, 
p. 6 ff., which has gained considerable 
attention (cf. Holtzmann, Wendt, Felten, 

ZOckler, in loco), viz.: 'TtfCFji = Koi(*a<r0ai, 

so that the word = KoifrqT^piov, cf. Matt. 
xxvii. 8. This is the derivation preferred 
by Wendt, and it is very tempting, but 
see also Enc. Bibl., I., 32, 1899, sub v. 

It is true that the two accounts in St. 
Matthew and St. Luke give two reasons 
for the name Field of Blood. But why 
should there not be two reasons ? If the 
traitor in the agony of his remorse rushed 
from the Temple into the valley of Hin- 
nom, and across the valley to " the pot- 
ter's field " of Jeremiah, the old name of 
the potter's field might easily become 
changed in the popular language into 
that of " field of blood," whilst the rea- 
son given by St. Matthew for the name 
might still hold good, since the blood- 
money, which bv a fiction of law was. 





toutcVti xupio? aifiaTos. 20. Y«YP airTai Y*P *" P^^H* ^aX/Aw^, 
" fevr\Qr\T<i) f\ lirauXis aurou cpTjfxos, ical p.T] eorw 6 KaToixwe iv 
auTTJ • " kcu, " Ttjk cmaxoirTji' auTou Xd$oi erepos. 21. Aei ovv 
rStv oweXOorrwK -^^i,!^ akSpue iv iracTi xpoVw ef u> eicrfjXdc 

still considered to belong to Judas, was 
employed for the purchase of the accursed 
spot as a burial ground for strangers. 
See Edersheim, Jesus the Messiah, ii., 
574, 575. Whatever may be alleged as 
to the growth of popular fancy and tradi- 
tion in the later account in Acts of the 
death of Judas, it cannot be said to 
contrast unfavourably with the details 
given by Papias, Fragment, 18, which 
Blass describes as " insulsissima et 
fcedissima ". 

Ver. 20. The quotation is twofold, 
the first part from Psalm lxix. 26 (LXX, 
lxviii.) ; in the LXX we have avTuv, 
changed here into outov with reference 
to Judas, whilst iv tois <rKT] is 
omitted and the words kv aviTfj, referring 
to ciravXis, are added. The omission 
would make the application of the words 
more general than in the original, which 
related to the desolation of the encamp- 
ment and tents of a nomadic tribe. The 
other part of the quotation is verbatim 
from Psalm cviii. 8 (cix.), called by the 
ancients the Iscariot Psalm. With the 
exception of Psalm xxii., no Psalm is 
more frequently quoted in the N.T. than 
lxix. ; cf. ver. 9 with John ii. 17 ; ver. 21 
with Matt, xxvii. 34, and with John xix. 
28 ; ver. 22 and 23 with Rom. xi. 9, 10 ; 
and ver. 9 with Rom. xv. 3. In these 
Psalms, as in the twenty-second Psalm, we 
see how the history of prophets and holy 
men of old, of a David or a Jeremiah, 
was typical of the history of the Son of 
man made perfect through suffering, and 
we know how our Lord Himself saw the 
fulfilment of the words of the suffering 
Psalmist .(xli. 9) in the tragic events of 
His own life (John xiii. 18). So too St. 
?eter in the recent miserable end of the 
ttaitor sees another evidence, not only of 
*he general truth, which the Psalmists 
learnt through suffering, that God re- 
warded His servants and that confusion 
awaited the unrighteous, but also another 
fulfilment in the case of Judas of the 
doom which the Psalmists of old had in- 
voked upon the persecutors of the faith- 
ful servants of God. But we are not 
called upon to regard Psalm cix. as the 
Iscariot Psalm in all its details (see Per- 
owne, Psalms, p. 538 (smaller edition)), 
or to forget, as Delitzsch reminds us, that 
the spirit of Elias is not that of the N.T. 

St. Peter, although he must have re- 
garded the crime of Judas as a crime 
without a parallel, does not dwell upon 
his punishment, but passes at once to the 
duty incumbent upon the infant Church 
in view of the vacant Apostleship. — ■ 
iiravXis : by many commentators, both 
ancient and modern (Chrys., Oecum. , so 
too Nosgen, Overbeck, Wendt, Blass, 
Holtzmann, Zockler, Jiingst), this is re- 
ferred to the x«*ptov, which was rendered 
desolate by the death of Judas in it, on 
the ground that -yap thus maintains its 
evident relation to what precedes. But 
if the two preceding verses are inserted 
by St. Luke, and form no part of St. 
Peter's words, it would seem that ciravXis 
must be regarded as parallel to cmo-Koirq 
in the second quotation. — iirio-Koiri)v ; 
"his office," R.V. ("overseership," mar- 
gin), so for the same word in LXX, Ps, 
cix. 8, from which the quotation is made. 
In the LXX the word is used, Num. iv. 
16, for the charge of the tabernacle. St. 
Peter uses the word e-rrio-KOTros in 1 
Peter ii. 25, and it is significant that 
there the translators of 161 1 maintain 
the use of the word "bishop," as here 
"bishoprick" (so R.V., "overseer," mar- 
gin), whilst they use "overseer" and 
" oversight " (eirio-icoir^), Acts xx. 28 and 
1 Peter v. 2, where the reference is to 
the function of the elders or presbyters. 
The word eirio-Koinj, of course, could not 
have its later ecclesiastical force, but the 
Apostolic office of Judas might well be 
described as one of oversight, and care 
of others ; and it is significant that it is 
so described, and not only as a Siaicovia 
(see below on ver. 25, and on cirio-xoiros, 
xx. 28, note) : " St. Peter would not have 
quoted the Psalm containing the expres- 
sion iiruTKo-n-T] unless he had instinctively 
felt the word to be applicable to Judas' 
position " (Canon Gore in Guardian, 16th 
March, 1898). 

Ver. 2i. 8tt ovv, see ver. 16. As the 
one prophecy had thus already been ful- 
filled, so for the fulfilment of the other 
it was imperative upon the Church to 
elect a successor to Judas. — elo-fjXfle teal 
e£-t}\.8ev : a Hebraistic formula expressing 
the whole course of a man's daily life ; ix. 
28 ; cf. LXX Deut. xxviii. 6, 1 Sam. xxix. 
6, Psalm cxx. 8, and for other instances, 
Wetstein, in loco. There is no occasion 

20— 23- 



e|TJ\0ei' e<£' t]fias 6 Kupio? 'ItjctoGs, 2 2. dp£du,eeos divd tou Pairrur- 
jaotos 'la>dm>u lus 1 tt]9 T)|xe'pas rjs dye\T)4>0r| d<|>' iq^wK, p.dpTupa ttjs 
dvaarcio-ews auTou yey&rOeu ow ^(xik lea TOoTWf. 23. Kat eoTtjaai' 

Su'o, 'lw(rr]4» TOk KaXoiip.evoi' Bapaapdf,^ os e7reK\i]0Tj IoGotos, KOt 


1 cw9 BCDE, so W.H., Wendt doubtful, Weiss ; aypi fc^A 61 — both ews and axpti 
as Wendt points out, are frequent in Luke. 

2 BapcraBav C, Vulg. clem., Syrr.; BaperopBav, so fr$ABE, Tisch., W.H., R.V., 
Weiss, Wendt; BapvaBav D, Gig., Par. tol., Aeth.— but Blass reads = W.H. in 
his 8 text — Wendt thinks that D may have been a confusion with iv. 36 — see also 
Winer-Schmiedel, p. 56, on the spelling. 

to render !<£' T)p.ds, " over us," R.V., mar- 
gin, for in full the phrase would run : 
ci<TTJX0cv c4>' t)jjl3.s Kai elijXOev a<£' tju-wv. 
The formula shows that St. Peter did not 
shrink from dwelling upon the perfect 
humanity of the Ascended Christ, whilst 
in the same sentence he speaks of Him 
as 6 Kvpios. 

Ver. 22. apga|i.cvos, cf. note on verse 
1. The word need not be restricted to 
our Lord's own baptism, but would in- 
clude the time of the baptism preached 
by John, as his baptism and preaching 
were the announcement of, and a pre- 
paration for, the Christ. If St. Mark's 
Gospel, as there is every reason to believe, 
was closely connected with St. Peter, its 
opening verses give us a similar date for 
the commencement of the Apostolic tes- 
timony ; cf. Schmid, Biblische Theologie 
des N. T., p. 436. — ews ttjs fo&M tjs : 
according to Wendt and Weiss, the 
relative is not attracted for tj, but is to 
be regarded as a genitive of time, but cf. 
Lev. xxiii. 15, Haggai ii. 18, Bar. i. 15 ; 
Winer-Schmiedel, p. 226; Blass, ubi supra, 
p. 170. — p.apTvpa ttjs ava<rTa<rews. It 
has been noted as remarkable that St. 
Peter here lays down experience of mat- 
ters of fact, not eminence in any subjec- 
tive grace or quality, as one of the con- 
ditions of Apostleship, but it is evident 
that from the first the testimony of the 
Apostles was not merely to the facts, but 
to their spiritual bearing, cf. chap. v. 32 : 
"On the one side there is the historical wit- 
ness to the facts, on the other, the internal 
testimony of personal experience " (West- 
cott's St. John, xv., 27), and the appeal to 
Him " Who knew the hearts," showed 
that something more was needed than 
intellectual competency. Spitta and 
Jungst (so Weiss) regard the whole clause 
cv iravTi xp6v<* . . . kty -qp-civ as intro- 
duced by a reviser, but on the other hand 
Hilgenfeld considers the words to be in 
their right place. He also rebukes Weiss 
<or maintaining that the whole passage, 

w. 15-26, could not have been composed 
by the author of the book, who gives no 
intimation of the number of the Apostles, 
with whom the Twelve as such play no 
part, and who finds his hero outside their 
number. But Hilgenfeld points out that 
the Twelve have for his " author to 
Theophilus" a very important place; 
cf. ii. 14, 22, iv. 33, v. 12, 40, viii. 1, 
14, ix. 27. 

Ver. 23. ?<n-T)<rav, not «rrr|<rev : the 
latter reading, " nimium Petro dat, nihil 
concilio relinquit" (Blass). "They put 
forward," R.V., not " appointed," A.V., 
for the appointment had not yet been 
made. — 'I«*o-tj«|> tov kclX. Bap<raBdv, 
"Joseph called Barsabbas". We can- 
not identify him with Joseph Barna- 
bas (iv. 36), or with Judas Barsabbas 
(xv. 22). Barsabbas may have been a 
patronymic " son of Sabba," but cf. Enc. 
Bibl., I., 487, 1899. It is only a conjecture 
that he was the brother of Judas Barsab- 
bas just mentioned. The name Justus is 
probably a Roman surname, as Novo-tos 
indicates, adopted after the custom of the 
time, just as the second Evangelist took 
the Roman name Marcus in addition to 
the Hebrew John. Nothing more is said 
of him in the N.T. Eusebius ranks him 
with Matthias as one of the Seventy, 
H.E., i., 12, and Papias is said to have 
related concerning him that he drank 
deadly poison but escaped all harm, 
Euseb., H.E., Hi., 39. On the connection 
of this tradition with Aristion see Nestle, 
Einfuhrung in das G. N. T., p. 240, and 
Zahn, Einleitung, ii., p. 231. If the 
reading of Blass in B, supported by the 
Latin, rhv xat '1ov<ttov (qui et Justus) 
may claim acceptance, it affords, as Belser 
notes, an interesting parallel with the 
ZavXos 6 Kai riavXos of xiii. 8. On the 
spelling of the word, see W.H. Appendix 
p. 166, and also Winer-Schmiedel, pp. 56, 
57. — MaT0iav. Nothing more is known 
of him with certainty than that he must 
have fulfilled the qualifications required 




MaT^'ay. 1 24. koi Trpocreulafxe^oi eliroc, lu Kupie, KapSiOYVwcrra 
irdrrwk, dvdSeiloK ck touton' twk Soo eva ov i%e\4i<i). 25. Xa|3€iy Toy 

J MarOwiv; but MoO. in B*D, Sah., ao T., W.H., Hilg. (see Winer- Schmiedel, 
p. 60; W.H., App., pp. 162, 166). 

by St. Peter. Both Eusebius and Epi- 
phanius rank him in the Seventy, and he 
is said to have suffered martyrdom in 
Ethiopia. An apocryphal Gospel was 
ascribed to him, Euseb., H.E., iii., 25, 
and from Clem. Alex., Strom., iv., 6, 35, 
we find that the words of Zacchaeus, 
Luke xix. 8, were supposed to be his ; so 
too Hilgenfeld, Actus Apost., p. 202, 1899. 
Ver. 24. Kvpie KapSioyvuicrTa . . . tv 
e$e\c£<n. The words may well have been 
addressed to Christ: St. Peter had just 
spoken of Him as the Lord, his own 
experience and that of his fellow-disciples 
must have taught him that Jesus was 
One Who knew the hearts of all men 
(John ii. 25, xxi. 17), and he had heard 
his Master's claim to have chosen the 
Apostles (cf. Luke vi. 13, and v. 2 above, 
where the same verb is used). On the 
other hand Wendt regards as decisive 
against this view that St. Peter himself 
in xv. 7 says i%e\i%a.To 6 9«os and then 
in ver. 8 calls God KapSioYvu>crTT]s (cf. 
Jeremiah xvii. 10, where Jehovah is said 
to search the heart). But the passage 
in Acts xv. is much too general in its 
reference to consider it decisive against 
any special prerogative ascribed to Jesus 
here {viz., the choice of His own 
Apostles), and the references to 2 Cor. 
i. 1, Ephes. ii. 1, where St. Paul refers 
his Apostleship to God, may be fairly 
met by Acts ix. 17 and xxvi. 16. It is 
quite true that in iv. 29 Kvpic is used in 
prayer plainly addressed to the Lord 
Jehovah, but it is equally certain that 
prayer was directed to Christ in the 
earliest days of the Church (Zahn, 
Skizzen aus dem Leben der alten Kirche, 
pp. 1-38 and notes), see also below onii. 21 
(and cf. 1 Thess. iii. n, 12, and 2 Thess. 
ii. 16 ; Archbishop of Armagh in Speaker's 
Commentary, iii., 690). — dvd8ci£ov: in 
Luke x. 1 the only other passage in the 
N.T. where the word is used, it is applied 
to our Lord's appointment of the Seventy, 
and is rendered " appointed," A. and R.V. 
But here R.V. renders " show" as A.V. 
(Rendall, "appoint"). The verb how- 
ever may be used in the sense of showing 
forth or clearly, and hence to proclaim, 
especially a person's appointment to an 
office (cf. the noun dvd8ei£is also used 
by St. Luke only in his Gospel, i. 80) ; cf. 
for the former meaning, 2 Mace. ii. 8, cf. 

v. 6, and for the latter, 2 Mace. ix. 14, 
2 3» 351 x - 11; x i v - 12, 26; 1 Esdras i. 
35, viii. 23; so too the use of the word 
in Polybius and Plutarch (see Grimm- 
Thayer, sub v., and Weiss, in loco). 

Ver. 25. t&v tcXrjpov : R.V. t&ttov 
marking the antithesis between the place 
in the Apostleship and " his own place " 
to which Judas had gone, Vulg. locum. 
— rfjs Siaxovias Tavrqs icai diroo-ToXTJs : 
as above we have not only the word 
Siaicovia used but also eiricricoirij, v. 17 and 
20, so here too we have not only Siaicovia 
but also dirooroXi], although no doubt 
there is a sense in which we may truiy 
say with Dr. Hort (Ecclesia, p. 204) that 
Apostleship is the highest form of minis- 
tration. On the word dirocrroXos see 
xiii. 2, 3 ; the term was undoubtedly 
used in N.T. to include others besides 
the Twelve, although there is no reason 
to suppose that the qualification of 
having " seen the Lord " was in any case 
invalidated (cf. Gwatkin, " Apostle," 
Hastings' B.D., p. 126). The whole nar- 
rative before us which relates the solemn 
appeal of the Church to her Ascended 
Lord, and the choice determined upon 
in immediate sequence to that appeal, is 
clearly at variance with any conception 
of Apostleship as other than a divine 
commission received directly from Christ 
Himself (Moberly, Ministerial Priest- 
hood, p. 130). — irapE^T], " fell away." 
R.V. cf. LXX Exod. xxxii. 8, ck ttjs 6Sov, 
so Deut. ix. 12, xvii. 20, diro tuv svtoXuv 

(cf. xxviii. 14, A.), so the Heb. "V)D 

followed by Yf2» A.V. following Tyn- 

dall renders "by transgression fell," 
which lays too much stress upon "fell," 
which is not the prominent notion of the 
Greek verb, elsewhere " transgressed " 
(Humphry on Revised Version, p. 188). 
— els tov toVov tov tSiov : on toitos 
in the sense of social position, dignity, 
see Ecclesiasticus, xii., 12, and also Deiss- 
mann, Neue Bibelstudien, p. 95, of suc- 
ceeding to the vacant place caused by 
death in a religious community. Here 
the phrase is usually explained as the 
place of punishment, Gehenna, cf. Baal- 
Turim on Numb. xxiv. 25 (and Gen. 
xxxi. 55) " Balaam ivit in locum suum," 
i.e., Gehenna, Lightfoot, Hor.Heb., while 

2 4 - 




KXrjpof l rfjs SiaKOfias Tau'-rns *a! oiitootoXtjs, e| 2 tjs irapifir] 'louSas, 

TTOp€U0TJl'ai CIS TOK TOTTOl' TCW iStOl'. 26. Kal eSodKCll' KX^pOUS (HUTU)!', 3 

1 KX-qpov NC 3 E, Syrr., Arm., Eus., Bas., Chrys. toitov ABC*D, Vulg., Sah., 
Boh. ; so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt, Hilg. (kXtjpov probably gloss ver. 17). 

2 eg; but o4»* in ^ABCD 61, Bas., Aug., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt, 

3 avTuv D*E, Syr. Hard., Arm. ; so Blass in {3 with Gig. and Par. 1 , so Hilg. ovtois 
fc^ABCD 2 , Vulg., and good versions; so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt (pro- 
bably the dative was misunderstood, see comment.). 

on the other hand Schottgen sees no 
need to explain the expression in this 
way. In each of the passages in the 
O.T. the word 1810s does not occur in 
the LXX, although in the still more fanci- 
ful comment of the Rabbis on Job ii. 11, 
we have lie ttjs ISias x*»P a S« That the 
phrase 1810s t6*itos may be used in a 
good or bad sense is plain from Ignat., 
Magn., v., in a passage which is naturally 
referred to the verse before us, where a 
man's "own place" denotes the place 
of reward, or that of punishment, cf., e.g., 
els tov 6<f>eiXdp.£vov t«$itov, Polycarp, 
Phil., ix., where the words refer to the 
martyrs who were with the Lord, and 
els tov 6(f>ciX. toVov t^s S^ltjs said of 
St. Peter, Clem. Rom., Cor. v. Nbsgen 
argues, Apostelgeschichte, pp. 88, 89, that 
we are not justified in concluding from 
a few Rabbinical passages which contain 
such fanciful interpretations of simple 
words (cf. the comment on Job ii. n, 
quoted by Wetstein) that St. Peter must 
have meant "Gehenna". In his wilful 
fall from the place chosen for him by God, 
Judas had chosen in self-will TSios toVos, 
and this wilful and deliberate choice St. 
Peter would emphasise in contrast to the 
TiJiros diroo-ToXTJs about to be bestowed, 
ver. 25 (see also Rendall, Acts, p. 174). 
But however this may be, the words 
may well indicate a reserve on the part 
of St. Peter in speaking of the fate and 
destiny of Judas, characteristic of his 
reference to him cf. note on ver. 16. 
None of the other explanations offered 
can be deemed satisfactory, as, e.g., that 
the word iropcvOijvai k.t.X. refers to the 
successor of Judas ; that Matthias should 
undertake the Apostolic circuit assigned 
to Judas (so Oecumenius, and amongst 
English commentators, Hammond) ; or, 
that the words refer to the house or 
home of Judas, or to his association with 
the Pharisees, or to his suicide and dis- 
honoured burial, or to the \o>piov men- 
tioned above. Spitta, amongst recent 
commentators, stands almost alone in 
referring the words back to ver. 16, and 

holds that they refer to the position of 
Judas as the guide to those who took 
Jesus. The sense of the passage is ex- 
pressed in the reading of A Sikcliov 
instead of iSiov. 

Ver. 26. Kal cSuicav KXVjpovs ovtwv, 
" they gave forth their lots," A.V. But 
R.V. reads atn-ols, " they gave lots for 
them ". R.V. margin, " unto them ". It 
is difficult to decide whether the ex- 
pression means that they gave lots unto 
the candidates themselves or whether 
they cast lots for them — i.e., on their 
behalf, or to see which of the two would 
be selected. How the lot was decided 
we cannot positively say. According 
to Hamburger (Real-Encyclopddie des 
Judentums, i., 5, p. 723) the Bible does 
not tell us, as the expressions used point 
sometimes to a casting, sometimes to a 
drawing out, of the lots ; cf. Proverbs 
xvi. 33 : " Quo modo et ratione uti sunt 
Apostoli incertum est. Certum est Deum 
per earn declarasse Mathiam turn diri- 
gendo sortem ut caderet in Mathiam 
juxta illud Prov. xvi. 33 " (Corn, a 
Lapide). For the expression cf. Lev. 
xvi. 8. Hebraismus (Wetstein), so 
Blass. Kal erreo-ev, i.e., through shak- 
ing the vessel, Jonah i. 7 ; cf. Livy, 
xxiii., 3 ; so in Homer and Sophocles 
•n-dXXeiv, cf. Josephus, Ant., vi., 5. — 
<royKa.Tttyr\$Lo-6i\ : only here in N.T. 
" he was numbered with the eleven 
Apostles," i.e., as the twelfth. The verb 
is used in the middle voice for condemn- 
ing with others, Plut., Them., 21, but 
as it occurs nowhere else we have no 
parallels to its use here. Grimm ex- 
plains it "deponendo (Kara) in urnam 
calculo, i.e., suffragando assigno (alicui) 
locum inter (trvv) ". But here it is used 
rather as an equivalent of <r«Y KaTa P 1 ^- 
pei<r6ai; cf. ver. 17 (and also xix. 19), 
(Blass and Wendt, in loco) = !vap£0p.ios, 
o-vp\|/T]<{>io-8£is> KOTapiflurjBeCs, Hesy- 
chius. Wendt as against Meyer maintains 
that it is not proved that recourse was 
never again had to lots, because no other 
instance of such an appeal is recorded in 



I. 26. 

kcu €TT€<j€f 6 KX^pos eirl MaT0iar, Kal auyi<aTe4»T]4)ia0Ti l (jlcto. iw 
eV8«Ka dirooToXw*'. 

1 <rvYKaTt\(»Ti4>iafr»i ; but <rvv— ABCE 61, so W.H., Weiss; fr$* has icaT6\|/Tj4>. [cf. 
Const. Apost., vi., 12, 1) ; D has oti(vc)\|/t)<{>. ; probably variants caused by the unusual 
word. Tu>v evSetca, D reads i0' = SuScica, SuSeicaTos Aug., so Blass in 3 (see p. xx., 
Pref.) ; both readings are probably due to taking jieTa twv evScica in an inclusive sense. 

Acts. But it is most significant that this 
one instance should be recorded between 
the departure of the Lord and the out- 
pouring of the Spirit on the Day of 
Pentecost, and that after Pentecost no 
further reference is made to such a mode 
of decision. Cf., e.g., x. 19, xvi. 6. 
With regard to the historical character 
of the election of Matthias, Wendt sees 
no ground to doubt it in the main, 
although he is not prepared to vouch for 
all the details, but he finds no reason to 
place such an event at a later date of the 
Church's history, as Zeller proposed. 
To question the validity of the appoint- 
ment is quite unreasonable, as not only 
is it presupposed in ii. 14, vi. 2, but even the 
way in which both St. Paul (1 Cor. xv. 5) 
and the Apocalypse (xxi. 14) employ the 
number twelve in a technical sense of the 
Twelve Apostles, makes the after choice 
of Matthias as here described very prob- 
able (so Overbeck, in loco). No mention 
is made of the laying on of hands, but 
" non dicuntur manus novo Apostolo 
impositas; erat enim prorsus immediate 
constitutus," Bengel. See also on ver. 
25, and xiii. 3. 

Ascension of our Lord. — Friedrich in his 
Das Lucasevangelium, p. 47 ff., discusses 
not only similarity of words and phrases, 
but similarity of contents in St. Luke's 
writings. With reference to the latter, 
he examines the two accounts of the 
Ascension as given in St. Luke's Gospel 
and in the Acts. There are, he notes, 
four points of difference (the same four 
in fact as are mentioned by Zeller, Acts 
of the Apostles, i., 166, E. T.) : (1) Beth- 
any as the place of the Ascension, Luke 
xxiv. 30; Acts i. 12, the Mount of Olives; 

(2) the time of the Ascension ; according 
to Acts the event falls on the fortieth day 
after the Resurrection, i. 3 ; according to 
the Gospel on the Resurrection day itself; 

(3) the words of Jesus before the Ascen- 
sion are not quite the same in the two 
narratives ; (4) in the Gospel the words 
appear to be spoken in Jerusalem, in 
the Acts at the place of the Ascension. 
Friedrich points out what Zeller fully 
admitted, that (1) has no importance, for 
Bethany lay on the Mount of Olives, and 
the neighbourhood of Bethany might be 

described quite correctly as opos IXaiwvos; 
(3) is not of any great importance (as 
Zeller also admitted), since Luke xxiv. 
47-49 and Acts i. 4-8 agree in the main. 
With regard to (4), Friedrich is again in 
agreement with Zeller in holding that 
the difficulty might easily be solved by 
supposing some slight inaccuracy, or that 
the words in question were uttered on the 
way from Jerusalem to the Mount of 
Olives ; but he agrees also with Zeller in 
maintaining that the time of the Ascen- 
sion as given in Luke's Gospel and in 
Acts constitutes the only definite contra- 
diction between the two writings. But 
even this difficulty presents itself to Frie- 
drich as by no means insuperable, since 
the author has not attempted to avoid 
apparent contradictions in other places 
in the Acts, and therefore he need not 
have felt himself called upon to do so in 
the passage before us, where the book 
seems at variance with his Gospel (see 
pp. 48, 49). 

But Friedrich proceeds to emphasise 
the many points in which the history of 
the Ascension in Acts reminds us of the 
close of the Gospel (see also Zeller, u. s., 
ii., pp. 226, 227, E.T., and also Feine). 
Only St. Luke knows of the command 
of Jesus, that the Apostles should not 
leave Jerusalem, and of the promise of 
the Holy Spirit associated with it, Luke 
xxiv. 49, and Acts i. 4-8. So also Luke 
xxiv. 47 reminds us unmistakably of Acts 
i. 8 ; also Luke xxiv. 52 and Acts i. 12, 
Luke xxiv. 53 and Acts i. 14 (ii. 14) (cf. 
also Acts i. 5 and Luke iii. 16). But 
there is no need to adopt Friedrich's 
defence of the supposed contradiction 
with regard to the time of the Ascension. 
Certainly in the Gospel of St. Luke 
nothing is said 01 any interval between 
the Resurrection and the Ascension, but 
it is incredible that " the author can mean 
that late at night, vv. 29, 33, Jesus led 
the disciples out to Bethany and ascended 
in the dark ! " Plummer, St. Luke, p. 
569, see also Felten, Apostelgeschichte, 
p. 59, and Blass, Acta Apostolorum, p. 
44. It is of course possible that St. 
Luke may have gained his information 
as to the interval of the forty days be- 
tween the writing of his two works, but 

II. 1—2. 



II. I. KAI eV TO) o-uu/rrXnpouo-Ocii l ttjv iqu.e'pcu' ttjs neK-njKwrrTJs, 
r\crav airarres 2 6p.o0uu,a8dy cm to ciuto. 2. ical 3 iyivero afyvu) « tou 

1 <\T,pov<r9ai fr$B 3 ; <rvvirX. AB'CDE, so Tisch., W.H., Weiss. 

2 airovTCS cursives; iravres J^cABC 6i, so Tisch., W.H., R.V. (omit in fe>$E). 
op.oevpa.8ov C 3 E, Chrys. ; op.ov fr$ABC* 6i, e, Vulg., Ath., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., 
Weiss, Wendt ; op.o0. very common in Acts, ojiov only elsewhere in John (3 times). 
D instead of icai ev toi <rvp/irX. reads tcai ryeveTO ev toxs Tjp-epais ctccivais tov <rvp.irX., 
very likely as Blass says in notes on text, "ut in principio lectionis". d, e, Gig., 
Par., Vulg., Aug. read to,? tjpepas (e.g., Par., " et dum complerentur dies" — ev to> 
crup.irXT)pov<r9ai rr\v T)pepav is now read by Blass in p, see comment.). (See Page, 
Classical Review, July, 1897, p. 319, and cf. also Weiss, Codex D, p. 55, note.) D 
also reads before eiri to outo the words ovrwv avTwv iravTwv. Hilg. follows D. 

3 After Koi D inserts iSov (cf. Syriac characteristic, Chase). 

however this may be (cf. Plummer, but 
against this view Zockler, Apostelge- 
schichte, p. 173), it becomes very im- 
probable that even if a tradition existed 
that the Ascension took place on the 
evening of the Resurrection, and that 
Luke afterwards in Acts followed a new 
and more trustworthy account (so 
Wendt), that the Evangelist, the disciple 
of St. Paul, who must have been ac- 
quainted with the continuous series of 
the appearances of the Risen Christ in 
1 Cor. xv., should have favoured such a 
tradition for a moment (see Zockler, u. s.). 
On the undue stress laid by Harnack 
upon the famous passage in Barnabas, 
Epist., xv., see Dr. Swete, The Apostle's 
Creed, p. 68, Plummer, u. s., p. 564, and 
on this point and also the later tradi- 
tion of a lengthy interval, Zockler, u. s. 
For the early testimony to the fact of 
the Ascension in the Apostolic writings, 
and for the impossibility of accounting 
for the belief in the fact either from O.T. 
precedents or from pagan myths, see 
Zahn, Das Apostolische Sytnbolum, pp. 
76-78, and Witness cf the Epistles (Long- 
mans), p. 400 ff. The view of Steinneyer 
that St. Luke gives us a full account of 
the Ascension in the Acts rather than in 
his Gospel, because he felt that the true 
position of such an event was to empha- 
sise it more as the beginning of a new 
period than as a conclusion of the Gospel 
history, Die Auferstehungsgeschichte des 
Herrn, pp. 226, 227, deserves attention, 
and may be fitly compared with W.H., 
Notes on Select Readings, p. 73. 

Chapter II. — Ver. 1. iv t$ <rup,irXTj- 
poWOai, lit., " when the day of Pente- 
cost was being fulfilled " (filled up). 
R.V. renders " was now come," and a 
question arises as to whether the words 
mean this, or that the day was only 
being filled up, and not fully come. 
Blass interprets the expression to mean 

a short time before the day of Pentecost, 
not the day itself. Weiss and others 
suppose that the expression refers to the 
completing of the interval of time be- 
tween the Paschal Feast and Pentecost. 
Vulgate (cf. Syriac) reads " cum com- 
plerentur dies Pentecostes," and so all 
English versions have "days" except 
A. and R.V. The verb is only used 
by St. Luke in the N.T., twice in his 
Gospel, viii. 23, and in the same sense 
as here, ix. 51, and once more in the pas- 
sage before us. We have the noun 
o-upTrX^ptueris in the same sense in LXX 
2 Chron. xxxvi. 21, Dan. (Theod.) ix. 2, 
1 Esdras i. 58 ; see Friedrich, ubi supra, 
p. 44. The mode of expression is He- 
braistic, as we see also from Exod. vii. 
25, Jeremiah xxxvi. 10 (LXX). St. 
Luke may be using the expression of a 
day which had begun, according to Jewish 
reckoning, at the previous sunset, and 
which thus in the early morning could 
not be said to be either fulfilled or 
past, but which was in the process of 
being fulfilled (Hilgenfeld, Zeitschrift 
fur wissenschaft. Theol., p. 90, 1895 ; 
Knabenbauer, in loco). The parallel 
passage in Luke ix. 51 cannot be 
quoted to support the view that the 
reference here is to a period preceding 
the day of Pentecost, since in that pas- 
sage we have ^pipa?, not T|p.€pav as here, 
and, although the interpretation of the 
word as referring to the approach of the 
Feast is possible, yet the circumstances 
and the view evidently taken by the nar- 
rator point decisively to the very day of 
the Feast (see Schmid, Biblische Thefil., 
p. 283). On the construction iv r<o with 
the infinitive, see Blass, Grammatik des 
N. G., pp. 2(32, 234, and Dalman, Die 
Worte Jesu, p. 27. It is quite in the 
style of St. Luke, who frequently employs 

it; cf. the Hebrew use of 2, Fried- 




oupa^ou t}x°5 *»o"ir€p <pepop,erns ttkotjs 0iaias, itai lirX^pwacc SXoi' 

t6v oikok ou rja-ak Ka0T)p.erot ■ 1 3. ital w^O-ncrav auTOis Siau.€pi£6p.€vcu 

1 tca6iifJk.svoi ; CD read Ka0c£o|xevoi, so Lach., Meyer, Hilg. ; but reading in text 
^ABE, minusc, Ath., Cyr.-Jer., Cyr.-Al., Theodrt., Wendt (as against Meyer), 
W.H., Weiss. 

rich, p. 13, ubi supra, Lekebusch, Apos- 
telgeschichte, p. 75). On Spitta's forced 
interpretation of the word, see p. 100. 
— rijs rievTijKooTTjs : no occasion to 
add -f||Aep a ' as the word was used as 
a proper name (although as an adjective 
^fiepa would of course be understood 
with it) ; cf. 2 Mace. xii. 32 (Tob. ii. 1), 
Hera 8e t$|v Xeyop.. rievTTjicooTijv. — 
airavTes, i.e., the hundred-and-twenty 
as well as the Apostles (Chrysostom, 
Jerome), and the expression may also 
have included other disciples who were 
present in Jerusalem at the Feast (so 
Hilgenfeld, Wendt, Holtzmann). This 
interpretation appears to be more in 
accordance with the wide range of the 
prophecy, ii. 16-21. — 6p.o0v|iaSov, see 
above on ver. 14. Iiri t6 air6 may 
simply = " together," so that of the two 
expressions 6p.ov, R.V., and this phrase 
" alterum abundat " (Blass, Weiss) ; but 
the reference may be to the room in 
which they were previously assembled ; 
cf. i. 15. 

Ver. 2. a<|>vii> : only in Acts, here, and 
in xvi. 26, xxviii. 6 ; Klostermann's Vin- 
dicia Lucana, p. 55 ; several times in 
LXX, but also in classical Greek in 
Thuc, Dem., Eur. — tjx°s wo-ircp 4>epop.. 
irv. (Jiaias, lit., " a sound as if a vio- 
lent gust were being borne along ". St. 
Chrysostom rightly emphasises the is, 
so that the sound is not that of wind, 
but as of the rushing of a mighty wind 
(so too the tongues are not of fire, but 
as of fire). The words describe not a 
natural but a supernatural phenomenon, 
as Wendt pointedly admits. Wind was 
often used as a symbol of the divine 
Presence, 2 Sam. v. 24, Psalm civ. 3, 1 
Kings xix. 11, Ezekiel xliii. 2, etc.; cf. 
Josephus, Ant., iii., 5, 2 ; vii., 4 ; here it is 
used of the mighty power of the Spirit 
which nothing could resist. St. Luke 
alone of the N.T. writers uses tjx ' — 
Heb. xii. 19 being a quotation, and it is 
perhaps worth noting that the word is 
employed in medical writers, and by one 
of them, Aretaeus, of the noise of the sea 
(cf. tjx ov s 8aX<io-<rrjs, Luke xxi. 25). — 
SXov tov oIkov. If the Temple were 
meant, as Holtzmann and Zockler think, 
it would have been specified, iii. 2, 11, v. 

Ver. 3. Sia|icpi£6y. vXdxj-a-ai: the 
audible orjpciov is followed by a visible : 
-yXuo-o-ai the organs of speech by which 
the wonderful works of God were to be 
proclaimed, so that the expression cannot 
be explained from Isaiah v. 24, where the 
tongue of fire is represented as an organ 
of destruction (Wendt, note, in loco). 
uxrel irvp^s in their appearance and 
brightness. The words themselves there- 
fore forbid reference to a natural phe- 
nomenon, to say nothing of the fact of the 
spiritual transformation of the Apostles 
which followed. Fire like wind was 
symbolic of the divine Presence, Exod. 
iii. 2, and of the Spirit who purifies and 
sanctifies, Ezekiel i. 13, Malachi, iii. 2, 
3 (see Wetstein for classical instances of 
fire symbolical of the presence of the 
deity ; cf., e.g., Homer, Iliad, xviii., 214 ; 
Virgil, Mn., ii., 683). 8iap.epi£., lit., 
dividing or parting themselves off. R.V. 
" tongues parting asunder," so that origi- 
nally they were one, as one mighty flame 
of fire. This rendering is strictly in ac- 
cordance with the meaning of the verb. 
Vulgate dispertita (the word used by 
Blass). 8iap.epi£ti> is used once again in 
Acts ii. 45 in the active voice, and once 
only by St. Matthew and St. Mark (once 
by St. John as a quotation) in the middle 
voice, but six times by St. Luke in his 
Gospel ; frequently in the LXX. — licadio-E 
(not -av), sc, y\u><r<ra (not irvp or irvcvpa 
ayiov), although the latter is advocated 
by Chrysostom, Theophylact, Bengel : 
"it sat," R.V. The singular best ex- 
presses the result of the tongues parting 
asunder, and of the distribution to each 
and all. So too «<j>' ?va ficao-rov avrwv, 
"upon each one of them," R.V., cf. ver. 
6 ets ?ko,o-tos (and ver. 8). The resting 
of a flame of fire upon the head as a 
token of the favour of Heaven may be 
illustrated from classical sources (see 
above and instances in Wetstein), but 
the thought here is not so much of fire 
as the token of divine favour, as of the 
tongue (as of fire) conferring a divine 
power to utter in speech divine things. 

Ver. 4. airo4>0EYYe<rOai — a word pecu- 
liar to Acts, cf. v. 14 and xxvi. 25 ; in the 
LXX used not of ordinary conversation, 
but of the utterances of prophets; cf. 
Ezek. xiii. 9, Micah v. 12, 1 Chron. xxv. 




yXwCTcrai ticrex mipos, inadicrt 1 tc €<$>' eVa ItcaaToe auiw, 4. icol 
cirX^aO^aaK airakTes flceufiaTos 'Ayiou, ica! rjplai'To XaXeli' eTe'pais 
YXwcjo-ais, icaflws to rketj/xa. eoiSou aurots diro<j)OeYY€CT0ai. 5. *Haai' 
oe eV c lepouora\T]jx KaToiKourres 'louocuoi dVSpes €u\aj3els &tt6 irat'Tos 
I0foos Tuf otto toc oupacoV. 6. yekojjiefTjs 8e ttjs 4>w^s -raimjs, 
owr|X0e to ttXtjOos teal avve-)(uQr) • on tjkoook els ficacrros ttj ISia 

1 cKa.6i.o-av fc<$*D, probably emendation from 7X010-0-01, but overwhelming evidence 
for -otv. 

1, so fitly here : (cf. diro4>6eyp.aTa, used 
by the Greeks of the sayings of the wise 
and philosophers, and see also references 
in Wendt). — ere pais "yXwcrcrai.s, see addi- 
tional note. 

Ver. 5. KaToiico€vTE$> probably used 
not merely of temporary dwellers for 
the Feast, but of the devout Jews of the 
Diaspora, who for the purpose of being 
near the Temple had taken up their 
residence in Jerusalem, perhaps for the 
study of the Law, perhaps to live and to 
die within the city walls (see St. Chry- 
sostom's comment on the word). They 
were hot proselytes as is indicated by 
MovSaioi, but probably devout men like 
Symeon, Luke ii. 25, who is described by 
the same word cv\af3i]5, waiting for the 
consolation of Israel. The expression, 
as Z odder points out, is not quite 
synonymous with that in ver. 14 (or with 
Luke xiii. 4), and he explains it as above. 
There is certainly no need to consider 
the word, with Spitta and Hilgenfeld, as 
an epithet added by a later editor, or to 
omit 'lovSaioi, as Blass strongly urges 
(while Hilgenfeld desires to retain this 
word). The word may fairly be regarded 
as contrasted with TaXiXaioi (ver. 7). 
.The same view of it as applied here 
to foreign Jews who had their stated 
residence in Jerusalem is maintained by 
Schurer, Jewish People, div. ii., vol. ii., 
p. 291 (note) E.T. — ko.toik€iv is used 
generally of taking up a permanent abode 
as in contrast to irapoucciv used of tem- 
porary sojourn, and on the frequent use 
of the word in St. Luke, Friedrich, ubi 
supra, p. 39. But here it is followed 
most probably by cl? not eV, constructio 
pragnans, cf. Wendt and Weiss as against 
W.H.(T.R.«vandsoBlassin0). Weiss, 
Apostelgeschichte, p. 36, regards this 
frequent use of els as characteristic of 
the style of Acts, cf. ix. 21, xiv. 25, and 
considers it quite inconceivable that ev 
would be changed into «Ls, although the 
reverse is likely enough to have happened 
(Wendt).— evXaPeis, see viii. 2. — diro 

itovtos eOvovs : "from every nation," so 
R.V. ; "out of," A. V., but this would 
represent Ik rather than diro, and would 
imply that they belonged to these 
different nations, not that they were 
born Jews residing among them and 
coming from them (Humphry, Com- 
mentary on R.V.). — twvihto t6v ovpavov, 
sc. I0v<ov. The phrase is used frequently 
in LXX, cf. Deut. ii. 25, and in classical 
literature by Plato and Dem. If Ka-roi- 
kovvtcs includes the Jews who had 
come up to the Feast as well as those 
who had settled in Jerusalem from 
other countries, this expression is strik- 
ingly illustrated by the words of Philo, 
De Monarchia, ii., 1, p. 223. The Pente- 
cost would be more largely attended even 
than the Passover, as it was a more 
favourable season for travelling than the 
early spring (see Wetstein, in loco), and 
cf. Schurer, Jewish People, div. ii., vol. 
ii., pp. 291, 307, E.T. 

Ver. 6. <^o>vt)s tcivttjs : " when this 
sound was heard," R.V. " Hie idem 
quod tJx°s comm. 2," so Wetstein, who 
compares for fyuvri in this sense Matt. 
xxiv. 31, 1 Cor. xiv. 7, 8 (2 Chron. v. 
13), and so most recent commentators 
(cf. John iii. 8) ; if human voices were 
meant, the plural might have been ex- 
pected. But the word in singular might 
refer to the divine voice, the voice of the 
Spirit, cf. Matt. iii. 17, xvii. 5. The A.V., 
so too Grotius, following Erasmus, Cal- 
vin, render the word as if <Hp.T|, Dut the 
two passages quoted from LXX to justify 
this rendering are no real examples, cf., 
e.g., Gen. xiv. 16, Jer. xxvii. 46. — 
to itXtjOos : a characteristic word of St. 
Luke, occurring eight times in his Gospel, 
seventeen in Acts, and only seven times 
in rest of the N.T. ; on the frequency 
with which St. Luke uses expressions 
indicative of fulness, see Friedrich, Das 
Lucasevangelium, pp. 40, 102. In in- 
scriptions the word seems to have been 
used not only of political but of religious 
communities, see Deissmann, Neue Bibel- 




SioX^ktw XaXouVTwy auiw. 1 7. e^ioraiTo Be irdrres Kal e9auu.a£ot>, 
XeyofTCs irpos aXXrjXous, Ouk 2 loou Trdires outoi €ictii> 61 XaXourres 
TaXiXaiot ; 8. Kal irws tju,€is dKouou.ey ckciotos ttj ISia SiaX^KTW 
T)p.wi' ey i] eyci'eqSTiu.ey, 9. lldpOoi Kal MtjSoi koi 'EXajUTai, 8 koi 01 

1 tt) 181a SiaX. XaXovvTwv ; in D XaXovvra? tolls yXbxrcrai.s avTuv, Syr. Hard., 
(Aug. connate), but not received by, Blass in f3 although retained by Hilg. ; may 
be retranslation from Syriac (Chase), but see Weiss, Codex D, p. 56. 

2 ovk AC; ovx fc$DE 61, so Tisch., W.H. marg. ; ovxi B, so W.H. text, Weiss 
(Wendt doubtful) ; see further Winer-Schmiedel, p. 39. 

3 EXajtiTai N 3 EIP, but EXa|i€iToi A(B)(C)D (fc$ omits), so Tisch., W.H., Weiss; 
Blass in |3 reads AiXcliiltcli, cf. B. 

studien, pp. 59, 60 (1897), an( * see below 
on xv. 30. — cruv€xv0T] — from <ruv\vviit 
(trvv\iu>), only found in Acts, where it 
occurs five times (cf. also avyxvais, 
Acts xix. 29), see Moulton and Geden, 
sub v. For its meaning here cf. Gen. 
xi. 7, 9, 1 Mace. iv. 27, 2 Mace. xiii. 
23, xiv. 28 ; Vulg., mente confusa est. — 
SiaXtKTu : only in the Acts in N.T. The 
question has been raised as to whether 
it meant a dialect or a language. Meyer 
argued in favour of the former, but the 
latter rendering more probably expresses 
the author's meaning, cf. i. 19, and also 
xxi. 40, xxii. 2, xxvi. 14. The word is 
apparently used as the equivalent of 
yXuxra-a, ver. 11, A. and R.V. "lan- 
guage". As the historian in his list, vv. 
9, 10, apparently is following distinctions 
of language (see Rendall, Acts, p. 177, 
and Appendix, p. 359), this would help to 
fix the meaning of the word SidXexTos 
here. Wendt in revising Meyer's ren- 
dering contends that the word is pur- 
posely introduced because yXwacra, w. 
3, 4, had just been employed not in the 
sense of language but tongue, and so 
might have been misunderstood if re- 
peated here with XaXciv. On the other 
hand it may be urged that some of the 
distinctions in the list are those of dialect, 
and that St. Luke intentionally used a 
word meaning both language and dialect. 
Ver. 7. e|ioTovTo: frequent in St. 
Luke, three times in his Gospel, eight in 
the Acts, elsewhere once in St. Paul, once 
in St. Matthew, four times in St. Mark. 
The word is often found in the LXX in 
various senses ; cf. for its meaning here 
Gen. xliii. 33, Judith xiii. 17, xv. 1, 1 Mace, 
xv. 32, xvi. 22. irdvTes — raXiXaioi : there 
is no need to suppose with Schottgen (so 
Grotius, Olshausen) that the term im- 
plies any reference to the want of culture 
among the Galileans, as if in this way to 
emphasise the surprise of the questioners, 

or to explain the introduction of the 
term because the Galileans were " magis 
ad arma quam ad litteras et linguas 
idonei " (Corn, a Lapide). But if there 
is a reference to the peculiar dialect of 
the Galileans this might help to explain 
the introduction of 'lovScuav in ver. 9 
^Wetstein followed by Weiss, but see 
below). Weiss sees here, it is true, the 
hand of a reviser who thinks only of the 
Apostles and not of the hundred-and- 
twenty who could not be supposed to 
come under the term TaXiXaioL But 
whilst no doubt TaX. might be considered 
a fitting description of the Apostolic band 
(except Judas), Hilgenfeld well asks why 
the hundred-and-twenty should not have 
been also Galileans, if they had followed 
Jesus from Galilee to Jerusalem. 

Ver. 8. TJJ ISia 8taX. . . . iv fl lyewr\- 
0T]fjL«v — used distributively as ver. 11 
tcus t||ict. yXwacrais shows — and hence 
cannot be taken to mean that only one 
language common to all, viz., Aramaic, 
was spoken on the outpouring of the 

Vv. 9-11. The list which follows has 
been described as showing the trained 
hand of the historian, whilst it has also 
been regarded as a distinctly popular 
utterance in Greek style (Ramsay, Church 
in the Roman Empire, p. 149 ; but see 
also Rendall, Acts, Introd., p. 13). 
But, as Dean Plumptre well remarks, 
the omission of many countries which 
one might have expected shows that 
the list was not a made up list after 
the event, but that St. Luke had accu- 
rately mentioned the nations present at 
the Feast. The reference throughout is 
of course to Jews of the Dispersion, and 
Schiirer (see too Schottgen) well parallels 
the description given here of the extent 
of the Diaspora with the description in 
Agrippa's letter to the Emperor Caligula 
given by Philo (Legat. ad Gaium, 36. 

7 — io. 

nPAHEis AnorroAQN 


KaToiKoGrrcs t^\v McCToiroTajxtai', 'louScuai' tc Kai Kairn-aooxiai', 
V\6\mov Kal ttjc 'Aaiaf, IO. ♦puyio*' tc Kal ria.jji<$>u\icu\ AiyuTTTOK 
Kal to, y.ipt\ ttjs AiPu'tjs tt]s Kara KupfjnrjK, Kal oi ^TuSr||Aourres 

Mang., ii., 587). All commentators 
seem to be agreed in regarding the 
list as framed to some extent on geo- 
graphical lines, beginning from Parthia 
the furthest east. Mr. Page holds that 
the countries named may be regarded as 
grouped not only geographically but his- 
torically. Of the Jews of the Dispersion 
there were four classes : (1) Eastern or 
Babylonian Jews, corresponding in the 
list to Parthians, Medes, Elamites ; (2) 
Syrian Jews, corresponding to Judasa, 
Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia 
and Pamphylia ; (3) Egyptian Jews, corre- 
sponding to Egypt and the parts of Libya 
over against Cyrene ; (4) Roman Jews. 
(1) Parthia, mentioned here only in the 
N.T., is placed first, not only because 
of the vast extent of its empire from 
India to the Tigris, but because it then 
was the only power which had tried 
issues with Rome and had not been de- 
feated, " Parthia " B.D. (Rawlinson). 
In Mesopotamia, Elam, and Babylonia 
were to be found the descendants of the 
kingdom of the Ten Tribes and of the 
kingdom of Judah, transported thither by 
the Assyrians and Chaldeans, now and 
until the reign of Trajan the subjects of 
the Parthians, but always of political 
importance to Rome from their position 
on the eastern borders of the Empire 
(Schiirer, ubi supra, div. ii.,vol. ii.,pp. 223, 
224 E.T.). At the head of (2), MovSouav 
is placed by Mr. Page, i.e., at the head of 
the group with which in his view it is 
geographically connected. Of Asia, as 
of Syria, it could be said that Jews dwelt 
in large numbers in every city, and the 
statement that Jews had settled in the 
most distant parts of Pontus is abund- 
antly confirmed by the Jewish inscrip- 
tions in the Greek language found in the 
Crimea. Seleucus Nicator granted to 
the Jews in Syria and Asia the same 
privileges as those bestowed upon his 
Greek and Macedonian subjects (Jos., 
Ant., xii., 31) ; and to Antiochus the 
Great was due the removal of two 
thousand Jewish families from Mesopo- 
tamia and Babylonia to Lydia and Phry- 
gia (Schurer, /. c, and " Antiochus III.," 
B.D. 2 ; Jos., Ant., xii., 3, 4). Mr. Page 
uses the word 'lovScua as equivalent to the 
land of the Jews, i.e., Palestine and per- 
haps also to some part of Syria. In the 
former sense the word could undoubtedly 

be employed (Hamburger, " Judaa," Real- 
Encyclopddie des Judcntums, i., 5 ; so 
too by classical writers and by Strabo, 
"Judaea," B.D.). But it is very doubtful 
how far the term can be extended to in- 
clude any part of Syria, although Josephus 
{B.J., iii., 3, 5) speaks of the maritime 
places of Judasa extending as far as Ptole- 
mais. It may well be that Syria was 
regarded as a kind of outer Palestine, 
intermediate between it and heathendom 
(Edersheim, Sketches of Jewish Social 
Life, pp. 16-ig, 71, 73). St. Jerome reads 
Syria instead of J udasa, a reading to which 
Blass apparently inclines. Tertullian 
conjectured Armenia, c. Jud., vii., and 
Idumaea (so again Spitta), Bithynia and 
India have been proposed. It is often 
very difficult to say exactly what is 
meant by Asia, whether the term refers 
to the entire Roman province, which had 
been greatly increased in the first cen- 
tury b.c. since its formation in 133 B.C., 
or whether the word is used in its popular 
sense, as denoting the jEgean coast lands 
and excluding Phrygia. Here the term 
is used with the latter signification 
(Ramsay, Church in the Roman Empire, 
p. 150, and also "Asia" in Hastings, 
B.D.). At the head of (3) stands Egypt, 
where the Jewish Dispersion, especially 
in Alexandria, played so important a part 
in the history of civilisation. The greatest 
prosperity of the Jews in Egypt began 
with Alexander the Great, but long be- 
fore his time, in the seventh century b.c, 
Jewish immigrants were in the country 
(Schurer, ubi supra, pp. 226, 227, and 
" Alexandria," B.D. 2 ). From Egypt the 
Dispersion penetrated further westward 
(Schurer, u. s., pp. 230, 231, and note), 
and in Libya Cyrenaica or Pentapolitana, 
the modern Tripoli, the Jews were very 
numerous ; if. for their history in Cyrene 
1 Mace. xv. 23; 2 Mace. ii. 23; Jos., 
Ant., xvi., 6, 1, 5, and Acts vi. 9, xi. 
30, xiii. 1 ; SchUrer, u. s., p. 232, and 
Merivale, Romans under the Empire, 
pp. 364, 365. The expression used here, 
ra pepr) TT 1S A. ttjs KaTo K., affords a 
striking parallel to that used by Dio 
Cassius, tj irpbs KvpTjvTjv Aif3vr), liii., 
12 ; cf. also Jos., Ant., xvi., 16; 
"Cyrene," B.D. 2 , and Hastings' B.D. 
In (4) we have oi liriS. 'Pupaiou There 
is no ground for supposing that any Jews 
dwelt permanently in Rome before the 




'Pcojxaioi, MouSaloi re Kal TrpoorjXuTOi, II. Kpfjres K-oX "Apa^cs, 
&icouou.ey XaXourrwi' auiw Tais ^p-ercpais yXwcrcrais to. u-eyaXeia 

time of Pompey, although their first ap- 
pearance there dates from the days of 
the Maccabees (i Mace. viii. 17, xiv. 24, 
xv. 15 ff.). Of the numerous Jewish 
families brought to Rome by Pompey 
many regained their freedom, and settled 
beyond the Tiber as a regular Jewish 
community with the rights of Roman 
citizenship. In 19 a.d., however, the 
whole Jewish population was banished 
from the imperial city, Jos., Ant., xviii., 
3, 5 ; but after the overthrow of Sejanus 
it may be safely assumed that Tiberius 
allowed their return to Rome(SchUrer, u. s., 
p. 232 ff.). — ol emSijuovvTes 'Pcojiaioi, 
" Sojourners from Rome," R.V., i.e., the 
Jews who live at Rome as sojourners — 
Roman Jews. Others take iiriS. as re- 
ferring to the Roman Jews who were 
making a temporary sojourn in Jerusa- 
lem for the Feast, or for some other pur- 
pose, the word being thus in a certain 
degree opposed to the Kai-oiKovvTcs (of 
permanent dwelling) in ver. 5. Others 
again apparently take the expression as 
describing Roman Jews who, born in 
Rome, had taken up their dwelling in Jeru- 
salem, and who are thus distinguished from 
those Jews who, born in Jerusalem, were 
Romans by right of Roman citizenship. 
The only other passage in which ciuSt)- 
}j,ovvtcs occurs is Acts xvii. 21 (but cf. 
xviii. 27, D and P (Blass)), and it is there 
used of the |€voi sojourning in Athens, 
and so probably thus making a temporary 
sojourn, or who were not Athenians by 
birth or citizenship, as distinct from the 
regular inhabitants of Athens. Cf. Athe- 
nseus, viii., p. 361 F. — ol 'Pciji^v kcltoi- 
<covvtcs» Kal ol evemST)p,ovvTes tjj iroXei, 
which passage shows that eiriS. " minus 
significat quam Ka/roiiceiv " (Blass), and 
other instances in Wetstein. Hilgenfeld, 
whose pages contain a long discussion of 
recent views of the words in question, 
argues that according to what precedes we 
should expect koA ol Ka-roiKovvres 'Pwjmjv, 
and according to what follows we should 
•xpect simply 'Pupcuoi, and he solves 
the difficulty by the arbitrary method of 
omitting koA ol iiriS. before 'Puuaioi, 
and MovS. T6 Kal irpoo-rjXvroi after it, 
Zeitschrift fur wissenschaft. Theol., p. 
93 ff. (1895) ; see further Actus Apost., 
p. 260, i8gg. — 'lovSaioi T6 koi irpoo-i]- 
Xvtoi. Not only would St. Luke in 
writing to a Roman convert of social 
Tank like Theophilus be likely to mention 

the presence of Roman Jews at the first 
Christian Pentecost, but he would also 
emphasise the fact that they were not 
only Jews, or of Jewish origin, but that 
proselytes from heathendom were also 
included (Felten, Belser). In thus ex- 
plaining the words Felten refers them, 
with Erasmus and Grotius, to ol eiriS. 
'P<i>p.aioi only, whilst Overbeck, Weiss, 
Holtzmann, Wendt, Belser, so Page, 
Hackett, refer them to the whole of the 
preceding catalogue. It is evident that 
Schurer takes the same view, for in speak- 
ing of the large offerings contributed by 
proselytes to the Temple at Jerusalem 
he mentions that in stating the number of 
Jews of every nationality living in Jeru- 
salem the Acts does not forget to men- 
tion the proselytes along with the Jews, 
ii. 10 («. 5., p. 307). 

Ver. 11. KptJTes Kal "Apafieg : both 
names seem to have been added to the 
list as an after-thought. Even if we can- 
not accept Nosgen's idea that St. Luke 
is repeating verbatim the account which 
he had received orally from an eyewit- 
ness who had forgotten the Arabians 
and Cretans in going through the list 
geographically, yet the introduction of 
the two names in no apparent con- 
nection with the rest ought to show 
us that we are not dealing with an arti- 
ficial list, but with a genuine record 
of the different nations represented 
at the Feast. Belser, who endorses 
this view, supposes that St. Luke 
obtained his information from an eye- 
witness who added the Cretans and 
Arabians supplementarily, just as a per- 
son might easily forget one or two names 
in going through a long list of represen- 
tative nations at a festival. It is possible, 
as Belser suggests, that the Cretans and 
Arabians were thinly represented at the 
Pentecost, although the notices in Jo- 
sephus and Philo's letter mentioned 
above point to a large Jewish population 
in Crete. The special mention of the 
Cretans is strikingly in accordance with 
the statement of the Jewish envoys to 
Caligula, viz., that all the more noted 
islands of the Mediterranean, including 
Crete, were full of Jews, "Crete," B.D., 2 
and Schurer, «. s., p. 232. In R.V. 
"Cretans"; which marks the fact that 
the Greek Kprjres is a dissyllable ; in A.V. 
" Cretes " this is easily forgotten (cf. 
Titus i. 12k — iieyaXcia only found here 




tou Oeou; 12. €|i<rrarro 8c irdrres icai Sujiropoue, 1 aXXo$ irpis 
aX\oi> Xcyoires, Ti &v 0eXoi touto eti/ai ; 1 3. eVepoi oe x.Xeudiioi'Tes 2 
t'Xeyoy, °Oti yXeuicous fiep.eCTT(up,eVoi eiai. 

1 Swjiropovv CDEI, Bas., Chrys., so Lach. ; SiTjiropovvTo fr^AB, so Tisch., Weiss, 
W.H., R.V. After irpos aXXov D adds eirt tw ye-yoyoi-i, so Blass in P, and Hilg. 
(Syr. Hard., Aug.) ; cf. iii. 10, iv. 21, and Weiss, Codex D, p. 56. 

2 x^eva£ovres, but SiaxXcvag. R.V., W.H., Weiss, Wendt, beyond doubt to be read. 

in N.T. ; the reading of T.R., Lake i. 49, 
cannot be supported; cf. Psalm lxx. (lxxi.) 
ig, where the word occurs in LXX. 

(Hebrew, JT^'fil) Ecclesiasticus xvii. 

9, xviii. 4, xxxiii. (xxxvi.) 8, xlii. 21, 
3 Mace. vii. 22, R. The word is found 
in Josephus, and also in classical Greek : 
used here not only of the Resurrection of 
the Lord (Grotius), but of all that the 
prophets had foretold, of all that Christ 
had done and the Holy Ghost had con- 

Ver. 12. SiTjirdpow : not found in LXX 
(only in Psalm lxxvi. 5, and Dan. ii. 3, 
Symmachus), and peculiar to St. Luke 
in the N.T. , once in his Gospel, ix. 7 
(xxiv. 4 airopei<r8ai, W.H. and R.V.), 
and three times in Acts, cf. v. 24, x. 17. 
SiTjiropovvTo in R.V. "were perplexed"; 
A.V. " were in doubt," although in Luke 
xxiv. 4 this or a similar word is rendered 
as in R.V., "were (much) perplexed". 
The Greek conveys the thought of utter 
uncertainty what to think, rather than 
doubt as to which opinion of several is 
right (Humphry). The word no doubt 
is frequently found in classical writers, 
and is found also in Philo (not in Jo- 
sephus), but it may be worth noting that 
airopia, eviropia, Siairopeiv, ciiiropeiv 
are all peculiar to St. Luke, and were 
terms constantly employed by medical 
writers (Hobart, Medical Language, etc., 
p. 163). ti av Oe'Aoi tovto elvai — OeXai 
was constantly used in this sense in 
classical writers, see instances in Wet- 
stein. On the popular use of 64\o> instead 
of (3ov\ in later Greek, cf. Blass, 
Acta Apostolorum, p. 15. Blass points out 
that St. Luke's employment of | 
is characteristic of his culture, although it 
must be remembered that the Evangelist 
uses 8e\w (as here) very frequently. 

Ver. 13. Ircpoi, 8k : although the word 
is e-rcpoi, not aXXoi, it is doubtful how 
far it indicates a distinct class from those 
mentioned as speaking in vv. 7-12. At the 
same time not only iravTes, ver. 12, but 
also the behaviour of the erepoi, seems 
to separate them from the cvXa^cis in 

ver. 5. — xXcvd£ovTes : but stronger with 
the intensifying Sid than the simple 
verb in xvii. 32 ; used in classical Greek, 
Dem., Plato, and in Polybius — here only 
in N.T., not found in LXX, although 
the simple verb is used (see below). — 
yXevicovs : if the rendering R.V. "new 
wine " is adopted, the ridicule was indeed 
ill-timed, as at the Pentecost there was 
no new wine strictly speaking, the earliest 
vintage being in August (cf. Chrysostom 
and Oecumenius, who see in such a charge 
the excessive folly and the excessive 
malignity of the scoffers). Neither the 
context nor the use of the word elsewhere 
obliges us to suppose that it is used here 
of unfermented wine. Its use in Lucian, 
Ep., Sat., xxii. (to which reference is 
made by Wendt and Page), and also in 
LXX, Jobxxxii. 19, wenrep cickos yXcuxous 
£luv SeScpcvos, points to a wine still 
fermenting, intoxicating, while the defi- 
nition of Hesychius, to diro'oTaYpa ttjs 
otokjwXtjs irplv ira.TY)6x}, refers its lus- 
ciousness to the quality of its make (from 
the purest juice of the grape), and not of 
necessity to the brevity of its age, see 
B.D. "Wine". It would therefore be 
best to render " sweet wine," made per- 
haps of a specially sweet small grape, 
cf. Gen. xlix. 11. "The extraordinary 
candour of Christ's biographers must not 
be forgotten. Notice also such sentences 
as ' but some doubted,' and in the 
account of Pentecost, ' these men are 
full of new wine'. Such observations 
are wonderfully true to human nature, 
but no less wonderfully opposed to 
any ' accretion ' theory " : Romanes, 
Thoughts on Religion, p. 156. 

Ver. 14. <rra0£is 8J PUrpos : St. Chry- 
sostom rightly remarks on the change 
which had passed over St. Peter. In 
the place where a few weeks before he 
had denied with an oath that he knew 
" the man," he now stands forth to pro- 
claim him as the Christ and the Saviour. 
It is quite characteristic of St. Luke 
thus to introduce participles indicating 
the position or gesture of the speaker 
(cf. Friedrich, Zockler, Overbeck) ; cf St. 




14. XraOels 8c rU'rpos vvv tois eVScKa, 1 eTnjpe T(\v cjxofrje aurou, 
nal aTre^GeylaTO auTots, "AkSpes 'I00S0101 ita! oi KaTOiKourres 
'kpouo-aXqp. airarres> touto 6p.if yvunrrbv torw, koi eyamo-aafle to. 
pr)u.ara fiou. 1 5. 00 yap, ^5 up.eis otroXap-PaKCTC, outoi p-eOoooCTif • 
Ian yap wpa TpiTT] ttjs r}p,e'pas • 16. aXXct tout(5 coti to elpripveVoK 
Sid tou irpo<|>rJTou 'IghjX, 2 17. " Kal 3 larai 4k Tais €o-x<£tcus rj|ilpais, 

1 «v8e<a D, Gig., Par., Syr., Pesh., Aug. add airoo-ToXois ; cf.'i. 20. D reads Setta 
for cvSctca, perhaps through carelessness (Weiss). After eirtjpev D, Par. 2 insert 
irpcuTos ; E has irpoTcpov after ttjv <J>uvr|v omtov ; irpwTos retained by Blass in {}, and 
by Hilg. ; it seems a needless addition as it is implied in the verse (see also Harris, 
Four Lectures, p. 58). 

2 IwtjX NABCEIP, Vulg., Bas., Chrys., Cyr.-Jer. ; so W.H., R.V., Weiss. Om. 
D, Iren., Aug., Hil. " Rebapt.," so Hilg. Blass regards it as an interpolation even 
in a text. 

3 Kai om. by D, Gig., Par., Ir., Aug., Sah., Boh. ; but in LXX. 

Luke xviii. 11, 40, xix. 8, Acts v. 40, xi. 
1^, xvii. 2, xxv. 18, xxvii. 21. — crvv tois 
IvSekcl, and so with Matthias; cf. v. 32, 
and i. 22. — eirfjp* ttjv <j>«i>vtjv oaitov : this 
phrase is only found in St. Luke's Gospel 
(xi. 29) and the Acts (xiv. 11, xxii. 22), but 
it is quite classical, so in Demosthenes, 
and in LXX it occurs several times. — 
oirt<|)6€y|oTo : "spake forth," R.V., cf. 
xxvi. 25, expressive of the solemnity of 
the utterance, see above in ver. 4, and 
showing that St. Peter's words were in- 
spired no less than the speaking with 
tongues (Weiss). — avSpcs MovSaioi: no 
word of reproach, but an address of 
respect ; the words may be taken quite 
generally to indicate not only those 
previously present, but also those who 
were attracted by the noise. There is 
no need to suppose that St. Peter 
addressed the inhabitants of Jerusalem 
and the Jews as if they had been the 
only scoffers as distinct from the pilgrims 
from other lands. It is no doubt possible 
that the first part of the speech was 
addressed to the native home-bred resi- 
dents, and that in ver. 22 St. Peter in 
the word 'lo-parjXiTai includes all the 
Jews whether resident in Jerusalem or 
not. — tv(i)Ti<rao-8e : only here in N.T., 
but frequent in LXX, especially in the 
Psalms. It usually translates Hebrew 

V)*$T} from Hebrew pN = ear : c f- 

inaurire ; Kennedy, Sources of N. T. 
Greek, p. 130. "Give ear unto my 
words," R.V. Auribus percipite, Vulg. 
Ver. 15. upa Tp^TTj Ttjs -qjxepas : if 
-the words refer to the hour of early 
prayer, 9 a.m., the Jews previously did 
not partake of food, and on festal days 

they abstained from food and drink until 
the sixth hour (twelve o'clock). But if 
Schiirer (see on iii. 1, and Blass, in loco) 
is right in specifying other hours for 
prayer, the expression may mean that 
St. Peter appeals to the early period 
of the day as a proof that the charge of 
drunkenness was contrary to all reason- 
able probability. 

Ver. 17. «v tolis «o"x. , np^P'» '•'•! tne 
time immediately preceding the Parousia 
of the Messiah (Weber, Judische Theolo- 
g ie i V- 37 2 )- The expression is introduced 
here instead of p.€Ta ravTa, LXX, to 
show that St. Peter saw in the outpour- 
ing of the Spirit the fulfilment of Joel's 
prophecy, ii. 28-31 (LXX), and the dawn 
of the period preceding the return of 
Christ in glory, Isaiah ii. 2, Micah iv. 1 
(2 Tim. iii. 1, James v. 3, Heb. i. 1). — 
Xc'yci 6 0eos : introduced possibly from 
Joel ii. 12, although wanting in LXX 
and Hebrew. — ckxeu : Hellenistic future, 
Blass, Grammatik des N.G., pp. 41, 42, 58, 
cf. x. 45, Titus iii. 6. In LXX the word 
is used as here, not only in Joel, but in 
Zach. xii. 10, Ecclus. xviii. 11, xxiv. 33, 
but very often of pouring forth anger. — 
dirb tov irvcvp.. pov, " I will pour forth of 
my Spirit," R.V., so in LXX, but in Heb., 
*' I will pour out my Spirit ". The parti- 
tive diro" may be accounted for by the 
thought that the Spirit of God considered 
in its entirety remains with God, and that 
men acquire only a certain portion of its 
energies (so Wendt, Holtzmann). Or 
the partitive force of the word may be 
taken as signifying the great diversity of 
the Spirit's gifts and operations. See also 
Viteau, Le Grec du N. T., p. 151 (1893). — 
iratrav crdpica, i.e., all men ; but this ex- 

14— 1 8. 



Xe'yei 6 ©eos, eK)(€(ij diro tou TT^eufiOTos uou eirl iraaav adpKa, Kal 
TTpo$\iTe6(Toucnv ol ulol upon- * Kai at Goyarepes uuu>p * Kal ol cea- 
yurKoi uuwc opdaeis o^oirai, Kal oi Trpea^dTepoi uuwe eVuima 2 
cVuTreiaaf^CTorrai, 1 8. Kai ye em tou$ SouXou$ uou Kal eirl tos 
SouXas uou ei* Tais ijue'pais CKei^ais * €K)(6u diro tou TireuuaTOS uou, 

1 For vuuv . . . vp,wv D, Gig., Tert., *' Rebapt." Hil. read avTuv (referred by 
Harris to a Montanistic application). 

- evvima EP, Tert., Chrys. (cf. LXX, but AS 3 has -iois) ; but ewxviois fc$ABCD 2 
13, 27, 6i, Epiph., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Wendt, Weiss, Hilg. 

3 «v rais ijpepais ckcivcus om. D, Gig. (Cypr.), Acta Perpetua. Kai irpo^>i)Tcv- 
trovo-iv om. D, Par. 1 , Tert. (Cypr.), Acta Perpetua (not in LXX). The two clauses 
come together in Syriac and may have been omitted together (Chase). 

pression in itself suggests a contrast 
beween the weakness and imperfection 
of humanity and the all-powerful working 
of the divine Spirit. The expression is 
Hebraistic, cf. Luke iii. 6, John xvii. 2, 
and Ecclus. xlv. 4, and often in LXX. 
In Joel's prophecy the expression only 
included the people of Israel, although 
the divine Spirit should be no longer 
limited to particular prophets or favoured 
individuals, but should be given to the 
whole nation. If we compare ii. 39, the 
expression would include at least the 
members of the Diaspora, wherever they 
might be, but it is doubtful whether we 
can take it as including the heathen as 
such in St. Peter's thoughts, although 
Hilgenfeld is so convinced that the verse 
ii. 39 can only refer to the heathen that 
he refers all the words from Kal ira<ri to 
the end of the verse to his " author to 
Theophilus". Spitta on the other hand 
regards the expression as referring only 
to the Jews of the Diaspora ; if the 
Gentiles had been intended, he thinks 
that we should have had tois els uaxpav 
«8v€<riv as in xxii. 21. Undoubtedly we 
have an analogous expression to ii. 39 in 
Eph. ii. 13, ot irore 8vt«s paKpdv, where 
the words evidently refer to the heathen, 
but we must not expect the universalism 
of St. Paul in the first public address of 
St. Peter : for him it is still 6 Oeos ^uuv, 
" our God," ver. 39, and even the expres- 
sion, irpwTov, iii. 26, in which Holtzmann 
sees a reference to the extension of the 
Messianic blessings to the Jew first and 
then to the Gentile, need only mean that 
in St. Peter's view these blessings could 
only be secured by the Gentile through 
becoming a proselyte to the faith of 
Israel. It is thus only that St. Peter's 
subsequent conduct becomes intelligible. 
Tile reading airCtv instead of vpwv in 
the next clause before both viol and 

6vyaT£pcs if it is adopted (Blass 0) 
would seem to extend the scope of the 
prophecy beyond the limits of Israel 
proper. — Ovyarepcs : as Anna is called 
irpoc^rJTis, Luke ii. 36, so too in the 
Christian Church the daughters of Philip 
are spoken of as irpo^tjTcvovo-ai, xxi. 9. 
— vcaviCKOi : in LXX and Hebrew the 
order is reversed. It may be that Bengel 
is right in drawing the distinction thus : 
" Apud juvenes maximi vigent sensus 
externi, visionibus opportuni : apud senes 
sensus interni, somniis accdmmodati ". 
But he adds " Non tamen adolescentes 
a somniis, neque sensus a visionibus 
excluduntur " (see also Keil, in loco), 
and so Overbeck, Winer, Wendt see 
in the words simply an instance of the 
Hebrew love of parallelism. — xa{ ye 
(in LXX) = Hebrew Q3fl — only here in 

N.T. and in xvii. 27 W.H. (and possibly 
in Luke xix. 42) = "and even," Blass, 
Grammatik des N. G., p. 255. The only 
good Attic instance of Kai ye with an 
intervening word is to be found in Lysias, 
in Theomn., ii., 7, although not a strict 
parallel to the passage before us, Simcox, 
Language of the N. T., p. 168. 

Ver. 18. As there was to be no limit of 
sex or age, so too there was no limit of con- 
dition. The word p.ov is not in the Hebrew, 
only in the LXX, but as it is found in the 
latter and in Acts it is argued that the 
words SovXovs and SovXas do not mean 
those of servile rank, but are applied in 
a general sense to those who are wor- 
shippers, and so servants of God. But 
in retaining the word pow we are not 
obliged to reject the literal meaning 
" bond-servants," just as St. Peter him- 
self, in addressing household servants 
and slaves, commands them to act ws 
SovXoi Oeov (r Peter ii. 16) : " Intelliguntur 
servi secundum carnem, diversi a liberis. 




«ai Trpo4)T)Teu(rou<ri. 19. Kai o&Ictw Te*paTa eV tu> oupavw aVu>, Kal 
arjpeia eil ttjs yfjs Kara), 1 aiaa Kal irup Kai a/ru-iSa Ka-nvou. 20. 6 
fJXios p.€Taorpa<|>ria€Tai eis ctkotos, Kal rj aeX^r] els aipia, 2 irpl^ r\ 

1 aifia Kai irup Kai arpiSa Kairvov om. D, Gig., Par. 1 , Hilg. 

2 irpiv t| BP, Chry9., so W.H., marg. ; retained by Weiss (Wendt doubtful). t| 
omitted in ^ABCDE 13, 61 ; so Tisch., W.H., Hilg. text, R.V. (omitted also in LXX). 
ttjv Tjuepav, article omitted by fc$*BD '• so Tisch., W.H., Weiss, Wendt, Hilg. 

ver. 17, sed iidem servi Dei," Bengel. 
According to Maimonides, no slave could 
be a prophet, but as in Christ there was 
neither Jew nor Gentile, neither male 
nor female, so in Him there was neither 
bond nor free (see also Keil, in loco). — 
Kai irpo()>T)Tev<rov<ri : an explanatory ad- 
dition of the speaker, or an interpolation 
from ver. 17, not found either in Hebrew 
or LXX. 

Ver. 19. The word o-rjucia is wanting 
in the Hebrew and the LXX, but the 
co-ordination of the two words rcpas and 
<tt||A€iov is frequent in the N.T. (John iv. 
48, Acts iv. 30, Rom. xv. 19, 2 Cor. 
xii. 12), and even more so in the LXX 
(Exod. vii. 3, 9, Deut. iv. 34, Neh. ix. 10, 
Dan. vi. 27), so also in Josephus, Philo, 
Plutarch, Polybius. For the distinc- 
tion between the words in the N.T., 
see below on ver. 22. Tt'pas is often 
used of some startling portent, or of 
some strange appearance in the heavens, 
so here fitly used of the sun being 
turned into darkness, etc. But God's 
TtpaTa are always <ri)pcia to those who 
have eyes to see, and significantly in the 
N.T. the former word is never found 
without the latter. It is no doubt true to 
say that St. Peter had already received a 
sign from heaven above in the tjxos « k 
tov oiipavov, and a sign upon the earth 
below in the XaXeiv IWpais 'yXwo-aais 
(Nosgen), but the whole context, w. 19- 
21, shows that St. Peter's thoughts had 
passed from the day of Pentecost to 
a period of grace and warning which 
should precede the Parousia. No ex- 
planation, therefore, of the words which 
limits their fulfilment to the Pentecostal 
Feast (see Keil, in loco, and also his re- 
"erence to the interpretation of the 
Rabbis) is satisfactory. — crr||XEia is pro- 
bably introduced into the text to empha- 
sise the antithesis, as also are av» and 
mtu. — alua Kai irvp : if we see in these 
words a-rjueia eirl ttjs ytjs kcLtco, there is 
no need to refer them to such startling 
phenomena as rain of blood, or fiery 
meteors, or pillars of smoke rising from the 
earth (so De Wette, Overbeck), but rather 

to the bloodshed and devastation of war 
(so Holtzmann, Wendt, Felten) ; cf. our 
Lord's words, Matt. xxiv. 6, 29. Dean 
Plumptre thinks of the imagery as drawn 
from one of the great thunderstorms of 
Palestine, and cf. Weber, Jitdische 
Theologie, pp. 350, 351 (1897). 

Ver. 20. For similar prophetic imagery 
taken from the startling phenomena of 
an eclipse in Palestine, cf. Isaiah xiii. 10, 
Ezek. xxxii. 7, Amos viii. 9. — irpiv tj 
cXOciv. The LXX omit tj, and Weiss 
contends that this is the reason of its 
omission here in so many MSS. 
Weiss retains it as in vii. 2, xxv. 
16 ; cf. also Luke ii. 26 (but doubt- 
ful). Blass omits it here,-but retains it in 
the other two passages cited from Acts : 
" Ionicum est non Atticum " ; cf. Viteau, 
Le Grec du N. T., p. 130 (1S93). — ttjv 
-quEpav Kvpiov. It is most significant 
that in the Epistles of the N.T. this O.T. 
phrase used of Jehovah is constantly 
applied to the Coming of Jesus Christ to 
judgment ; cf. 1 Thess. v. 2, 1 Cor. i. 8, 
2 Cor. i. 14, Phil. i. 10; Sabatier, 
L'Apotre Paul, p. 104. — Kai cTri<|>avTJ : if 
the word is to be retained, it means a day 
manifest to all as being what it claims 
to be, Vulgate manfestus, " clearly 
visible " ; Luke xvii. 24 ; also 1 Tim. 
vi. 14, 2 Thess. ii. 8, where the word 
€-iri<j>aveia is used of the Parousia (cf. 
Prayer-Book, " the Epiphany or Mani- 
festation of Christ to the Gentiles "). 

But in the Hebrew the word fc^^n 

= •■ terrible," not " clearly visible," and 
the LXX here, as elsewhere, Hab. i. 
7, Mai. i. 14 (Judges xiii. 6, A.), etc., 
has failed to give a right derivation of 

the word which it connects with HfrO 

T t' 

to see, instead of with N"V, to fear 

(Niph. fc$*YO and Part., as here, "ter- 
rible"). Zockler holds that the LXX 
read not ^li3H, but ^l^n. 

ig — 22. 



eXOeic ttjk f\\iipav Kupiou tt\v peydXr)i> nal eirKpawY]. 1 2 r. icai eorai, 
irds os av cmicaXeVnTai to 6Vop.a Kupiou o-w0i)o-€Tai." 2 2. "A^Spes 
'IffpanXiTai, 2 dicouaaTe tous Xoyous toutous ' 'ino-oCe Toe Na^topatoi', 
aVSpa cLtto tou ©eou d-iroSeSeiypeVof els upas Suv'dpeo'i Kal Tepam 

1 eirufravr] ABCEP, Vulg., Chrys., W.H., Weiss, R.V. ; but om. ^D, Gig., so 
Tisch., Wendt, Hilg., Blass, who adds " del. igitur et in a, et fort, omnino per locum 
4-14 (i.e., w. 17-20) forma a male interpolata ". 

2 lo-paTjXiTcu P ; l<rpar)\eiTai ^ABCDE, so Tisch., W.H., Weiss. 

Ver. 21. 6iriKa\l<rT]Tai to ovofxa, the 
usual LXX rendering of a common He- 
brew phrase. The expression is derived 
from the way in which prayers addressed 
to God begin with the invocation of the 
divine name, Psalm iii. 2, vi. 2, etc., and 
a similar phrase is found in classical 
writers, lirncaXcurfiai tovs 0€ovs> Xen., 
Cyr., vii., 1., 35 ; Plat., Tim., p. 27, c. ; 
Polyb., xv., i, 13. From this it was an 
easy step to use the phrase as meaning 
the worshippers of the one God, Gen. 
iv. 26, xii. 8, 2 Kings v. 4. It is there- • 
fore significant that the Christian con- 
verts at Corinth are described by the 
same phrase, 1 Cor. i. 2. But just as in 
Rom. x. 12 this same prophecy of Joel 
is beyond all doubt referred by St. Paul 
to the Lord Jesus, so here the whole 
drift of St. Peter's speech, that the same 
Jesus who was crucified was made both 
Lord and Christ, points to the same con- 
clusion, ii. 36. In Joel Kvpios is un- 
doubtedly used of the Lord Jehovah, and 
the word is here transferred to Christ. 
In its bearing on our Lord's Divinity 
this fact is of primary importance, for it 
is not merely that the early Christians 
addressed their Ascended Lord so many 
times by the same name which is used 
of Jehovah in the LXX — although it is 
certainly remarkable that in 1 Thess. 
the name is applied to Christ more than 
twenty times — but that they did not 
hesitate to refer to Him the attributes 
and the prophecies which the great pro- 
phets of the Jewish nation had associated 
with the name of Jehovah, Zahn, Skizzen 
aus dem Leben der alien Kirche, pp. 8, 
10, 16 (1894), ana for the force of the ex- 
pression, citik. to ovopa, in 1 Cor. i. 2, 
see Harnack, History of Dogma, i., p. 
29, E.T. — $s ay liriK., " whosoever " : it 
would seem that in St. Peter's address 
the expression does not extend beyond 
the chosen people ; cf. v. 36. — o-uOt]- 
o-eTai : to the Jew salvation would 
mean safety in the Messianic kingdom, 
and from the penalties of the Messianic 
judgment ; for the Christian there would 
VOL. II. 6 

be a partial fulfilment in the flight of the 
believers to Pella for safety when the 
Son of Man came in the destruction ot 
Jerusalem ; but the word carries our 
thoughts far beyond any such subordinate 
fulfilment to the fulness of blessing for 
body and soul which the verb expresses 
on the lips of Christ ; cf. Luke vii. 50. 
And so St. Luke places in the forefront 
of Acts as of his Gospel the thought of 
Jesus not only as the Messiah, but also 
as the ZwTijp, Luke ii. 14 ; cf. Psalms of 
Sol., iv., 2 (Ryle and James). 

Ver. 22. 'lo-patjXiTai : the tone of St. 
Peter throughout is that of a man who 
would win and not repulse his hearers, cf. 
v. 29, and so he commences the second 
part of his speech, in proof that Jesus was 
both Lord and Christ, with a title full 
of honour, reminding his hearers of their 
covenant relation with God, and prepar- 
ing them for the declaration that the 
covenant was not broken but confirmed 
in the person of Jesus. — 'I. t6v Hat,., 
"the Nazarene," the same word (not 
Na£api)vos) formed part of the inscription 
on the Cross, and it is difficult to believe 
with Wendt that there is no reference to 
this in St. Peter's words (cf. irpoairT]!- 
avTes, w. 23 and 36), although no 
doubt the title was often used as a 
description of Jesus in popular speech, 
iv. 10, xxvi. 9. No contrast could be 
greater than between 'lijo-ovs the de- 
spised Nazarene (6 N. ovtos, vi. 14) 
dying a felon's death, and Mtjo-ovs 
Xpio-Tos, v. 38, v\|/w6ei5, v. 33, no longer 
upon the Cross, but at a seat on the 
right hand of the Father (cf John xii. 
12) ; again the marvellous change which 
had passed over St. Peter is apparent: 
" If Christ had not risen," argues St, 
Chrysostom, " how account for the fact 
that those who fled whilst He was alive, 
now dared a thousand perils for Him 
when dead? St. Peter, who is struck 
with fear by a servant-maid, comes 
boldly forward " (so too Theophylact). — 
avSpa airoScScty. d/rro tov Qcovcls vuas,. 
" a man approved of God unto you," 




koi (TTjuciois, ols eirotTjae Si' auTou 6 0e6s iv p.&ru> u|M>e, KaOus koi * 
auTol oiSarc, 23. toutoc ttj wpiorfieVt] |3ouXfj ical Trpoyt'waei tou 

1 Kai qvtoi; but Kai om. in fr$ABC*DE, Vulg. versions (Syr. Pesh.), Irint., so 
Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, VVendt. 

R.V. The word, only used by St. Luke 
and St. Paul in the N.T. (cf. xxv. 7, 1 
Cor. iv. 9, 2 Thess. ii. 4) = demonstrated, 
and "approved" in its old meaning 
would be a good equivalent ; so in 
classical Greek, in Plato and Aristotle, 
shown by argument, proved, cf. xxv. 
7. The sense of the word is given 
by the gloss in D It 
occurs in Esther ii. 9, AB, and iii. 13 
(LXX), and several times in the Books 
of the Maccabees (see Hatch and Red- 
path, sub v.). — avSpa: Erasmus com- 
mends the wisdom of Peter, " qui apud 
rudem multitudinem Christum magnifice 
laudat, sed virum tantum nominat, ut 
ex factis paullatim agnoscant Divini- 
tatem ". — a-iro : probably here not simply 
for vnro (as Blass, and Felten, and 
others). The phrase means " a man 
demonstrated to have come unto you 
from God by mighty works," etc. If the 
words may not be pressed to mean our 
Lord's divine origin, they at least de- 
clare His divine mission (John iii. 2), 
divinitus (Wendt in loco). — Wjiori Kai 
Te'paor Kai o~r]p.eiois : cf. 2 Cor. xii. 12, 
Heb. ii. 4, and 2 Thess. ii. g ; cf. Rom. 
xv. 19. — <r«]ueia Kai re'paTa : no less than 
eight times in Acts. — Swdpeis is often 
rendered in a way which rather obscures 
its true form and meaning. Lit. = 
" powers," and so here in R.V. margin, 
where in the text we have " mighty 
works," so in Heb. ii. 4. St. Luke is 
fond of using Svvapis of the power in- 
herent in Christ, and so the plural might 
well be used of the outward manifesta- 
tions of this power in Christ, or through 
Him in His disciples. The word there- 
fore seems in itself to point to the new 
forces at work in the world (Trench, 
N. T. Synonyms, ii., p. 177 ff.). — Te'paTa: 
the word is never used in the N. T. alone 
as applied to our Lord's works or those 
of His disciples, and this observation 
made by Origen is very importaut, since 
the one word which might seem to 
suggest the prodigies and portents of the 
heathen world is never used unless in 
combination with some other word, 
which at cnce raises the N.T. miracles 
to a higher level. And so whilst the 
ethical purpose of these miracles is least 
apparent in the word Te'paTa, it is brought 

distinctly into view by the word with 
which Te'paTa is so often joined — o"r)p,eia, 
a term which points in its very meaning 
to something beyond itself. Blass there- 
fore is not justified in speaking of o~T)p.eia 
and TtpaTa as synonymous terms. The 
true distinction between them lies in 
remembering that in the N.T. all three 
words mentioned in this passage have 
the same denotation but a different con- 
notation — they are all used for miracles, 
but miracles regarded from different 
points of view (see Sanday and Head- 
lam, Romans, p. 406). — 01s eirolr\crev ... 
6 0eo$. The words, as Alford points out 
against De Wette, do not express a low 
view of our Lord's miracles. The favourite 
word used by St. John for the miracles of 
Christ, €p7a, exactly corresponds to the 
phrase of St. Peter, since these epya were 
the works of the Father Whom the Son 
revealed in them (cf. St. John v. 19, 
xiv. 10). — Ka0o>s Kai atiToi oiSa-rt : Weiss 
rightly draws attention to the emphatic 
pronoun. The fact of the miracles was 
not denied, although their source was 
so terribly misrepresented ; cf. " Jesus 
Christ in the Talmud," Laible, E.T. 
(Streane), pp. 45-50 (1893). 

Ver. 23. tovtov, emphatic, IkSotov 
delivered up, by Judas, not by God ; 
only here in the N.T., but see instances 
from Josephus, also from classical Greek, 
in Wetstein. In Dan., Theod., Bel and 
the Dragon ver. 22. — upicruEvi) PovXfl '■ 
both favourite words of St. Luke : upi<r. 
used by him five times in the Acts, x. 42, 
xi. 29, xvii. 26, 31 ; once by St. Paul, 
Rom. i. 4 ; once in Hebrews, iv. 7, and 
only in St. Luke amongst the Evange- 
lists, xxii. 22, where our Lord Himself 
speaks of the events of His betrayal by 
the same word, koto, to wpicrpcvov (cf. 
xxiv. 26). — {JovXfj : Wendt compares the 
Homeric A165 8' ctcXcCcto |3o-uX->}. The 
phrase fJotiX-q tov 0. is used only by 
St. Luke ; once in his Gospel, vii. 30, 
and three times in Acts, xiii. 36, xx. 
27 (whilst PovXi] is used twice in the 
Gospel, eight times in the Acts, and only 
three times elsewhere in the N.T., 1 Cor. 
iv. 5, Ephes. i. 11, Heb. vi. 17), but cf. 
Wisdom vi. 4, ix. 13, and often v\ ^ovXt] 
Kvpiov in LXX. — irpoYvwo-ei : the word is 
only found again in 1 Peter i. 2. and its 




0£ou eKSoToi' \aj36cTes, 1 Sia yeipiav di'opjjv Trpo<nrf\£ai>res dfeiXeTC ■ 
24. 01/ 6 0609 a.v€o-Ti]<je, Xucras T&s (iSiyas tou Qavdrou* kciOoti ouk 

1 Xa^ovTes om. }tf*ABC 61, Vulg., Sah., Boh., Syr. Pesh., Arm., Aeth., Ath., Ir>nt. ( 
Victorin. ; so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss — but omitted by Blass in {3 although found in 
D^ 3 EC 3 P, Syr. Hard., Eus., Chrys. ; Hilg. retains. x <l P uv I but X cl P°« in N ABC*T) 
13, 15, 61, Syr. Hard., Aeth., Eus., Ath., Cyr., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt, 
Hilg. (plural probably out of the following avoficov). avciXcrc minusc, but avciXarc 
NABCDEP, so Tisch., W.H., Weiss— see W.H., Appendix, p. 172, and Winer - 
Schmiedel, p. 112. 

2 OaVaTov ^ABCEP, Syr. Hard., Sah., Arm., Aeth., Eus., Ath., Cyr., Theodrt. ; 
so Tisch., W.H., Wendt, Weiss. aSov D, Vulg., Syr. Pesh., Boh., Gig., Par., Polyc, 
Epiph., Irenint — similar var. I. in 1 Cor. xv., 55, cf. Ps. xvii. (xviii.) 5, 6 ; $8011 out 
of ver. 27, 31 (Wendt). 

occurrence in that place, and the thoughts 
which it expresses, may be classed 
amongst the points of contact between 
Acts and 1 Peter (see at end of 
chap. iii.). In the Passion and Resur- 
rection of Christ, which at one time 
seemed to Peter impossible, cf. Matt, 
xvi. 22, he now sees the full accom- 
plishment of God's counsel, cf. iii. 20, and 
1 Peter i. 20 (Nosgen, Apostelgeschichte, 
p. 53, and also 48-52). In this spiritual 
insight now imparted to the Apostle 
we see a further proof of the illu- 
minating power of the Holy Ghost, the 
gift of Pentecost, which he himself 
so emphatically acknowledges in his 
first epistle (i.. 1-12). — Sia x £t P" v > best 
explained as a Hebraism. Cf. for the fre- 
quent use of this Hebraistic expression, 
Blass, Gratnmatik des N. G., pp. 126, 
127 ; and Simcox, Language of the 
N. T., p. 141. In the LXX, cf. 2 
Kings xiv. 27, 1 Chron. xi. 3, xxix. 5. 
St. Luke is very fond of these para- 
phrases with irpoeruirov and x e ^P> see 
Friedrich, Das Lukasevangelium, pp. 8, 9, 
and Lekebusch, Apostelgeschichte, p. 77 ; 
cf v. 12, vii. 25, xi. 30, xiv. 3, xv. 23, xix. 
II, SO cv X €l P^> € 'S X E tp a 5* — av6|i<ov : 
" lawless," R.V., generally taken to refer 
to the Roman soldiers who crucified our 
Lord, i.e., Gentiles without law, as in 
1 Cor. ix. 21, Rom. ii. 14. In Wisdom 
xvii. 2 the same word is used of the 
Egyptians who thought to oppress the 
holy nation — they are described as avop.01. 
— -7rpo<ririj|avT£s, sc, to o-Tatipu : a gra- 
phic word used only here, with which we 
may compare the vivid description also 
by St. Peter in v. 29-32, x. 39, cf. 
1 Peter ii. 24 — the language of one who 
could justly claim to be a witness of the 
sufferings of Christ, 1 Peter v. 1. The 
word is not found in LXX, cf Dio 
Cassius. — aveiXeiTe: an Alexandrian form, 
see for similar instances, Kennedy, 

Sources ofN. T. Greek, pp. 159, 160. The 
verb is a favourite with St. Luke, nine- 
teen times in Acts, twice in the Gospel, 
and only once elsewhere in the Evan- 
gelists, viz., Matt. ii. 16, and the noun 
dvaipccris is only found in Acts viii. 10 
(xxii. 20), cf. its similar use in classical 
Greek and in the LXX. The fact that St. 
Peter thus describes the Jewish people 
as the actual murderers of Jesus is not 
a proof that in such language we have 
an instance of anti-Judaism quite incon- 
sistent with the historical truth of the 
speech (Baur, Renan, Overbeck), but 
the Apostle sees vividly before his eyes 
essentially the same crowd at the 
Feast as had demanded the Cross of 
Jesus before the judgment -seat of 
Pilate, Nosgen, Apostelgeschichte, p. 
103. — Sv 6 0eos dv6<mj<re, " est hoc 
summum orationis," Blass, cf. v. 32, and 
i. 22. 

Ver 24. Xvo-as t&s uSiva; tov 0av. : 
R.V. " pangs " instead of " pains " (all 
previous versions) approaches nearer to 
the literal form of the word — " birth- 
pangs," the resurrection of Christ being 
conceived of as a birth out of death, as 
the Fathers interpreted the passage. The 
phrase is found in the Psalms, LXX 
xvii. 4, cxiv. 3, but it is most probable 
that the LXX has here mistaken the 

force of the Hebrew 72Pf which might 
mean " birth-pangs," or the cords of a 
hunter catching his prey. In the Hebrew 
version the parallelism, such a favourite 
figure in Hebrew poetry, decides in favour 
of the latter meaning, as in R.V. Ps' 
xviii. 4, 5 (LXX xvii.), Sheol and Death 
are personified as hunters lying in wait 
for their prey with nooses and nets 
(Kirkpatrick, Psalms, in loco, the word 

^tTjTIft meaning snares by which birds 

or beasts are taken (Amos iii. 5)). In 

8 4 



rjv SuKaToc KpareicrOai auTOK fiir' outoo. 25. Aapio yap Xe'yei els 
auTOF, " ripowpcSpvrp' 1 top Kupioy ivunri6v pou 81a Trai'Tos ' on Ik 
$t£iwv pou Icttii', iko p,T) aaXeuOw • 26. Bio, touto €u<J>paV0r) f] icapSia 

1 irpo W pwpT)v B 3 P ; irpoop. ^AB*CDE, so Tisch., W.H., Weiss, Wendt, Hilg. 
(see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 101). 

the previous verse the parallelism is also 
maintained if we read "the waves of 
death " (cf. 2 Sam. xxii. 5) " compassed 
me, the floods of ungodliness made 
me afraid ". It is tempting to account 
for the reading wSivas by supposing 
that St. Luke had before him a source 
for St. Peter's speech, and that he 
had given a mistaken rendering of the 

word 7Hn» But it would certainly seem 
that Xvcras and KpaTEiarOai are far more 
applicable to the idea of the hunter's 
cords, in which the Christ could not be 
bound, since He was Himself the Life. 
A similar mistake in connection with the 

same Hebrew word S^Pl mav possibly 
occur in 1 Thess. v. 3 and Luke xxi. 34. 
There is no occasion to find in the word 
any reference to the death-pains of Christ 
(so Grotius, Bengel), or to render uSivcs 
pains and snares (Olshausen, Nosgen), 
and it is somewhat fanciful to explain 
with St. Chrysostom (so Theophylact 
and Oecumenius) 6 OavaTos uSivc KttTe'xwv 
avrbv Kai to. Sciva iiracrxe. — icaOoTi : only 
found in St. Luke, in Gospel twice, and 
in Acts four times (Friedrich) ; gener- 
ally in classical Greek ica8' o ti (cf. 
Tobit i. 12, xiii. 4). — owtc -rjv Svvarov . . . 
Yap : the words primarily refer to the 
proof which St. Peter was about to ad- 
duce from prophecy, and the Scripture 
could not be broken. But whilst Baur 
sees in such an expression, as also in iii. 
15, a transition to Johannine conceptions 
of the Person of Jesus, every Christian 
gladly recognises in the words the moral 
impossibility that the Life could be holden 
by Death. On the impersonal construc- 
tion, see Viteau, Le Grec du N. T., p. 
151 (1893). — KpaTcio-0ai . . . iir', cf. 
Luke xxiv. 16 (John xx. 23), only in 
these passages in passive voice in N.T., 
but cf. for similar use of the passive 
voice, 4 Mace. ii. 9, and so in Dem. 
Schmid compares this verse where the in- 
ternal necessity of Christ's resurrection 
is thus stated with 1 Peter iii. 18, show- 
ing that the irvevpa in Him possessed 
this power of life (Biblische Theologie des 
N. T., p. 402). 

Ver. 25. AaveiS yap Xryct : the words 
which follow are quoted by St. Peter 

from Psalm xvi. ; and it has been said 
that the Apostle's argument would be the 
same if the Psalm were the work of some 
other author than David. But if the 
following Psalm and the Psalm in ques- 
tion may with considerable reason be 
attributed to the same author, and if the 
former Psalm, the seventeenth, may be 
referred to the period of David's persecu- 
tion by Saul, then David's authorship of 
Psalm sixteen becomes increasingly prob- 
able (Kirkpatrick). In Delitzsch's view 
whatever can mark a Psalm as Davidic 
we actually find combined here, e.g., 
coincidences of many kinds which he 
regards as undoubtedly Davidic (cf. v. 
5 with xi. 6, v. 10 with iv. 4, v. n with 
xvii. 15), and he sees no reason for giving 
up the testimony afforded by the title. 
But it is plain that David's experience 
did not exhaust the meaning of the 
Psalm, and St. Peter in the fulness of 
the gift of Pentecost interprets the words 
cU avTov, " with reference to Him," i.e., 
the Messiah (cf. St. Paul's interpreta- 
tion of the same Psalm in xiii. 35). 
On the application of the Psalm as 
Messianic, cf. Edersheim, Jesus the 
Messiah, ii., p. 717. — ripocDpoiprjv: not 
" I foresaw," but " I beheld the Lord 
always before my face," LXX ; Heb., " I 
have set the Lord always before me". 
— Kvpiov = Jehovah. — Ik 8e£iwv pov : as a 
defence and helper. Cf. irapao-Ta-nris, 
Xen., Cyr., iii., 3, 21. The imagery may 
be taken from that of the trials in which 
advocates stood at the right hand of their 
clients (Psalm cix. 31), or there may be a 
reference to a champion who, in defending 
another, would stand on his right hand ; 
cf. Psalm ex. 5, exxi. 5 (Kirkpatrick, and 
Robertson Smith, Expositor, 1876, p. 
351). — tvo pi| o-aXcvOw: although the 
verses which follow contain the chief 
Messianic references in St. Peter's inter- 
pretation, yet in the fullest sense of the 
words the Christ could say irpoop. k.t.X. 
(see Felten, in loco). But because the 
Father was with Him, He could add 81a 
tovto €xi(|>pav0T] -f| KapSia pov : "the 
heart " in O.T. is not only the heart of 
the affections, but the centre of the 
man's whole moral and intellectual nature 
(Oehler,rA<?oZ-'^5^.r.,p.7i).— €v4>pdven, 



fj.00, Kal fjyaWiaaaTO rj yXSttrad jiou ■ cti 8e Kal r\ aap£ pvou Kara- 
aKTjcoiaei iir' eXmoi • 27. on ouk iyKaTakeltyzis rr]v vj/ux^ |aou els 

refers rather to a joyous state of mind, 
" was glad," R.V., iq-yaWidcraTo used of 
outward and active expression of joy is 
rendered " rejoiced," R.V. (in A.V. the 
meaning of the two verbs is transposed). 
At the same time cti<|>pdv0T) is some- 
times used in LXX and N.T., as in 
modern Greek of festive enjoyment, 
Kennedy, Sources of N. T. Greek, p. 

155. — T| yXaxro-d jiov : in Hebrew "'TOS 

"my glory," i.e., my soul, my spirit (cf. 
Gen. xlix. 6, Schottgen). The Arabs use a 
similar expression for the eye, the hand, 
or any member of the body held in special 
honour (cf. Lumby on Psalm cviii. 1). — 
en Si koI r\ <rdp| : flesh does not here 
mean the dead corpse but the living 
body (Perowne, Kirkpatrick). — Kcn-acr- 
KTjvuo-ei, " shall dwell in safety," R.V., 
"confidently," margin (O.T.); the ex- 
pression is used frequently of dwelling 
safely in the Promised Land. In N.T. 
the R.V. translates " shall dwell," " taber- 
nacle " margin, shall dwell as in a tent, a 
temporary abode. In its literal meaning, 
therefore, there is no reference to the 
rest of the body in the grave, or to the 
hope of resurrection from the grave, but 
the words must be understood of this 
life (Perowne) ; cf. Deut. xxxiii. 12, 28, 
Psalm iv. 8, xxv. 13, Jer. xxiii. 6, xxxiii. 
16. For the hope of the Psalmist, ex- 
pressed in the following words, is primarily 
for preservation from death : " Thou wilt 
not give up my soul to Sheol [i.e., to the 
underworld, so that one becomes its 
prey], neither wilt thou suffer thy beloved 
one [singular] to see the pit" (so Delitzsch 
and Perowne, as also R. Smith and Kirk- 

Ver. 27. In LXX and N.T. rightly 
els aSijv. W.H. ; cf. also Briggs, Mes- 
sianic Prophecies, p. 24; although in T.R. 
as usually in Attic, cU SSov, sc, Sdjiov. 
Blass regards eU as simply usurping in the 
common dialect the place of Iv, but we can 
scarcely explain the force of the preposi- 
tion here in this way. tyicaTaX.€u|;ci.? 
used of utter abandonment, cf. Psalm 
xxii. 1 (cf. 2 Tim. iv. 10, 16). — cU 
$8t]v : whilst it is true that the 
Psalmist " says nothing about what 
shall happen to him after death" (Per- 
owne), he expresses his conviction that 
his soul would not be given up to the 
land of gloom and forgetfulness, the 
abode of the dead, dark and cheerless, 

with which the Psalmist cannot associate 
the thought of life and light (see also on 
ver. 31).— oviSe Swaeis : in R.V. (O.T.) 
the word " suffer " is retained, but in R.V. 
(N.T.) we find " thou wilt not give," the 

Hebrew \P\2 being used in this sense to 

permit, to suffer, to let, like 8i8wpt and 
dare, Viteau, he Grec du N. T., p. 156 
(1893). — tov oo-idv <rov: the Hebrew 
Chasld which is thus sometimes trans- 
lated in the LXX (Vulgate, Sanctus) is 
often rendered " thy beloved one," and the 
word denotes not only one who is godly 
and pious, but also one who is the object 
of Jehovah's loving-kindness. The word 
might well be used of Him, Who was not 
only the Holy One of God, but 6 dyairriTos 
vlds, " the beloved Son ". On the word 
Chasid see Kirkpatrick, Psalms, Appen- 
dix, p. 221. — ISeiv 8ia<f>6opdv : "corrup- 
tion " or " the pit," margin R.V. (O.T.), 
but in the N.T. simply " corruption " 
(A. and R.V.), Vulgate, corruptio. In the 

LXX the Hebrew ]""\nt£J * s often ren- 
dered 8ia<(>9opd, "corruption," as if 
derived from ]"\nt2J 8ia<j>0cip€iv, " to cor- 

— T 

rupt " ; not, however, in the sense of cor- 
ruption, putridity, but of destruction. The 

derivation however is probably from fTl^?, 

to sink down, hence it means a pit, and 
sometimes a sepulchre, a grave, Psalm 
xxx. 10, lv. 24, so here "to see the 
grave," i.e., to die and be buried, cf. 
Psalm xlix. 10 (see Robinson's Gesenius, 
p. 1053, note, twenty-sixth edition). Dr. 
Robertson Smith maintains that there 
are two Hebrew words the same in 
form but different in origin, one mas- 
culine = putrefaction or corruption, the 
other feminine = the deep or the pit. 
So far he agrees with the note in Gesenius, 
u.s., that the word 8ia$0opd. should here 
be rendered by the latter, the pit, but he 
takes the rendering, the deep or the pit, 
as an epithet not of the grave but 'of 
Sheol or Hades (see Expositor, p. 354, 
1876, the whole paper on " The Sixteenth 
Psalm," by Dr. R. Smith, should be con- 
sulted, and p. 354 compared with the 
note in Gesenius), and this view certainly 
seems to fit in better with the parallel- 




aoou, 1 ouSe Swueis rbv oaioV aou ISeiK Siacpdopde. 38. iyvutpMras 
fioi 6S0U9 ^wtjs ' TrXrjpwCTeis pc eu<ppoowT)s peTa tou irpoffwirou erou." 
29. "AfSpcs dSeX^ol, e|of eiTrcic peni Trapprjcrias TTpos upas irepl 
tou iraTpidpxou Aa|3i8, on Kal eTeXeuTTjcre Kal eTa<pT], xal to pefjpa 

1 »8ov EP, Chrys. (in LXX A) ; aBtjv J^ABCD, Clem., Epiph., so|Tisch., W.H.,. 
Weiss, Wendt (so in LXX B— tov aoV S 1 ). 

Ver. 28. €YVwp«rds poi 680115 £g>tjs : 
St. Peter quotes from the LXX, which 
has the plural 68ovs — so in Proverbs v. 
6, where Hebrew has the same word as 
here in the singular, the LXX translates 
68ovs £u>TJs.— n«Ta tov irpoa*uirov o*ov, 
" with thy countenance " = " in thy pre- 
sence," margin ; = Hebrew, " in thy pre- 
sence ". The LXX irpoVwirov is a literal 

translation of the Hebrew D^2D. f tue or 

• T ' 

countenance, in the O.T. The expression 
is a common one in the O.T., " in God's 
presence " ; cf. Psalm iv. 6, xvii. 15, xxi. 6, 
cxl. 13. Grimm-Thayer explains (pc) 
ovTa pcTot, etc., " being in thy pre- 
sence " (see sub perd, i. 2 b). The 
force of the expression is strikingly 
seen in its repeated use in Numbers vi. 
25 ; cf. Exodus xxxiii. 14 ; Oehler, Theo- 
logie des A. T., pp. 46, 56, 62, and West- 
cott, Hebrews, p. 272. And so the 
Psalm ends as it had begun with God ; 
cf. ver. 2, and ver. 11. The Psalmist's 
thoughts carried him beyond mere tem- 
poral deliverance, beyond the changes 
and chances of this mortal life, to the 
assurance of a union with God, which 
death could not dissolve ; while as Chris- 
tians we read with St. Peter a deeper 
and a fuller meaning still in the words, 
as we recall the Life, Death, Resurrec- 
tion, and Ascension of Him, of Whom 
it was written : 6 Xdyo? o-ap| iyivero 
Kal ea-Kijvwo-ev iv "qpiv. 

Ver. 29. avSpcs d8eX^>o( : an affec- 
tionate form of address as compared 
with w. 14 and 22 (cf. vii. 2, xxii. 1), but 
still much more formal than iii. 17, where 
we have d8e\<f>o£ alone in St. Peter's pity 
for those who crucifying the Saviour 
knew not what they did. — Qbv, sc, iari 
(with infinitive), cf. 2 Cor. xii. 4, only in 
N.T. Viteau, Le Grec du N. T., p. 200 
(1893), cf. LXX Esther iv. 2; 4 Mace. 
v. 18 ; not " may I speak unto you," but 
" I may say unto you," R.V., not = «7T*>, 
but Io-t( (e£«o-Ti), Wendt, in loco. — ptTo 
-n-appi]o-(as : on the phrase, see below, iv. 
r3, and its repeated use by St. Luke ; cf. 
Heb. iv. 16 ; Lat., cum fiducia, West- 
cott, Hebrews, p. 108. In the LXX 

the phrase is found, Lev. xxvi. 13,. 
Esther viii. 12, 1 Mace. iv. 18, 3 Mace, 
iv. 1, vii. 12. St. Peter will first of all 
state facts which cannot be denied, before 
he proceeds to show how the words used 
of David are fulfilled in " great David's 
greater Son ". He speaks of David in 
terms which indicate his respect for his 
name and memory, and as Bengel well 
says, " est igitur hoc loco irpodcpaircta, 
praevia sermonis mitigatio " (" est haec 
irpodep. ut aiunt rhetores," Blass, in loco). 
— tov iraTpidpxov, the name is emphati- 
cally used in the N.T. of Abraham ; cf. 
Heb. vii. 4 (properly the apx<»v (auctor), 
iraTptas), and of the sons of Jacob, Acts 
vii. 8, 9, and cf. 4 Mace. vii. 19, used of 
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. In the LXX 
it is used of the " heads of the fathers' 
houses," 1 Chron. ix. 9, xxiv. 31, in a 
comparatively lower sense. Here used, 
as a term of high honour, of David, re- 
garded as the ancestor of the kingly race. 
See on the word and its formation, Ken- 
nedy, Sources of New Testament Greek, 
p. 114. — oTt teal €T€XevTt]o , € Kal cTa^t] : 
" that he both died and was buried," 
R.V. St. Peter states notorious facts, 
and refers to them in a way which could 
not wound the susceptibilities of his 
hearers, whilst he shows them that 
David's words were not exhausted in his 
own case. The argument is practically 
the same as that of St. Paul in xiii. 36 
from the same Psalm. — Kal to u.vfjpa 
axiTov to-riv iv ', i.e., in Jerusalem, 
the mention of the tomb empha- 
sises the fact and certainty of the death 
of David, and implies that his body had 
seen corruption. That David's tomb 
was shown in the time of Nehemiah 
we know from Neh. iii. 16. From Jos., 
Ant., vii., 15, 3 ; xiii., 8, 4 ; B. y., i., 2, 5, 
we learn that Solomon had buried a large 
treasure in the tomb, and that on that 
account one of its chambers had been 
broken open by Hyrcanus, and another 
by Herod the Great. According to Jos., 
Ant., xvi., 7, 1, Herod, not content with 
rifling the tomb, desired to penetrate 
further, even as far as the bodies of 
David and Solomon, but a flame burst 




auTou lariv iv T|(Aif axpi rfjs ^p-e'pas TauTrjs. 30. irpo^TTjs ouv 
(iirdp\<ov, Kal €i8a>s on opKw uipotret' auru 6 ©cos, ck KapiroG tt^s 
oacpuos auTou to koto. crdpKa d^aCTT^acii' Toy XpiaroK, 1 icaOiaai em 
tou Opoi'oo auTou, 31. irpoiSwr eXdXrjo-e ircpl tt)s dcaoTaaea*? tou 
XpioroG, on ou Ka,Te\ei<f>0T] 2 iq »J*oxtj owtoG eis aoou, ouSe iq o-dp| 

1 to koto, or. . . . tov X. otii. fc$ABCD 2 61, Vulg., good versions, Eus., Cypr., 
Irenint-, so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt (rejects as a marginal gloss, so Alford); 
but although a similar reading is found in DE Blass does not receive it in his f3 text 
(see Weiss on Codex D, p. 57). oo-<jwos, D reads teapSias ; Gig., Par., Syr. Pesh., 
so Hilg., Iren. tcoiXias (ventris) ; so in {3 (LXX Ps. cxxxi. 11, S 2 R). 

2 e-yicaTcXeufreT) ^BCDE, Eus., Chrys., Theodrt., so Tisch., W.H., Weiss, Wendt, 
ev. A (alt. in W.H.), too well testified to suppose that it is simply derived from ver. 27 
(Wendt). o.8ov ACDEP, Chrys., Lach. ; a8r|v fr$B, Eus -» Thaum., so Tisch., W.H M 
Wendt, Weiss, tj v|/vxtj avTow om. fr$ABC*D 61, 81, Syr. Pesh., Boh., Sah., Aeth., 
Eus., Irenint., Didint., Victorin. so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt (from ver. 27, 
so also ov . . . ovSe, instead of ovre . . . outc. ovSc ; but ovre J^ACD, Eus., 
Chrys., Cyr., so Tisch., W.H., Wendt; but Weiss ovre . . . ovSe, following B). 

forth and slew two of his guards, and the 
king fled. To this attempt the Jewish 
historian attributed the growing troubles 
in Herod's family. In the time of 
Hadrian the tomb is said to have fallen 
into ruins. Whatever its exact site, it 
must have been within the walls, and 
therefore could not correspond with the 
so-called "tombs of the kings" which 
De Saulcy identified with it. Those 
tombs are outside the walls, and are of the 
Roman period (Schiirer, Jewish People, 
div. i., vol. i., p. 276, E.T., " David," 
B.D. 2 ). Wetstein, in loco, quotes the testi- 
mony of Maundrell as to the sepulchres of 
David and his family being the only 
sepulchres within the walls. St. Jerome, 
Epist., xlvi., writing to Marcella, ex- 
presses a hope that they might pray to- 
gether in the mausoleum of David ; so 
that at the end of the fourth century 
tradition must still have claimed to mark 
the spot. 

Ver. 30. irpo^Ttjs : as David could 
not have spoken this Psalm of himself, 
he spoke it of some other, who was none 
other than the Messiah — here the word 
is used in the double sense of one 
declaring God's will, and also of one 
foretelling how that will would be ful- 
filled. — virapxwv : another favourite word 
of St. Luke, in his Gospel, and especially 
in Acts ; in the former it is found seven 
times, and in the latter no less than 
twenty-four times, and in all parts (ex- 
cluding to virdpxovTa), Friedrich, Das 
Lucasevangelinm, p. 7. It is not used 
by the other Evangelists. In the N.T., 
as in later Greek, it is often weakened 
into an equivalent of eivai; Blass, Gram- 

matik des N. G., p. 239. Here it may 
indicate that David was a prophet, not 
only in this one instance, but constantly 
with reference to the Messiah. — optcm 
up.oo-ev, Hebraistic ; cf. ver. 17. Viteau, 
Le Grec du N. T., p. 141 (1896) ; for the 

oath cf. Ps. cxxxii. n, 2 Sam. vii. 16. 

4k Kopirov ttjs 6o~<f>vos avrov, i.e., of 
his offspring. It is a common Hebraistic 
form of expression — oo-<£v? read here, 
but KotXia in Ps. cxxxi. 11 (LXX); cf. 
Gen. xxxv. n and 2 Chron. vi. 9 (Heb. 
vii. 5). With regard to the human ele- 
ment in the Person of Jesus, Peter speaks 
of him as a descendant of David accord- 
ing to prophecy, as in the Synoptists and 
Rom. i. 3 (Schmid). The exact expres- 
sion, Kapiros Ttjs oai^vos, is not found in 
the LXX, but icap. ttjs KoiAta; is found, 
not only in the Psalm quoted but in 
Mic. vi. 7 (Lam. ii. 20), where the same 
Hebrew words are used as in the Psalm : 
6o-<J>vs in the LXX is several times a trans- 
lation of another Hebrew word D^^n 

(dual). This partitive construction 
(supply nva) is also a Hebraistic mode 
of expression, and frequent in the LXX ; 
cf. ii. 18, v. 2. See Viteau, Le Grec 
du N. T., p. 151 (1896). 

Ver. 31. irpo'iSuv, cf. Gal. iii. 8. 
The word ascribes prophetic conscious- 
ness to David in the composition of the 
Psalm, but, as we learn from St. Peter 
himself, that prophetic consciousness did 
not involve a distinct knowledge of the 
events foretold (1 Pet. i. 10-12) ; that 
which the Holy Ghost presignified was 
only in part clear to the prophets, both 
as to the date of fulfilment and also as 




auTou elSc Sia^Oopdv. 32. touto^ Toy 'Itjo-oui' &vi(rrt}<r€v 6 ©eos, 
ou irdcTes ^fieis ep-fiey jxtipTupes. 33. rfj 8e|ia 06V tou ©eou 
6\|«(o6eis, Trjv tc cTrayyeXiav tou 'Ayiou n^cu/xaTOs 1 Xap&H' impel tou 

1 tov A7. riv. ; but tov irv. tov a-y. fr^ABCE 13, 61, 130, Vulg., Chrys., so W.H., 
Weiss; but TR. in DP, Irint., and accepted by Blass in and by Hilg. 

to historical shaping (Schmid, Biblische 
Theol. des N. T., p. 395, and Alford, in 
loco). — oTi : introducing the words which 
follow as a fuller explanation, or simply 
as expressing a well-known fact. — eyKaTC- 
\€i4)8t| . . . eXSev : aorists, not futures, be- 
cause from St. Peter's standpoint the pro- 
phecy had been already fulfilled (Felten, 
VVendt). With this verse we naturally 
compare the mention of Christ's descent 
into Hades and His agency in the realms 
of the dead in St. Peter's First Epistle, 
iii. 19 (cf. Phil. ii. 10, Ephes. iv. 9, Rom. 
>:. 7 ; Zahn, Das Apost. Symbolum, pp. 
71-74; but see also Schmid, ubi supra, 
p. 414). Thus while the words bore, as 
we have seen, a primary and lower re- 
ference to David himself, St. Peter was 
led by the Holy Ghost to see their higher 
and grander fulfilment in Christ. — «U 
aSov : on the construction see above on 
ver. 27, and on the Jewish view of Sheol 
or Hades in the time of our Lord as an 
intermediate state, see Charles, Book of 
Enoch, p. 168 and p. 94, and compare 
also the interesting although indirect 
parallel to 1 Pet. iii. 19, which he finds 
in The Book of the Secrets of Enoch, 
p. xlv. ff. ; Weber, Judische Theologie, 
pp. 163, 341. 

Ver. 32. ov : may be masculine = 
Christ, cf. xiii. 31, but is taken as neuter 
by Blass (so too Overbeck, Holtzmann, 
Weiss, Wendt, Felten). Bengel remarks 
" nempe Dei qui id fecit," and compares 
v. 32, x. 41, and 1 Cor. xv. 15. 

Ver. 33. oviv : the Ascension is a 
necessary sequel to the Resurrection, cf. 
Weiss, Leben Jesu, iii., 409 ff. and in loco. 
Or the word may mark the result of the 
assured and manifold testimony to the 
Resurrection, to which the Apostle had 
just appealed : " Confirmata resurrec- 
tione Christi, ascensio non potest in 
dubium vocari," Bengel. — tjj 8«£i£ tot) 
©cov : best to take the words as an in- 
strumental dative, so in v. 31, with the 
majority of recent commentators. On 
grammatical grounds it would be difficult 
to justify the rendering " to the right 
hand " (although taken in connection 
with v. 34 it would give very good 
sense), since such a combination of the 
dative alone is found only in the poets. 

and never in prose in classical Greek. 
The only other instances adduced, Acts 
xxi. 16 and Rev. ii. 16, can be other- 
wise explained, cf. Winer-Moulton, xxxi., 
p. 268. On Judg. xi. 18 (LXX) quoted in 
support of the local rendering by Fritzsch, 
see Wendt's full note in loco. The in- 
strumental meaning follows naturally 
upon ver. 32 — the Ascension, as the 
Resurrection, was the mighty deed of 
God, Phil. ii. 9. There is therefore no 
occasion to regard the expression with 
De Wette as a Hebraism, see Wetstein, 
in loco. — v\J/to6eis, cf. especially John 
xii. 32, and Westcott's note on John iii. 
14. The word is frequently found in 
LXX. As Lightfoot points out, in our 
Lord Himself the divine law which He 
Himself had enunciated was fulfilled, 
6 Ta-TTCivwv eavTov v\|ra>0i]<r£Tai (Luke 
xiv. 11, xviii. 14). — r-qv T€ eiro/yY^io-v 
tov a-yCov irvevfxaTOS k.t.X., see above on 
i. 4 (Gal. iii. 14). The language of St. 
Peter is in agreement with, but yet in- 
dependent of, that in St. John, whilst it 
calmly certifies the fulfilment of our 
Lord's promise. — ^X €€: "hath poured 
forth," R.V. All previous English 
versions except Rhem. = A.V. The verb 
is used in the LXX in the prophecy cited 
above, Joel ii. 28, 29 (cf. also Zech. xii. 
10), although it is not used in the Gos- 
pels of the outpouring of the Spirit. — 
tovto : either the Holy Ghost, as the 
Vulgate takes it, or an independent 
neuter "this which ye see and hear," i.e., 
in the bearing and speech of the assem- 
bled Apostles. St. Peter thus leads his 
hearers to infer that that which is poured 
out is by its effects nothing else than the 
Holy Ghost. It is noteworthy that just 
as Joel speaks of God, the Lord Jehovah, 
pouring out of His Spirit, so the same 
divine energy is here attributed by St. 
Peter to Jesus. See above on ver. 17. 

Ver. 34. St. Peter does not demand 
belief upon his own assertion, but he 
again appeals to the Scriptures, and to 
words which could not have received a 
fulfilment in the case of David. In this 
appeal he reproduces the very words in 
which, some seven weeks before, our 
Lord Himself had convicted the scribes 
of error in their interpretation of this 

5 2— 36. 



iraTpos, eC e X ee l TO " TO ° v ^ v "M- e ^S PXeireTe Kal dKOU€T€. 34. 00 yap 
Aa|3io dye'fiT] eis tous oupayous, Xe'yci oe auTOS, " Etwee 6 Kopios tu> 
Kupiw p,oo, Kd9ou eK 8e£iwe fiou, 35. e'ws at' 9ai tous e)(0pous aou 
uttottoSiov twc iroSuiy o"Ou." 36. 'Ao^aXuis ouV yiyajCTKeTti) irds oikos 
MaparjX on Kal 2 Kupioe Kal Xpioroi' auTOf 6 0eos eTroiTjae, toutov tok 
^lYjcroui' oe r^u-eis ecrraupwo-aTe. 

1 After ej; e X ££ and before totjto D (Par.) insert vu.iv, and E, Syrr. (Pesh. and Hare), 
Sah. tol. demid., Ir., Did., Ambr., Par. hoc donum. Harris ascribes this second 
addition, though dubiously, to a Montanist; but cf. ver. 38, x. 45, xi. 17, although 
in these passages Supea, not 8a>pov, is used. 

2 xa.1. K. ; Kai in all uncials, also Vulg., Syr. H., W.H., R.V., Weiss ; om. by many 
cursives, also Syr. Pesh. icai X. avTov EP 6r, Ath., Epiph. ; awTov Kai X. fc^ABCD 2 
15, 18, 61, 130, Vulg., Arm., Bas., Ir"»t., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss. 

same Psalm (Matt. xxii. 44, Mark xii. 35, 
Luke xx. 41), and, "unlearned" in the 
eyes of the scribes, had answered the 
question which they could not answer, 
how David's Son was also David's Lord. 
No passage of Scripture is so constantly 
referred to in the N.T. as this 110th Psalm, 
cf. references above, and also 1 Cor. xv. 
25, Heb. i. 13, v. 6, vii. 17, 21, x. 13. 
The Psalm was always regarded as 
Messianic by the Jews (Weber, Jiidische 
Thcologie, p. 357 (1897) ; Edersheim, 
Jesus the Messiah, ii., 720 (Appendix) ; 
Cheyne, Origin of the Psalter, p. 35 ; 
Driver, Introduction to O. T., pp. 362, 
363 ; and if it had not been so in the 
time of our Lord, it is obvious that His 
argument would have missed its point 
if those to whom He addressed His 
question " What think ye of the Christ ?" 
could have answered that David was not 
speaking of the coming Messiah. For 
earlier interpretations of the Psalm, and 
the patristic testimony to its Messianic 
character, see Speaker's Commentary, iv., 
427, and on the authorship see Gifford, 
Authorship of the 110th Psalm, with 
Appendix, 1895 (SPCK), and Delitzsch, 
Psalms, iii., pp. 163-176, E.T. — icdOov Ik 
8e|iuv pov : icddov contracted for KaOijo-o 
(cf. also Mark xii. 36, Heb. i. 13) ; this 
" popular " form, which is also found in 
the Fragments of the comic writers, is 
the present imperative of icd0T) in 
modern Greek, Kennedy, Sources of N. T. 
Greek, p. 162. In the LXX it is fre- 
quently used (see Hatch and Redpath, 
sub. v.). — Iu>s : the word does not imply 
that Christ shall cease to reign subse- 
quently : the word here, as elsewhere, 
does not imply that what is expressed 
will only have place up to a certain time 
(cf. Gen. xxxiii. 15, Deut. vii. 4, 2 Chron. 
vi. 23; cf. 1 Tim. iv. 13), rather is it 

true to say that Christ will only then 
rightly rule, when He has subjugated all 
His enemies. — av with ?«s as here, where 
it is left doubtful when that will take 
place to which it is said a thing will 
continue (Grimm-Thayer, and instances 
sub €o»s> i., 1 b). — v-iroTi-dSiov, cf. Josh. x. 
24, referring to the custom of conquering 
kings placing their feet upon the necks 
of their conquered enemies (so Blass, in 
loco, amongst recent commentators). 

Ver. 36. d<r4>a\ws : used here em- 
phatically ; the Apostle would emphasise 
the conclusion which he is about to draw 
from his three texts ; cf. xxi. 34, xxii. 3c, 
and Wisdom xviii. 6 (so in classical 
Greek). — iros oticos M<rp., without the 
article, for oikos 'I. is regarded as a 
proper name, cf. LXX, 1 Sam. vii. 2, 
1 Kings xii. 23, Neh. iv. 16, Ezek. xlv. 6, 
or it may be reckoned as Hebraistic, 
Blass, Grammatik des N. G., pp. 147, 
158. — Kai Kwpiov xal Xpiarov : the 
Kvpios plainly refers to the prophetic 
utterance just cited. Although in the 
first verse of Ps. ex. the words tu Kvpiw 
jiov are not to be taken as a name of 
God, for the expression is Adoni not 
Adonai (" the Lord saith unto my Lord," 
R.V.), and is simply a title of honour 
and respect, which was used of earthly 
superiors, e.g., of Abraham, Moses, 
Elijah, Sisera, Naaman, yet St. Peter 
had called David a Prophet, and only in 
the Person of the Risen and Ascended 
Christ Who had sat down with His, 
Father on His Throne could the Apostle 
see an adequate fulfilment of David's 
prophecy, or an adequate realisation of 
the anticipations of the Christ. So in 
the early Church, Justin Martyr, Apol., i., 
60, appeals to the words of " the prophet 
David " in this same Psalm as foretelling 
the Ascension of Christ and His reign 




37. 'AKOocrai'Tcs 1 8e KaTti'uyrjo-ai' ttj Kapoia, cittoV T€ irpos to^ 
ricTpov kcu T069 Xonrous 2 airocrroXoug, Ti Troi^o-ofiec, acSpes &8eX<|>oi ; 

1 atcovo-avres ; before this word D (so Syr. Hard, mg.) reads totc iravTes 01 
crvveXOovTCS Kat, and after ttartwy. -njv xapS. D adds icai txvcs e£ avxwv (etirav), so 
Hilg. According to Blass's theory this would show moreaccount and detailed informa- 
tion, ... all were pricked, etc., but only some inquired — but on the other hand it may 
have been inserted to explain an apparent difficulty. According to Weiss, Codex D, 
p. 57, this and the following addition in D, viroSciga-rc tjp.iv, are emendations of a 
kind similar to those which we find in ii. 45. In rore k.t.X. in D, Harris sees either 
a lectionary preface or reader's expansion. Others find a case of assimilation, e.g., 
to Luke xxiii. 48 (Chase points out that similar words occur in the Syriac of the two 
passages). In totc Weiss can only see one of the frequent ways in which the 
characteristic alterations of D are introduced. 

2 Xoiirovs om. by D, Gig., Aug. — Hilg., and Blass, who omits it in (3 also, say " recte 
fort, et in a" ; cf. v. 2g. irotTjcruuev ^ABCEP, Epiph., Chrys. ; so Tisch., W.H., 
R.V., Weiss, Wendt (as against Meyer), so also Blass in ; but Hilg. follows T.R. 
a8e\$oi; after this word D adds vrroS£t£aT6 T)piv, so E, Gig., Par., Wer. tol., Syr. 
Hard, mg., Aug., Prom. ; so Hilg. The word could be well connected with the kou. 
nves as indicating their earnestness and willingness ; cf. Luke iii. 7, Matt. iii. 7 (to 
which Chase sees an assimilation), Acts ix. 16, xx. 35. 

over His spiritual enemies. On the 
remarkable expression Xptcrros Kvptos 
in connection with Ps. ex. 1, see Ryle 
and James, Psalms of Solomon, pp. 
141-143, cf. with the passage here x. 
36, 42. In 1 Peter iii. 15 we have the 
phrase Kvptov 8e Xptcrrov d-yiao-are k.t.X. 
(R.V. and W.H.), "sanctify in your 
hearts Christ as Lord" (R.V.), where St. 
Peter does not hesitate to command that 
Christ be sanctified in our hearts as 
Lord, in words which are used in the 
O.T. of the Lord of hosts, Isa. viii. 13, 
and His sanctification by Israel. If it is 
said that it has been already shown that 
in Ps. ex. 1 Christ is referred to not as 
the Lord but as " my lord," it must not 
be forgotten that an exact parallel to 1 
Peter iii. 15 and its high Christology 
may be found in this first sermon of St. 
Peter, cf. note on w. 18-21 and 33. — 
tovtov Tor I. &v vpcts €trravpoicraT€, 
"hath made Him both Lord and Christ, 
this Jesus whom ye crucified," R.V., so 
Vulgate. The A.V., following Tyndale 
and Cranmer, inverts the clauses, but 
fails to mark what Bengel so well calls 
aculeus in fine, the stinging effect with 
which St. Peter's words would fall on 
the ears of his audience, many of whom 
may have joined in the cry, Crucify Him ! 
(Chrysostom). Holtzmann describes this 
last clause of the speech as " ein schwerer 
Schlusstein zur Kronung des'Gebaudes ". 
Ver. 37. KaTtvo-ytjcrav t^v tcapSiav : 
no word could better make known that 
the sting of the last word had begun to 
work (see Theophylact, in loco) = com- 
pungo, so in Vulg. The word is not 

used in classical Greek in the same sense 
as here, but the simple verb vvcrcrtiv is 
so used. In LXX the best parallels 
are Gen. xxxiv. 7, Ps. cviii. 16 (cix.) : 
cf. Cicero, De Orat., iii., 34. " Hoc 
pcenitentise initium est, hie ad pietatem 
ingressus, tristitiam ex peccatis nostris 
concipere ac malorum nostrorum sensu 
vulnerari . . . sed compunctioni accedere 
debet promptitudo ad parendum," Calvin, 
in loco. — t( irotijcrci»p,ev ; conj., delib. , cf. 
Luke iii. 10, 12, 14, Markxii. 14, xiv. 12, 
John xii. 27, Matt. xxvi. 54, Burton, 
Moods and Tenses of N. T. Greek, pp. 76, 
126, and Viteau, Le Grec du N. T., 
p. 28 ff. (1893). — avSpts aScX^oi : in- 
dicating respect and regard — St. Peter's 
address had not been in vain — "nonita 
dixerant prius " Bengel ; but now the 
words come as a response to St. Peter's 
own appeal, v. 29, cf. also Oecumenius, 
(so too Theophylact), Kat o!k€iu)tiku>s 
avTovs aSfX^xriis KaXovcriv, ovs irpuijv 
IxXcva^ov. — (xeTavo^ixaTt, Luke xxiv. 47. 
The Apostles began, as the Baptist began, 
Matt. iii. 2, as the Christ Himself began, 
Matt. iv. 17, Mark i. 15, with the exhort- 
ation to repentance, to a change of heart 
and life, not to mere regret for the past. 
On the distinction between p.6Tavociv and 
p.cTa|ic', see Trench, N. T. Syno- 
nyms, i., 208. Dr. Thayer remarks that 
the distinction drawn by Trench is hardly 
sustained by usage, but at the same 
time he allows that (xexovoeiv is undoubt- 
edly the fuller and nobler term, expressive 
of moral action and issues, as is indicated 
by the fact that it is often employed in 
the imperative (p,cTap,e*Xopai never), ancL 




38. ricTpos 8e 2<})T] irpos auTOus, MeTayoiqo-aTe, Kal Paima^Ta) 
£Ka<rTos ofi-wf 1 em tw 6k6p.aTi 'Itjctou Xpurrou els afyeaiv dpapTiwr • 
Kal X^<J/eCT0e tt]v Swpedv tou 'Ayiou rieeupaTOS. 39. up.^ yap eorii' 
iq eTrayyeXi'a Kal tols TeKfois upoiy, Kal irdai tois eiS paKpdk, ocrous 

1 eiri NAEP, Bas., Chrys., so Tisch. and Weiss ; but ev in BCD, Cyr.-Jer., Epiph., 
Cyr., Theodrt., so W.H., R.V. ; both expressions seem to be equally common in 
Luke and Acts. 

by its construction with dir<5, Ik, cf. also 
Acts xx. 31, r\ els 0e6v pcTavoia (Syno- 
nyms in Grimm-Thayer, sub peTape- 
Xo|xat). Christian Baptism was not 
admission to some new club or society 
of virtue, it was not primarily a token of 
mutual love and brotherhood, although 
it purified and strengthened both, cf. ver. 

44 ff - 

Ver. 38. pairrio-OiJTw : " Non satis est 
Christocredere,sed oportet et Christianum 
profited, Rom. x. 10, quod Christus per 
baptismum fieri voluit," Grotius. John's 
baptism had been a baptism of repentance 
for the remission of sins, but the work 
of St. Peter and of his fellow-Apostles 
was no mere continuation of that of the 
Baptist, cf. xix. 4, 5. Their baptism was 
to be eirl (ev) tw ovo^an 'I. X. St. Peter's 
address had been directed to the proof 
that Jesus was the Christ, and it was 
only natural that the acknowledgment 
of the cogency of that proof should form 
the ground of admission to the Christian 
Church : the ground of the admission to 
baptism was the recognition of Jesus 
as the Christ. The reading lirC (see 
especially Weiss, Apostelgeschichte, pp. 
35, 36) brings this out more clearly than ev. 
It is much better to explain thus than 
to say that baptism in the name of one of 
the Persons of the Trinity involves the 
names of the other Persons also, or to 
suppose with Bengel (so Plumptre) that 
the formula in Matt, xxviii. 19 was used 
for Gentiles, whilst for Jews or Proselytes 
who already acknowledged a Father and 
a Holy Spirit baptism in the name of 
the Lord Jesus sufficed ; or to conjecture 
with Neander that Matt, xxviii. 19 was 
not at first considered as a formula to be 
adhered to rigidly in baptism, but that 
the rite was performed with reference to 
Christ's name alone. This difficulty, of 
which so much has been made, does not 
appear to have pressed upon the early 
Church, for it is remarkable that the 
passage in the Didache, vii., 3, which is 
rightly cited to prove the early existence 
of the Invocation of the Holy Trinity in 
baptism, is closely followed by another 

in which we read (ix. 5) (x^Sels 8e <|>ay«Tio 
(iT)8e irierw diro ttjs evxapiorrias vp,wv, 
dXV 01 PairTi(r6€VT€s els ovojia Kvpiov, 
i.e., Christ, as the immediate context 
shows. — els a<j)€oriv twv ap-apnuv vp.wv : 
el;, " unto " R.V., signifying the aim. 
It has been objected that St. Peter lays 
no stress upon the death of Christ in 
this connection, but rather upon His 
Resurrection. But we cannot doubt that 
St. Peter who had emphasised the fact 
of the crucifixion would have remembered 
his Master's solemn declaration a few 
hours before His death, Matt. xxvi. 28. 
Even if the words in this Gospel els a<f>e<riv 
apapnuv are rejected, the fact remains 
that St. Peter would have connected the 
thought of the forgiveness of sins, a 
prerogative which, as every Jew was 
eager to maintain, belonged to God and 
to God alone, with the (new) covenant 
which Christ had ratified by His death. 
Harnack admits that however difficult it 
may be to explain precisely the words of 
Jesus to the disciples at the Last Supper, 
yet one thing is certain, that He connected 
the forgiveness of sins with His death, 
Dogmengeschichte, i., pp." 55 and 59, see 
also "Covenant," Hastings, B. D., p. 
512. — vp.wv : the R.V. has this addition, 
so too the Vulgate (Wycl. and Rheims). 
As each individual eKacrros was to be 
baptised, so each, if truly penitent, would 
receive the forgiveness of his sins. — ttjv 
Scupeav, not xdpi<rpa as in 1 Cor. xii. 4, 
9, 28, for the Holy Ghost, the gift, was a 
personal and abiding possession, but the 
Xapio-jxaTa were for a time answering to 
special needs, and enjoyed by those to 
whom God distributed them. The word 
is used specially of the gift of the Holy 
Ghost by St. Luke four times in Acts, 
viii. 20, x. 45, xi. 17, but by no other, 
Evangelist (cf., however, Luke xi. 13), cf. 
Heb. vi. 4 (John iv. 10). 

Ver. 39. vpiv yop : the promise was 
made to the very men who had invoked 
upon themselves and upon their children, 
St. Matt, xxvii. 25, the blood of the 
Crucified. See Psalms of Solomon, viii., 
39 (Ryle and James' edition, p. 88). — 




&k Trpoo-icaXeonrjTai Kupios 6 0e6s Tquvcoc. 40. CTepois T€ Xoyois 
irXcioon Siefiap-rupeTO Kal irapcKaXei Xiyuv, Iw0r]Te diro ttjs ye^eds 
ttjs oxoXids TauTTjs- 4 1, ®l p.€> our do-jieVws 1 dTrooe|du.ei'oi t6i> 

1 a«ru.€vo>s EP, Syrr. (Pesh. and Hard.), Arm., Chrys. ; but om. by fr^ABCD 61, 
Vulg.. San., Boh., Aeth., Clem., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt. For airo- 
8«£aiA£V(H D substitutes wio-Tev<ravT«s, and Syr. Hard. mg„ Aug. add icai irio-Tev- 
<ravT«s. (Harris sees a Montanist addition, necessity of faith for baptism.) 

ttcLo-i tois cts n-aKpav : no occasion with 
Wendt and others to limit the words to 
the Jews of the Diaspora. It must not 
be forgotten that the Apostles were not 
surprised that the Gentiles should be 
admitted to the Christian Church, but 
only that they should be admitted with- 
out conforming to the rite of circum- 
cision. If we compare iii. 26, and Ephes. 
ii. 13, 17 (cf. Rom. x. 13), it would seem 
that no restriction of race was placed 
upon the declaration of the Gospel 
message, provided that it was made to 
the Jew first (as was always Paul's 
custom). Hilgenfeld interprets the words 
as referring beyond all doubt to the Gen- 
tiles, since vp.iv . . . vu.uv had already 
expressed the Diaspora Jews. But he 
contends that as ver. 26 plainly intimates 
that the address was delivered only to 
Israelites, the words in question are 
added by "the author to Theophilus". 
He therefore places them in brackets. 
Jungst in the same way thinks it well to 
refer them to the Redactor, and Feine 
refers them to Luke himself as Reviser. 
Weiss sees in the words an allusion to an 
O.T. passage which could only have been 
applied at first to the calling of the Gen- 
tiles, but which (in the connection in 
which it is here placed by the narrator) 
must be referred to the Jews of the 
Diaspora. It may well have been that 
(as in Holtzmann's view) St. Peter's audi- 
ence only thought of the Jews of the 
Diaspora, but we can see in his words a 
wider and a deeper meaning, cf. Isaiah 
v. 26, and cf. also Isaiah ii. 2, Zech. vi. 
15. Among the older commentators 
Oecumenius and Theophylact referred 
the words to the Gentiles. — Screws av 
7rpocrKaXe'crr|Tai Kvpio? 6 0eo$ ^|iuv. 
Wendt presses the T|p.uv to favour his 
view that St. Peter thinks only of the 
Jews and not of the Gentiles, since he 
speaks of " our God," but Blass catches 
the meaning much better in his com- 
ment: "t|u.wv Israelitarum, qui idem 
gentes ad se vocat ". This gives the true 
force of Trpoo-KaX., " shall call unto him " 
(so R.V.). Oecumenius also comments 
on the words as revealing the ttue peni- 

tence and charity of Peter, ^ V XT "y°-P °Tav 
tavTT}v KCtTaSiKcurg, ovk Iti cpOoveiv 

Ver. 40. ercpois re Xoyois TrXeiotruv 
T€ (not 8e), as so frequent in Acts ; 
" inducit quae similia cognataque sunt, 
Se diversa," Blass, in loco, and Gram- 
matik des N.G., p. 258. — 8up.ap-rvpa.T0 : 
the translation " testified," both in A. 
and R.V., hardly gives the full form of the 
word. Its frequent use in the LXX in 
the sense of protesting solemnly, cf. 
Deut. iv. 26, viii. 19, 1 Sam. viii. 9, Zech. 
iii. 7 (6), seems more in accordance with 
St. Peter's words, who here as elsewhere 
(x. 42, xliii. 5, xx. 21) was not simply 
acting as a witness paprupelv, but was 
also protesting against the false views ot 
those he was addressing. It must not, 
however, be forgotten that in other 
passages in the LXX the verb may mean 
to bear witness (see Hatch and Redpath, 
sub v.). In the N.T., as Wendt notes, 
it is used by St. Paul in the former sense 
of protesting solemnly in 1 Tim. v. 21, 
2 Tim. ii. 14, iv. 1. With this Mr. Page 
rightly compares its use in Acts xx. 23 
(cf. also v. 20,, and Luke 
xvi. 28. So too in classical writers. — 
irapcKaXci: the imperfect suggests the 
continuous exhortation which followed 
upon the Apostles' solemn protest (Weiss, 
in loco). — ttjs yevtas ttjs <tkoXios tcivttjs : 
the adjective is used to describe the 
rebellious Israelites in the wilderness, 
LXX, Deut. xxxii. 5 (and Ps. lxxvii. 8), a 
description used in part by our Lord 
Himself, Matt. xvii. 17, Luke ix. 41, and 
wholly by St. Paul, Phil. ii. 15. The 
correct translation "crooked," R.V. 
(which A.V. has in Luke iii. 5, Phil. ii. 
15), signifies perversity in turning oft 
from the truth, whilst the A.V. " un- 
toward" (so Tyndale) signifies rather 
backwardness in coming to the truth 
(Humphry, Commentary on R. V.), Hort, 
yudaistic Christianity , pp. 41, 42. 

Ver. 41. 01 (tir ovv : a truly Lucan 
formula, see i. 6. There is no anacolu- 
thon, but for the answering 8c see v. 43. 
The words therefore refer to those men- 
tioned in v. 37 ; in contrast to the three 

40— 42. 



X^yoc auTOu e)5aTTTtcr0Y)CTOi' • Kal irpoacTefl'no-ai' 1 rfj n^jjicpa. cKCinf] 
«)/uxai W<7€1 Tpi<T)(lXiat. 

42. *Ho-ae 8e TrpocrKapTepoGrrcs T»j StSaxTJ t<*>v dirooToXwy Kal ttj 

1 Trpo<r€T€eTj<rav ; after the verb ev inserted by fc^ABCD 15, 18, 61, Vulg., so Tisch., 
W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt, Hilg. 

thousand fear came upon every person, 
\J/vxi], so Mr. Page, on pJv ow, in loco. 
Mr. Rendall finds the answering Z4 in 
v. 42 ; two phases of events are con- 
trasted; three thousand converts are 
added in one day — they clave stedfastly 
to the Christian communion. See also 
his Appendix on aev ow, p. 162. — 
airoSeldpevoi tov Xo-yov ovtov : used in 
classical Greek, especially in Plato, of 
receiving a teacher or his arguments with 
acceptance, and in the N.T. of receiving 
with approval ; cf. xxiv. 3. The verb is 
only found in St. Luke in the N.T. with 
varying shades of meaning, twice in his 
Gospel, and five times in Acts in all 
parts. Only found in LXX in Apocryphal 
books, Tob. vii. 17, Judith xiii. 13 (but 
see Hatch and Redpath, sub v.), and in 
the Books of the Maccabees ; cf. xviii. 
27, xxi. 17, xxiv. 3, xxxviii. 30, see below. 
— ij3aTTTio-0T|orav. There is nothing in the 
text which intimates that the Baptism of 
the three thousand was performed, not 
on the day of Pentecost, but during the 
days which followed. At the same time 
it is not said that the Baptism of such a 
multitude took place at one time or in 
one place on the day of the Feast, or 
that the rite was performed by St. Peter 
alone. Felten allows that others besides 
the Twelve may have baptised. See his 
note, in loco, and also Zockler, Apostel- 
geschichte, p. 183. — Trpoo-eT€0Y)0-av, cf. 
ver. 47, and v. 14, xi. 24. In the LXX 
the same verb is used, Isa. xiv. 1, for a 
proselyte who is joined to Israel, so too 
Esth. ix. 27. — i|/vxoA, "souls," i.e., per- 
sons. See on ver. 43. — oxrei Tpio-xiXiai : 
the adverb is another favourite word of 
St. Luke (Friedrich) — it is not found in 
St. John, and in St. Mark only once, in 
St. Matthew three times, but in St. Luke's 
Gospel eight or nine times, and in Acts 
six or seven times. As in i. 15 the intro- 
duction of the adverb is against the sup- 
position that the number was a fictitious 
one. We cannot suppose that the in- 
fluence and the recollection of Jesus had 
vanished within a few short weeks with- 
out leaving a trace behind, and where 
the proclamation of Him as the Christ 
followed upon the wonderful gift of 
tongues, in which many of the people 

would see the inspiration of God and a 
confirmation given by Him to the claims 
made by the disciples, hearts and con- 
sciences might well be stirred and quick- 
ened — and the movement once begun 
was sure to spread (see the remarks of 
Spitta, Apostelgeschichte, p. 60, on the 
birthday of the Church, in spite of the 
suspicion with which he regards the 
number three thousand). 

Ver. 42. The growth of the Church 
not merely in numbers but in the in- 
crease of faith and charity. In R.V. by 
the omission of Kal before ttj KXdarci 
two pairs of particulars are apparently 
enumerated— the first referring to the 
close adherence of believers to the 
Apostles in teaching and fellowship, the 
second expressing their outward acts of 
worship ; or the first pair may be taken 
as expressing rather their relation to 
man, the second their relation to God 
(Nosgen). Dr. Hort, while pointing out 
that the first term r-jj SiSa^r) t«v diroo-- 
t6Xg>v (" the teaching," R.V., following 
Wycliffe ; cf. Matt. vii. 28, "doctrine," 
A.V., which would refer rather to a de- 
finite system, unless taken in the sense of 
the Latin doctrina, teaching) was obvi- 
ously Christian, so that the disciples 
might well be called scribes to the king- 
dom, bringing out of their treasures 
things new and old, the facts of the life 
of Jesus and the glory which followed, 
facts interpreted in the light of the Law 
and the Prophets, takes the next words 
ttj Koivwvia as separated altogether from 
twv dirooroXuv, " and with the com- 
munion " : Koivuvia, in Dr. Hort's view 
by parallelism with the other terms, ex- 
presses something more external and 
concrete than a spirit of communion ; it 
refers to the help given to the destitute 
of the community, not apparently in 
money, but in public meals, such as from 
another point of view are called "the, 
daily ministration " (cf. Acts vi. 2, 
Tpairc£ai$). There are undoubtedly in- 
stances of the employment of the word 
Koivwvia in this concrete sense, Rom. xv. 
26, 2 Cor. viii. 4, ix. 13, Heb. xiii. 26, 
but in each of these cases its meaning is 
determined by the context (and Zockler, 
amongst recent commentators, would so 




Kouwria * icai ttj KXdaei tou dpTou Kal tciis Trpoaeuxais- 43» eyeVcTO 
8e ird<rn \|»uxi] ^^P ?} iroWd ~e Te'paTa Kal o-npeia 8ia T<if divoa- 

1 koitt) kWci; om. koi ^*ABCD* 6i, so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt, 
Hilg., so Alford. icoivwvia ttjs KXacreus tov aprov, so d, Vulg., Sah. (so in Gig., 
Par. tov ap. ttjs k\.), of which Blass says " recte, nisi delenda t. kX.". But the 
Western readings look like attempts to remove a difficulty. 

restrict its meaning here). But, on the 
other hand, there are equally undoubted 
instances of koivwvio. referring to spiritual 
fellowship and concord, a fellowship in 
the spirit ; cf. 2 Cor. vi. 4, xiii. 14, Phil, 
ii. r, Gal. ii. g, 1 John i. 3, 6, 7 ; cf. also 
in classical writers, Arist., Ethic, viii., g, 
12, ev koivuvio. r\ <j>iXia iorC. Here, if 
the word can be separated from airoo-., 
it may be taken to include the inward 
fellowship and its outward manifesta- 
tion, ver. 44. May not a good parallel 
to this signification of the word be 
found in Phil. i. 5, where KOiruvta, 
whilst it signifies co-operation in the 
widest sense, including fellowship in 
sympathy, suffering and toil, also indi- 
cates the special and tangible manifesta- 
tion of this fellowship in the ready alms- 
giving and contributions of the Philippian 
Church ; see Lightfoot, Philippians, in 
loco. The word naturally suggests the 
community of goods, as Weizsacker 
points out, but as it stands here without 
any precise definition we cannot so 
limit it, and in his view Gal. ii. g gives 
the key to its meaning in the passage 
before us — the bond which united the 
fAa0T)Tcu was the consciousness of 
their belief in Christ, and in the name 
d8eX4>oi the relationship thus consti- 
tuted gained its complete expression. — 
ttj icXdo-ci tov apTov : no interpretation 
is satisfactory which forgets (as both 
Weizsacker and Holtzmann point out) 
that the author of Acts had behind him 
Pauline language and doctrine, and that 
we are justified in adducing the language 
of St. Paul in order to explain the words 
before us, cf. 1 Cor. x. 16, xi. 24, Acts 
xx. 7 (and xxvii. 35, Weizsacker). But 
if we admit this, we cannot consistently 
explain the expression of a mere common 
meal. It may be true that every such 
meal in the early days of the Church's 
first love had a religious significance, 
that it became a type and evidence of the 
kingdom of God amongst the believers, 
but St. Paul's habitual reference of the 
words before us to the Lord's Supper 
leads us to see in them here a reference to 
the commemoration of the Lord's death, 
although we may admit that it is altogether 

indisputable that this commemoration at 
first followed a common meal. That St. 
Paul's teaching as to the deep religious 
significance of the breaking of the bread 
carries us back to a very early date is 
evident from the fact that he speaks to 
the Corinthians of a custom long estab- 
lished ; cf. " Abendmahl I." in Hauck's 
Real-Encyklopadie, heft i. (1896), p. 23 
ff., on the evidential value of this testi- 
mony as against Julicher's and Spitta's 
attempt to show that the celebration ot 
the Lord's Supper in the early Church 
rested upon no positive command of 
Jesus. Weizsacker's words are most 
emphatic: "Every assumption of its 
having originated in the Church from 
the recollection of intercourse with Him 
at table, and the necessity felt for re- 
calling His death is precluded — the cele- 
bration must rather have been generally 
observed from the beginning " Apostolic 
Age, ii., p. 279, E.T., and cf. Das apostol. 
Zeitalter, p. 594, second edition (1892), 
Beyschlag, N eutestamentliche Theol., i., 
p. 155. Against any attempt to inter- 
pret the words under discussion of mere 
benevolence towards the poor (Isaiah 
lviii. 7) Wendt regards xx. 6, 7 (and also 
xxvii. 35) as decisive. Weiss refers to 
Luke xxiv. 30 for an illustration of the 
words, but the act, probably the habitual 
act of Jesus, which they express there, 
does not exhaust their meaning here. 
Spitta takes vi. 2, Siaxovciv Tpairc^ais 
as = kXclo-is fiprov, an arbitrary inter- 
pretation, see also below. The Vul- 
gate connects rjj tcXdo-Ei tov apTov with 
the preceding icoivuvia, and renders in 
communicatione fractionis panis, a ren- 
dering justified in so far as the Koivuvia 
has otherwise no definite meaning, and 
by the fact that the brotherly intercourse 
of Christians specially revealed itself in 
the fractio panis, cf. 1 Cor. x. 16, and 
Blass, in loco, and also P where he reads 
Kal TT) KOlVCdvCa TTJ9 icXdo-E(i>s tov apTov. 
But whilst Felten refers to the evidence 
of the Vulgate, and also to that of the 
Peshitto, which renders the words before 
us " in the breaking of the Eucharist " 
(so too in xx. 7), it is worthy of note that 
he refuses to follow the usual Roman 

"3— 45- 



ioXojv lylvero. 1 44. Travres 8e ot moTcuocTes rjo-av em to oiuto, ica! 
elxoc 2 aTracTa KOiva, 45« 3 icott Ta KTrjfiaTa icai Tas UTrdp|eis eiriTrpao*- 

1 In ver. 43 fc^ACE 13, many cursives, Vulg., Syr. Pesh,, Boh. add ev Upovo-aX/qp. 
(which is added by D to twv airoo-r. in ver. 42); so Tisch., R.V. marg. But the 
addition is not found in BD 1, 31, 61, Sah., Syr. Hard., Arm., Aeth., Chrys. ; so 
W.H., R.V. text, Weiss, Wendt. ^AC 40, Vulg., Boh. add also <j>o(3os t« tjv peya? 
eiri iravTas, so Tisch. ; but omitted by BDE, Sah., Syrr. (P. and H.), Arm., Aeth., 
Chrys. — perhaps assimilation to iv. 33, v. 5 ; it has been already expressed in the 
first clause of the verse, and as the authorities for its retention are mainly the same 
as for ev Up., it would seem that the former addition may also be rejected. 

2 T|<rav €iri to oaito icai eixov, so Tisch., Hilg. ; but B 57, Orig., so W.H., Weiss, 
Wendt have only em to ovto eix° v — *lo-av and icai might easily be added, but their 
falling out is difficult to imagine. 

3 D (cf. Pesch.) reads ko.i 00-01 icTTjuaTa eix°v tj v-irapf ci$ emirpao-Kov ; so Hilg. Be- 
fore waai D, Gig., Par. insert kcG' Tjpepav. For ko6oti . . . eixe D reads tois ov tis 
xp«iav eix«v (tois xP €iav exovaiv in (3) ; cf. iv. 35. The remarks of Belser and Weiss 
on the passage should be compared — the former sees in P a more precise account 
and, at the same time, a more moderate account of the "community of goods" at 
Jerusalem than is sometimes derived from this passage (see comments), whilst here 
Weiss sees in D nothing but fruitless and even senseless emendations. 

interpretation, viz., that the words point 
to a communion in one kind only, Apos- 
telgcschichte, p. 94. It is possible that 
the introduction of the article before at 
least one of the words ry\ ic\ao-ei (cf. 
R.V.) emphasises here the Lord's Supper 
as distinct from the social meal with which 
it was connected, whilst ver. 46 may point 
to the social as well as to the devotional 
bearing of the expression (cf. Zockler, note 
in loco), and this possibility is increased 
if we regard the words twv airoo-roXuv as 
characterising the whole sentence in ver. 
42. But unless in both verses some 
deeper meaning was attached to the 
phrases t^ tc\do"ei tov apxov — kXwvtcs 
apTov, it seems superfluous, as Schottgen 
remarked, to introduce the mention of 
common food at the time of a community 
of goods. No doubt St. Chrysostom (so 
Oecum., Theophyl.) and Bengel inter- 
pret the words as simply = victusfrugalis, 
but elsewhere St. Chrysostom speaks of 
them, or at least when joined with 
Koivuvia, as referring to the Holy Com- 
munion (see Alford's note in loco), and 
Bengel's comment on ver. 42 must be 
compared with what he says on ver. 46. 
— Kal Tats irpoo-cvxais, " and [in] the 
prayers " R.V. Dr. Hort suggests that 
the prayers may well have been Christian 
prayers at stated hours, answering to 
Jewish prayers, and perhaps replacing 
the synagogue prayers (not recognised in 
the Law), as the Apostles' "teaching" 
had replaced that of the scribes (jfudais- 
tic Christianity, p. 44, and Ecclesia, p. 
45). But the words may also be taken 

to include prayers both new and old, cf. 
iv. 24, James v. 13 (Eph. ii. ig, Col. iii. 
16), and also Acts iii. 1, where Peter and 
John go up to the Temple "at the hour 
of prayer," cf. Wendt, Die Lehre Jesu, 
ii., p. 159. 

Ver. 43. irao-rj ^vxij, i.e., every 
person, and so iii. 23, Hebraistic, cf. 

t2}Q^~v3 Lev. vii. 17, xvii. 12, etc., and 

cf. 1 Mace. ii. 38. In ver. 41 the plural 
is used rather like the Latin capita in 
enumerations, cf. Acts vii. 14, xxvii. 37, 
and LXX, Gen. xlvi. 15, Exod. i. 5, Num. 
xix. 18, etc. But Winer-Moulton (p. 194, 
xxii. 7) would press the meaning of ^x 1 ! 
here, and contends that the fear was pro- 
duced in the heart, the seat of the feelings 
and desires, so that its use is no mere 
Hebraism, although he admits that in 
Rom. xiii. 1 (1 Peter iii. 20) the single 
irao-a ij/vxtj = every person, but see I.e. 
— 4>o^os t cf. iii. 10, i.e., upon the non- 
believers, for " perfect love casteth out 
fear ". Friedrich notes amongst the 
characteristics of St. Luke that in his 
two books one of the results of miracu- 
lous powers is fear. Here the <j>of?os 
means rather the fear of reverential awe 
or the fear which acted quasi freno, 
(Calvin), so that the early growth of the 
Church was not destroyed prematurely 
by assaults from without. There is 
surely nothing inconsistent here with 
ver. 47, but Hilgenfeld ascribes the 
whole of ver. 43 to his " author to 
Theophilus," partly on the ground of 
this supposed inconsistency, partly be- 

9 6 



koi', Kal Sieuc'pi^oi' auTa iraai, Ka0<m ay ti$ xp^iav €*x€ • 46. * Ka8' 
rWpav tc Trpoo-KapT€pouvT€S 6p.06ufi.a86c iv tu tepw, k\u>vt€S T€ kot' 

1 D omits ko.6' T)u.«pav (see previous note) and reads iravTes re irpoo-Kapxcpovv, 
perhaps for additional clearness, or perhaps some confusion (see also Weiss's 
comments). D reads also icai KaToiKovaav eiri to avro— D 2 del. av, and so Blass 
corrects icai k&t oikovs Tjo-av ; so too Hilg. Belser sees in kot' olkovs an answer 
to the objection that kot' oikov in a text refers to the house of assembly of the 
Christians, and that as the number 3000 could not assemble in a single dwelling it 
must be an exaggeration — no doubt if Luke had meant one house of assembly he 
would have written Kara tov oikov, but the reading tcaT oikovs puts the matter beyond 
a doubt, and shows how tear oikov must be taken as = vicissim per domos. 

cause the mention of miracles is out 
of place. But it is nowhere stated, as 
Hilgenfeld and Weiss presuppose, that 
the healing of the lame man in iii. 1 ff. 
was the first miracle performed (see note 
there, and Wendt and Blass). 

Ver. 44. iravTes 8e k.t.X., cf. iii. 24, 
all, i.e., not only those who had recently 
joined, ver. 41. — Ittito axiro, see note on 
i. 15 ; here of place. Theophylact takes 
it of the unanimity in the Church, but 
this does not seem to be in accordance 
with the general use of the phrase in 
the N.T. = ouov, lirl t6v avTov towov 
(Hesychius). Blass points out that lirl 
to avTo demands tjo-ov, and if we omit 
this word (W.H.) we must supply ovres 
with !ir! to aviTo, as lirl t6 atiTo elxov 
could not stand (W.H.). The difficulty 
raised by Hilgenfeld, Wendt, Holtzmann, 
Overbeck, in this connection as to the 
number is exaggerated, whether we meet 
it or not by supposing that some of this 
large number were pilgrims who had 
come up to the Feast, but who had now 
returned to their homes. For in the 
first place, lirl to avTo cannot be taken 
to mean that all the believers were 
always assembled in one and the same 
place. The reading in p\ ver. 46, may 
throw light upon the expression in this 
verse kui kut' oikovs rjo-av lirl to awo, 
or the phrase may be referred to their 
assembling together in the Temple, ver. 
46, and v. 12 may be quoted in support 
of this, where all the believers apparently 
assemble in Solomon's Porch. It is 
therefore quite arbitrary to dismiss the 
number here or in iv. 4 as merely due to 
the idealising tendency of the Apostles, 
or to the growth of the Christian legend. 
— eiX 0V awavTa KOivd, "held all things 
common," R.V. Blass and Weiss refer 
these words with lirl to axn-6 to the 
assembling of the Christians together for 
common meals and find in the statement 
the exact antithesis to the selfish conduct 
in 1 Cor. xi. 20, 21. But the words also 

demand a much wider reference. On 
the " Community of Goods," see ad- 
ditional note at end of chapter. 

Ver. 45. Ta KTi^paxa . . . tols tnrdpleis : 
according to their derivation, the former 
word would mean that which is acquired, 
and the latter that which belongs to a 
man for the time being. But in ordinary 
usage KTijuaTa was always used of real 
property, fields, lands, cf. v. 1, whilst 
vn-dp£cis was used of personal property 
( = to virdpxovTa in Heb. x. 34). This 
latter word, to virdpxovTa, was a fa- 
vourite with St. Luke, who uses it eight 
times in his Gospel and in Acts iv. 32. 
No doubt KTTJpa is used in LXX for field 
and vineyard, Prov. xxiii. 10, xxxi. 16, but 
the above distinction was not strictly ob- 
served, for to virdpxovTa, virap^is, are 
used both of movable and immovable 
property (see Hatch and Redpath, sub 
v.). — eiri-irpao-Kov : all three verbs are in 
the imperfect, and if we remember that 
this tense may express an action which 
is done often and continuously without 
being done universally or extending 
to a complete accomplishment (cf. iv. 
34, xviii. 8, Mark xii. 41), considerable 
light may be thrown upon the picture 
here drawn (see Blass, Grammatik des 
N. G., p. 186, on the tense and this 
passage) : " And kept getting . . . and 
distributing to all, as any man [tis] 
[not ' every man,' A.V.] had need ". See 
Rendall, Acts, in loco, and on iv. 32, 
and Expositor, vii., p. 358, 3rd series. — 
kciGoti : peculiar to St. Luke ; in Gospel 
twice, and in Acts four times. av makes 
the clause more indefinite : it is found 
in relative clauses after os, 5o-tis, etc., 
with the indicative— here it is best ex- 
plained as signifying " accidisse aliquid 
nor. certo quodam tempore, sed quoties- 
cumque occasio ita ferret," quoted by 
Wendt from Herm., ad Vig., p. 820 ; cf. 
Mark vi. 56, Blass, in loco, and Viteau, 
Le Grec du N. T., p. 142 (1893). Grimm 
renders ko,8oti dv here " in so far," or- 

4 6. 



" so often as," " according as ". Spitta 
refers w. 45-47 to the Apostles only, 
but to justify this he is obliged to refer 
ver. 44 to his reviser. Hilgenfeld brackets 
the whole verse, referring it to his " author 
to Theophilus," retaining ver. 44, whilst 
Weiss also refers the whole verse to a 
reviser, who introduced it in imitation 
of St. Luke's love of poverty as indicated 
in his Gospel. But by such expedients 
the picture of the whole body of the 
believers sharing in the Apostles' life 
and liberality is completely marred. 

Ver. 46. 6jj.o0-ujj.a86v, see note on i. 
14. — irpoo-KapTepovvTes, cf. i. 14. — iv tw 
Upa» : we are not told how far this parti- 
cipation in the Temple extended, and 
mention is only made in one place, in 
xxi. 26, of any kind of connection between 
the Apostles or any other Christians and 
any kind of sacrificial act. But that 
one peculiar incident may imply that 
similar acts were not uncommon, and 
their omission by the Christians at Jeru- 
salem might well have led to an open 
breach between them and their Jewish 
countrymen (Hort, Judaistic Christi- 
anity, pp. 44, 45). No doubt the Apostles 
would recommend their teaching to the 
people by devout attendance at the 
Temple, cf. iii. 1, v. 20, 42, like other 
Jews. — kot' oIkov, R.V. " at home " (so 
in A.V. margin). But all other English 
versions except Genevan render the words 
"from house to house" (Vulgate, circa 
domos), and this latter rendering is quite 
possible, cf. Luke viii. 1, Acts xv. 21, xx. 
20. If we interpret the words of the 
meeting of the believers in a private 
house (privatim in contrast to the Iv tu 
Up<I>, palam), cf. Rom. xvi. 3, 5, 1 Cor. 
xvi. 19, Col. iv. 15, Philemon 2, it does 
not follow that only one house is here 
meant, as Wendt and Weiss suppose by 
referring to i. 13 (see on the other hand 
Blass, Holtzmann, Zockler, Spitta, Hort) 
— there may well have been private houses 
open to the disciples, e.g., the house of 
John Mark, cf. Dr. Edersheim, Sketches of 
Jewish Social Life, pp. 259, 260. Hil- 
genfeld, with Overbeck, rejects the 
explanation given on the ground 
that for this kolt' oikovs, or Kara tovs 
oikovs, would be required — an argument 
which does not however get over the 
fact that tccn-a may be used distributively 
with the singular — according to him all 
is in order if ii. 42 follows immediately 
upon 41a, i.e., he drops 41b altogether, and 
proceeds to omit also the whole of vv. 
43 and 45. — k\uvt€9 apTOv : the question 
has been raised as to whether this ex- 
pression has the same meaning here as 

in ver. 42, or whether it is used here of 
merely ordinary meals. The additional 
words neTe\op.|3avov Tpo<j>TJs have been 
taken to support this latter view, but on 
the other hand if the two expressions are 
almost synonymous, it is difficult to see 
why the former kXu>vt«s dprov should 
have been introduced here at all, cf. 
Knabenbauer in loco. It is not satis- 
factory to lay all the stress upon the 
omission of the article before op-rov, and 
to explain the expression of ordinary 
daily meals, an interpretation adopted 
even by the Romanist Beelen and others. 
In the Didache the expression icXdo-aTg 
aprov, chap. xiv. 1, certainly refers to the 
Eucharist, and in the earlier chap, ix., 
where the word icXdo-p.a occurs twice in 
the sense of broken bread, it can scarcely 
refer to anything less than the Agape 
(Salmon, Introd., p. 565, and Gore, The 
Church and the Ministry, p. 414, on the 
value of the Eucharistic teaching in the 
Didache). — pcrcX. : the imperf. denotes a 
customary act, the meaning of the verb 
with the gen. as here is frequently found 
in classical Greek ; cf. LXX, Wisdom 
xviii. 9, 4 Mace. viii. 8, AR., and xvi. 
18. — iv ayaXXiao-ei : exulting, bounding 
joy ; Vulgate, exultatione, " extreme joy," 
Grimm, used by St. Luke twice in his 
Gospel, i. 14, 44 — only twice elsewhere 
in the N.T., Heb. i. 9, quotation, and in 
Jude, ver. 24. The word, though not 
occurring in classical Greek, was a favou- 
rite in the LXX, where it occurs no less 
than eighteen times in the Psalms alone. 
This "gladness" is full of significance 
— it is connected with the birth of the 
forerunner by the angel's message to 
Zacharias, Luke i. 14; the cognate verb 
d-yaXXidw,, common to St. Luke's 
Gospel and the Acts, denotes the spiritual 
and exultant joy with which the Church 
age after age has rejoiced in the Song of 
the Incarnation, Luke i. 47. — oi4>«Xottjti 
KapSias : rightly derived from a priv. 
and <f>eXXcvs, stony ground = a smooth 
soil, free from stones (but see Zockler, in 
loco, who derives d<f>eXct.a, the noun in 
use in Greek writers, from 4>e\a, ireXXa, 
Macedon. a stone). The word itself does 
not occur elsewhere, but d^e'Xcia, a^cXijs, 
d<f>6Xu« are all found (Wetstein), and 
just as the adj. d^cXijs signified a man 
airXovs iv t» |3ia>, so the noun here use'd 
might well be taken as equivalent to 
oitXottjs (Overbeck) "in simplicity of 
heart," stmplicitate, Bengel. Wendt 
compares the words of Demosthenes, 
o.(J>cXt)s teal irappT)o-ias pco-rd?. 

Ver. 47. alvoiivTes tov 0cov : a favou- 
rite expression with St. Luke, cf. Gospel 

9 8 



oIkok apTOf, p.€T€Xdu.0afOk Tpo<}>TJs e^ dyaXXidaei ical d<J;cX6TY]Ti 
KapSias, 47. alyourres t6c 0e6f Kal ?x o, ' TC S X&P iy "^P ? oXof to/ 

ii. 13, 20, xix. 37, Acts Hi. 8, 9, else- 
where only in Rom. xv. 11 (a quotation), 
and Rev. xix. 5, with dative of person, 
W.H. The praise refers not merely to 
their thanksgivings at meals, but is 
characteristic of their whole devotional 
life both in public and private ; and their 
life of worship and praise, combined with 
their liberality and their simplicity of 
life, helped to secure for them the result 
given in the following words, and an un- 
molested hearing in the Temple " Hunc 
inveniunt (favorem) qui Deum laudant " 
Bengel. aivc'u is very frequent in the 
LXX, and nearly always of the praise 
of God, but cf. Gen. xlix. 8, Prov. 
xxxi. 28, 30, 31, Ecclus. xliv. 1, etc. — 
«?X°vt€s xdpiv : if the life of the Church 
at this stage has been compared with 
that of her divine Master, inasmuch as it 
increased in wisdom and stature, another 
point of likeness may be found in the 
fact that the Church, like Christ, was in 
favour with God and man. — x < *P LV : ver y 
frequent in St. Luke's Gospel and the 
Acts (Friedrich), only three times in the 
Gospel of St. John, and not at all in 
St. Matthew or St. Mark. In the O.T. it 
is often used of finding favour in the sight 
of God, and in the N.T. in a similar 
sense, cf. Luke i. 30, Acts vii. 46. It is 
also used in the O.T. of favour, kind- 
ness, goodwill, especially from a superior 
to an inferior (Gen. xviii. 3, xxxii. 5, 
etc.), so too in the N.T., here, and in 
Acts vii. 10. See further note on Acts 
xiv. 3. In Luke's Gospel eight times, in 
Acts seventeen times. See also Plum- 
mer's full note on Luke iv. 22, Sanday 
and Headlam's Romans, p. 10, and 
Grimm-Thayer, sub v. Rendall would 
render " giving Him thanks before all 
the people," and he refers to the fact 
that the phrase is always so rendered 
elsewhere (though once wrongly trans- 
lated, Heb xii. 28). But the phrase is 
also found in LXX, Exodus xxxiii. 12, 1 
Esdras vi. 5 (see also Wetstein, in loco) 
in the sense first mentioned. — 6 8c 
Kvpio; irpocreTiOci, i.e., the Lord Christ, 
cf. ver. 36 (as Holtzmann, Wendt, 
Weiss, amongst others). The pure and 
simple life of the disciples doubtless 
commended them to the people, and 
made it easier for them to gain con- 
fidence, and so converts, but the growth 
of the Church, St. Luke reminds us, was 
not the work of any human agency or 
attractiveness. — toxis cru>£o^£vov$ : natur- 

ally connected with the prophecy in ver. 
21 (cf. v. 40), so that the work of salva- 
tion there attributed to Jehovah by the 
Old Testament Prophet is here the work 
of Christ the inference is again plain 
with regard to our Lord's divinity. The 
expression is rightly translated in R.V. 
(so too in 1 Cor. i. 18, 2 Cor. ii. 15. 
See Burton, Moods and Tenses in N. T. 
Greek, pp. 57, 58). It has nothing to do, 
as Wetstein well remarks, with the 
secret counsels of God, but relates to 
those who were obeying St. Peter's com- 
mand in ver. 40. An apt parallel is given 
by Mr. Page from Thuc, vii., 44. 

Gift of Tongues, ii. 4. XaXeiv cTcpais 
■yXwo-crais. — There can be no doubt that 
St. Luke's phrase (cf. yXiio-crais icatvais, 
Mark xvi. 17, W.H., margin, not text), 
taken with the context, distinctly asserts 
that the Apostles, if not the whole 
Christian assembly (St. Chrysostom, 
St. Jerome, St. Augustine, including the 
hundred-and-twenty), received the power 
of speaking in foreign languages, and 
that some of their hearers at all events 
understood them, w. 8, n (^(ACTepais). 
(On the phrase as distinguished from 
those used elsewhere in Acts and in 
1 Cor., see Grimm-Thayer, sub v., 
yXoJTTa 2, and Blass, Acta Apost., p. 50, 
" yXwTTa etiam ap. att. per se est lingua 
peregrina vel potius vocabulum pere- 
grinum ".) Wendt and Matthias, who 
have recently given us a lengthy account 
of the events of the first Christian Pente- 
cost, both hold that this speaking with 
tongues is introduced by St. Luke him- 
self, and that it is a legendary embel- 
lishment from his hand of what actually 
took place ; the speaking with tongues 
at Pentecost was simply identical with 
the same phenomenon described else- 
where in x. 46, xix. 6, and in 1 Cor. xii.- 
xiv. This is plain from St. Peter's own 
words in xi. 15, 17 ; so in xix. 6, the 
speaking with tongues is the immediate 
result of the outpouring of the Spirit. 
So too' Wendt lays stress upon the 
fact that St. Paul says XaXeiv yXuxrcrais 
or ■yXwo-o-rj, but not XaX. eTe'p. vX. The 
former was evidently the original mode 
of describing the phenomenon, to which 
Luke recurs in his own description in x. 
46 and xix. 6, whereas in the passage 
before us his language represents the 
miraculous enhancement of the events ol 
Pentecost. M'Giffert, in the same way, 
thinks that the writer of Acts, far re- 




moved rirom the events, could hardly avoid 
investing even the common phenomena 
of the Glossolalia with marvel and 
mystery. Wendt however admits that 
this embellishment was already accom- 
plished by Christian tradition before 
Luke. But if St. Luke must have had 
every means of knowing from St. Paul 
the character of the speaking with 
tongues at Corinth, it does not seem un- 
fair to maintain that he also had means 
of knowing from the old Palestinian 
Christians, who had been in union with 
the Church at Jerusalem from the be- 
ginning, e.g., from a John Mark, or a 
Mnason (apxatos (laO-rjTTJs, xxi. 16), the 
exact facts connected with the great 
outpouring of the Spirit on the day of 
Pentecost (Schmid, Biblische Theologie, 
pp. 278, 279). But it is further to be 
noted that Wendt by no means denies 
that there was a miraculous element, as 
shown in the outpouring of the Spirit, in 
the events of the Pentecostal Feast, but 
that he also considers it quite unlikely 
that Luke's introduction of a still further 
miraculous element was prompted by a 
symbolising tendency, a desire to draw a 
parallel between the Christian Pentecost 
and the miraculous delivery of the Law, 
according to the Jewish tradition that 
the one voice which proceeded from 
Sinai divided into seventy tongues, and 
was heard by the seventy nations of the 
world, each in their mother tongHe (so 
Zeller, Pfleiderer, Hilgenfeld, Spitta, 
Jiingst and Matthias, and so apparently 
Clemen in his " Speaking with Tongues," 
Expository Times, p. 345, 1899). But in 
the first place there is no convincing evi- 
dence at the early date of the Christian 
Pentecost of any connection in Jewish 
tradition between the Feast of Pentecost 
and the giving of the Law on Sinai (cf. 
Schmid, Biblische Theologie, p. 286 ; 
Hamburger, Real-Encyclopddie des jfud- 
entums, i., 7, 1057, and Holtzmann, 
Apostelgeschichte, p. 330), and it is signi- 
ficant that neither Philo nor Josephus 
make any reference to any such connec- 
tion ; and in the next place it is .. . . ange, as 
Wendt himself points out, that if Luke 
had started with the idea of the impor- 
tance of any such symbolism, no reference 
should be made to it in the subsequent 
address of Peter, whereas even in the 
catalogue of the nations there is no re- 
ference of any kind to the number 
seventy ; the number actually given, w. 
9, 11, might rather justify the far- 
fetched notice of Holtzmann («. s., p. 
331), that a reference is meant to the 
sixteen grandson? of Noah, Gen. x. i, 2, 

6, 21. Certainly Heb. il. 2-4 cannot, 
as Schmid well points out against 
Holtzmann, lead to any such con- 
nection of ideas as the pcpurpol 
irvEvp.. £7. are evidently the distribu- 
tion of the gifts of the Spirit. We 
may readily admit that the miracle on 
the birthday of the Christian Church 
was meant to foreshadow the universal 
progress of the new faith, and its message 
for all mankind without distinction of 
nation, position, or age. But even if the 
Jewish tradition referred to above was in 
existence at this early date, we have still 
to consider whether the narrative in 
Acts could possibly be a copy of it, or 
dependent upon it. According to the 
tradition, a voice was to be expected 
from Heaven which would be understood 
by different men in their mother tongues, 
but in our narrative the Apostles them- 
selves speak after the manner of men in 
these tongues. For to suppose that the 
Apostles all spoke one and the same 
language, but that the hearers were 
enabled to understand these utterances, 
each in his own language, is not only to 
do violence to the narrative, but simply 
to substitute one miraculous incident for 
another. Nor again, as Wendt further 
admits, is there any real ground for 
seeing in the miraculous event under 
consideration a cancelling of the con- 
fusion of tongues at Babel which resulted 
from rebellion against God, for the narra- 
tive does not contain any trace of the 
conception of a unity of language to 
which the Jewish idea appears to have 
tended as a contrast to the confusion 
of Babel (Test, xii., Patr., Jud., xxv.). 
The unity is not one of uniformity of 
speech but of oneness of Spirit and in 
the Spirit. At the same time there was 
a peculiar fitness in the fact that the first 
and most abundant bestowal of this 
divine gift should be given at a Feast 
which was marked above all others by 
the presence of strangers from distant 
lands, that a sign should thus be given 
to them that believed not, and that the 
firstfruits of a Gentile harvest should be 
offered by the Spirit to the Father (Iren. , 
Adv. Haer, iii., 17), an assurance to the 
Apostles of the greatness and universality 
of the message which they were com- 
missioned to deliver. But there is no 
reason to suppose that this power of 
speaking in foreign languages was a per- 
manent gift. In the first place the 
Greek language was known throughout 
the Roman Empire, and in the next 
place Acts xiv. 11 (see in loco) seems to 
forbid any such view. The speaking 




Xaov'. 1 6 8c Kupios irpocreTidei Toils (7w£op,eVous Ka0' Tjpe'pae rrj 
exicXno-ia. 2 

1 tov Xaov ; D has tov koo-uov. Nestle and Chase point out Syriac as probable 
source ; the former, with Blass, thinking that St. Luke first of all translated the 
word wrongly, Koo-ftov, and corrected it in later edition to Xaov, whilst Chase gives 
the variation a much later origin. Harris supposes that the translator first intro- 
duced " mundum " (cf. " tout le monde ") and thence it crept into the Greek. Belser 
finds no need for Syriac influence, as St. Luke in revising might easily substitute 
" people " for the more general term " world ". Some Syriac influence may have 
been at work, or possibly a corruption of the Greek may be suggested. Hilg. also 
has Koo-pov. See further Dalman, Die Worte jfesu, p. 54. 

2 t[) €kk\tio-io. cm to ewrro (iii.) EP, Syrr. (P. and H.) ; but for omitting Tn ckkX. 
and concluding ii. with eiri to o/uto fr^ABCG 61, Vulg., Sah., Boh., Arm., Aeth., so 
Bengel, Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt. The T.R. was followed by Meyer, 
De Wette, Nosgen, on account of the extreme difficulty of the proposed correction, 
but the latter is too well attested. Hilg. has eiri to o,vto ev tr ckkXtjo-io, so D. 

with tongues in Acts ii. and in other 
passages of the N.T. may be classed as 
identical in so far as each was the effect 
of the divine rivevpa, each a miraculous 
spiritual gift, marking a new epoch of 
spiritual life. But in Acts we have what 
we have not elsewhere — the speaking in 
foreign tongues — this was not the case 
in Corinth ; there the speaking with 
tongues was absolutely unintelligible, it 
could not be understood without an in- 
terpreter, i.e., without another gift of the 
divine Spirit, viz., interpretation, 1 Cor. 
xii. 10, 30 (the word unknown inserted in 
A.V. in 1 Cor. xiv. is unfortunate), and 
the fact that the Apostle compares the 
speaking with tongues to a speaking in 
foreign languages shows that the former 
was itself no speaking in foreign tongues, 
since two identical things do not admit 
of comparison (Schmid, u. s., pp. 288, 28a). 

Peter might well express his belief 
that Cornelius and those who spoke 
with tongues had also received the Holy 
Ghost, cf. x. 44, xi. 17, 24, in loco ; but it 
does not follow that the gift bestowed 
upon them was identical with that be- 
stowed at Pentecost — there were diver- 
sities of gifts from the bounty of the One 
Spirit. Felten, Apostelgeschichte, p. 78 ; 
Evans in Speaker's Commentary on 1 Cor., 
p. 334; Plumptre, B.D. 1 "Tongues, Gift 
of" ; Weizsacker, Apostolic Age, ii., pp. 
272, 273, E.T., and Feine, Eine Vorkano- 
nische Ueberlieferung des Ltikas, n., p. 
167 ; Zockler, Apostelgeschichte, p. 177 ; 
Page, Acts of the Apostles, note on chap, 
ii., 4; and A. Wright, Some N. T. Pro- 
blems, p. 277 ff. 

The objection urged at length by 
Wendt and Spitta that foreign lan- 
guages could not have been spoken, since 
in that case there was no occasion to 

accuse the Apostles of drunkenness, but 
that ecstatic incoherent utterances of 
devotion and praise might well have 
seemed to the hearers sounds produced 
by revelry or madness (cf. 1 Cor. xiv. 
23), is easily met by noting that the utter- 
ances were not received with mockery 
by all but only by some, the word cTepoi 
apparently denoting quite a different 
class of hearers, who may have been un- 
acquainted with the language spoken, 
and hence regarded the words as an un- 
intelligible jargon. 

Spitta attempts to break up Acts ii. 
1-13 into two sources, i.», 4, 12, 13, 
belonging to A, and simply referring 
to a Glossolalia like that at Corinth, 
whilst the other verses are assigned 
to B and the Redactor, and contain 
a narrative which could only have been 
derived from the Jewish tradition men- 
tioned above, and introducing the 
notion of foreign tongues at a date 
when the Glossolalia had ceased to exist, 
and so to be understood. Spitta refers 
<rv(4'7rXtjpoi)o-0at ii. 1 to the filling up of 
the number of the Apostles in chap, i., 
so that his source A begins ical ev to» 
OTifnrX. . . . eirXTjcfrijo-av iravTes ir. ay.} 
Apostelgeschichte, p. 52. It is not sur- 
prising that Hilgenfeld should speak of 
the narrative as one which cannot be 
thus divided, upon which as he says 
Spitta has in vain essayed his artificial 

Community of Goods. — The key to the 
two passages, ii. 42 ff. and iv. 32 ff., is to 
be found in the expression in which they 
both agree, occurring in ii. 45 and iv. 35, 
KaOori ov tis xP c ^ av '^X ** Such ex- 
pressions indicate, as we have seen, not 
reckless but judicious charity (see also 
Ramsay, St. Paul, etc., p. 373, and„ 




reading in D, ii., 45); they show wise 
management, as in early days St. Chry- 
sostom noted in commenting on the 
words, so that the Christians did not act 
recklessly like many philosophers among 
the Greeks, of whom some gave up their 
lands, others cast great quantities of 
money into the sea, which was no con- 
tempt of riches, but only folly and mad- 
ness (Horn., vii.). Not that St. Luke's 
glowing and repeated description (on St. 
Luke's way of sometimes repeating him- 
self as here, see Harris, Four Lectures on 
the Western Text, p. 85) is to be confined 
to the exercise of mere almsgiving on the 
part of the Church. Both those who 
had, and those who had not, were alike 
the inheritors of a kingdom which could 
only be entered by the poor in spirit, 
alike members of a family and a house- 
hold in which there was one Master, 
even Christ, in Whose Name all who 
believed were brethren. In this poverty 
of spirit, in this sense of brotherhood, 
" the poor man knew no shame, the rich 
no haughtiness" (Chrys.). 

But whilst men were called upon to 
give ungrudgingly, they were not called 
upon to give of necessity : what each one 
had was still his own, to. wirapxovTa 
avT<i, iv. 32, although not even one (ovS« 
tis) of them reckoned it so ; the daily 
ministration in vi. 1 seems to show that 
no equal division of property amongst 
all was intended ; the act of Barnabas 
was apparently one of charity rather than 
of communism, for nothing is said of an 
absolute surrender of all that he had ; the 
act of Ananias and Sapphira was entirely 
voluntary, although it presented itself 
almost as a duty (Ramsay, u. s.) ; Mark's 
mother still retains her home at Jerusa- 
lem, xii. 12, and it would seem that 
Mnason too had a dwelling there (see on 
xxi. 16). At Joppa, ix. 36, 39, and at 
Antioch, xi. 29, there was evidently no 
absolute equality of earthly possessions 
— Tabitha helps the poor out of her own 
resources, and every man as he prospered 
sent his contributions to the Church at 

It is sometimes urged that this en- 
thusiasm of charity and of the spirit 
(ev6ovcria<ru<fc, as Blass calls it), which 
filled at all events the Church at Jeru- 
salem, was due to the expectation of 
Christ's immediate return, and that in 
the light of that event men regarded 
lands and possessions as of no account, 
even if ordinary daily work was not neg- 
lected (O. Holtzmann, Neutest. Zeit- 
geschichte, p. 233). But it is strange 
that if this is the true account of the 

action of the Church at Jerusalem, a 
similar mode of life and charity should 
not have found place in other Churches, 4 
e.g., in the Church at Thessalonica, 
where the belief in Christ's speedy 
return . was so overwhelmingly felt 
(Felten). No picture could be more 
extraordinary than that drawn by O. 
Holtzmann of the Christian Church at 
Jerusalem, driven by the voice of Chris- 
tian prophets to enjoin an absolutely 
compulsory community of goods in ex- 
pectation of the nearness of the Parousia, 
and of Ananias and Sapphira as the 
victims of this tyrannical product ot 
fanaticism and overwrought excitement. 
It is a relief to turn from such a strange 
perversion of the narrative to the en- 
thusiastic language in which, whilst in- 
sisting on its idealising tendency, Renan 
and Pfleiderer alike have recognised the 
beauty of St. Luke's picture, and of the 
social transformation which was destined 
to renew the face of the earth, which 
found its pattern of serving and patient 
love in Jesus the Friend of the poor, whose 
brotherhood opened a place of refuge for 
the oppressed, the destitute, the weak, 
who enjoyed in the mutual love of their 
fellows a foretaste of the future kingdom 
in which God Himself will wipe all tears 
from their eyes. Whatever qualifications 
must be made in accepting the whole 
description given us by Renan and Pflei- 
derer, they were at least right in recog- 
nising the important factor of the Person 
of Jesus, and the probability that dur- 
ing His lifetime He had Himself laid 
the foundations of the social movement 
which so soon ennobled and blessed 
His Church. It is far more credible 
that the disciples should have continued 
the common life in which they had lived 
with their Master than that they should 
have derived a social system from the 
institutions of the Essenes. There is no 
proof of any historical connection between 
this sect and the Apostolic Church, nor 
can we say that the high moral standard 
and mode of common life adopted by the 
Essenes, although in some respects an- 
alogous to their own, had any direct 
influence on the followers of Christ. 
Moreover, with points of comparison, 
there were also points of contrast. ,St. 
Luke's notice, ii. 46, that the believers 
continued steadfastly in the Temple, 
stands out in contrast to the perpetual 
absence of the Essenes from the Temple, 
to which they sent their gifts (Jos., Ant., 
xviii. 2, 5) ; the common meals of the 
Essene brotherhood naturally present a 
likeness to St. Luke's description of the 




III. I. 1 'Em to auTo oc rUrpos koi 'iwcWrjs avifiaivov els to 
tepoc em ttjc wpa^ ttjs irpoo-euxfjs TTjy iv&Ti)\>. 2. kcu 2 tis dftjp 

1 D begins cv 8« tois TjfAtpous Tavrais, so Par. Blass (so Harris) regards the 
phrase as addition " in principio novae lectionis," but the addition is characteristic of 
Luke ; Hilg. retains. After lepov D also inserts to SeiXivov (the ace. of time, like to 
irpuj'i, v. 21 — defended by Belser (and by Zockler), who argues that it is more likely 
to have been struck out on revision than added by a later hand) ; Hilg. retains. 

2 After icai D, Par. 3 , Syr. Pesb. insert iSov. virapx»v om. D, Gig., Par. 

early Christian Church, but whilst the 
Essenes dined together, owing to their 
scrupulosity in avoiding all food except 
what was ceremonially pure, the Chris- 
tians saw in every poor man who partook 
of their common meal the real Presence 
of their Lord. Of all contemporary sects 
it may no doubt be said that the Chris- 
tian society resembled most nearly the 
Essenes, but with this admission Weiz- 
sacker well adds : " The Essenes, through 
their binding rules and their suppression 
of individualism, were, from their very 
nature, an order of limited extent. In 
the new Society the moral obligation of 
liberty reigned, and disclosed an un- 
limited future, "Apostolic A ge,\., 58 (E.T.). 
It is often supposed that the after-poverty 
of the Church in Jerusalem, Rom. xv. 26, 
Gal. ii. 10, etc., was the result of this 
first enthusiasm of love and charity, and 
that the failure of a community of goods 
in the mother city prevented its intro- 
duction elsewhere. But not only is the 
above view of the "communism" of the 
early Christians adverse to this supposi- 
tion, but there were doubtless many causes 
at work which may account for the poverty 
of the Saints in Jerusalem, cf. Rendall, 
Expositor, Nov., 1893, p. 322. The collec- 
tion for the Saints, which occupies such a 
prominent place in St. Paul's life and 
words, may not have been undertaken for 
any exceptional distress as in the earlier 
case of the famine in Judaea, Acts xi. 26, 
but we cannot say how severely the 
effects of the famine may have affected 
the fortunes of the Jerusalem Christians. 
We must too take into account the per- 
secution of the Christians by their rich 
neighbours ; the wealthy Sadducees were 
their avowed opponents. From the first 
it was likely that the large majority of the 
Christians in Jerusalem would possess 
little of this world's goods, and the con- 
stant increase in the number of the dis- 
ciples would have added to the difficulty 
of maintaining the disproportionate num- 
ber of poor. But we cannot shut our eyes 
to the fact that there was another and a 
fatal cause at work — love itself had grown 

cold — the picture drawn by St. James- 
in his Epistle is painfully at variance 
with the golden days which he had himself 
seen, when bitter jealousy and faction 
were unknown, for all were of one heart 
and one soul, Zahn, Skizzen aus dem 
Leben der alten Kirche, p. 39 ff. ; Zockler, 
u.s., pp. 191, 192; Wendt, in loco; 
M'Giffert, Apostolic Age, p. 67 ; Cony- 
beare, "Essenes," Hastings' B.D. ; 
Kaufmann, Socialism and Communism, 
p. 5 ff. — 

Chapter III. — Ver. 1. St. Luke 
selects out of the number of Te'paTa ical 
o-T)p.£ia the one which was the immediate 
antecedent of the first persecution. " Non 
dicitur primum hoc miraculum fuisse, sed 
fuit, quanquam unum e multis, ipso loco 
maxime conspicuum," Blass, as against 
Weiss, Hilgenfeld, Feine. — ave|3aivov, cf. 
Luke xviii. 10. " Two men went up into 
the Temple to pray," i.e., from the lower 
city to Mount Moriah, the hill of the 
Temple, " the hill of the house," on its 
site see "Jerusalem," B.D. 8 . The verb 
is in the imperfect, because the Apostles 
do not enter the Temple until ver. 8. 
St. Chrysostom comments : rierpos Kol 
Mcdawns rjo"av ical tov 'Itjcovv elxov 
(jlc'o-ov, Matt, xviii. 20. — tirl ttjv wpav 
ttjs irpoo-cvxTis, not during or about, but 
marking a definite time, for the hour, 
i.e., to be there during the hour — some- 
times the words are taken to mean 
"towards the hour": see Plummer on 
Luke x. 35 (so apparently Weise). Page 
renders " for, i.e., to be there at the 
hour" (so Felten, Lumby). In going 
thus to the Temple they imitated their 
Master, Matt. xxvi. 55. — ri\v evd/nrjv, i.e., 
3 p.m., when the evening sacrifice was 
offered, Jos., Ant., xiv., 4, 3. Edersheim 
points out that although the evening 
sacrifice was fixed by the Jews as " be- 
tween the evenings," i.e., between the 
darkness of the gloaming and that of 
the night, and although the words of 
Psalm exxxiv., and the appointment of 
Levite singers for night service, 1 Chron. 
ix. 33, xxiii. 30, seem to imply an even- 
ing service, yet in the time of our Lord 



XwXos ck KOiXias (xtjTpos auTOu uTrdpxwf cPaord^eTO • ov ctiOouk 
Ka0' rifjiepaw irp6$ tV Gu'pav tou UpoO ri)V XcyopeVtjK 'flpaiaf, tou 

the evening sacrifice commenced much 
earlier, The Temple; its Ministry and 
Services, pp. 115, 116. According to 
Schurer, followed by Blass who appeals 
to the authority of Hamburger, there is 
no ground for supposing that the third, 
sixth, and ninth hours of the day were 
regular stated times for prayer. The 
actual times were rather (1) early in the 
morning at the time of the morning 
sacrifice (see also Edersheim, u. s., p. 
1 15) ; (2) in the afternoon about the ninth 
hour (three o'clock), at the time of the 
evening sacrifice; (3) in the evening at 
sunset (Jewish People, div. ii., vol. i., 
290, E.T.). The third, sixth, and ninth 
hours were no doubt appropriated to 
private prayer, and some such rule might 
well have been derived from Psalm lv. 
7; cf. Dan. vi. 11. This custom of 
prayer three times a day passed very 
early into the Christian Church, Didache, 
viii. 3. To Abraham, Isaac and Jacob 
the three daily times of prayer are traced 
back in the Berachoth, 26 b; Charles, 
Apocalypse of Baruch, p. 99. 

Ver. 2. tis, by its position as in Luke 
xi. 27 directs attention to this man, '* the 
man was conspicuous both from the 
place and from his malady " Chrys., 
Horn., viii. — x u ^°s • • • virapxwv : "a 
certain man that was lame " R.V., 
otherwise vrrdpxwv is not noticed, fit- 
tingly used here in its classical sense 
expressing the connection between the 
man's present state and his previous 
state, see on ii. 30. — cPacrxd^eTo : im- 
perf., expressing a customary act, the 
man was being carried at the hour of 
worship when the Temple would be 
filled with worshippers (Chrysostom) ; 
or the verb may mean that he was being 
carried in the sense that the bearers had 
not yet placed him in the accustomed 
spot for begging, cf. 2 Kings xviii. 14, 
Ecclesiasticus vi. 25, Bel and the Dragon, 
ver. 36 ; Theod. — 8v ItiOovv : the imper- 
fect used of customary or repeated action 
in past time, Burton, Syntax of Moods 
and Tenses, etc., p. 12, on the form see 
Winer-Schmiedel, p. 121 ; Blass, Gram- 
matik des N. G., p. 48: in Acts there are 
several undoubted instances of the way 
in which the imperfect 3rd plural of verbs 
in p-i was often formed as if from a 
contract verb, cf. iv. 33, 35, xxvii. 1. — 
irpos tt)v Bvpav : R.V. "door," although 
in ver. 10 we have not Ovpa but ttvXt). 
— ttjv Xc-y. 'Qpaiav : it may have been the 

gate of Nicanor (so called because Judas 
Maccabaeus had nailed to the gate the 
hand of his conquered foe, 1 Mace. vii. 
47). The description given of it by 
Josephus, B. J., v., 5, 3, marks it as 
specially magnificent, cf. also Ham- 
burger, Rcal-Encycl., ii., 8, p. 1198. 
This view was held by Wetstein, see, in 
loco, Nicanor's gate. Another interpreta- 
tion refers the term to the gate Shushan, 
which was not only close to the Porch 
of Solomon, but also to the market for 
the sale of doves and other offerings, 
and so a fitting spot for a beggar to 
choose (Zockler). The gate may have 
been so called because a picture of the 
Persian capital Susa was placed over it 
(Hamburger, u. s.), i.e., Town of Lilies. 
Cf. Hebrew Shushan, a lily, the lily 
being regarded as the type of beauty. 
Wendt suggests that the title may be 
explained from the decoration on the 

pillars of lily work ]f^W iTft^gg'. 

Mr. Wright, Some N.T. Problems, 1898, 
has recently argued that the eastern gate 
of the Court of the Women is meant, 
p. 304 ff. (so too Schurer, Jewish People, 
div. ii., vol. i., p. 180, E.T.). This court 
was the place of assembly for the services, 
and a beggar might naturally choose a 
position near it. The decision as to 
which of these gates reference is made to 
is rendered more difficult by the fact that, 
so far as we know, no gate bore the 
name " Beautiful ". But the decision 
apparently lies between these alternatives, 
although others have been proposed, cf. 
John Lightfoot, Hor. Heb., in loco, and 
Wright, m. 5. In such notices as the 
mention of the Beautiful Gate, Solo- 
mon's Porch, Feine sees indications of a 
true and reliable tradition. — tov aiTetv : 
genitive of the purpose, very frequent 
in this form, genitive of the article with 
the infinitive both in the N.T. and in the 
LXX, cf. Gen. iv. 15, 1 Kings i. 35, 
Ezekiel xxi. 11 ; Luke xxiv. 16, see 
especially Burton, Syntax of Moods and 
Tenses, p. 159. It is very characteristic 
of St. Luke, and next to him of St. Paul 
— probably indicates the influence of the 
LXX, although the construction is found 
in classical Greek, cf. Xen.,Anab., iii., 5, 
see Viteau, Le Grec du N. T., p. 172 
(1893). It was a common thing for 
beggars amongst the Jews as amongst the 
Christians (just as amongst the Romans, 
Martial, i., 112) to frequent the Temple 



cuTciy e\eY] | uocrueT]i/ * Trapa rCtv clo-jropeuop.cVciH' els To iepoV. 3. os 
ISuf 2 lleTpoi' Kai 'iwdf vr\v p.e'XXot'Tas ciaicVai ei$ to iepoK T)pciTa 3 
cXctju.oo-uVtji' Xa/3ei.y. 4.* &T€Ki<ras 8c [Herpes els auTOK ow tw 
'IuoVct], cittc, 5 B\evj/oc cis T) 5- 6 6 Se CTreixcf auTols, TrpoaSoKwc 

1 For Trapa tuv eicnr. eis to icpov D has Trap* aura)* eicnrop. avTwv eis to iep., but 
not received by Blass in p (Chase sees in first part exact reproduction of Syriac 
ovt<uv being carelessly repeated). 

2 For os iSuv D, Flor. read ovtos (so Gig., Par.) aTcvio-as tois o<}»9aXp.ois avTov 
Kai iSfuv (Chase: interpolation arose in Syriac). Belser again sees the longer form 
which Luke abbreviated in a. 

3 After TjpioTa D, Flor., Par. 1 insert avrovs. XaPeir (fr^ABCE, b, 13, 6i, Vulg., 
Boh., Arm., Chrys.) om. by DP, h, Fl., Gig., Par. 1 , Syr. Hard., Lucif.— Blass 
"recte ut vid.". — added by T.R., W.H.. Weiss. 

4 For aTevio-as D, Flor., Par. 2 read ep.pXev{fas (ep-PXeireiv not uncommon in the 
Gospels) ; (<rwv IwavTjv in D is attributed by Chase to Syriac influence, cf. Aquila, 
o-vv tov ovpavov Kai <rvv rt\v ytjv) ; Hilg. follows D. 

5 For cure Flor. has " (ad)stans dixit ei" ; so in p etrurra.% eiirev avTif, in which 
Belser sees the simpler form of Luke's own revision. For pXexJ/. eis *ip<as D, Flor. 
aTtvio-ev cis ep.e ('HP-ttS D) ; cp.c is curious, but may be earlier edition, or introduced 
later because John here says nothing. Throughout the passage D, as compared 
with T.R. or with W.H., introduces different synonyms for "see". Thus T.R. 
10W . . . arevicras . . . p\e\|fov, D aTCVio~as (tov? o4>8. Kai iSuiv) . . . cp.pX€\(ras 
. . • aT«vio-ov, or from Belser's point of view, we must see in the T.R. three words 
for " see" which may be introduced by Luke in revising his rough draft. But it is 
difficult to account even in a rough draft for aTcvuras in ver. 5 instead of rjTevurev, 
and for the icai introduced before eiirev without any construction in ver. 4. 

6 €ir«ixev avTois ; Dreads aTevura? ; Flor. represents tjTevio-ev eis avTov (so P), 
see above. But in the fact that D reads avTois instead of cis avTovs (ov), as we 
might expect after oltcv., Weiss sees a further proof of the secondary character of 
the reading. 

and Churches for alms. St. Chrysostom Ver. 4. aTcvio-as, cf. i. 10. pXc\|rov 

notes the custom as common as it is to- eis tjp-S.s : it has sometimes been thought 

day in continental cathedrals or modern that the command was given to see 

mosques. — eXcTjpoo-iJvrjv : common in whether the man was a worthless beggar 

the LXX but not classical, some- or not (Nosgen), or whether he was 

times used for the feeling of mercy spiritually disposed for the reception of 

(eXcos), Prov. iii. 3, xix. 22, and con- the benefit, and would show his faith (as 

stantly through the book ; and then for in our Lord's miracles of healing), or it 

mercy showing itself in acts of pity, might mean that the man's whole at- 

almsgiving, Tobit i. 3, xii. 8, cf. Acts tention was to be directed towards the 

ix. 36, x. 2, where it is used in the plural, Apostles, as he evidently only expects 

as often in the LXX. Our word alms an alms, ver. 5. At the same time, as 

pis derived from it and the German Feine remarks, the fact that the narra- 

Almosen, both being corruptions of the tive does not mention that faith was 

Greek word. demanded of the man, forms an essential 

Ver. 3. TjpciTa XaPeiv : " asked to contrast to the narrative often compared 

receive," R.V., as other English versions with it in xiv. 9. 

except A.V. The expression is quite Ver. 5. 6 8c lircixcv, sc, vovv (not 

classical, atTwv \aj3eiv, Aristoph., Plut., tows d<J>0aXp.ovs) ; cf. Luke xiv. 7, 1 

240, cf. Mark i. 17, and LXX, Exodus Tim. iv. 16, Ecclesiasticus xxxi. (xxxiv.) 

xxiii. 15, for similar instances of a re- 2, 2 Mace. ix. 25 (Job xxx. 26, A.S.* 

dundant infinitive. The verb is in the al.) with dative ret ; so in Polybius. ,- 

imperfect, because the action of asking Ver 6. apyvpiov icalxpvo-iov : the words 

is imperfect until what is asked for is do not suggest the idea of a complete com - 

granted by another, Blass, in loco, and munism amongst the believers, although 

Gratnmatik des N. G., pp. 187, 236, and Oecumenius derives from them a proof 

Salmon, H ermathena, xxi. p. 228. of the absolute poverty of the Apostles. 




■" irap' auTwf XaPeu\ 6. cure 8e fleTpos, 'Apyupioc ical \pvalov 
oux uirdp)(€i poi • o 8e €X CJ > T0UT0 <roi 81'owp.i. ey tw 6i>6u,aTi 'Itjctoo 
Xpierrou tou Na^wpaiou, ' lyeipcu ical TrcpnraTei. 7. ical iridcras 

1 tYt'ipoi icai ircpnraTei ; AEGP 61 ead eyeipe, found in ACEGP 61, Vulg., Boh., 
Syrr. (P. and H.), Arm., Aeth., Ir>nt. ; but omitted by N BD > Sah., so Tisch., W.H., 
R.V., Weiss, Hilg., Wendt (who sees in the preceding words assimilation to passages 
in the Gospels). avacrTa Epiph. 

They may perhaps be explained by re- 
membering that if the Apostles had no 
silver or gold with them, they were 
literally obeying their Lord's command, 
Matt. x. 9, or that whatever money 
they had was held by them in trust for 
the public good, not as available for 
private charity. Spitta, who interprets 
ii. 45 of the Apostles alone (pp. 72-74), 
sees in St. Peter's words a confirmation 
of his view, and a further fulfilment of 
our Lord's words in Luke xii. 33, but if 
our interpretation of ii. 44 ff. is correct, 
our Lord's words were fully obeyed, but 
as a principle of charity, and not as a 
rule binding to the letter. St. Chry- 
sostom (Horn., viii.) justly notes the un- 
assuming language of St. Peter here, so 
free from boasting and personal display. 
Compare 1 Peter i. 18 (iii. 3), where the 
Apostle sharply contrasts the corrupt- 
ible gold and silver with higher and 
spiritual gifts (Scharfe). — S 8« ex * : the 
difference between this verb and virapx«i 
may be maintained by regarding the 
latter as used of worldly belongings, 
(\ia of that which was lasting and most 
surely held. — Iv tq> dvopan, : no occasion 
to prefix such words as Xe'-yo> <roi for the 
expression means " in the power of this 
name" (cf. Matt. vii. 22, Luke x. 17, 
Acts iv. 10, xvi. 18, James v. 14, Mark 

xvi. 17). So too the Hebrew Qt!?S 

in the name of any one, i.e., by his autho- 
rity. Exodus v. 23, and thus " in the 
name of Jehovah," i.e., by divine autho- 
rity, Deut. xviii. 22, 1 Chron. xxii. ig, 
Jer. xi. 21, and frequently in the Psalms, 
cf. also Book of Enoch, xlviii. 7 (Charles, 
p. 48). On the use, or possible use, of 
the phrase in extra-biblical literature, see 
Deissmann, Bibelstudien, p. 145, and 
also Neue Bibelstudien, p. 25 (1897). 
When Celsus alleged that the Christians 
cast out demons by the aid of evil spirits, 
Origen claims this power for the name of 
Jesus : to«tovtov yap SvvaTai to ovopa 
tov Mt]<rov, cf. also Justin Martyr, Dial, 
c. Tryph., 85. — M. X. rov Na£u>paiov ; the 
words must n themselves have tested 

the faith of the lame man. His part has 
sometimes been represented as merely 
passive, and as if no appeal of any kind 
were made to his faith contrasted with 
xiv. 9 (ver. 16 in this chapter being 
interpreted only of the faith of the 
Apostles), but a test of faith was implied 
in the command which bade the man 
rise and walk in the power of a name 
which a short time before had been 
placed as an inscription on a malefactor's 
cross, but with which St. Peter now bids 
him to associate the dignity and power 
of the Messiah (see Plumptre, in loco). 
It is necessary from another point of 
view to emphasise this implied appeal 
to the man's faith, since Zeller and 
Overbeck regard the omission of faith 
in the recipient as designed to magnify 
the magic of the miracle. Zeller re- 
marks : " Our book makes but one ob- 
servation on his state of mind, which 
certainly indicates a receptivity, but un- 
fortunately not a receptivity for spiritual 
gifts". But nothing was more natural 
than that the man should at first expect 
to receive money, and his faith in St. 
Peter's words is rather enhanced by the 
fact that the Apostle had already de- 
clared his utter inability to satisfy his 
expectations. St. Luke much more fre- 
quently than the other Evangelists names 
our Lord from His early home Nazareth 
in which frequency Friedrich sees an- 
other point of likeness between St. 
Luke's Gospel and the Acts, Das Lucas- 
evangelium, p. 85. Holtzmann attempts 
to refer the whole story to an imitation 
of Luke v. 18-26, but see as against such 
attempts Feine, Eine vorkanonische 
tfberlieferung des Lukas,pp. 175, 199, 200. 

Ver. 7. irtdo-as, cf. xii. 4 : so in LXX," 
Cant. ii. 15, Ecclesiasticus xxiii. 21, A. «/. 
X»po$ very similar to, if not exactly, a 
partitive genitive, found after verbs of 
touching, etc., inasmuch as the touching 
affects only a part of the object (Mark v. 
30), and so too often after verbs of taking 
hold of, the part or the limit grasped is 
put in the genitive, Mark v. 41 (accusa- 
tive being used when the whole person is 




avrbv rrjs Sepias x €l P°S l *W ei P 6 ' ' n ' a P a XP*ir ia Se i<rr€p€6Bi)(rav aoTOu 
al pdc7€is Kal ret axpupa, 8. Kal 8 claXXopeyos eorr) Kai ircpieTrciTci, 
Kai €io-f)X0e aitv auTOis cis to iep6f Trepiiraiw Kal aXXopeyos Kal 

1 rjY«ip« fc^ABCG 15, 18, 6i, Syr. (P. and H.), Arm., Sah., Boh., Aeth., Bas., Cypr., 
Lucif. insert ovtov ; so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt (but omitted by Meyer) 
—omitted in DEP. 

2 avTow oi 0a<ms DEGP, Chrys. ; but ai p. avTov fr^ABC 6i, Vulg., Bas., Tert., 
Lucif., so Tisch., W.H., Weiss. <r<|>vpa ^ 3 B 3 C 2 DEGP, so Hilg. ; but <r<f>v8pa 
^*B*C*, so Tisch., W.H., Weiss, Blass (Winer-Schmiedel, p. 64). 

3 icai tJ-aXXopevos €<tttj omit Flor. ircpieiraTci., after this word D inserts xaipopcvos 
(xaipwv E), Flor. gaudcns et exultans — xaipuv Kai c£aXXop.6vos in p, so Hilg. ircpi- 
iraTwv Kai aXX. Kai omitted by D, Flor. It is difficult to determine the precise order of 

events possibly " leaping " is not mentioned at all in Western text, and in it the 

healed man does not at all events " leap " in the Temple. It is again difficult to 
believe that in this passage the common text comes from a revision of the author, 
and not rather through corruption and confusion. 

seized, Matt. xiv. 3), Blass, Grammatik 
des N. G., p. 100, cf. classical use in 
Eurip., Hec, 523. The meaning of 
iriat> in N.T. and in the LXX has 
passed into modern Greek = trtdvu = 
seize, apprehend (Kennedy). For a 
similar use see also 2 Cor. xi. 32, Rev. 
xix. 20, and John vii. 30, 32, 33, 44, 
viii. 20, x. 39, xi. 57, xxi. 3, 10. — irapa- 
Xprjaa, i.e., irapd rh xpr\\na, forthwith, 
immediately, auf der Stelle, on the spot, 
specially characteristic of St. Luke, both 
in Gospel and Acts (cf. tvM* of St. Mark). 
It is found no less than ten times in the 
Gospel, and six to seven times in Acts, 
elsewhere in N.T. only twice, Matt. xxi. 
19, 20 ; several times in LXX, Wisdom 
xviii. 17, Tobit viii. 3, S., 2 Mace. iv. 34, 
38, etc., 4 Mace. xiv. 9, Bel and the 
Dragon, ver. 39, 42, Theod., and in 
Num. vi. 9, xii. 4, AB 2 R., Isaiah xxix. 
5, for Hebrew, DSPS; frequent in 

Attic prose; see also Dalman, Die Worte 
jfesu, pp. 22, 29. But as the word is so 
manifestly characteristic of St. Luke it 
is noteworthy that in the large majority 
of instances it is employed by him in 
connection with miracles of healing or 
the infliction of disease and death, and 
this frequency of use and application 
may be paralleled by the constant em- 
ployment of the word in an analogous 
way in medical writers ; see, e.g., Hobart, 
Medical Language of St. Luke, and in- 
stances in Hippocrates, Galen, Dios- 
corides. — icnepeb>9r\<Ta.v : o-Tcpeow = 
to make firm or solid ; it cannot by 
any means be regarded only as a techni- 
cal medical term, but as a matter of fact 
it was often employed in medical lan- 
guage (so also the adjective <rrepe6s). 

and this use of the word makes it a 
natural one for a medical man to employ 
here, especially in connection with pdaeis 
and <r<£vpd. It is used only by St. 
Luke in the N.T. (ver. 16 and xvi. 5), but 
very frequently in the LXX. The near- 
est approach to a medical use of the 
word is given perhaps by Wetstein, in 
loco, Xen., Peed., viii. — al pdaeis, " the 
feet " (Paivu). The word is constantly 
used in LXX, but for the most part in 
the sense of something upon which a 
thing may rest, but it is found in the 
same sense as here in Wisdom xiii. 18 ; 
cf. also Jos., Ant., vii., 3, 5, so in Plato,. 
Timaus, 92, A. It was in frequent use 
amongst medical men, and its employ- 
ment here, and here only in the N.T., 
with the mention of the other details, 
e.g. , the more precise cr<^vpd, "ankle- 
bones," also only found in this one pas- 
sage in N.T., has been justly held to 
point to the technical description of a 
medical man ; see not only Hobart, p. 
34 ff., u. s., and Belcher's Miracles of 
Healing, p. 41, but Bengel, Zockler, 
Rendall, Zahn. 

Ver. 8. e£aXX<Sp.cvos : not leaping out 
of his couch (as has sometimes been sup- 
posed), of which there is no mention, 
but leaping up for joy (cf. Isaiah lv. 12, 
Joel ii. 5) (on the spelling with one X see 
Blass, p. 51) ; cf. also Isaiah xxxv. 6. 
This seems more natural than to suppose 
that he leaped because he was incredu- 
lous, or because he did not know how to 
walk, or to avoid the suspicion of hypo- 
crisy (Chrys., Horn., viii., so too Oecu- 
menius). St. Chrysostom remarks that 
it was no less than if they saw Christ 
risen from the dead to hear Peter saying : 
*' In the name," etc., and if Christ is not 

8 — IO. 



ulvCiv tov 0eoV. 9. tea! elSev auroy iras 6 Xaos irepnraToui'Ta Kal 
ai^ouvTa roy 0e6V • IO. eTreyifwaKoV tc aiirov on outos r\v 6 irpos 
tt)j/ eXerip.oauVrji' Kaflque^os em ttj 'Jlpaia ttuXtj tou lepou • Kal 
eirXTJo-OYjo-ae 0dp.j3ous Kal 1 e^Kcrrdcrews em tw auu(3epT)KOTt au-rto. 

1 cKO-rao-cws, before this word Flor., Par. 1 insert iravres. lor 9ajj.p\ icai cko-tout. 
Flor., Par. 1 read €K<rTacr. Kai eOa\i.fiovvTo €<}>' w avTu o~ufj.(3t|3T)Kev taois ; but D with 
a accepts Yc-ytvT)p.£vii> instead of <rvp{3ef3., c_/. iv. 22 ; so Hilg. 

raised, how account for it, he asks, that 
those who fled whilst He was alive, now 
dared a thousand perils for Him when 
dead ? — ttm\ Kal irepwiraTei : " he stood 
and began to walk " R.V., thus marking 
the difference between the aorist and the 
imperfect. Such vivid details may have 
been derived from St. Peter himself, and 
they are given here with a vividness 
characteristic of St. Mark's Gospel, of 
which St. Peter may reasonably be re- 
garded as the main source. If St. Luke 
did not derive the narrative directly from 
St. Peter, he may easily have done so 
from the same Evangelist, John Mark, see 
on chap, xii., and Scharfe, Die petrinische 
Stromung der N. T. Literatur, pp. 59, 60 
(1893). — atvwv tov fleiJv : commentators 
from the days of St. Chrysostom have 
noted that by no act or in no place could 
the man have shown his gratitude more 
appropriately ; characteristic of St. Luke, 
to note not only fear, but the ascription 
of praise to God as the result of miracu- 
lous deeds ; cf., e.g., Luke xix. 37, xxiv. 
53, Acts iii. g, iv. 21, xi. 18, and other 
instances in Friedrich (Das Lucasevan- 
gelium, pp. 77, 78). On the word see 
further, p. 97. Spitta regards ver. 8 as 
modelled after xiv. 10, a passage attributed 
by him to his inferior source B. But on 
the other hand both Feine and Jiingst 
regard the first part of ver. 8 as belong- 
ing to the original source. 

Ver. 10. tirty ivomtkoV re : •* took know- 
ledge of him " or perhaps better still 
" recognised ". The word is so used of 
recognising any one by sight, hearing, or 
certain signs, to perceive who a person 
is (Grimm), cf., e.g., Luke xxiv. 16, 31, 
Matt. xiv. 35, Mark vi. 54. — 6 . . . KaOij- 
uevos : imperfect, may refer to the cus- 
tomary action of the man: or may be 
equivalent here to an imperfect, a force 
of the imperfect usual in similar cases 
when reference is made to a time before 
the actual time of recognition, Blass, 
Gratnmatik des N. G., p. 188. — liri: for 
the local dative cf. v. 9, Matt. xxiv. 33, 
Mark xiii. 29, John v. 2, Rev. ix. 14. — 
6ap.povs, cf. Luke iv. 36 and v. 9. A 

word peculiar to St. Luke in the N.T. 
(so St. Luke alone uses tK0a.jj.pos, ver. 
11); used from Homer downwards, of 
amazement allied to terror or awe, cf. 
LXX, Ezek. vii. 18, Cant. iii. 8, vi. 3 (4), 
9 (10). — cKcrrdcreus : for the word in a 
similar sense, Mark v. 42, xvi. 8, Luke v. 
26. Its use in ordinary Greek expresses 
rather distraction or disturbance of mind 
caused by a shock. The word is very 
common both in Hippocrates and Are- 
taeus. In the LXX it is employed in 
various senses, cf. Deut. xxviii. 28, 
cK<rrd<rei Siavoias ; elsewhere it is used 
of agitation, trouble, 2 Chron. xxix. 8, 
and most frequently of terror, fear, 1 
Sam. xi. 7, Ezek. xxvi. 16. See further 
on. Here the word expresses more than 
simple astonishment as its collocation with 
Oap-pos shows (Wendt, in loco), rather 
" bewilderment, " cf. Mark v. 42. See on 
ii. 43 for this characteristic of St. Luke. 
But there is no occasion to conclude 
with Weiss that these strong expressions 
as to the effect of the miracle show that 
it must have been the first which the 
disciples performed. It was the unique 
nature of the miracle which affected the 
beholders so powerfully. 

Ver. 11. KparovvTos: in his joy and 
gratitude, " holding them " in a physical 
sense, although it is possible that it 
signifies that the healed man joined 
himself to the Apostles more closely as 
a follower (iv. 14), fearing like the de- 
moniac healed by Christ (Luke viii. 38). 
lest he should be separated from his 
benefactors, cf. Cant. iii. 4. — lirl t-q <TToqL 
T(j Ka\. I. : better " portico," R.V. 
margin ; colonnade, or cloister (John x. 
23). It derived its name from Solomon, 
and was the only remnant of his temple. 
A comparison of the notices in Josephus, 
B.y.,v., 5, 1 ; Ant., xv., 11,5 andxx.,9, 7,' 
make it doubtful whether the foundations 
only, or the whole colonnade, should be 
referred back to Solomon. Ewald's idea 
that the colonnade was so called because 
it was a place of concourse for the wise 
in their teaching has not found any 
support : Stanley's Jewish Church, ii. f 


II. KpaToueTos 8c 1 tou laOc'rros x w ^°" Toy llcTpoi' Kal \advvi\v, 
auwe'Spafxe -irpos auTous iras 6 Xa6s em ttj oroa tt) naXouu.ei'T| 
loXou-wrros, €K8au.0oi. 12. i8a»' Se lleTpos direKpifaTO irpos TOf 
Xaoe, "A^opes 'lypaTjXiTat, ti 6aup.d£€Te em toutu, r\ ^u.if ti &Teyi- 
£6T€, 2 u»s ISia 8ufd(i.ei r\ euoepeia ■n-eiroiTjKoai tou irepiTraTeif auToy; 

1 tow taOevTos; but avrov in ^ABCDE 6i, Vulg., Syrr. P. H., Sah., Boh., Arm., 
so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss ; Rec. = prob. beginning of a church lectionary. But'n 
ver. ii Western text quite different. D, Flor. €Kiropevo|j,€vov (Fl. -vuv) 8e tou n. ko.i 
lu. o-uve|eirop€V6TO Kpa/ruv ovtovs, and D continues (not Flor. = o) oi Se 0au.|3T)0€VTes 
€o-TT]crav ev tt| o-too. t-ji koA. 1. €ic6au.|3oi (but in (3 Blass brackets the last word) ; Hilg. 
follows D. There is a distinction evidently drawn between the area of the Temple 
and Solomon's Porch, " nam porticus ilia extra aream sacram fuit," Blass ; and icpor 
might perhaps be so used as distinct from the outer court or cloisters. If so, the 
Western text may contain the more precise account of a writer who wishes to bring 
the Apostles and the lame man from the one into the other, in accordance with the 
topography with which he was familiar. But if, as Weiss admits, £K7rop. . . . 
o-we?€Trop€U€To is implied in the Kpo/ruv and change of locality, cf. vv. 8 and n, we 
may have another case in which the theory of Blass may hold good, and Luke him- 
self may have revised for shortness (see Belser's retention of the (3 reading, and Blass, 
Acta Apost., in loco). IoXou-uvtos ^(A)BCP i, 13, 31, 61 ; so Tisch., W.H., Weiss 
(but see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 93). 

2 D, Flor., Par. begin a-n-oicpidcis 8e 6 I"!, eiitcv irpos awTovs — o Xaos and iras o 
Xaos both omitted, us iSia . . . irepiir. ovtov, for this D, Flor., Gig., Severian. read 
us T]|iuv tt) iSia 8vv. tj cvo-c{3. ireiroiT|icoTuv tov irepiir. awTOV, so Hilg. — gen. abs. 
characteristic of the Western text (see Weiss, Codex D, p. 60) ; cf. ii. 1, 15; may 
be careless transcription or through translation. D has tovto both before and after 
ire-ironiKOTuv (Harris, Latinising ; Chase, due to Syriac) ; but see iv. 7 — the second 
tovto perhaps confusion with tov or to. 

184 ; Edersheim, Temple and its Services, Ver. 12. This address of St. Peter 

pp. 20, 22, and Keim, Geschichte jfesu, divides itself into two parts, 12-16, 17-26, 

iii., 161. It was situated on the eastern and although it covers much of the same 

side of the Temple, and so was some- ground as in chap, ii., there is no need 

times called the Eastern Cloister, and to regard it with Overbeck and Holtz- 

from its position it was a favourite re- mann as unhistorical : see Blass, in loco, 

sort. — T'jj koA. : the present participle and Feine ; the latter points out that St. 

is used just as the present tense is found Peter would naturally, as in chap, iii., 

in the notice in St. John's Gospel, chap, take the incident before him as his text, 

v. 2 (see Blass, Philology of the Gospels, place it in its right light, and draw from 

pp. 241, 242), and if we cannot conclude it an appeal to repentance and conver- 

from this that the book was composed sion. But whilst we may grant the 

before the destruction of the Temple, the common and identical aim of the two 

vividness of the whole scene and the discourses, to proclaim the Messiahship 

way in which Solomon's Porch is spoken of Jesus before the Jews, none can fail 

of as still standing, points to the testi- to see that in chap. iii. the Messianic 

mony of an eye-witness. Nosgen argues idea becomes richer and fuller. Jesus 

that this narrative and others in the early is the prophet greater than Moses: 

chapters may have been derived directly Jesus is the fulfilment of the Abrahamic 

from St. John, and he instances some covenant, through which the blessing of 

verbal coincidences between them and the Abraham is to extend to all the earth, 

writings of St. John (Apostelgeschichte, Matt. viii. 11. And more than this : St. 

p. 28). But if we cannot adopt his conclu- Peter has learnt to see in the despised 

sions there are good reasons for referring Nazarene not only the suffering servant 

some of these Jerusalem incidents to St. of Jehovah (irats), but in the servant the 

Peter, or to John Mark, see introduction King, and in the seed of David the Prince 

and chap. xii. Feine rightly insists upon of Life. And in the light of that revela- 

this notice and that in ver. 2 as bearing tion the future opens out more clearly 

the stamp of a true and trustworthy before him, and he becomes the first 

tradition. prophet in the Messianic age — the spirit- 

ii— 13- 



13. 1 6 06os 'APpaaji Kal 'lo-aciic kcu 'laKco(3, 6 0e6s twv -naripfav 
r\li£)v, €0o|ao"6 rbv TraiSa auTou Itjo'ooi' • ov ufieis 2 TrapeSoJicaTe, Kal 

1 6 0. ABp. Kot l<r. Kai lax. BEP 61, Sah., Syr. (Pesh. Hard.) ; so W.H., Weiss, 
R.V., T.R. ; Wendt, who explains the reading in Tisch., Hilg. introducing (o) ©eos 
(fc^ACD) before l<r. and before laK. as out of LXX, Exod. iii. 6 (cf. Matt. xxii. 32). 

- iropeSwKaTe ; D adds ets Kpio-iv, so Hilg. ; E cis KpiT-qptov (cf. also Flor., Par. 1 , 
Syr. H«rcl. mg., Iren., cf. Luke xxiv. 30; see also Chase, in loco). 

ual presence which the believers now 
enjoyed, and by which those mighty 
deeds are wrought, is only a foretaste of 
a more visible and glorious Presence, 
when the Messiah should return in His 
glory; and for that return repentance 
and remission of sins must prepare the 
way (see Briggs, Messiah of the Apostles, 
pp. 31, 32). On St. Peter's discourses 
see additional note at end of chapter. — 
aireicpivaTo : cf. Luke xiii. 14, xiv. 3, 
answered, i.e., to their looks of astonish- 
ment and inquiry. The middle voice as 
here, which would be the classical usuage, 
is seldom found in the N.T.,. but gener- 
ally the passive aorist, aircicpiOi], and so 
in the LXX. "In Biblical Greek the 
middle voice is dying, in modern Greek 
it is dead," Plummer. Thus in modern 
Greek, in the passive = to 
answer, Kennedy, Sources of N. T.. Greek, 
p. 155, and Blass, Gramtnatik des N. G., 
p. 44. — o>s ireironjKoo-iv tov irepiiraTctv : 
this use of the infinitive with the geni- 
tive of the article, instead of the simple 
infinitive with or without &<rre, to express 
a purpose, or result as here : " non de 
consilio sed de eventu " (Blass), may be 
illustrated from the LXX, Gen. xxxvii. 
18, 1 Chron. xliv. 6, Isaiah v. 6. — cvcreBeia: 
" godliness," R.V., as always elsewhere in 
A. V., i.e., by our piety towards God, as 
always in the Bible, although eWtBeia 
may be used like the Latin pietas of 
piety towards parents or others, as well 
as of piety towards God. It is frequently 
used in the LXX of reverence towards 
God, els, so too in Josephus, irpos t6v 
©eov, cf. Prov. i. 7, xiii. 11, Isaiah xi. 2, 
Wisdom x. 12, and often in 4 Mace. In 
Trench, N. T. Synonyms, ii., p. 196, and 
Grimm-Thayer, sub v. In the N.T. the 
word is used, in addition to its use here, 
by St. Paul ten times in the Pastoral 
Epistles, and it is found no less than four 
times in 2 Peter, but nowhere else. St. 
Chrysostom, Horn, ix., comments: "Do 
you see how clear of all ambition he is, 
and how he repels the honour paid to 
him ? " so too Joseph : Do not interpreta- 
tions belong to God ? 

Ver. 13. 6 ©eos k.t.X.: the 

words were wisely chosen, not only to 
gain attention and to show that the 
speaker identified himself with the nation 
and hope of Israel, but also because in 
Jesus St. Peter saw the fulfilment of the 
promise made to Abraham. — e8d|acre, 
John viii. 54, xi. 4. Again we mark the 
same sharp contrast as in St. Peter's 
former address — God hath glorified . . . 
but you put to an open shame. The 
objections of Weiss, who traces a re- 
viser's hand in the double mention of the 
glorification of Jesus in ver. 13 and in 
15, fail to secure the approval of Spitta, 
Feine, Jiingst, who all hold that eSo£ao-c 
refers to the power of the Risen Jesus, 
shown in the healing of the lame man, 
which Peter thus expressly emphasises. 
But the glorification was not, of course, 
confined to this miracle : "auxit gloria hoc 
quoque miraculo " (Blass). — t6v iralSa : 
" his Servant," R.V. (margin, " Child "). 
Vulgate has flium, which all other Eng- 
lish versions (except A.V., " Child ") seem 
to have followed. But the rendering 
" Servant " is undoubtedly most appro- 
priate, cf. ver. 26, and iv. 27, 30 (em- 
ployed in the Messianic sense of Isa. 
xiii. 1, lii. 13, liii. 11), where the LXX 

has irats, Hebrew "D^, In Matt. xii. 

18 the Evangelist sees the fulfilment of 
the first passage in Jesus as the Christ, 
the Servant of Jehovah. Wendt rightly 
emphasises the fact that no Apostle ever 
bears the name irais ©eov, but SovXos ; 
cf. iv. 29. In the LXX Moses is called 
both irats and SovXos. The rendering 
of R.V. is generally adopted, and by 
critics of very varying schools, e.g., 
Overbeck, Nosgen, Holtzmann, Felten, 
Hilgenfeld. Zockler, whilst he adopts 
the rendering " Servant," still maintains 
that Luther's translation, Kind Gottcs, 
cannot be regarded as incorrect (cf. the 
double meaning of the word in classical 
literature). Certainly he seems justified 
in maintaining that in the numerous 
parallels in the sub-apostolic writings the 
conception of the Servant by no means 
always excludes that of the Son, e.g., 
Epist. ad Diofn., viii., 11 and 9, where of 




ripvnaaoQt a^rov KaTa Trpoaanroy riiXaTou, Kpivavros cKet^ou airo- 
Xueiy. 14. uu.ets 8e tov ayioc Kal oiKaioe 2 rip^rjarao-fle, kcu "rJTr)aao-0e 

1 riiXaTou ; B*D read lleiX., so Tisch., W.H., Weiss, Hilg. — see Winer-Schmiedel, 
p. 43. KpivavTos oceivov airoX. ; D adds avrov OeXovros and prefixes tov (om. in 
D 2 ) ; connate OeXovTos assim. to Luke xxiii. 20. 

2 T]pvn<rao-0€, but D, Iren., Aug. have c|3apvvaTc (aggravastis), so Hilg. ; Nestle 
(so Blass, Chase, and see also Belser) believes confusion arose in Syriac between 
QTHQ^'DrVOS ; see Nestle, Philologia Sacra, 1896, p. 40, and Einfuhrung 

■in das G. N. T., p. 240 (and also Harris, who explains through -nTT]o-aT«, ver. 6, 
for T)TT)<ra<r8€, displaced T)pv»io-a0-0e, and became corrupted into TjTTTjB-aTe, transl. 
aggravastis) ; see also Blass, Philology of the Gospels, p. 194, and also Dalman, Die 
Worte jfesu, p. 54, and Enc. Bibl., i., 56. <$>ov«a ; after this word D inserts t,r\v icai, 
so E, Flor., Aug. Gloss. ; but Belser sees in it a marked contrast to 4>ovea, "that a 
murderer should live," original, avrov om. fc^ABC, Tisch., W.H., R.V. 

God's great scheme it is said avcKoivw- 
<raTo p.6v&) tu iraiSi (to His Son alone), 
called in 11 tov dYairtjTov iraiSos ; cf. 
Martyr. Polyc, xiv., 3, where the same 
phrase occurs, reminding us of Matt. iii. 
17 (Col. i. 13, Eph. i. 6) and xiv. 1, where 
God is spoken of as 6 irarijp of the well- 
beloved Son -rrtuSos. In Clem. Rom., 
Cor. lix. 2-4, the word is used three 
times of Jesus Christ, and twice with tov 
T)YairT]p.€vov (iraiSos), and if there is no- 
thing in the context to determine the 
exact sense of the word, in the previous 
chapter St. Clement had written £t| -yap 
6 ©cos Kal £fj 6 Kvpios Mtjo-ovs Xpio-ros 
Kai to irveOpa to ayiov k.t.X. ; cf. also 
Barnabas, Epist. (iii., 6), vi., 1 ; Apost. 
Const., viii., 5, 14, 39, 40, 41 ; and 
Didache, ix., 2, 3 ; x., 2, 3, where, how- 
ever, at the first introduction of the word, 
David and Jesus are both called by it in 
the same sentence. In the Dtdache the 
title is found altogether five times, once 
as above, and four times as applied to 
Jesus alone. But these passages all 
occur in the Eucharistic Prayers of the 
Didache (placed by Resch as early as 
80-90 a.d.), and in them we find not 
only the title " Lord " used absolutely of 
Jesus, ix., 5, but He is associated with 
the Father in glory and power, ix., 4. 
Knowledge, faith, and immortality are 
made known by Him, spiritual food and 
drink, and eternal life are imparted by 
Him, x., 2, 3. Zockler, Apostelgeschichte, 
in loco ; Lock, Expositor, p. 183 ff. (1891), 
" Christology of the Earlier Chapters of 
the Acts " ; Schmid, Biblische Theologie, 
p. 405. But further : if we bear in mind 
all that the " Servant of the Lord " must 
have meant for a Jew, and for a Jew so 
well versed in the O.T. Prophets as St. 
Peter, it becomes a marvellous fact that 
he should have seen in Jesus of Nazareth 
the realisation of a character and of a 

work so unique (cf. Isaiah xlii. 1 ff., xlix. 
I_ 3. 5> 8, 1. 4-9, Hi. 13-liii. 12). For if 
we admit that the word " Servant " 
may be used, and is sometimes used, of 
the nation of Israel (cf. Isaiah xli. 8, 
xiv. 4), and if we admit that some of the 
traits in the portrait of Jehovah's " Ser- 
vant " may have been suggested by the 
sufferings of individuals, and were appli- 
cable to individual sufferers, yet the 
portrait as a whole was one which trans- 
cended all experience, and the figure of 
the ideal Servant anticipated a work and 
a mission more enduring and compre- 
hensive than that of Israel, and a holiness 
and innocency of life which the best of 
her sons had never attained (Driver, 
Isaiah, pp. 175-180). But not only in 
His miraculous working, but in His 
Resurrection and Ascension St. Peter 
recognised how God had glorified His 
Servant Jesus ; and whilst it was natural 
that the word " Servant " should rise to 
his lips, as he recalls the submission to 
betrayal and death, whilst he never forgets 
the example of lowliness and obedience 
which Christ had given, and commends 
to poor Christian slaves the patience and 
humility of Him Who was "the first 
Servant in the world " (1 Peter ii. 18-25), 
he sees what prophets and wise men had 
failed to see, how the suffering " Ser- 
vant" is also "the Prince of Life," cf. 
chap v. 15, and v. 31. — vucis p,€v: there 
is no regular answering 8e in the text 
(cf. i. 1), but the words in ver. 15 6 ©tos 
TJ-yeipw express the antithesis (Blass, 
Wendt, Holtzmann). In dwelling upon 
the action of Pilate and the guilt of the 
Jews, the Apostle loses the direct gram- 
matical construction ; he emphasises the 
denial (rjpvijo-ao-Oe twice) and its base- 
ness ; but nothing in reality was more 
natural, more like St. Peter's impetuosity. 
— Kara irpoo-wirov, coram, cf. Luke ii. 31, 

i 4 — 15- 



dVSpa 4>o^e'a \apt,<rOf\vat "f i ^ | '» T 5* r ° v ^ < *PX T IY 01 ' T T$ S w t)S diretc- 
TeivaTC • or 6 0e6s rjyeipev ck veKpuv, o5 T)|xec$ jidpTups's €<rp.ev. 

2 Cor. x. i — the expression need not be 
explained as a Hebraism, it is found 
several times in Polybius ; see Dalman, 
Die Worte Jesu, p. 23. In the LXX 
it is frequent in various senses, and 
sometimes simply in the sense of before, 
in the presence of, a person, 1 Sam. xvii. 
S, 1 Kings i. 23, 1 Chron. xvii. 25, 
Ecclesiasticus xlv. 3, Jer. lii. 12, 33, 
Judith x. 23, xi. 5, etc. Rendall takes 
the words as usually denoting open en- 
counter with an opposite party face to 
face, cf. xxv. 16, Gal. ii. 11, and so here; 
the Jews met Pilate's proposal to free 
the prisoner with a point-blank denial. 
13b is referred by Hilgenfeld to the 
revising hand of "the author to Theo- 
philus," and he sees in its introduction 
a proof of the anti- Judaism of the reviser, 
whilst Jungst prefers to regard the first 
part of ver. 14 as an insertion, but this 
Hilgenfeld will not accept, as thus the 
antithesis in ver. 15 is not marked. — 
tcpivavTos : "when he had determined," 
R.V., not a purpose only, but a decision, 
Luke xxiii. 16. — ckcivov, not avTov, em- 
phasising the antithesis between what 
Pilate had determined and what they 
had done : vpeis exeivov 6eX.ijcravTos ovk 
TJ0eXtj<raT€ (Chrys.). 

Ver. 14. tov aytov Kai Sticaiov : both 
epithets are used of John the Baptist, 
Mark vi. 20, avSpa Sixaiov ical a-yiov, but 
Jesus is emphatically "the Holy and 
Righteous One " R.V. Not only is the 
sinlessness of His human character em- 
phasised, but also associated with the 
language of prophecy. St. Peter had 
already spoken of Jesus as God's Holy 
One, ii. 27, and if the word used here 
means rather one consecrated to God's 
service, it is the thought involved in the 
Trais 0€ov (a-yios, e.g., ckXcktos ©eov, see 
Grimm, sub v., and cf Isaiah xlii. 1 
LXX). The word was used by the 
demoniacs as they felt the power of the 
unique holiness of Christ, Mark i. 34, 
Luke iv. 34, and in St. John's Gospel vi. 
69, it is the title given to Jesus by St. 
Peter in his great confession. — tov 8ik. : 
the reference to the language of prophecy 
is unmistakable. The suffering Servant 
of Jehovah was also the righteous Ser- 
vant, Isaiah liii. n (cf. xi. 5, and Jer. 
xxiii. 5), see Acts vii. 52, xxii. 14. Later, 
in the Book of Enoch, the title is applied 
to the Messiah as the Righteous One, 
xxxviii. 2, liii. 6, xlvi. 3 (Charles' edition, 
pp. 48, 112, 144). In Acts vii. 52, 56. the 

title is found on the lips of St. Stephen, 
and in xxii. 14, Ananias, a Jewish Chris- 
tian, announces to Paul that God had 
chosen him to see the Righteous One. 
When we remember too that this title is 
used again in the writings of each of the 
Apostles, who now appealed to it, 1 Peter 
iii. 18, 1 John ii. 1, cf. ver. 20 (Rev. 
iii. 7), it would seem that it was not only 
a favourite one amongst these early 
believers, but that it affords in itself a 
marvellous proof of the impression made 
by the human life of Jesus upon those 
who knew Him best, or who at all events, 
like St. Stephen, had ample opportunities 
of learning the details of that life of 
holiness and righteousness, cf. also 
Matt, xxvii. 19, 24, Luke xviii. 47. — avSpa 
4>ovca : nearly all commentators dwell 
upon the marked contrast between this 
description of Barabbas and that just 
given of Jesus. Both St. Mark, xv. 7, and 
St. Luke, xxiii. 19, notice that Barabbas 
was not only a robber but a murderer. 
The addition, avSpa, common in Luke, 
makes the expression stronger than the 
simple (fiovca; cf. Soph., O. C, 948, 
avSpa iraTpoKTovov, O. R., 842, avSpas 
Xflcrras. No crime was more abhorrent 
to the Christian life, as St. Peter himself 
indicates, 1 Peter iv. 15. — x a P l <r0TJvai : 
to be granted to you as a x^P 1 ? or favour, 
as if St. Peter would recall the fact that 
Pilate had given them a gratification ! 
The verb is used several times in Luke, 
three times in his Gospel, vii. 21, 42, 43, 
and four times in Acts, cf. xxv. n, 16, 
xxvii. 24, elsewhere only in St. Paul's 
Epistles, where it is found fifteen times. 
In the LXX, cf. Esther viii. 7, Ecclus. 
xii. 3, and several times in the Books of 
the Maccabees, cf. 2 Mace. iii. 31, 33, 
and other instances in Hatch and Red- 
path, sub v. St. Chrys. writes : " Peter 
shows the great aggravation of the act. 
As he has them under his hand, he strikes 
hard ; while they were hardened he re- 
frained from such language, but when 
their minds are most moved then he 
strikes home, now that they are in a con- 
dition to feel it" (Horn., ix.). 

Ver. 15. tov Si apxuvov tt]s £u>tjs' 
again the words stand in marked cor> 
trast not only to 4>ovea but also to a/rrcK 
rtlvare ; magnificum antitheton, Bengel. 
The word is rendered " Author " in th' 
margin of R.V. (Vulgate, auctorcm) bu» 
"Prince" in the text and so in v. 31 (Vulg., 
principem). In the two other passages in 

I J 2 



16. Kal 1 Ctrl ttj marei tou 6vou.citos auToG, TouTOf, ov Gcwpctre Kal 
oioaTC, corepewo-e to oVou-a auToG • Kai f\ maris ^ Si' auToG ISwKgy 

1 em ^ :i ACDEP, Vulg., Sah., Boh., Ir«nt., so Tisch., and so Weiss ; but om. fc$B 
61, Arm., so W.H. (Lachmann and Blass punctuate eo-repewcrev • to ovop,.) 

which the word occurs in the N.T., viz., 
Heb. ii. 10, xii. 2, R.V. renders " Author," 
" the author of their salvation," " the 
author and perfecter of our faith," mar- 
gin "captain" (Vulgate, auctorem); see 
Westcott, Hebrews, pp. 49, 395. Christ 
is both the Prince of life and the Source 
(aactor) of life : " Vitam aliis dat 
Christus, opp. <J>ov£vs qui adimit " 
(Blass). Grimm and others draw a dis- 
tinction between the meaning attaching to 
the word here and in v. 31. The use of 
the word in the LXX may help to justify 
such a distinction, for whilst it is found 
in the sense of a leader or a captain 
(Num. xiv. 4, Judith xiv. 2), or the chief 
of a family or tribe (R.V. renders it 
" every one a prince " in Num. xiii. 2, but 
in the next verse "heads of the children 
of Israel "), it is also used to signify the 
author, or beginner, the source, cf. 1 
Mace. ix. 61, x. 47, Micah i. 13 (although 
it was never used for a prince or to de- 
scribe kingly attributes) ; but in many 
respects the rendering " Prince" may be 
compared with the Latin princeps, which 
signifies the first person in order, a chief, 
a leader, an originator, the founder of a 
family (in the time of the emperors it was 
used of the heir to the throne). So in 
classical Greek the word was used for a 
leader, a founder, Latin auctor, for the 
first cause, author, so God tuv iravT*»v, 
Plat., and also for a prince, a chief, and, 
especially in later Greek, of the person 
from whom anything good or bad first 
proceeds in which others have a share, 
e.g., apxi)Y°s K0 * aiTios combined (ante- 
si gnanus et auctor), Polyb., i., 66, 10 ; 
Hdian., ii., 6, 22, and as Alford points 
out in Heb. ii. 10, this later usage 
throws a light upon its meaning in 
Acts iii. 15, cf. Chrys. on Heb. ii. 10, 
apxTYov ttjs o*ajTt)pCas TOVTeori t6v 
ainov ttjs o~uTi)pia$. Christ is the source 
of life, a life in which others share 
through Him ; in this very place where 
St. Peter was speaking our Lord had 
spoken of Himself as the giver of eternal 
life, John x. 28, although doubtless the 
expression may include the thought that 
in Him was life in its fullest and widest 
sense — physical, intellectual, moral, 
spiritual. St. Chrysostom comments on 
the words " Prince of Life," Horn., ix. : 

" It follows that the life He had was not 
from another, the Prince or Author ot 
Life must be He who has life from Him- 
self". Theophylact and Oecumenius see 
in the words a contrast to the <J>ovea, in 
that Christ gives life, while the murderer 
takes it away — a contrast deepened by the 
words of St. Peter's fellow-disciple whom 
he here associates with himself in his 
appeal to the people, cf. 1 John iii. 15. 
In ver. 31 dp\. in its rendering " Prince" 
of kingly dignity may be compared with 
the use of the word in Thuc. , i., 132, 
^Esch., Agam., 259. Rendall sees in the 
expression both here and Acts v. 31 a 
reference to Jesus (the name used by St. 
Peter) as the second Joshua. As Joshua 
was the captain of Israel and led them 
across the Jordan into the land of pro- 
mise, so Jesus was the Captain of the 
living army of the Resurrection ; and for 
Saviour, v. 31, he compares Matt. i. 21. 
Such associations may be included in St. 
Peter's words, but they seem much more 
applicable to v. 31. In modern Greek the 
word dpxT|Y°s = leader, in the ordinary 
sense, Kennedy, Sources of N. T. Greek, 
p. 153; see Grimm, sub v. — ov may 
refer to ov, cf. i. 8, xiii. 31, or to the 
fact of the Resurrection, cf. ii. 32, v. 32, 
x. 39. R.V. reads " of whom " in the 

Ver. 16. eirl: so T.R., and so Weiss 
and Wendt : " on the ground of faith 
in His name," R.V. margin; cf Luke v. 
5 (not expressing the aim as if it meant 
with a view to faith in His name). But 
the name is no mere formula of incanta- 
tion, see xix. 13, nor is it used as, in 
Jewish tradition, the name of God, in- 
scribed on the rod of Moses, was said to 
have given him power to work his 
miracles in Egypt and the wilderness, 
see above on ver. 5. On the use of 
ovojao. in formula? of incantation, see 
Deissmann, Bibclstudien, pp. 25-54. — tj 
maris r\ 81' avTov : " the faith which is 
through Him," not by it, i.e., the name 
— not only the healing power is through 
Christ, but also the faith of the Apostles 
as of the man who was healed, cf, 
especially, 1 Pet. i. 21. tows Si* avrov 
irio-rovs els 0€ov, i.e., his converts who 
through Christ are believers in God : He 
is the object and the author of our faith. 

16 — 18. 



auTw ttjv oXoKXrjpiav toluti)v direvavTi irarrwc upwv. 1 7. Kal vuv, 
dSeXjpoi, 1 018a on KaTot ayfoiac €irpd|aTe, woTrep Kal oi ap^orres 
up.a>v • 18. 6 8c Seos a irpoKaT^yyeiXc Sid «rr6p.aTos TrdvTwv twv 

1 Before aScXcjioi DE, Flor., Par. 1 insert avSpes. For 018a on D, Flor. read 
eirio-TQ(X£0a on vp.ei9 (iev, perhaps for emphasising contrast (cf. w. 13, 14) with 
ver. iS, o 8c 0cos (Chase, Syriac). errpa£aTe, D, FL, Gig., Par., Syr. H. mg., Irint., 
Aug., Ambrst. add to iroviipov, so Hilg., a gloss to explain eirpa£. since it is not in 
accordance with the exculpating tone of the context (Weiss). 

Cf. also Nestle, Expository Times, Feb., 
;8gg, p. 238, and the connection of this 
phrase with Codex D, xviii. 8, and xx. 
21 (see Blass, /. c). — oXoKXrjpiav : only 
here in N.T., integrant sanitatem, Vul- 
gate, but the adjective oXoxXijpos in an 
ethical sense, 1 Thess. v. 23, James i. 4. 
The noun is only used once in the LXX, 
and there in a physical sense, Isaiah i. 
6. The adjective is used by Josephus 
of a sacrifice complete in all its parts 
(integer), Ant., iii., 12, 2, cf. its use in 
Philo., but in LXX, Zach. xi. 16, its use 
in a physical sense is a very doubtful 
rendering of the Hebrew, see further 
Trench, N. T. Synonyms, i., 85, and 
Mayor's St. James, p. 34. Cf. Plato, 
Tim., 44. — oXokXtjpos vywjs tc iravTcXcis. 
In Plutarch the noun is joined with 
vyUia, and also with tov o-<ofj.aTos 
(Grimm), but whilst the noun does not 
seem to be used by the strictly medical 
writers, oXokXtjoos is frequently used of 
complete soundness of body (Hobart, 

Ver. 17. xal vvv: favourite formula 
of transition, cf. vii. 35, x. 5, xx. 25, 
xxii. 16, 1 John ii. 28, 2 John 5. See 
Wendt and Page, in loco. Bengel de- 
scribes it as " formula transeuntis a prae- 
terito ad prassens ". Blass, " i.e., quod at- 
tinet ad ea quae nunc facienda sunt, ver. 
19 ".— dSeX^oi : affectionate and con- 
ciliatory, cf. ver. 12, where he speaks 
more formally because more by way of 
reproof: " One of the marks of truth 
would be wanting without this accord- 
ance between the style and the changing 
mental moods of the speaker " (Hackett). 
— koto, ayvoiav : the same phrase occurs 
in LXX, Lev. xxii. 14 (cf. also Lev. v. 
18, Eccles. v. 5). On Kara* in this 
usage, see Simcox, Language of the 
N. T., p. 149, who doubts whether it is 
quite good Greek. It is used in Poly- 
bius, and Blass compares Ka-r 1 avdvKT|v 
(Philem., ver. 14), which is found in Xen., 
Cyr., iv., 3. Their guilt was less than 
if they had slain the Messiah koto. 
iTp60€c-i.v, KaTa irpocupeaiv, or Iv x el P*- 
vTT£pt)4)avias,' Num. xv. 30, and there- 
VOL. II. 8 

fore their hope of pardon was assured 
on their repentance (cf. 1 Pet. i. 14, Iv 
dyvoia, and Psalms of Solomon, xviii., 5, 
for the same phrase). St. Peter speaks 
in the spirit of his Master, Luke xxiii. 
34. See instances in Wetstein of the 
antithesis of the two phrases icaT* 
dyvoiav and Kara irpoSco-iv (irpoaipeo*iv) 
in Polybius. — oi dpxovTcs vpiv, cf. 1 
Cor. ii. 8. The guilt of the rulers was 
greater than that of the people, but even 
for their crime St. Peter finds a palliation 
in the fact that they did not recognise 
the Messiah, although he does not hold 
them guiltless for shutting their eyes to 
His holiness and innocence. 

Ver. 18. 8c : a further mitigation ; 
whilst they were acting in their ignor- 
ance, God was working out His unerring 
counsel and will. — irdvTwv Tciv irpo^Twv ; 
not to be explained by simply calling it 
hyperbolic. The prophets are spoken of 
collectively, because the Messianic re- 
demption to which they all looked for- 
ward was to be accomplished through 
the death of Christ, cf. x. 43. The view 
here taken by St. Peter is in striking 
harmony with his first Epistle, i. 11, and 
ii. 22-25. — -nraOeiv tov X. atiTov, R.V., 
" his Christ," cf. Luke xvii. 25, xxiv. 26. 
The phrase, which (W.H.) is undoubtedly 
correct, is found in Psalm ii. 2, from 
which St. Peter quotes in iv. 26, and the 
same expression is used twice in the 
Apocalypse, but nowhere else in the 
N.T. ; xi. 15, xii. 10 (cf. also Luke ii. 
26, ix. 20). See also the striking pas- 
sage in Psalms of Solomon, xviii., 6 
(and ver. 8), ev dvd£ci XpioToC avrov y 
and Ryle and James on Psalm xvii. 
36. The paradox that the suffering 
Messiah was also the Messiah of Jehovah, 
His Anointed, which the Jews could not 
understand (hence their a-yvoia), was 
solved for St. Peter in the Passion, 
Death, and Resurrection of Jesus. On 
the suffering Messiah, see note xxvi. 
23. — lirX^pwacv oiiT<t> : " He thus ful- 
filled," i.e., in the way described, w. 
15. On irXtjpou, see i. 16. " In 
gardens of the Carthusian Convent , 


ii 4 



7rpo<|>Y]TWf auTou, iraGeiv Toy Xpiorov, eirX^pcixrey outw. 19. u.eTa- 
vo^cra-rc ovv Kal €morpe»|mTe, els to e^a\ei^0YJeai up.uv Tas uuapTias, 

near Dijon ... is a beautiful monu- 
ment. ... It consists of a group of 
Prophets and Kings from the O.T., each 
holding in his hand a scroll of mourning 
from his writings — each with his own 
individual costume and gesture and 
look, each distinguished from each by the 
most marked peculiarities of age and 
character, absorbed in the thoughts of 
his own time and country. But above 
these figures is a circle of angels, as like 
each to each as the human figures are 
unlike. They, too, as each overhangs 
and overlooks the Prophet below him, 
are saddened with grief. But their ex- 
pression of sorrow is far deeper and 
more intense than that of the Prophets, 
whose words they read. They see some- 
thing in the Prophetic sorrow which the 
Prophets themselves see not : they are 
lost in the contemplation of the Divine 
Passion, of which the ancient saints 
below them are but the unconscious and 
indirect exponents : " Stanley's Jewish 
Church, pref. to vol. ii. 

Ver. 19. cincrTpeiJ'aTc : "turn again," 
R.V. ; cf. also Matt. xiii. 15, Mark iv. 12, 
and Acts xxviii. 27 (Luke xxii. 32), in 
each of these passages, as in the text, 
A. V., " should be converted," following 
the Vulgate, convertantur. But the verb 
is in the active voice in each of the pas- 
sages mentioned ; cf. LXX, 1 Kings viii. 
33, 2 Chron. vi. 24, 37, Isaiah vi. 10 
(" turn again," R.V.), Tobit xiii. 6 — eirt- 
<rrp«|/a,Te apapTcoXoi : this passive ren- 
dering in the Vulgate and A.V. testifies 
to the unwillingness in the Western 
Church to recognise the " conversion " 
to God as in any degree the spontaneous 
act of the sinner himself — men have en- 
larged upon Lam. v. 21, but have 
forgotten James iv. 8 (Humphry, Com- 
mentary on the R. V., pp. 31, 32). — irpo? 
to llaXci^&fjvai : in the LXX the verb 
is found in the sense of obliterating 
dvouias, Ps. 1. (Ii.) I, g ; Isaiah xliii. 25, 
Ecclesiasticus xlvi. 20, Jer. xviii. 23, 
with djjLdpTias, 2 Mace. xii. 42, with 
a|idpTT)p.a (cf. 3 Mace. ii. ig, airaXci4>eiv 
with aixaprias), and in N.T. ; cf. Col. ii. 
14. For other instances of its use in the 
N.T., cf. Rev. iii. 5, with Deut. ix. 14, 
Ps. ix. 5, etc., and see also Rev. vii. 17, 
xxi. 4. In Psalms of Solomon it is used 
twice — once of blotting out the memories 
of sinners from off the earth, Psalm ii. 
19 ; cf. Exod. xvii. 14, etc., and once of 
blotting out the transgressions of Saints 

by the Lord, Psalm xiii. g. Blass speaks 
of the word as used " de scriptis proprie ; 
itaque etiam de debita pecunia " ; cf. 
Dem., 7gi, 12 (Wendt), and see also 
Wetstein, in loco. The word can 
scarcely be applied here to the Baptism 
(as Meyer), for which a word expressing 
washing would rather be required, cf. 
xxii. 16, although no doubt, as in ii. 38, 
Baptism joined with Repentance was re- 
quired for the remission of sins. — oiru>s 
av : not "when" (as if otrios = ot€), but 
"that so there may come," R.V., av with 
oircos indicates that the accomplishment 
of the purpose is dependent upon cer- 
tain conditions ; here dependent upon the 
repentance. In the N.T. there are only 
four instances of this use of o-rrws av, all 
in pure final clauses, viz., in the text, 
Luke ii. 35, and in two quotations from 
the LXX, Acts xv. 17 (where av is want- 
ing in LXX, Amos ix. 12), and Rom. iii. 4 
= LXX, Ps. 1. (Ii.) 4, so that this usage 
is practically peculiar to St. Luke in the 
N.T. Viteau, Le Grec du N. T., p. 80 
(1S93); Blass, Grammatik des N. G., p. 
207, and Burton, N.T. Moods and Tenses, 
p. 85. — tccupoi. ava\{rv£cci>s : the word 
avai]/v|is, used only by St. Luke, means 
refreshing or refreshment. In the LXX 
it occurs in Exod. viii. 15 (but cf. Aq. 
on Isaiah xxviii. 12, and Sym. on 
Isaiah xxxii. 15), where it is translated 
" respite," although the same Hebrew 

word rUTH, m the on ty other place 

T T . 

in which it occurs, Lam. iii. 56, may 
have the sense of "relief" (see Dr. 
Payne Smith, in loco, Speaker's Com- 
mentary, vol. v.). In Strabo a.vd\J»u|is is 
found in the sense of recreation, refresh- 
ment, x., p. 45g ; see also Philo, De Abr., 
29, and cf. the verb avaxj/vx'* in 2 Tim. 
i. 16 (cf. Rom. xv. 32, dva\j/ti£a) U60 5 vuuv, 
DE, refrigerer vobiscum, Vulgate, and 
Nosgen on Acts iii. 19). Rendall would 
render it here "respite," as if St. Peter 
urged the need of repentance that the 
people might obtain a respite from the 
terrible visitation of the Lord. But the 
Kaipol dvaij/. are identified by most com- 
mentators with the airoxara. irdvTfciv, and 
dvai|/. need by no means be rendered 
" respite ". Nosgen, connecting the words 
with the thought of avairav<rts (cf. the 
various renderings in Rom. xv. 32), would 
see here a fulfilment of Christ's promise, 
Kayu avairavo-w iifxa.5, Matt. xi. 28, to 
those who turned to Hifn in true re- 

ig — 21. 



ottws &v eXfiwCTi Katpol dea«J<u£e<i>s diro Trpoorwiroo tou K up too, 20. Kai 
dTrocTTeiXr] Toy TrpoKeKrjpuYp-e'vov l^o-ouv Xpiarov, 21. ov Set 

pentance, and so" in his view the expres- 
sion applies to the seasons of spiritual 
refreshment which may be enjoyed by 
the truly penitent here and now, which 
may occur again and again as men repent 
(Isaiah lvii. 16) ; so J. Lightfoot, Hor. 
Heb., interprets the word of the present re- 
freshing of the Gospel, and God's present 
sending of Christ in His ministry and 
power, and in the same manner airo<r- 
TciXfl, i.e., not at the end of the world, 
when Christ shall come as Judge, but in 
the Gospel, which is His voice. But the 
context certainly conceives of Christ as 
enthroned in Heaven, where He must 
remain until His Second Advent, al- 
though we may readily admit that there 
is a spiritual presence of the enthroned 
Jesus which believers enjoy as a fore- 
taste of the visible and glorious Presence 
at the Parousia, Briggs, Messiah of the 
Apostles, p. 31 ff. — airo irpoawirov tov 
K. irpdcranr., lit., face, often used as here 
for " the presence " ; cf. Hebrew, 

^-D72, frequently in LXX, and see above 

on ii. 28, here of the refreshment which 
comes from the bright and smiling pre- 
sence of God to one seeking comfort (so 
Grimm). The phrase occurs three times 
in Acts v. 41, vii. 45, elsewhere in 2 
Thess. i. 9, and three times in Apoc. 
On St. Luke's fondness for phrases 
with irp<5o-«i>irov (aird, irpo, KaTa), see 
Friedrich (Das Lucasevangelium, pp. 
8, 9, 89). The Lord is evidently God the 
Father, the Kaipoi are represented as 
present before God, already decreed and 
determined, and as coming down from 
His presence to earth (Weiss, Wendt). 
Christ speaks, i. 6, of the seasons which 
the Father hath set in His own power, 
and so St. Chrysostom speaks of God as 
oitios of the seasons of refreshment. 

Ver. 20. Kai. airooretX.'fl, i.e., at His 
Parousia. The construction is still oirws 
av with the verb, airoerr. is here used 
as in Luke iv. 18, 43, expressing that the 
person sent is the envoy or representative 
of the sender (iriyLirw is also used of the 
mission of our Lord). — tov irpoKCKTjpvy- 
pe'vov, T.R., see on ver. 18; but W.H., 
Blass, Weiss, tov irpoKexcipio-uevov vp.iv 
Xpiorrov, 'Itjo-ovv : " the Christ who hath 
been appointed for you, even Jesus ". So 
R.V. This verb is found with accusative 
of the person in the sense ot choosing, 
appointing, in Acts xxii. 14, xxvi. 16, 
and nowhere else in the N.T. ; cf. Josh. 

iii. 12, 2 Mace. iii. 7, viii. 9, Exod. vi. 
13 (cf. its use also in Dem., Polyb., 
Plut., and instances in Wetstein) ; Latin 
eligere, destinare. The expression here 
refers not only to the fact that Jesus 
was the appointed Christ, inasmuch as 
the covenant with Abraham was iulfilled 
in Him, ver. 25, but also to the return of 
Jesus as the Christ, the Messianic King, 
at His Parousia, in accordance with the 
voices of the Prophets. This is more 
natural than to suppose that the expres- 
sion means foreordained, i.e., from eter- 
nity, although St. Peter's words elsewhere 
may well be considered in connection 
with the present passage, 1 Pet. i. 20. 

Ver 21. p,£v: no answering 8e ex- 
pressed, but the antithesis is found in 
the axpi \p6vuv airoK., " quasi dicat : ubi 
illud tempus venerit, ex coelo in terras 
redibit," Grotius (so Weiss, Blass). — 6v 
Set otipavov 8e£ao-6at : the words have 
been rendered in three ways : (1) " whom 
the heaven must receive," i.e., as the 
place assigned to Him by God until the 
Parousia, Phil. iii. 20, Col. iii. 4. In this 
case 8ti is not used for e8et, as if St. Luke 
were referring to the past historical fact 
of the Ascension only, but Christ's ex- 
altation to heaven is represented as a 
fact continually present until His coming 
again ; or (2) the words have been taken 
as if ov were the subject, " who must 
possess the heaven ". But the former 
seems the more natural rendering, so in 
A.V. and R.V., as more in accordance 
with the use of 8€'x«o-0ai, and KaTe'xeiv 
would be rather the word in the second 
rendering (see Wendt's note). Zockler 
takes the words to mean "who must 
receive heaven," i.e., from the Father. 
Here St. Peter corrects the popular view 
that the Messiah should remain on earth, 
John xii. 34, and if we compare the words 
with the question asked in i. 6, they 
show how his views had changed of his 
Master's kingdom (see Hackett's note). — 
&xpi XP& VWV airoKaTao-TcurettS : the latter 
noun is not found either in LXX or else- 
where in N.T., but it is used by Polybius, 
Diodorus, Plutarch. In Josephus, Ant., 
xi., 3, 8, 9, it is used of the restoration' of 
the Jews to their own land from the 
captivity, and also in Philo., Decal., 30, 
of the restoration of inheritances at the 
Jubilee. The key to its meaning here is 
found not in the question of the disciples 
in i. 6, but in our Lord's own saying, 
Matt. xvii. n, Mark ix. 12, " Elias truly 




oupa^ov ftiv o^|a<x0ai a^pi -^pivotv diroKaTaoTaaews ■jrdvTwv, wr 
i\i\t]<rey 6 0e6s Sid ot<S|Aotos 1 trdvrwv aylwv aurou TTpo$r\T<av air' 

1 a-yi»v, prefix t»v instead of iravT»v fr^ABCD 27, 61, Vulg. verss., Iriat-, Chrys., 
Orig. ; so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt, avTov irpo(j>. air' aiwvos ; but 
S$*AB*C 61, 69 read air' aicovos av-rov irptxpijTwv, so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, 
Wendt. In D, Flor., Gig., Par., Iren., Tert., so Arm. air' aiuvos omitted ; so in Hilg. 

first cometh, and shall restore all things," 
Kot oiroKaTacrTi]<rei irdvTa, and cf. LXX, 
Mai. iv. 6, where the same verb is found 
(a-jroicwToa-r^treu). It was the teaching 
of the Scriptures that Elias should be 
the forerunner of the Messiah, Mai. iv. 5, 
and Matt. xvii. 11, and xi. 14. But his 
activity embraced both an external and an 
internal, i.e., a moral restoration, Ecclesi- 
asticus xlviii. 10. He is said icaTao-TTJtrai 
4>wXas Maicwf), to enable those who had 
been illegally excluded from the con- 
gregation to attain their inheritance. 
But he is eager also for the moral 
and religious renewal of his people. All 
disputes would be settled by him at his 
coming, and chiefly and above all he 
conducts the people to a great repent- 
ance, which will not be accomplished 
before he comes, Luke i. 16, 17 (Mai. iv. 
6, LXX). This is the inward and moral 
side of the airoieaTacrracris, Matt. xvii. n, 
Mark ix. 12. But as in Acts i. 6 our 
Lord had corrected the ideas of the dis- 
ciples as to an external restoration of the 
kingdom to Israel, so in the Gospels He 
had corrected their ideas as to the coming 
of Elias, and had bidden them see its 
realisation in the preaching of John the 
Baptist in turning the hearts of the 
fathers to the children, and the disobedi- 
ent to the wisdom of the just. And so 
the airoicaTeurTo<ris irdvTiov had already 
begun, in so far as men's hearts were 
restored to obedience to God, the begin- 
ning of wisdom, to the purity of family 
affection, to a love of righteousness and 
a hatred of iniquity. Even when the 
thoughts of the N.T. writers embrace the 
renewal of the visible creation, the moral 
and spiritual elements of restoration were 
present and prominent; cf. 2 Pet. iii. 13, 
Rom. viii. 19-21, Rev. xxi. 5. So too 
the iraXxvyevco-ia, in Matt. xix. 28, is 
joined with the rule which the disciples 
would share with their Lord, and in- 
volved great moral issues. A renewal 
of all things had no doubt been fore- 
told by the prophets, Is. xxxiv. 4, li. 6, 
lxv. 17 ; it was dwelt upon in later Jew- 
ish writings, and often referred to by 
the Rabbis (cf., e.g., Book of Enoch, xlv., 
a; brii., 1; xci., 16, 17; Apocalypse of 

Baruch, xxxii., and instances in Eder- 
sheim, Jesus the Messiah, ii., p. 343) ; 
but even amongst pious Israelites there 
was always a danger lest their hopes for 
the future should be mainly associated 
with material prosperity and national 
glorification. It is perhaps significant 
thas Josephus uses the two terms airo- 
KOTacTaais and -jraXiv-yeveaia in close 
conjunction of the restoration of the 
Jews to their own land after the exile. 
How this restoration of all things was 
to be effected, and what was involved 
in it, St. Peter does not say, but his 
whole trend of thought shows that it 
was made dependent upon man's re- 
pentance, upon his heart being right 
with God, see Weber, Judische Theol- 
ogie, p. 352 ff. (1897) ; Edersheim, 
Jesus the Messiah, ii., pp. 343, 706; 
Hauck's Real-Encyclopadie, " Apokatas- 
tasis," p. 616 ff. (1896).— iv refers to 
Xpovwv, so R.V. "whereof," i.e., of 
which times. Holtzmann and Wendt 
on the other hand refer &v to irdvrwv. 
But the words of our Lord in Matt. xvii. 
11 certainly point to the former reference, 
and the words are so taken by Weiss, 
Page, Hackett. In the article from 
Hauck quoted above, the writer speaks 
of the reference to \pov<av as the more 
correct, and points out that if S>v is the 
relative to irdvTwv, the restoration spoken 
of would no longer be a restoration of 
all things, but only of those things of 
which the prophets had spoken. On 
the prophecies referred to see above. 
All the words from irdvTwv to irpo^Tp-wv 
are ascribed by Hilgenfeld to his " author 
to Theophilus " ; the thought of the 
prophets existing air' at&vos (Luke i. 70) 
belongs in his opinion to the Paulinism 
of this reviser, just as in Luke's Gospel 
he carries back the genealogy of Jesus not 
to Abraham but to Adam. To a simi- 
lar Pauline tendency on the part of the 
same reviser, Hilgenfeld refers the intro- 
duction in w. 25, 26 of the promise made 
to Abraham embracing all the nations of 
the earth (Gal. iii. 16), and also the 
introduction of the word irpwrov (Rom. 
i. 16, ii. 9), to show that not only upon 
the Jews, but also upon the Gentiles had 




aiwi'os. 22. 1 Mgmttjs p.ef Y^P ^pos tous iraTe'pos elireK, "*Oti irpo- 
^r\TT]v ufiik dfacrrrjcret Kupios 6 ©eos u|x.a>r ck twc dSe\4xI)i' t>\xu)v, 
wsefie* auTOu dKOuacade Kara irdrra oaa de \a\Y]<rn irpos ojids. 
23. corai 8^, ira<ra »|»u)(il, ^tis av pi) a.Ko6cn\ tou irpo<prJTOu ckciuou, 

1 Mwotjs, so fc$EP ; but Muvo-qs in ABCD, so Tisch., W.H., Weiss, Hilg., so 
Winer-Schmiedel, p. 51. jiev yap ; but only p,ev in fc^ABCDE, vers., Iren., Chrys., 
so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt. irpos tovs ira/repa? om. fr^ABC 15, 18, 61, 
Vulg., Syr. Pesh., Boh.; so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt. 

God conferred the blessings of the Christ; 
cf. ii. 39, where the same revising hand 
is at work. But St. Peter's " univer- 
salism " here is in no way inconsistent 
with that of a pious Jew who would believe 
that all nations should be blessed through 
Israel, so far, i.e., as they conformed to 
the covenant and the law of Israel. 
Spitta sees no difficulty in referring both 
the passage before us and ii. 39 to the 
Jewish Diaspora (so too Jiingst). — Sia 
<TT<J(iaTos tg>v ay. irpocj). : cf. Luke i. 70, 
a "periphrasis of which St. Luke is fond 
(Plummer), cf. i. 16, iii. 18, iv. 25, 30, xv. 
7, not found in the other Evangelists 
except once in St. Matthew in a quota- 
tion, iv. 4. — air* alwvos : in the singular 
the phrase is only used by St. Luke in 
the N.T., Luke i. 70, Acts iii. 21, and 
xv. 18, but the plural air' alcivwv is used 
twice, Col. i. 26, Ephes. iii. 9 (Friedrich), 
cf. in LXX, Gen. vi. 4, Isaiah xlvi. 9, 
Jer. xxxv. (xxviii.) 8. The phrase here 
may be taken simply = " of old time," 
cf. Tobit iv. 12. 

Ver. 22. p^v : answered by, or rather 
connected with, icai irdvTes 8i (ver. 24), 
" Moses indeed, yea and all the Prophets 
from Samuel" — not "truly" as in A.V., 
as if p.ev were an adverb. The quotation 
is freely made from Deut. xviii. 15. On 
the Messianic bearing of the passage see 
Weber, Judische Theologie, p. 364 (1897), 
and Lumby, Acts, in loco. Wetstein 
sees no necessity to refer the word 
irpo^TTiv, ver. 22, to Jesus, but rather 
to the succession of prophets who in 
turn prophesied of the Coming One. 
But " similitudo non officit excellentiae " 
(Bengel, so Wendt), and the words in 
Deuteronomy were fulfilled in Christ 
alone, the new Law-giver ; the Revealer 
of God's will, of grace and truth, " Whom 
the Lord knew face to face," Who was 
from all eternity "with God". But the 
N.T. gives us ample reason for referring 
the verse, if not to the Messiah, yet at 
least to the Messianic conceptions of till- 
age. To say nothing of St. Stephen's 
significant reference to the same pro- 

phecy, vii. 37, it would certainly seem 
that in the conversation of our Lord with 
the Samaritan woman, John iv. 19 ff., 
the conception of the Messianic prophet 
is in her mind, and it was upon this pre- 
diction of a prophet greater than Moses 
that the Samaritans built their Messianic 
hopes (Briggs, Messiah of the Gospels, p. 
272, and see also for Deut. xviii. 15, and 
its Messianic fulfilment, Messianic Pro- 
phecy, p. no ff.). On other allusions in 
St. John's Gospel to the anticipation in 
Deut. xviii. 15 see Bishop Lightfoot, 
Expositor, i. (fourth series), pp. 84, 85 ; 
there are, he thinks, four passages, John 
i. 21, 25, vi. 14, vii. 40, in all of which 
"the prophet" is mentioned (so R.V. in 
each place). But whilst in St. John the 
conception is still Jewish (that is to say, 
St. John exhibits the Messianic concep- 
tions of his countrymen, who regard the 
Christ and the prophet as two different 
persons), in Acts it is Christian. St. 
Peter identified the prophet with the 
Christ (and so inferentially St. Stephen). 
(But see also Alford's note on St. John 
vi. 14, and also Weber, ubi supra, p. 354, 
for the view that Jeremiah was 6 irpo<^., 
in John i. 21, 25, vii. 40 (cf. 2 Mace. xv. 
14), whilst Wendt's Teaching of Jesus, i., 
pp. 67-69, E.T., should also be consulted.) 
— wsepe: rendered by A. V. and R.V. "like 
me " (the meaning of the Hebrew, in loco), 
but in margin R.V. has " as he raised up 
me," a rendering adopted as the only 
admissible one of the Greek by Page and 
Rendall ; as no doubt it is, if we read 
wenrep, as in LXX, Deut. xviii. 18. But 
ws is found in the LXX in v. 15. Cer- 
tainly the rendering in A.V. and R.V. 
could not be applied to any one prophet 
so truly as to Christ, and the ws ep,€ is a 

rendering of the familiar Hebrew 3 (Lum- 
by), which is so frequent in the LXX ; 
see also Grimm-Thayer, sub v., and 
Delitzsch, Messianische Weissagungen, 
p. 46 ff., second edition (1899). 

Ver. 23. corai 8J, cf. ii. 17. The 
expression, which is not in the Hebrew, 

1 1 8 



e£o\o6peu9r)cr€TCK e* too Xaoo. 24. koi irdrrcs &« 01 Trpo^fJTCu. 
diro lafAOurjX kou twp KaGe^TJs, 1 oaot cXdXrjaa*', Kal TrpoKaT^yYCiXaK 

1 oo-oi, D has 8 eXaX-rjo-ev — Harris accounts for as quodquod of d, read as quod, 
and so 0. T.R. has the support of ^BC 3 EP ; so W.H., Weiss. 01 in ^C 2 D 2 , Vulg., 
Gig., Par. 2 . 

seems to call attention to what follows. — 
eloXeOpcvOijo-eTai «k tov Xaov : " shall be 
utterly destroyed" (eg), R.V. In the 
LXX, Deut. xviii. 19, following the 
Hebrew, the words are kyit ckSiki]0-w 
e£ aiirov, " I will require it of him ". 
But the phrase which St. Peter uses 
was a very common one, from Gen. 
xvii. 14, for the sentence of death, 
cf. also Exod. xii. 15, 19, Lev. xvii. 4, 
9, Num. xv. 30. Here again the quota- 
tion is evidently made freely or from 
memory. The strong verb, although 
frequent in the LXX, is found only here 
in the N.T. It is used by Josephus and 
by Philo, but not in classical Greek. 
The warning is evidently directed against 
wilful disobedience, and is expressed in 
terms signifying the utterness of the de- 
struction from the people. But in their 
original meaning in the O.T. they need 
not refer to anything more than the 
penalty of the death of the body, and it 
is not necessary to see in them here any 
threat of eternal punishment in Gehenna 
(so Wendt, Holtzmann, Felten). If the 
word has any eschatological bearing it 
would support the theory of annihilation 
more easily. Grotius explains e£oXc0., 
" morte violenta aut immatura," and he 
adds " mystice etiam Rabbini hoc ad 
poenas post hanc vitam referunt," but 
this is quite apart from the primary mean- 
ing of the word. 

Ver. 24. XafiovT|X : On Samuel as the 
founder of the prophetic schools and the 
pattern of all later prophets, see Ham- 
burger, Real-Encyclofadie des Juden- 
tums,i.,6, p. 854; " Prophet,"*:/. Midrash 
Shemuel, c. 24, where Samuel is called 
the Rabban, tie chief and teacher of the 
prophets ( Wetstein, in loco, and Lumby), 
cf. also Heb. xi. 32, AaveiS re Kal I. Kal 
tuv "rrpo4>T)Ttiv. — Kal twv KaOefrjs : an 
unmistakable tautology. Wendt con- 
siders the expression as inaccurate, see 
his note, and for a full discussion cf. 
Winer-Moulton, lxvii. 2, who compares 
Luke xxiv. 27, = "all the series of 
prophets beginning from Samuel 
(Page) ; " longa tamen successione, uno 
tamen consensu " (Calvin). Ka0e£. used 
by St. Luke alone, Luke i. 3, viii. 1, 
Acts xi. 4, xviii. 23. In Greek writers = 

c4>c|tjs> not found in LXX. — Kal KaTijyy. 
ras ^(Aepas TavTas : "have also told of 
these days," i.e., the present days, cf. 
v. 36, Luke xxiv. 18. This interpreta- 
tion does not prevent the identification 
of " these days " with the xp^ v ° l """HS 
diroKaTao-racrews, since in one sense 
the restoration had already begun with 
the coming of the forerunner and 
of the Christ, and in the acceptance 
of the repentance which they had 
preached. Rendall renders ' ' yea, so 
said all the prophets from Samuel 
... as many as have spoken and told 
of these days," as if the fact which St. 
Peter wished to emphasise was that all 
the prophets had spoken threats of utter 
destruction like Moses. But the Greek 
does not by any means of necessity bear 
this construction (Viteau, Le Grec du N. 
2™-» P- 55 (!896), and such an interpreta- 
tion seems too harsh. As Wendt admits, 
the reference is not merely to the pro- 
phetical sayings relating to the last judg- 
ment, but also to the promises of salva- 
tion and to all which is connected with 
the \p6voi diroKar. Moreover the refer- 
ence to Samuel is made because of 
Nathan's prediction, " the fundamental 
prophecy respecting the seed of David," 
2 Sam. vii. 12 ff., in which it is foretold 
that mercy shall not be taken away even 
in the midst of punishment. Blass ex- 
plains the expression -ras T|{A«p. tovt. 
" regni felicis Messianici " ; but we must 
remember that it does not follow that the 
popular views of the Messianic kingdom 
and judgment were still held by St. Peter. 
Ver. 25. vucts, as in ver. 26, emphatic, 
" obligat auditores " Bengel, cf. ii. 39, 
Rom. ix. 4, xv. 8 ; their preference and 
destiny ought to make them more sensible 
of their duty in the reception of the 
Messiah ; vloi, " sons " as in Matt. viii. 
12, R.V. The rendering " disciples " 
(Matt. xii. 2), even if vloi could be so 
rendered with irpo^rp-wv (J. Lightfoot, 
Kuinoel), could not be applied to tt)s 
8ia0i)irr|s. The expression is Hebraistic, 
see Grimm-Thayer, sub vi6%, 2, and on 
many similar expressions Deissmann, 
Bibehtudien, p. 163 ff. — Sia0. Si«9«to, cf. 
Heb. viii. 10, x. 16, Gen. xv. 18, 1 Mace, 
i. 11, for a similar construction in LXX 




Tas ^fiepas TauTas. 25. upeis core 1 uiot twv Trpo4>T}Ta>c, teal ttjs 
8ia0r|KT)s *)s SieOeTO 6 ©eos irpos -rods ivaTepas * TQU-uiy, \ey<av vpbs 

1 vioi, prefix 01 NABCE 61, Boh., Sah. ; so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss. 

2 t)|xwv ^*CDP 1, 13, 31, Vulg., Boh., Sah., Syrr. (P. and H.), Arm., Aeth., so 
Tisch., W.H. margin, Hilg. ; vp-wv ^ 3 ABE, Sahwoi., Armcodd., Chrys., so W.H. 
text, Weiss, Wendt. 

in more than seventy places, so also fre- 
quently in classical writers. — Siadi]KY)$ : 
on the word, see below, vii. 8. — ev t« 
<nrepp.aTi <rov, cf. Gen. xxii. 18, xii. 3. 
For the application of the prophecy to 
the Messiah as the seed of Abraham by 
the Rabbinical writers, see Wetstein on 
Gal. iii. 16 (and Edersheim, Jesus the 
Messiah, ii., p. 712) ; so by St. Luke, al- 
though the words of the prophecy were 
first uttered in a collective sense. — 
TraTpial: "families," R.V., Luke ii. 4, 
Eph. iii. 15 ; " kindreds," A.V., is the 
rendering of other words, iv. 5, vii. 3. 
iraTpid is found in LXX (and in Hero- 
dotus) ; in Gen. xii. 3 <lmXai is used, and 
in xviii. 18 eOvr], but in Ps. xxii. 27 and 
in 1 Chron. xvi. 28 we have the phrase 
ai irarpiat twv eflvwv (but see Nbsgen, 
in loco). In this quotation, cf. Gal. iii. 
8, 16, and in the -srpwTov of the next 
verse we may see a striking illustration 
of the unity of Apostolic preaching, 
and the recognition of God's purpose 
by St. Peter and St. Paul alike (Rom. 
i. 16, ii. 9, 10). — evevXoyq8i]crovTa,i : 
ev of the instrument as often : the verb 
is not used in classical writers, but Blass 
gives several instances of verbs similarly 
compounded with Iv, cf. IvevSaipovEiv, 
eveuSoKipEtv. The compound verb is 
found several times in LXX. 

Ver. 26. -irpwTov — : again 
emphatic. In the words of St. Peter 
we may again note his agreement with 
St. Paul, xiii. 46, Rom. i. 16 (x. 11), al- 
though no doubt St. Peter snared the 
views of his nation in so far that Gentiles 
could only participate in the blessings of 
the Messianic kingdom through accept- 
ance of Judaism. —<rrqo-as, cf. ver. 
22, rbv iraiSa, " his servant," R.V., see 
above on ver. 13. aire'o-reiXev also shows 
that dvcwr. here refers not to the Resur- 
rection but to the Incarnation. — euXo- 
YovvTa : as in the act of blessing, present 
participle ; the present participle ex- 
pressing that the Christ is still continuing 
His work of blessing on repentance, but 
see also Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, 
p. 171. — ev t^: this use of ev governing 
the dative with the infinitive is most 
commonly temporal, but it is used to 

express other relations, such as manner, 
means, as here (cf. iv. 30, where the 
attempt to give a temporal sense is very 
far-fetched, Hackett, in loco); see Burton, 
u. s., p. 162, and Blass, Grammatik des 
N. G., p. 232. This formula of ev with 
the dative of the article and the infinitive 
is very common in St. Luke, both in his 
Gospel and in the Acts, and is char- 
acteristic of him as compared with 
the number of times the same formula 
is used by other writers in the N.T., 
Friedrich, Das Lucasevangelium, p. 
37, and also Zeller, *~ of the 

Apostles, ii., p. 196, E.L ' 3 also in 
the LXX the same construction is found, 
cf. Gen. xix. r6, xxxiv. 15, etc. — diro- 
errpe4>eiv '■ probably intransitive (Blass, 
Grimm, and so often in LXX, although 
the English A. and R.V. may be under- 
stood in either sense). Vulgate renders 
" ut convertat se unusquisque," but the 
use of the verb elsewhere in Luke xxiii. 
14 (cf. also Rom. xi. 26, Isa. lix. 20) 
makes for the transitive sense (so Weiss, 
in loco). The argument from ver. 19 (as 
Alford points out) does not decide the 
matter either way (see also Holtzmann). 
— irovTipiur, cf. Luke xi. 39, and adjective 
irovT]po9 frequent both in the Gospel and 
in the Acts ; in LXX both words are very 
common. The word may denote miseries 
as well as iniquities, as Bengel notes, 
but the latter sense is demanded by the 
context. irpwTov according to Jiingst 
does not mark the fact that the Jews 
were to be converted first and the Gen- 
tiles afterwards, but as belonging to the 
whole clause, and as referring to the first 
and past sending of Jesus in contrast to 
the second (ver. 20) and future sending 
in glory. But to support this view 
Jiingst has no hesitation in regarding 
25b as an interpolation, and so nothing 
is left but a reference to the 8ia6i]KT| of 
God with the fathers, i.e., circumcision, 
which is quite in place before a Jewish 

St. Peter's Discourses. — More recent 
German criticism has departed far from 
the standpoint of the early Tubrigen 
school, who could only see in these dis- 
courses the free composition of a latei 




'APpodfi, " Kal tw <riT^p|xaTi cou eyeuXoyTjOiqo-oi'Tai iracrai at iraTpial 
ttjs Y^5-" a ^ - "f"" ■""pwTOk' 6 0eos avaor^cras toc iraiBa auTOu 

age, whilst Dr. McGiffert, in spite of his 
denial of the Lucan authorship of Acts, 
inclines to the belief that the discourses 
in question represent an early type of 
Christian teaching, derived from primi- 
tive documents, and that they breathe 
the spirit of St. Peter and of primitive 
Jewish Christianity. Feine sees in the 
contents of the addresses a proof that 
we have in them a truthful record of the 
primitive Apostolic teaching. Just the 
very points which were of central interest 
in this early period of the Church's life 
are those emphasised here, e.g. , the proof 
that Jesus of Nazareth, the Crucified One, 
is the Messiah, a proof attested by His 
Resurrection, the appeal to Israel, the 
chosen people, to repent for the remission 
of sins in His name. Nor is there any- 
thing against the speeches in the fact of 
their similarity; in their first and early 
preaching, as Feine urges, the Apostles' 
thoughts would naturally move in the same 
circle, they would recur again and again 
to the same facts, and their addresses 
could scarcely be otherwise than similar. 
Moreover we have an appeal to the facts 
of the life of Jesus as to things well 
known in the immediate past : " Jesus of 
Nazareth" had been working in the 
midst of them, and Peter's hearers were 
witnesses with him of His signs and 
wonders, " as ye yourselves know," ii. 
23 ; we become conscious in such words 
and in their context of all the moral 
indignation and the deep pain of the 
Apostles at the crucifixion of their Mas- 
ter, just as in iii. 13 we seem to listen to 
another personal reminiscence of the 
Passion history (see Beyschlag, Neutest. 
Theol., i., pp. 304, 305 ; Scharfe, Die 
Petrinische Stromung, 2 c, pp. 184, 185). 
The fact that no reference is made to, 
or at all events that no stress is laid 
upon, the doctrinal significance of the 
death of Christ, as by St. Paul, is 
again an intimation that we are dealing 
with the earliest days of Apostolic teach- 
ing — the death of the Cross was in itself 
the fact of all others which was the 
insuperable offence to the Jew, and it 
could not help him to proclaim that 
Christ died for his sins if he had no 
belief in Jesus as the Christ. The first 
and necessary step was to prove to the 
Jew that the suffering of the Messiah 
was in accordance with the counsels of 
God and with the voices of the prophets 
(Lechler, Das Apostolische Zeitalter, pp. 

230, 231). But the historical fact accep- 
ted, its inner and spiritual significance 
would be imparted, and there was nothing 
strange in the fact that disciples who 
had themselves found it so difficult to 
overcome their repugnance to the men- 
tion of their Master's sufferings, should 
first direct their main efforts to remove 
the like prejudice from the minds of their 
countrymen. But we cannot adduce 
from this method that the Apostles had 
never heard such words as those of Christ 
(Matt. xx. 28, Mark x. 45, cf. 1 Peter i. 18) 
{cf. the striking passage in Beyschlag, 
u. s., pp. 306, 307), or that they were 
entirely ignorant of the atoning signi- 
ficance of His Death. St. Paul, 1 Cor. 
xv. 1-3, speaks of the tradition which he 
had received, a tradition in which he 
was at one with the Twelve, ver. n, viz., 
that Christ died for our sins according 
to the Scriptures (Feine, Die vorkan- 
onische U eberlieferung des Lukas; see 
p. 230). 

When we pass to the consideration of 
St. Peter's Christology, we again see 
how he starts from the actual experience 
of his hearers before him : " Jesus of 
Nazareth, a man," etc. — plainly and 
fearlessly St. Peter emphasises the man- 
hood of his Lord — the title which is 
never found in any of the Epistles leads 
us back to the Passion and the Cross, to 
the early records of the Saviour's life on 
earth, Acts xxiv. 9, xxii. 8. And yet the 
Crucified Nazarene was by a startling 
paradox the Prince or Author of Life 
(see note on apxnyte) ', by a divine law 
which the Jews could not discern He 
could not save Himself — and yet — 
another paradox — there was no other 
Name given amongst men whereby they 
must be saved. 

St. Paul could write of Him, Who took 
upon Him the form of a servant, Who 
humbled Himself, and became obedient 
to the death of the Cross, Phil. ii. 6 ; and 
St. Peter, in one familiar word, which so 
far as we know St. Paul never used, brings 
before his hearers the same sublime pic- 
ture of obedience, humility, death and 
glory ; Jesus is the ideal, the glorified 
" Servant " of God (see note on iii. 13). 
But almost in the same breath St. Peter 
speaks of the Servant as the Holy and 
Righteous One, iii. 14; holy, in that 
He was consecrated to the service of 
Jehovah (£7105, iv. 27, 30, see note, 
and ii. 27) ; righteous, in that He was 




!t]ctoG»', 1 direoTeiXev aitjov euXoyouyTOi upas, iv tw diroorpc^ciK 
etcaoroy diro iw ■n-oiTjpicii' ufxwk. 

1 Irjo-ovvom. ^BCDE 6i, Vulg. ; so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Hilg. vpav 
^AC 3 DEP i, 31, 61, Syrr. (P. and H.), Arm., Aeth., so Tisch. [W.H.]., Weiss; in 
B, Chrys., Theophyl. omitted ; C s 13, Vulg., Sah., Boh., Irint. read avT«v. 

also the impersonation of righteousness, 
a righteousness which the Law had pro- 
claimed, and which Prophets and Kings 
had desired to see, but had not seen 
(Isaiah liii. 11). But whilst we note these 
titles, steeped each and all of them in 
O.T. imagery, whilst we may see in them 
the germs of the later and the deeper 
theology of St. Paul and St. John (see 
Dr. Lock, " Christology of the Earlier 
Chapters of the Acts," Expositor, iv. 
(fourth series), p. 178 ff.), they carry us 
far beyond the conception of a mere 
humanitarian Christ. It is not only that 
Jesus of Nazareth is set before us as " the 
very soul and end of Jewish Prophecy," 
as Himself the Prophet to whom the 
true Israel would hearken, but that He 
is associated by St. Peter even in his 
earliest utterances, as none other is as- 
sociated, with Jehovah in His Majesty in 
the work of salvation, ii. 34; the salva- 
tion which was for all who called upon 
Jehovah's Name, ii. 21, was also for all 
in the Name, in the power of Jesus 
Christ, iv. 12 (see notes, I. c, and cf. 
the force of the expression liriicaXeurtiai 
to ovopa in 1 Cor. i. 2, Schmid, Bib- 
lische Theologie, p. 407) ; the Spirit 
which Joel had foretold would be poured 
forth by Jehovah had been poured forth 
by Jesus raised to the right hand of God, 
ii. 18, 33 (see further notes in chap. x. 36, 

42, 43). 

One other matter must be briefly 
noticed — the correspondence in thought 
and word between the St. Peter of the 
early chapters of the Acts and the St. 
Peter of the First Epistle which bears 
his name. A few points may be selected. 
St. Peter had spoken of Christ as the 
Prince of Life ; quite in harmony with 
this is the thought expressed in 1 Pet. 
i. 3, of Christians as " begotten again " 
by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from 
the dead. St. Peter had spoken of Christ 
as the Holy and Righteous One, so in 
the First Epistle he sets forth this aspect 
of Christ's peculiar dignity, His sinless- 
ness. As in Acts, so also in 1 Pet. the 
thought of the sufferings of Christ is 
prominent, but also that of the glory 
which should follow, chap, i., ver. n. 
As in Acts, so also in 1 Pet. these 

sufferings are described as undeserved, 
but also as foreordained by God and in 
accordance with the voices of the Pro- 
phets, 1 Pet. i. n and ii. 22-25. As in 
Acts, so in 1 Pet. it is the special 
task of the Apostles to be witnesses of 
the sufferings and also of the resurrection 
of Christ, chap. v. 1. As in Acts, so 
in 1 Pet. we have the clearest testimony 
to the 8<5|a of Christ, 1 Pet. i. 21 and 
iv. 11. As in Acts stress is laid not 
only upon the facts of the life of Christ, 
but also upon His teaching, x. 34 ff., so 
also in 1 Pet., while allusions are made 
to the scenes of our Lord's Passion with 
all the force of an eye-witness, we have 
stress laid upon the word of Christ, the 
Gospel or teaching, i. 12, 23, 25, ii. 2, 8, 
iii. 19, iv. 6. As in Acts, so in 1 Pet. 
we have a reference to the agency of 
Christ in the realm of the dead, 1 Pet. 
iii. 19, iv. 6. As in Acts, x. 42, so in 
1 Pet. Christ is Himself the judge of 
quick and dead, iv. 6, or in His unity 
with the Father shares with Him that 
divine prerogative, cf. i. 17. As in Acts, 
so in 1 Pet. the communication of the 
Holy Spirit is specially attributed to the 
exalted Christ, cf. Acts ii. 33, 1 Pet. i. 
11, 12. As in Acts, so in 1 Pet. Christ 
is the living corner-stone on which 
God's spiritual house is built, Acts iv. 12 
and 1 Pet. ii. 4-10. As in Acts, so 
in 1 Pet. not only the details but the 
whole scope of salvation is regarded in 
the light and as a fulfilment of O.T. 
prophecy, cf. Acts iii. 18-25, I P et - "• 22 i 
23, and i. 10-12. But this correspon- 
dence extends to words, amongst which 
we may note irpt^yvowis, Acts ii. 23, 
1 Pet. i. 2, a word found nowhere else 
in the N.T. , and used in each passage 
in the same sense ; dirpoircoiroXrj(xirT<i>s, 
1 Pet. i. 17, and only here in N.T., but cf. 
Acts x. 34, oiik !<TTiv irpo<rti)iro\Tj(i'n , TTjs. 
gvXov twice used by St. Peter in Acts v. 
30, x. 39 (once by St. Paul), and again 
in 1 Pet. ii. 24; eJ^piTos only in the 
Cornelius history, Acts x. 28, by St. 
Peter, and in 1 Pet. iv. 3 ; pap-rvs with 
the genitive of that to which testimony 
is rendered, most frequently in N.T. 
used by St. Peter, cf. Acts i. 22, vi. 32, 
x. 39, and 1 Pet. v. 1 ; and further, in 




IV. I. AAAOYNTQN Se auTue irpos toc XaoV, cTrcoTTjaav auTOis ol 
lepeis l Kal 6 oTparnyos tou Upou kcu ot laoSouKaioi, 2. Siairwou- 

1 icpcis ^ADEP i, 31, 61, Vulg., Sah., Boh., Syrr. (P. and H.), Lucif., Chrys., so 
Tisch., W.H. margin, R.V. text, Weiss, Hilg. ; apxi«p«s BC 4, Arm., Aeth., so W.H. 
text, R.V. margin, Wendt ; o orpaT. tov lepov om. by D, but accepted by Blass in |3. 

Acts iv. 11 = 1 Pet. ii. 7, Acts x. 42 = 1 
Pet. iv. 5, the verbal correspondence is 
very close. 

See on the whole subject Nosgen, 
Apostelgeschichte, p. 48 ; Lechler, Das 
Apost. Zeitalter, p. 428 ff. ; Schaife, Die 
Petrinische Stromung, 2 c, p. 122 ff. ; 
Lumby, Expositor, iv. (first series), pp. 
118, 123; and also Schmid, Biblische 
Theologie, p. 389 ff. On the striking 
connection between the Didache, and the 
language of St. Peter's sermons, and the 
phraseology of the early chapters of 
Acts, see Gore, Church and the Ministry, 
p. 416. 

Chapter IV. — Ver. 1. XaXovvTtw 8e 
avraiv : the speech was interrupted, as 
the present participle indicates, and we 
cannot treat it as if we had received it in 
full. It is no doubt possible to infer 
from ovtwv that St. John also addressed 
the people. — eir«rr»)o-av avTois : com- 
monly used with the notion of coming 
upon one suddenly, so of the coming of 
an angel, xii. 7, xxiii. 11, Luke ii. 9, xxiv. 
4, sometimes too as implying a hostile 
purpose, cf. vi. 12, xvii. 5, and St. Luke 
(x. 40), xx. 1. For its use in the LXX 
cf. Wisdom vi. 5, 8, xix. 1. — oi lepeis : 
" the priests," so A. and R.V., but the 
latter, margin, "the chief priests," see 
critical note, apx^peis would comprise 
probably the members of the privileged 
high-priestly families in which the high- 
priesthood was vested (Schurer, Jewish 
People, div. ii., vol. i., pp. 203-206, E.T.), 
Jos., B. J., vi., 2, 2. That the members 
of these families occupied a distinguished 
position we know (cf. iv. 6), and there is 
nothing improbable in the supposition 
that the description apxiepeis would in- 
clude them as well as the ex-high-priests, 
and the one actually in office ; this seems 
justified from the words of Josephus in 
the passage referred to above (Deren- 
bourg, Histoire de la Palestine, p. 231). 
— 6 orpaTijYos tov lepov : the captain of 
the Temple (known chiefly in Jewish 
writings as " the man of the Temple 
Mount "). He had the chief superintend- 
ence of the Levites and priests who were 
on guard in and around the Temple, and 
under him were oTpaTTjYoi, who were 
also captains of the Temple police, 

although subordinate to the crTpa-nyYos 
as their head. The crrpaT. tov lepov was 
not only a priest, but second in dignity 
to the high-priest himself (Schurer, u. s., 
pp. 258, 259, 267, and Edersheim, u. s., 
and History of the Jewish Nation, p. 
139), Acts v. 24, 26, Jos., Ant., xx., 6, 2, 
B. J., vi., 5, 3. For the use of the term 
in the LXX, see Schurer, «. s., p. 258. 
In 2 Mace. iii. 4 the " governor of the 
Temple " is identified by some with the 
officer here and in v. 24, but see Rawlin- 
son's note in loco in Speaker's Commentary. 
— Kal ot laSSo-uKaioi : at this time, as 
Josephus informs us, however strange it 
may appear, the high-priestly families 
belonged to the Sadducean party. Not 
that the Sadducees are to be identified 
entirely with the party of the priests, 
since the Pharisees were by no means 
hostile to the priests as such, nor the 
priests to the Pharisees. But the Sad- 
ducees were the aristocrats, and to the 
aristocratic priests, who occupied in- 
fluential civil positions, the Pharisees 
were bitterly opposed. Jos., Ant., xvii., 
10, 6, xviii., 1, 4, xx., 9, 1. Schurer, u. s., 
div. ii., vol. ii., pp. 29-43, an( i div. ii., vol. 
i., p. 178 ff. The words ot Ia88. and 
r\ overa atpecris twv Z., ver. 17, are re- 
ferred by Hilgenfeld to his " author to 
Theophilus," as also the reference to the 
preaching of the Resurrection as the 
cause of the sore trouble to the Sad- 
ducees ; but the mention of the Sadducees 
at least shows (as Weizsacker and Holtz- 
mann admit) that the author of Acts had 
correct information of the state of parties 
in Jerusalem : " The Sadducees were at 
the helm, and the office of the high-priest 
was in Sadducean hands, and the Sad 
ducees predominated in the high-priestly 
families " (Weizsacker, Apostolic Age, i., 
61, E.T.). 

Ver. 2. 8ia.irovovp.evo 1, cf. xvi. iS, 
only in Acts in the N.T., not, as often in 
classical Greek, referring to the exertions 
made by them, but to the vexation which 
they felt, "being sore troubled," R.V. 
(irdvos, dolor, Blass), cf. LXX, Eccles. 
x. 9, used of pain caused to the body, 
and 2 Mace. ii. 28, R. (A. al. drovovvTts), 
but cf. Aquila, Gen. vi. 6, xxxiv. 7, 1 Sam. 
xx ' 3> 34> of mental grief. — iv tw 'It)o-ov : 




p,evoi Sid to 8iod<TK€iv outoos tov Xaov, Kal 1 KaTayytXXeiv iv tu 
IrjaoG ty)v dvaorao-iv ttjv ck vtKpwi' • 3. Kal eircpaXov auTOis Tas 
X€ipas, 2 Kal €0€rro els Tr^pnatv €is ty]v aupiov • r\v yap coTre'pa rfii\. 
4. iroXXol 8e twv dKouo-dvTwv t6v Xoyov cmoreuaav ■ Kal cycn^T) 6 

1 D reads avayyeXXeiv tov 1. cv ttj ava<rra<rci twv vcKpwv, but Blass rejects (Chase 
contends for Syriac) ; tjjv ck vcKpwv fr^ABCE, Vulg., Boh., Syrr. (P. and H.) ; twv 
v£Kp&>v DP, h, 31, Flor., Gig., Par., Sah., Arm., Aeth., Lucif., Ir., Chrys. 

2 x«tp<is ! after this word Flor. inserts eKparrjcrav clvtovs (which Zockler and 
Belser regard as original) ; for circpaXov D reads EirifSaXovrcs. 

not "through," but as in R.V., "in 
Jesus," i.e., " in persona Jesu quern resur- 
rexisse dicebant " (Blass). Others render 
it "in the instance of Jesus" (so Holtz- 
mann, Wendt, Felten, Zockler). — t»|v 
ovdo-Tao-iv ff|v ck vcKpwv : on the form 
of the expression see Plummer on St. 
Luke, xx. 35, and Lumby's note, in loco. 
It must be distinguished from (r\) dvewr- 
Tatris twv veKpwv. It is the more limited 
term implying that some from among the 
dead are raised, while others as yet are 
not ; used of the Resurrection of Christ 
and of the righteous, cf. with this pas- 
sage 1 Peter i. 3 (Col. i. 18), but see also 
Grimm-Thayer, sub dvd<rracris. It was 
not merely a dogmatic question of the 
denial of the Resurrection which con- 
cerned the Sadducees, but the danger to 
their power, and to their wealth from 
the Temple sacrifices and dues, if the Re- 
surrection of Jesus was proclaimed and 
accepted (see Wendt and Holtzmann, in 
loco, and Plummer on Luke xxiii. 1-7, 
note). Spitta agrees with Weiss, Feine, 
Jungst, in regarding the mention of the 
distress of the Sadducees at the preaching 
of the Apostles as not belonging to the 
original source. But it is worthy of 
notice that in estimating the positive 
value of his source, A., he decides to 
retain the mention of the Sadducees in 
rv. 1 — it would have been more easy, he 
thinks, for a forger to have represented 
the enmity to the Church as proceeding 
not from the Sadducees but from the 
Pharisees, as in the Gospels. But the 
Sadducees, as Spitta reminds us, accord- 
ing to J osephus, included the high-priestly 
families in their number, and it was by 
this sect that at a later date the death of 
James the Just was caused. Only once 
in the Gospels, John xii. 10, the chief 
priests, rather than the Pharisees, take 
the initiative against our Lord, but this 
was in the case of what was essentially a 
question for the Sadducees (as here in 
Acts iv. 2), the advisability of getting rid 
of Lazarus, a living witness to the truth 

which the Sadducees denied. It is no 
unfair inference that the chief priests in 
St. John occupy the place of the Saddu- 
cees in the Synoptists, as the latter are 
never mentioned by name in the fourth 
Gospel ; and if so, this is exactly in ac- 
cordance with what we should expect 
from the notices here and in Acts v. 17, 
and in Josephus ; see on the point Light- 
foot in Expositor, 1890, pp. 86, 87. 

Ver. 3. tWfiaXov avTois Tas x € ^P a « •' 
the verb is always as here joined with 
the same noun in Acts, and twice in the 
Gospel ; the phrase is found once in 
Matthew and Mark, and twice in John ; 
see Luke xx. 19, xxi. 12, Acts iv. 3, v. 18, 
xii. 1, xxi. 27, cf. in LXX, Gen. xxii. 12, 
2 Sam. xviii. 12 ; Esther vi. 2, so also in 
Polybius. — r»)pT]<riv, cf. v. 18, only used 
elsewhere in N.T. by St. Paul, 1 Cor. 
vii. 19; in Thuc, vii., 86 (Wendt), 
it denotes not only the act of guarding, 
but also a place of custody. Five 
times in LXX, but in the former sense. 
For another instance of its meaning 
as a place of custody (see Deissmann, 
Ncue Bibelstudien, p. 55), on papyrus in 
Egypt, second or third century after 
Christ. — tJv yap ecrcrcp* tJStj, cf. iii. 1, 
the judicial examination must therefore 
be postponed until the next day, see Jer. 
xxi. 12, on which it appears that the 
Rabbis founded this prohibition against 
giving judgment in the night (Lumby 
and Felten, in loco). — c<rircpa: only in 
St. Luke in the N.T., Luke xxiv. 29, 
Acts iv. 3 (xx. 15, W.H. margin) and 
xxviii. 23. 

Ver. 4. lycvijfrr) : " came to be " R.V., 
only here in St. Luke, except in the quo- 
tation in i. 20 (see also vii. 13, D., and 
Blass in (3 — hellenistic, frequently in LXX ; 
in N.T. cf. 1 Thess. ii. 14, Col. iv. n ; also 
Jos., Ant., x., 10, 2, Winer-Schmiedel, p. 
108, note). — dvSpwv. This word here ap- 
pears to be used of men only (so Wet- 
stein, Blass), cf. Matt. xiv. 21, Mark vi. 
40, for although we cannot argue with 
Weiss Jfrom v. 14, that women in great 

I2 4 



dpi6/i.os 1 tu>v dk'Spwv woVi ^iXtdSes irevre. 5. 'Eyckero Se 4m i4]f 
aupiof 2 <xuyay(Qr\va.i auiw tous ap^orras Kal Trpea|3uT€pous Kal YP a F-~ 
fiareis els 'UpouCTaXrju,, 6. Kal "Ayyay 8 Toy dpxiepe'a Kal Kaidcpav Kal 
'iwdkKtji' Kal AXe^afSpoy, Kai oaoi rjcraK ck y^ 011 ? dp^iepantcou. 

1 6 api6p.os, so AEP 31, 61, Chrys. ; but article om. fr$BD, soTisch., W.H., R.V., 
Weiss, utrei EP, Chrys. ; <os BD, so W.H., Weiss, Hilg. ; om. fr$A 61, Vulg. verss., 
so Tisch., Wendt (who compares ii. 41 and regards «os or ucrei as added accordingly). 

2 After avpiov D, Flor. add ripepav, so Hilg. ; Chase by assim. to Syriac, Harris by 
assim. to Bezan Latin — crastinum diem. But cf. crrjp,£pov T) in N.T., Acts xx. 26, 
Rom. xi. 8, 2 Cor. iii. 14. eis Up. fc^P 1, 31, Syr. Hard., so Tisch., Wendt; ev 
ABDE 61, Chrys., so W.H., R.V., Weiss, Hilg. ; Flor., Syr. Pesh. omit. <rvvax0T]vai,, 
D, Flor. change constr. trvvTjx&rjordv 01 apx- 

3 Awav, ace, EP 1, 31, 61, Chrys. ; Awas, nom. (and so all the proper names), 
fc^BD 15, 18, 36, 61, so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt (who holds, as against 
Meyer, that the noms. are not derived from o-uvy]-x&i\&av in D, but that the latter 
was occasioned by the noms.). Ibjawrjv, D, Gig., Par. 1 read Iceva6a$. Blass contends 
for the correctness of D, so Hilg., IwvaOas = Jonathan, son of Annas, who succeeded 
Caiaphas, Josephus, Ant., xviii., 4, 3 (see Blass, Acta Apost., 72 and 35), Iwawrjs 
being a common name and an unknown man. But we cannot conceive that Luke 
would himself have altered IcuvaOas into Iwawns, so Blass regards the former as the 
reading in a and — lo»awt)9 a later blunder. 

numbers did not join the Church until a 
later period (cf. also ii. 41, where women 
may well have been included), yet it 
seems that St. Luke, by his use of one 
word, dvSpwv, here refers to the additional 
number of men. St. Luke does not say 
that five thousand of St. Peter's hearers 
were converted, in addition to those al- 
ready converted at Pentecost (although 
Dr. Hort, following Chrys., Aug., Jer., 
takes this view, Judaistic Christianity, 
p. 47), or that five thousand were added, 
but his words certainly mark the growing 
expansion of the Church in spite of threat- 
ening danger, as this is also evident on 
the view that five thousand represent the 
total number of believers. The instances 
above from the Gospels are generally 
quoted to confirm the view here taken, 
but Wendt, in loco, curiously quotes the 
same passages in proof that dvSpuv here 
includes women. The numbers are re- 
garded by him as by Weizsacker as arti- 
ficial, but see above on i. 15. 

Ver. 5. fyeveTo Si: the formula is 
another characteristic of St. Luke's style, 
Friedrich, Das Lucasevangelium, p. 13, 
also Dalman, DU Worte Jesu, pp. 26, 29. 
Compare for the type of construction, 
according to which what takes place is 
put in the infinitive mood, depending 
upon ry«veTo, ix. 32, 37, 43, xi. 26, 
xiv. 1, and other instances in Dr. 
Plummer's exhaustive note, St. Luke, 
p. xlv. — iirl ttjv avpiov : here only and 
in Luke x. 35, in N.T. For the tem- 

poral use of itrl iii. 1. — <ruvax6tjvai, 
i.e., the Sanhedrim, apxovras here = 
dpxicpcis, who are mentioned first as 
a rule, where the N.T. enumerates the 
different orders of the Sanhedrim, 
whilst oi SpxovTes is an interchange- 
able expression, both in the N.T. and 
in Josephus (see, for instance, Schurer, 
Jewish People, div. ii., vol. i., pp. 177, 
205, E.T.), although there are two 
instances in which both words occur 
together, Luke xxiii. 13 and xxiv. 20. 
Whatever may have been the precise 
significance of the term apxiepels, 
Schurer, u. s., pp. 203-206, E.T., it in- 
cluded, beyond all doubt, the most pro- 
minent representatives of the priesthood, 
belonging chiefly, if not entirely, to the 
Sadducean party. — irpe<r0vWpovs : those 
members were known simply by this title 
who did not belong to either of the two 
special classes mentioned. — YP a P-P aT€ ^ : 
the professional lawyers who adhered to 
the Pharisees, Jos., Ant., xvii., 6, 2. Even 
under the Roman government the Sanhe- 
drim possessed considerable independence 
of jurisdiction, both civil and criminal. 
Not only could it order arrests to be 
made by its own officers, but it could 
dispose, on its own authority, of cases 
where the death penalty was not in- 
volved, Schurer, u. s., p. 187, E.T., and 
Edersheim, History of the Jewish 
Nation, p. 103 ff. — els 'lepowo-aX^p, : 
Weiss would restrict 4v 'Up. to the 
scribes of Jerusalem to distinguish them. 




7. Kai OT^crorres auTOus iv tu pecrw, iirvvQivovro, 'Ee iroia Suydpei 
r\ iv iroiw cVojaciti eTroirjo-aTe touto upeis ; 8. T0T6 rierpos, irXirjo-Qels 
flKeujuiaTos c Ayiou, etire irpos auTous, "Apxorres too Xaou icai Trpca- 

from the scribes of Galilee, but it is 
doubtful whether the words can bear 
this (see also Rendall, who favours the 
same view as Weiss). Holtzmann and 
Wendt, on the other hand, defend els, 
and suppose that the members of the 
Sanhedrim were obliged to hurry into 
the city from their country estates. 
Zockler applies «v 'Up. not only to 
Ypafi.(AaT€is, but also to the other mem- 
bers of the Sanhedrim, and sees in the 
words an intimation that the sitting was 
hurriedly composed of the members 
actually present in Jerusalem. 

Ver. 6. "Awos : Caiaphas, the son-in- 
law of Annas, was the high priest actually 
in office, but like other retired high 
priests, the latter retained not only the 
title, but also many of the rights and 
obligations of the office. Josephus cer- 
tainly appears to extend the title to 
ex-high priests, and so in the N.T. where 
apxicpeis appear at the head of the 
Sanhedrim as in this passage (apxovTes), 
the ex-high priests are to be understood, 
first and foremost, as well as the high- 
priest actually in office. The difficulty 
here is that the title is given to Annas 
alone, and this seems to involve that he 
was also regarded as president of the 
Sadducees, whereas it is always the actual 
apxiepcvs who presides, cf. Acts v. 17, 
vii. 1, ix: 1, xxii. 5, xxiii. 2, 4, xxiv. 1. 
But not only is the laxity of the term to 
be considered, but also the fact that 
Annas on account of his influence as the 
head of the yivos dpxi«pttTiK<5v may have 
remained the presiding apxtcpevs in spite 
of all the rapid changes in the tenure of 
the high-priestly office under the Romans. 
These changes the Jews would not re- 
cognise as valid, and if the early chapters 
of Acts came to St. Luke as seems 
probable from Jewish Christian sources, 
Annas might easily be spoken of as high- 
priest. His relationship to Caiaphas 
helps to explain the influence and power 
of Annas. On Hamburger's view (Real- 
Encyclopadie des Judentums, ii., 8, p. 
1151," Synhedrion "), that a Rabbi and not 
the high-priest presided over the Saddu- 
cees, see EdQrsheim,History of the Jewish 
Nation, p. 522, and Schiirer, u. s., p. 180. 
For Annas, see Jos., Ant., xviii., 2, 12, xx., 
9, i, and see further "Annas" in B.D. 2 
and Hastings' B.D. — 'Iwdvvr)?: identified 
by J. Lightfoot (cf. also Wetstein) with 

the famous Johanan ben Zacchai, presi- 
dent of the Great Synagogue after its 
removal to Jamnia, who obtained leave 
from Vespasian for many of the Jews to 
settle in the place. But the identifica- 
tion is very uncertain, and does not appear 
to commend itself to Schiirer ; see critical 
note above. — 'AAtgavSpos : of him too 
nothing is known, as there is no confir- 
matory evidence to identify him with the 
brother of Philo, alabarch of Alexandria, 
and the first man of his time amongst the 
Jews of that city, Jos., Ant., xviii., 8, 1, 
xix., 5, 1, xx., 5, B.D. 2 and Hastings' 
B.D., "Alexander". 

Ver. 7. kv tw jxeo-w : according to the 
Mishnah the members of the court sat 
in a semicircle, see Hamburger, u. s., to 
be able to see each other. But it is 
unnecessary to press the expression, it 
may be quite general, cf. Matt. xiv. 
6, Mark hi. 3, John viii. 3. On the 
usual submissive attitude of prisoners, 
see Jos., Ant., xiv., 9, 4. In this 
verse R.V. supplies "was there" as a 
verb, Annas being its subject. Various 
attempts to amend the broken construc- 
tion — all the proper names are in the 
nominative (not in accusative as T.R.), 
so W.H., R.V., Wendt, Weiss ; D. reads 
<rwvi 7X^ T l ' av > so Blass in p\ — ev iroicj. : by 
what kind of power ; or may = tLvi, xxiii. 
34. — ev iroicp ovopaTi : in virtue of what 
name ? " nomen hie vis ac potestas " 
Grotius and Wetstein, in loco. They 
ask as if they would accuse them of 
referring to some magical name or 
formula for the performance of the 
miracles, xix. 13 (on ovopa see iii. 16), 
cf. LXX, Exodus v. 23. Probably they 
would like to bring the Apostles under the 
condemnation pronounced in Deut. xiii. 1. 
" So did they very foolishly conceit that 
the very naming of some name might do 
wonders — and the Talmud forgeth that 
Ben Sadha wrought miracles by putting 
the unutterable name within the skin of his 
foot and then sewing it up," J. Lightfoot. 
— v)(xeis : as if in scorn, with depreciatory 
emphasis at the close of the question, so ' 
Wendt, and Blass, Grammatik des N. G., 
p. 160. — tovto : not this teaching (Ols- 
hausen), but the miracle on the lame 

Ver. 8. "wXijcOels wvev. ay. : the 
whole phrase is characteristic of St. 
Luke, who employs it in the Gospel 




Porepoi too 'icrpaqX, 1 9. €t ^(xel? cr^u.epoi' dva.Kpik6u.e0a em euepyecria 
d^Spoiirou dcrdevous, eV tici outos o-cVcdotcu • IO. YvwoTOf lore* 
irdo-iv up-ie Kal irairl to Xaw lapa^X, on eV to 6y6u.a,Ti 'Itjctou 
XpioTou tou Na^wpoiou, oy uu.eis eoraopoJo-aTe, o^ 6 0e6s ■qyeipei' eic 

1 tov l<rpaT)X om. NAB, Vulg., Sah., Boh., Aeth., Cyr., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., 
Weiss; but retained in DEP, Flor., Par., Syrr. (P. and H.), Irint., Chrys., Cypr., 
so Meyer, Blass, Hilg. D adds tv aXX&> 8e ou8evt to this verse, so E, Flor., Syr. 
Hard, mg., Cypr.; but see Weiss, Codex D, p. 64, and, on the other hand, Belser. 

three times and in Acts five (Friedrich, 
Lekebusch, Zeller). Acts has sometimes 
been called the Gospel of the Holy Spirit, 
and the number of times St. Luke uses 
the title "Holy Spirit" justifies the 
name, see above also p. 63. All three 
expressions, irvevp.a dyiov, to ayiov 
■jrvevpa, and to irvevu.a to ayiov are 
found in the Gospel and Acts, though 
much more frequently in the latter, the 
first expression (in the text) occurring 
quite double the number of times in 
Acts as compared with the Gospel, cf. in 
the LXX, Ps. 1. (li.) 11, Isa. lxiii. 10, n, 
Wisdom i. 5, ix. 17 ; and with 1 Cor. ii. 
10, 12, cf. Wisdom ix. 17, and Isa. lxiii. 
10, 11. On the omission of the article 
see Simcox, Language of N. T. Greek, 
p. 40. irXtjo-Oeis — the verb irtp.'rrX'rip.i 
common both in Gospel and in Acts, 
only found twice elsewhere in N.T., as 
against thirteen times in Gospel and nine 
times in Acts (Friedrich, Lekebusch). 
The word was also very frequent in LXX, 
cf. Ecclesiasticus xlviii. 12, A. The 
phrase irXT)o-8TJvai irvevp.. ay. is peculiar 
to St. Luke, in Gospel three times, i. 15, 
41, 67, and Acts ii. 4, iv. 31, ix. 17, xiii. 
9, cf. Luke xii. 12, and xxi. 14; see 
also Matt. x. 20, Mark xiii. ex. St. 
Peter's courage in thus openly proclaim- 
ing the Crucified for the first time before 
the rulers of his people might well be 
significantly emphasised, as in ver. 13. 
St. Chrysostom comments (Horn., x.) on 
the Christian wisdom of St. Peter on 
this occasion, how full of confidence he 
is, and yet how he utters not a word of 
insult, but speaks with all respect. 

Ver. g. el : chosen not without ora- 
torical nicety, if, as is the case = eirel 
T)p,eis, expressing at the same time the 
righteous indignation of the Apostles in 
contrast to the contemptuous vu.els of 
ver. 7, and their surprise at the object of 
the present inquiry ; so too in eir' evep- 
yecria St. Peter again indicates the un- 
fairness of such inquisitorial treatment 
(" cum alias dijudicari debeant, qui malum 
fecerunt" Bengel). — avaicpi.v6p.e0a : used 

here of a judicial examination, see xii. 
19 and Luke xxiii. 14, and cf. Acts xxiv. 
8, xxviii. 18, and 1 Cor. ix. 3, although 
the strictly technical sense of dvaKpicris 
as a preliminary investigation cannot be 
pressed here. — kit' evepy. d. dcrdevov? : 
" concerning a good deal done to an 
impotent man" — the omission of the 
articles in both nouns adds to St. Peter's 
irony ; " he hits them hard in that they 
are always making a crime of such acts, 
finding fault with works of beneficence," 
Chrys., Horn., x. ; avflpciirov on the ob- 
jective genitive, Winer-Schmiedel, pp. 
260 and 267.— ev rivi : " by what means," 
R.V. ; " in whom," margin. The neuter 
instrumental dative, cf. Matt. v. 13, is 
supported by Blass, Weiss, Holtzmann, 
and others, as if the expression embraced 
the two questions of ver. 7. Rendall, 
following the older commentators, re- 
gards the expression as masculine. — 
ovtos : the healed man is thought of as 
present, although nothing is said of his 
summons ; " this man," R.V. — creo-wcrrai : 
the word familiar to us in the Gospels, 
Luke *ii. 50, Mark x. 52, with the preg- 
nant meaning of health for body and soul 

Ver. 10. St. Peter does not hesitate to 
refer his judges to the same passage of 
Scripture which a few short weeks before 
Jesus of Nazareth had quoted to a de- 
putation of the Sanhedrim. In that case 
too the question put to Jesus had been 
as to the authority by which He acted, 
Matt. xxi. 42, Mark xii. 10, Luke xxi. 17. 
It is possible that the words from Ps. 
cxviii. 22 were already regarded as Mes- 
sianic, from the fact that the people had 
welcomed Jesus at His public entry into 
Jerusalem with part of a verse of the 
same Psalm, ver. 26, Edersheim, Jesus 
the Messiah, ii., 368. Moreover, the pas- 
sage, Isa. xxviii. 16, which forms the 
connecting link between the Psalm and 
St. Peter's words, both here and in his 
First Epistle (1 Pet. ii. 7, cf. Rom. ix. 
33, x. 11), was interpreted as Messianic, 
apparently by the Targums, and un- 




venpiDV, ev toutw outos irapecnrnKes/ cwinrioe uu.a>f uyirjs. 11. outos 
icrrtf 6 \i0os 6 e|ou0e»a]0els u<|> up-if tS>v otKoSofioucTut', 6 y6c6|xeMos 
£iS KC^aXrjt' yweias. I2. 1 Kal ouk Iotii' eV aXXw ouSei'l r\ awrnpia • 
outc y^P o^op-d eorif rrepoi/ otto to^ oupacov to 8eSop.eVof eV di'9poi- 
"iroiSj tv' <t Sei crw0T]vnu ^ju-as- 

1 Kttl OVK 

t) <r«)TT)pia. 

. t] crwTTjpta omit Flor., Ir., Cypr., Aug. ; D and Par. 1 omit also 

doubtedly by Rashi in his Commentary, 
cf. also Wetstein on Matt. xxi. 42; Eder- 
sheim, u. s., ii., 725. In the original 
meaning of the Psalm Israel is the stone 
rejected by the builders, i.e., by the 
heathen, the builders of this world's em- 
pires, or the expression may refer to those 
in Israel who despised the small begin- 
nings of a dawning new era (Delitzsch) ; 
but however this may be, in the N.T. the 
builders are the heads and representatives 
of Israel, as is evident from our Lord's 
use of the verse, and also by St. Peter's 
words here, "you the builders," R.V. But 
that which the Psalmist had spoken of 
the second Temple, that which was a 
parable of the history of Israel, had its 
complete and ideal fulfilment in Him 
Who, despised and rejected of men, 
had become the chief corner-stone of a 
spiritual Temple, in whom both Jew and 
Gentile were made one (1 Cor. iii. n, 
Eph. ii. 20). — !<rTavpwcra.T€ : mentioned 
not merely to remind them of their fault, 
cf. ii. 36, but perhaps also that they might 
understand how vain it was to fight 
against God (Calvin). — iv tovtjj* : " in 
him," or "in this name" R.V. margin. 
For the former Wendt decides, although 
in the previous verse he takes iv tCvi as 
neuter ; so too Page and Holtzmann. 
On the other hand Rendall (so De Wette, 
Weiss) adopts the latter rendering, while 
admitting that the reference to Jesus 
Himself is quite possible, as in ver. 12. — 
Jvciir. v»|awv : Hebraism, characteristic of 
St. Luke in his Gospel and in the Acts. 
The expression is never used in Matthew 
and Mark, and only once in John, xx. 30, 
but thirty-one times in the Hebraistic 
Apocalypse — frequent in LXX, but not 
found in classical or Hellenistic Greek, 
although to, evwiria in Homer, Blass, in 
loco, and Grammatik des N. G., p. 125. 
The word is also found on papyri twice, 
so Deissmann, Neue Bibelstudien, p. 40. 
Ver. 11. owtos : "He, as in R.V. 
All E.V. previously translated it " this," 
referring it to 6 Xi9os, but in the next 
verse a person is directly spoken of, not 
under the metaphor of a stone, and the 

pronoun finds its subject better in the iv 
tovt([), masculine of ver. 10. See Winer- 
Schmiedel, p. 216. — o e£ov0£vii6cls : in 
the LXX and in the Gospels the word 
used is aire8oKip.a<rav. St. Peter, quot- 
ing apparently from memory, used a 
word expressing still greater contempt. 
It is used, e.g., very significantly by St. 
Luke in his Gospel, xxiii. n, and again 
in xviii. g. The word is found in none 
of the other Gospels, and is characteristic 
of St. Luke and of St. Paul (cf. Rom. 
xiv. 3, 10, 1 Cor. i. 28, 1 Cor. vi. 4, etc.). 
It occurs several times in the LXX ; 
cf. Wisdom, iii. 11, iv. 18, Ecclesi- 
asticus xix. 1, 2 Mace. i. 27, and Psalms 
of Solomon, ii., 5. In classical writers it 
is not found at all. — 6 yevop. els, " which 
was made," R.V. Blass compares the 

Hebrew phrase ^nTfand finds parallels 

in v. 36, Luke xiii. 19, but yiyvccrSai 
els, while common in the LXX, is a 
correct expression in classical Greek, 
although the places in the N.T. in which 
the formula is found in O.T. quotations 
are undoubtedly Hebraisms (see below on 
v. 36), Winer-Schmiedel, p. 257, and with 
this may be connected the frequency of 
its occurrence in the Apocalypse (see Sim- 
cox on the phrase, Language of the N. T., 
p. 143). — Ke<f>a\T)v ycovias : not " the top- 
most pinnacle-stone," but a corner-stone 
uniting two walls, on which they rested 
and were made firm, cf. the meaning of 
aKpoyuviaios (Isa. xxviii. 16), 1 Pet. ii. 
6-8, Eph. ii. 20, which is used here by 
Symmachus instead of «<£. y<uv. The 

Hebrew H39 elsewhere always refers 

not to the upper part of the building, but 
to the lower (Isa. xxviii. 16, Jer. Ii. 26, 
Job xxxviii. 6, 6 {3a\uv XlOov ytov.aioy, 
Delitzsch). Probably therefore the ex- 
pression here refers to a foundation-stone 
at the base of the corner. On the 
occurrence of the phrase from Ps. cxviii. 
22 in St. Peter's First Epistle, and in 
his speech here, see p. 119, and also 
Scharfe, Die Petrinische Stromung, 2 c, 
p. 126. 




T3. ©ewpoGircs 8e ttji' tou n£rpou Trappy] o-iav Kal 'iaidVpou, Kal 
KaTaXaPope^oi on dV8panroi dypdu-pa-roi eiai koI iSiwTai, eOau- 

Ver. 12. t| aconipia, cf. v. 31, xvii. 
11, i.e., kot' l£oxtjv, the Messianic salva- 
tion. The interpretation which would 
limit r\ o~ut. to bodily healing is less 
satisfactory; infinitely higher than the 
healing of one man, ver. 9, stands the 
Messianic salvation, for which even the 
Sanhedrists were hoping and longing, 
but see also Rendall's note, in loco. A 
parallel to the expression is found in 
Jos., Ant., iii., 1, 5, but there are many 
passages in the O.T. which might have 
suggested the words to St. Peter, cf. Isa. 
xii. 2, xlix. 6-8, lii. 10. — oiSre yap ovojia, 
see on i. 15, ii. 21. oiiSe is the best 
reading, Winer-Moulton, liii. 10, "for 
not even is there a second name " — the 
claim develops more precisely and conse- 
quently from the statement iv d\\u> 
oiiSevi • €T£pos p.ev, eirl Svoiv • dXXos 8=, 
firl irXcidvwv (cf. 1 Cor. xii. 8, 2 Cor. xi. 
1, Gal. i. 6, 7), Ammonius, quoted by 
Bengel. — to SeSopcVov : on the force 01 
the article with the participle, see Viteau, 
Le Grec du N. T., pp. 183, 184 (1893) 
= tovto yap to ovoua, to ScSop.. iv 
avSpcoTTous, p.6Vov Io-tiv Iv a> Sci . . . and 
Blass, Grammatik des N. G., p. 238 ; cf. 
Luke xviii. g, Gal. i. 7, Col. ii. 8. — <L 
Set <r<o6TJvai: "Jesus when He spoke of 
the rejection as future, predicted that the 
stone would be a judgment-stone to 
destroy the wicked builders. But Peter 
takes up the other side, and presents the 
stone as the stone of Messianic salva- 
tion ; this name is the only name under 
heaven that is a saving name. Here 
Peter apprehends the spiritual signifi- 
cance of the reign of the Messiah," 
Briggs, Messiah of the Apostles, p. 34, 
and the whole passage. 

Ver. 13. OcwpovvTes 8«, cf. iii. 16, not 
merely p\e*ir., as in ver. 14, but " inest 
notio contemplandi cum attentione aut 
admiratione," Tittm., Synon. N. T., p. 
121. The present participle marks this 
continuous observation of the fearless 
bearing of the Apostles during the trial 
(Rendall). — Trapp-rjcriav : either boldness 
of speech, or of bearing ; it was the 
feature which had characterised the 
teaching of our Lord; cf. Mark viii. 32, 
and nine times in St. John in connection 
with Christ's teaching or bearing ; and 
the disciples in this respect also were as 
their Master, c. iv. 29, 31 (ii. 29) ; so too 
of St. Paul, xxviii. 31, and frequently used 
by St. Paul himself in his Epistles; also 
by St. John four times in his First Epistle 

of confidence in approaching God: " ur- 
bem et orbem hac parrhesia vicerunt," 
Bengel. Cf. irapprt<rid£eo-0ai used of 
Paul's preaching, ix. 27, 28, and again 
of him and Barnabas, xiii. 46, xiv. 3, of 
Apollos, xviii. 26, and twice again of 
Paul, xix. 8, xxvi. 26 ; only found in Acts,, 
and twice in St. Paul's Epistles, Eph. vi. 
20, 1 Thess. ii. 2, of speaking the Gos- ' 
pel boldly. For jrappr|o-ia, see LXX, 
Prov. xiii. 5, 1 Mace. iv. 18, Wisdom v. 
1 (of speech), cf. also Jos., Ant., ix., 10, 4, 
xv., 2, 7.— Mwdwov : even if St. John had 
not spoken, that " confidence towards 
God," which experience of life deepened, 
1 John iv. 17, v. 14, but which was 
doubtless his now, would arrest attention ; 
but it is evidently assumed that St. John 
had spoken, and it is quite characteristic 
of St. Luke's style thus to quote the most 
telling utterance, and to assume that the 
reader conceives the general situation, 
and procedure in the trial, Ramsay's St.. 
Paul, pp. 371, 372. — koI KaTaX.aPop.evoi : 
" and had perceived " R.V., rightly 
marking the tense of the participle ; 
either by their dress or demeanour, or by 
their speech (cf. x. 34, xxv. 25, Eph. iii. 
18, Blass, Grammatik des N. G., p. 181). 
— OTi . . . «l<rt . . . oTi o-uv t$ 'I. TJ<ra» 
in dependent clauses where English usage 
would employ a past tense and a pluper- 
fect, N.T. usage employs a present and an 
imperfect "perceived that tneyzew* . . . 
that they had been . . .," Blass, and see 
Salmon on Blass's Commentary, Her- 
mathena,xxi., p. 22g. — dvOpcuTroi : Wendt 
sees in the addition something depreci- 
atory. — aypdp,p.aTOi : lit., unlettered, i.e., 
without acquaintance with the Rabbinic 
learning in to. Upd ypduuaTa (2 Tim. 
iii. 15), the Jewish Scriptures (lit., letters, 
hence ypajiuaTcvs), cf. John vii. 15, 
Acts xxvi. 24, where the word is used 
without Upd, so that it cannot be con- 
fined to the sacred Scriptures of the O.T., 
and includes the Rabbinic training in 
their meaning and exposition. In 
classical Greek the word = " illiterati," 
joined by Plato with opeios, dp.ovo-09, see 
also Xen., Mem., iv.. 2, 20; by Plutarch 
it is set over against the p.euovo-up£vos, 
and elsewhere joined with dypoiKos, 
Trench, N. T. Synonyms, ii., p. 134, 
and Wetstein, in loco, cf. Athensus, x., 
p. 454 B., Pottjp 8' e<rr\v dypdupaTO?* — 
ISian-ai : the word properly signifies a 
private person (a man occupied with 
to fSia), as opposed to any one who 




p.a£ok, e-ireyivwoxoV tc ciutous oti auv tw 'Itjctou r\<rav • 14. Toy 8^ 
avOpwnw pXe'irokTCS a-ily auTois eorwra to^ TeOepa-rreuji^i'oi', ouSee 

holds office in the State, but as the 
Greeks held that without political life 
there was no true education of a man, 
it was not unnatural that 18ujtt]s should 
acquire a somewhat contemptuous mean- 
ing, and so Plato joins it with airpayfAwv, 
and Plutarch with airpaieros and dirai- 
SevTos (and instances in Wetstein). But 
further: in Trench, u. s., p. 136, and 
Grimm, sub v., the ISiwrns is " a lay- 
man," as compared with the tarpds, 
" the skilled physician," Thuc. ii. 48, 
and the word is applied by Philo to the 
whole congregation of Israel as contrasted 
with the priests, and to subjects as con- 
trasted with their prince, cf. its only use 
in the LXX, Prov. vi. 8 (cf. Herod., ii., 
81, vii., 199, and instances in Wetstein 
on 1 Cor. xiv. 16). Bearing this in mind, 
it would seem that the word is used by 
St. Paul (1 Cor. xiv. 16, 23, 24) of 
believers devoid of special spiritual gifts, 
of prophecy or of speaking with tongues, 
and in the passage before us it is applied 
to those who, like the aypap-paToi, had 
been without professional training in the 
Rabbinical schools. The translation 
"ignorant" is somewhat unfortunate. 
ISiwrns certainly need not mean ignor- 
ant, cf. Plato, Legg., 830, A., avSpwv 
<ro<j>wv tSiwruv T€ Kal <ruv€T«v. St. Paul 
uses the word of himself, ISluttjs iv Xoyw, 
2 Cor. xi. 6, in a way which helps us to 
understand its meaning here, for it may 
well have been used contemptuously of 
him (as here by the Sadducees of Peter 
and John) by the Judaisers, who despised 
him as "unlearned" and a "layman": 
he would not affect the Rabbinic subtle- 
ties and interpretations in which they 
boasted. Others take the word here as re- 
ferring to the social rank of the Apostles, 
" plebeians " " common men " (Kuinoel, 
Olshausen, De Wette, Bengel, Hackett), 
but the word is not so used until Herodian, 
iv., 10, 4. See also Dean Plumptre's note 
on the transition of the word through 
the Vulgate idiota to our word " idiot " : 
Tyndale and Cranmer both render " lay- 
men ". — e-ireyivajcrKdv tc : if we take those 
words to imply that the Sanhedrim only 
recognised during the trial that Peter 
and John had been amongst the disciples 
of Jesus, there is something unnatural 
and forced about such an interpretation, 
especially when we remember that all 
Jerusalem was speaking of them, w. 16, 
2i, and that one of them was personally 
known to the high priest (John xviii. 15). 
VOL. II. q 

In Codex D (so 0) an attempt is appar- 
ently made to meet this difficulty by 
reading tivcs 8J e| avrwv errcvtvoxTKov 
avTotis. Others have pointed out that 
the same word is used in Hi. 10 of the 
beggar who sat for alms, and that here, 
as there, krreyiv. implies something more 
than mere recognition (see especially 
Lumby's note on the force of iiri) ; thus 
the revisers in both passages render 
" took knowledge of". But here as else- 
where Professor Ramsay throws fresh 
light upon the narrative, St. Paul, p. 371. 
And however we interpret the words, St. 
Chrysostom's comment does not lose its 
beauty : lireyiv. re . . . rjo-av, i.e., in His 
Passion, for only those were with Him at 
the time, and there indeed they had seen 
them humble, dejected — and this it was 
that most surprised them, the greatness 
of the change; Horn., x. — The re after 
eireyiv., and its repetition at the com- 
mencement of ver. 14 (so R.V., W.H., 
Weiss), is very Lucan (see Ramsay's para- 
phrase above) ; for this closely connecting 
force of tc cf. Weiss's commentary, 
passim. With (rw k.t.X. Weiss com- 
pares Luke viii. 38, xxii. 56. 

Ver. 14. ItTTcoxa : standing, no longer 
a cripple, firmo talo (Bengel), and by 
his presence and attitude affording a 
testimony not to be gainsaid. — <rvv 
avrots, i.e., with the disciples. We are 
not told whether the man was a prisoner 
with the disciples, but just as the healed 
demoniac had sought to be with Jesus, so 
we may easily imagine that the restored 
cripple, in his gratitude and faith, would 
desire to be with his benefactors : " great 
was the boldness of the man that even in 
the judgment-hall he had not left them : 
for had they {i.e., their opponents) said 
that the fact was not so, there was he 
to refute them," St. Chrysostom, Horn., 
x. On St. Luke's fondness for the 
shorter form, c<ttus not Iott)k<5s, both 
in Gospel and Acts, see Friedrich. 
Das Lucasevangelium, p. 8. — ovS^v etxov 
acvr. : this meaning of ex« with the in- 
finitive is quite classical ; cf. the Latin 
habeo dicere ; on St. Luke's fondness 
for phrases with e-upicnceiv and ex elv 
see Friedrich, u. s., pp. II, 12.— 
dvTetireiv : only used by St. Luke in the 
N.T., Luke xxi. 15. The miracle, as St. 
Chrysostom says, spoke no less forcibly 
than the Apostles themselves, but the 
word may be taken, as in the Gospel, of 
contradicting personal adversaries, i.e.. 




etxov drrciirciv. 1 15. KcXeuaacTcs 8c ciutous c|<ii tou auweSpiou 
dircXOeiK, auvefiakov irpos dXXrjXous, 1 6. Xe'yocTes, Ti ■iroi^o-op.ef 2 
tois d^Opwirois toutois ; on pev yap ycwo-roy crr|u,eiok yeyoce Si' 
auTwe, irdai tois KaToiKOu<rii' 'lepouo-aXrju, 4>acep6c, 3 teal 00 8uydu.e0a 
dpyrjo-ao-flai • 17. dXX' ica ftT] eirl TrXeioe 8iak€u.T)6T] eis TOf XadV, 
direiXTJ * direiXt)o - wp,e9a auTois p.T]iceTi XaXeif eirl t<u d^op-an toutw 

1 avTeiiretv ; D, Flor. insert before, woiirjo-ai tj. D also omits last clause of ver. 
13, and puts in altered form at end of ver. 14 nves 8e «| avrw k.t.X. The -rives Se 
would follow naturally enough if we read with Flor. aKovcravres 8« irav-res at the 
beginning of ver. 13 ; but see connection of passage in comment. 

s TroiTio-o|jiev DP, Flor., Gig., Par., Vulg., Bas., Chrys., so Meyer and Hilg. ; iron)- 
o-«|x«v fr^ABE, so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt, and so Blass in (3. 

3 <j>avepov, D reads tttavcporcpov, according to Blass (in f3 retained), for superl. 
defended by Belser and Hilg. 

* airetXtj om. fc^ABD vers., Lucif., Bas., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Hilg. ; but retained 
by EP, Syr. Hard., Chrys., so by Meyer and Weiss (Wendt doubtful but on the whole 
against retention) ; cf. v. 28, Blass retains : " optime ". 

here, the Apostles, so Weiss, and cf. 
Rendall, in loco. 

Ver. 15. <rvv€'|3aXov irpos dXXij\o\is, 
sc, Xoyovs : only in St. Luke's writings, 
in different significations ; cf. for the 
construction here, Eurip., Iphig. Aul., 
830, and Plutarch, Mor., p. 222, C. — see 
on xvii. 18. 

Ver. 16. t( irotTJ<rop,6v : for the 
deliberative subjunctive, which should 
be read here, cf. ii. 37; it may express 
the utter perplexity of the Sanhedrists 
(so Rendall) ; in questions expressing 
doubt or deliberation, the subjunctive 
would be more usual in classical Greek 
than the future indicative, Blass, w. 5., p. 
205. — on piv : p,cv answered by dXXa in 
ver. 17 (omitted by D.), cf. Mark ix. 12, 
see Simcox, Language of the N- T. t p. 
168, and for other instances of p.e'v simi- 
larly used, see also Lekebusch, Apostel- 
geschichte, pp. 74, 75. — yvwo-Tov, that 
which is a matter of knowledge as op- 
posed to 8o|ao-Tov, that which is matter 
of opinion (so in Plato). The word is 
characteristic of St. Luke, being used by 
him twice in the Gospel, ten times in 
Acts, and elsewhere in N.T. only three 
times (Friedrich). 

Ver. 17. Iirl irXctov may be taken as 
= latins (2 Tim. ii. 16, iii. 9) or = 
diutius (Acts xx. 9, xxiv. 4), but the con- 
text favours the former. The phrase is 
quite classical, and it occurs several 
times in LXX, cf. Wisdom viii. 12 ; 3 
Mace. ▼. 18. — 8iavcp.T|6fj : only here in 
N.T. but frequently used in classical 
writers in active and middle — to divide 
into portions, to distribute, to divide 

among themselves — here = lest it 
should spread abroad (or better per- 
haps in D (|3)) It has been taken by 
some as if it had a parallel in us Yoy- 
ypaiva vop-fjv e£ei, 2 Tim. ii. 17, and ex- 
pressed that the report of the Apostles' 
teaching and power might spread and 
feed like a cancer (see Bengel, Blass, 
Zdckler, Rendall), but although ve'p&> in 
the middle voice (and possibly eiri.vep.a>) 
could be so used, it is very doubtful how 
far Siave'pu) could be so applied. At the 
same time we may note that Siavcpu 
is a word frequently used in medical 
writers, Hobart, Medical Language of 
St. Luke, pp. 196, 197, and that it, with 
the two other great medical words of 
similar import, Siaonreipeiv and dvaSi- 
Sdvai, is peculiar to St. Luke. In the 
LXX Siavcpco is only found once, 
Deut. xxix. 26 (25), in its classical sense 

as a translation of the Hebrew p^PT. 
— iirtiXTJ direi\T)o-u>fAe9a : if we retain 
the reading in T.R., the phrase is a 
common Hebraism, cf v. 28, xxiii. 14, 
ii. 17, 30, Luke xxii. 15, cf John vi. 29, 
James v. 7, and from the LXX, Matt. 
xiii. 14, xv. 4. The form of the Hebrew 
formula giving the notion of intenseness 
is rendered in A.V. by "straitly," as by 
the revisers (who omit dirciXfj here) in v. 
28. Similar expressions are common in 
the LXX, and also in the Apocrypha, cf 
Ecclus. xlviii. n, Judith vi. 4, and occa- 
sionally a similar formula is found in 
Greek authors, see especially Simcox, 
Language of the N. T., p. 83, and Blass, 
Grammatik des N. G., pp. 116, 117. — 

15 — 20. 


l 3 1 

fjLvjScct dkGpwTrwK. 18. 1 Kal KaXccra^TC? auTous, Trap^yyeiXat' outois 
to KaOdXou p.T] <p0€Yyeo-0ai pT|Oe SiSdoxcir errl tw ocojiaTi tou 'Itjctou. 
19. 6 8e ricTpos Kal '\<t)&vvr)<s diroKpiOeVTES irpos outous euror, El 
SiKatof eoTic ct'WTrtOK tou ©eou, up-wf dKoueic pdXXof tj tou ©eou, 
xpiVaTe. 20. ou Suedpeda yap r^peis a 2 eiSopef Kal r^ou'crapey p/r) 

1 At begin, of ver. D, Flor., Syr. Hard, mg., Lucif., Hilg. add o-vYKaTcrriOcpevcuv 8e 
avTuv tj) yvupxi- Belser sees here the hand of Luke who omitted the clause in 
revision, as he thinks no one could have added it (so to. pTjpaTa avTaiv after Xaov in 
ver. 17, see (3) ; but, on the other hand, Weiss, Codex D, p. 61. KaXeo-avres, D has 
c{>cuvT]<ravT€s. avrois om. fc^ABDE 13, Vulg., Syr. Hard., Arm., Chrys.,.so Tisch., 
W.H., R.V., Wendt, Weiss ; so to before KaOoXov tf*B, Tisch., W.H., Weiss, Wendt. 

2 eiSopev B 3 EP, Chrys., Cyr. ; eiSapev ^AB*D 4, Chrys., so Tisch., W.H., Weiss, 
Hilg.; see W.H., App., p. 171 (so for ei7rav above), Winer-Schmiedel, p. 112. 

tirl t^ ovdpaTi : on the name, i.e., resting 
on, or with reference to, this name, as 
the basis of their teaching, Winer- 
Moulton, xlviii. c, cf. v. 28, and Luke 
xxiv. 47, ix. 48,xxi. 8. The phrase has thus 
a force of its own, although it is ap- 
parently interchangeable with ev, ver. 10 
(Simcox, see also Blass, in loco) ; Ren- 
dall takes it = " about the name of 
Jesus," lirC being used as often with 
verbs of speech. — tovtco: "quern nomin- 
are nolunt, v. 28, vid. tamen 18," Blass; 
(on the hatred of the Jews against the 
name of Jesus and their periphrastic 
titles for him, e.g., otho ka'ish, " that 
man," "so and so," see "Jesus Christ 
in the Talmud," H. Laible, pp. 32, 33 

Ver. 18. ko.Oo'Xov : only here in 
N.T. The word which had been very 
common since Aristotle (previously 
ko,6' oXov) is quite classical in the sense 
in which it is used here, and it is also 
found a few times in the LXX (see 
Hatch and Redpath for instances of its use 
without and with the art., as here in T.R.). 
It is frequently used by medical writers, 
Hobart, Medical Language of St. Luke, 
p. 197. — pT| <j>8€Yyeo-9ai : " not to utter a 
word," so Rendall, ne muttire quidem 
(Blass). The word seems to indicate 
more than that the disciples should not 
speak, " ne hiscerent aut ullam vocem 
ederent," Erasmus. In contrast to 
SiSdo-icciv we might well refer it to the 
utterance of the name of Jesus in their 
miracles, as in iii. 6 ; only found twice 
elsewhere in N.T., and both times in 2 
Peter, ii. 16, 18, but its use is quite 
classical, and it is also found several 
times in LXX. 

Ver. 19. Parallel sayings may be 
quoted from Greeks and Romans, and 
from Jewish sources, see instances in 

Wetstein, cf. Plato, Apol., 29, D., the 
famous words of Socrates : ircicr6'pe6a tw 
6«<o pdWov tj vpiv, and Livy, xxxix., 37 ; 
Jos., Ant., xvii., 6, 3 ; xviii. 8, 2 ; on 
cvuiriov see ver. 10 ; dxoveiv = TrciOap- 
X«vv, v. 29, and cf. iii. 22, Luke x. 16, 
xvi. 31; pdXXov = potius, cf. Rom. xiv. 
13, 1 Cor. vii. 21. — Kpiva/rc : this appeal 
to the Sadducees could only be justified 
on the ground that the Apostles were 
sure of the validity of their own appeal 
to a higher tribunal. No man could lay 
down the principle of obedience to every 
ordinance of man for the Lord's sake, 
whether to the king or to governors, 
more plainly than St. Peter (1 Pet. ii. 13, 
cf. Rom. xiii. 1), and he and his fellow- 
disciples might have exposed themselves 
to the charge of fanaticism or obstinacy, 
if they could only say ov 8vv. . . . prj 
XaXeiv ; but they could add a. ctSoptv 
Kal TJKow., cf. Acts i. 8. The same 
appeal is made by St. John, both in his 
Gospel (i. 14) and in his First Epistle 
(i. 1, 2), in vindication of his teaching; 
and here the final answer is that of St. 
John and St. Peter jointly. 

Ver. 20. ov . . . pT) : on the two 
negatives forming an affirmative cf. 1 
Cor. xii. 15 ; Viteau, Le Grec du N. T., 
p. 220 (1893). Winer-Moulton, lv., g, 
compares Aristoph., Ran., 42 ; see also 
Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. T84. 

Ver. 21. irpoo-air£i.XT)0-dp6voi : " when 
they had further threatened them " R.V., 
or the word may mean " added threats to 
their warning " ver. 18 (" prius enim tair- 
tum prseceperunt," Erasmus). So Wendt 
as against Meyer ; cf. in LXX, Ecclus. xiii. 
3, S., and Dem., p. 544, 26. — dWXvo-av: 
"dimiserunt [iii. 13] non absolverunt," 
Blass; see St. Chrysostom's striking con- 
trast between the boldness of the Apostles 
and the fear of their judges (Horn., xi.). — 




XaXeiK. 21. ol 8c irpoo-aTretX'qo-dfxci'oi air^Kvcrav chjtous, 1 p-nSc? 
cupuncovres to irws KoXdo"w»TCH auToo5, Sid rbv XaoV, on TfdvTes 
eSola^oc top ©eoe eir! tw yeyovOTi. 2 2. Itwc yap r\v irkeiovw 
Teao-apdKOCTO 2 6 avQpuiiros e$' oV eycyoVci to cn\\ieiov touto ttjs 


23. 'ATroXuGeVres 8c tJXvok -rrpos toOs loious, ical dTrrjyyetXai' 00-a 
irpos auTous ot dpxicpets koI 01 irp€ff0uT€poi clivov. 24. 01 8e 
dKouaakTcs, 3 6p.o0ufxa86i' t]pav $<avr)v irpos rbv Qeov, ical curoy, 

1 D seems to read p.T] evpio-KovTcs airiav, so Hilg., see Harris (p. go). 

2 Ttorcrap., see on i. 3. 

3 After aieovo-avTes D adds icai eiri-yvovTes ttjv tov Oeov evepyciav, so Hilg. — Belser 
and Zockler hold that the clause cannot be a later addition, but Weiss objects that 
no reference is found to the words in ver. 29 which follows. em-yiv&xrKCD is used 
more frequently by St. Luke than by the other Evangelists, but cvcp-yeia is entirely 
confined to St. Paul in the N.T. 

to ir£s : finding nothing, namely (to), 
how they might, etc. ; this use of the 
article is quite classical, drawing atten- 
tion to the proposition introduced by it 
and making of it a compound substantive 
expressing one idea, most commonly with 
an interrogation ; it is used by St. Luke and 
St. Paul, and both in St. Luke's Gospel 
and in the Acts, cf. Luke i. 62, ix. 46, 
xix. 48, xxii. 2, 4, 23, 24, Acts xxii. 30, 
Rom. viii. 26, 1 Thess. iv. 1, cf. Mark 
ix. 23. So here the Sanhedrists are re- 
presented as asking themselves to itws 
koX. (Friedrich and Lekebusch both draw 
attention to this characteristic of St. 
Luke's writings). See Viteau, Le Grec 
du N. T., pp. 67, 68 (1893). koX. only 
here and in 2 Pet. ii. 9 in N.T. ; cf. 3 
Mace. vii. 3, where it is also used in 
middle, expressing to cause to be pun- 
ished, cf. 1 Mace. vii. 7, AS. — 81a tov 
Xaov belongs not to dircXutrav, but rather 
to p/$| cipCo-K. k.t.X. — €86|a^ov: see on 
ii. 46 ; cf. Luke ii. 20, 2 Cor. ix. 13, for 
the construction ; the verb never has in 
Biblical Gr. mere classical meaning of 
to think, suppose, entertain an opinion 
(but cf. Polyb., vi., 53, 10; Sc8o£ao-p.e'voi 
lit' dpeTTJ) ; in the LXX very frequently 
of glory ascribed to God, see Plummer's 
note on Luke ii. 20. 

Ver. 22. 'Characteristic of St. Luke 
to note the age, as in the case of ^Eneas, 
ix. 33, and of the cripple at Lystra, xiv. 
8, cf. also Luke viii. 42 (although Mark 
also here notes the same fact), xiii. 11. 
The genitive with elvoi or 7iyv€o-flai, 
instead of the accusative, in reference to 
the question of age, is noted by Fried- 
rich as characteristic of St. Luke; cf 

Luke ii. 42 (iii. 23), viii. 42, and here ; 
but cf. Mark v. 42. — eyeyovei: in this 
episode " with its lights and shades " 
Overbeck (so Baur) can only see the 
idealising work of myth and legend, but 
it is difficult to understand how a narra- 
tive which purports to describe the first 
conflict between the Church and the 
Sanhedrim could be free from such con- 
trasts, and that some collision with the 
authorities took place is admitted to be 
quite conceivable (Weizsacker, Apostolic 
Age, i., 46, E.T.) ; we should rather say 
that St. Luke's power as an historian is 
nowhere more visible than in the dramatic 
form of this narrative (Ramsay, St. Paul, 
u. s.). 

Ver. 23. tovs ISiovs : not necessarily 
limited to their fellow-Apostles (so Meyer, 
Blass, Weiss), but as including the 
members of the Christian community (so 
Overbeck, Wendt, Hilgenfeld, Zockler), 
cf. xxiv. 23, John xiii. 1, 1 Tim. v. 8, 
and also of one's fellow-countrymen, 
associates, John i. 11, 2 Mace. xii. 22. 

Ver. 24. 6p.08vp.a86v, see above on i. 
14. The word must not be pressed to 
mean that they all simultaneously gave 
utterance to the same words, or that they 
were able to do so, because they were 
repeating a familiar Hymn ; it may 
mean that the Hymn was uttered by one 
of the leaders, by St. Peter, or St. James 
(Zockler), and answered by the re- 
sponsive Amen of the rest, or that the 
words were caught up by the multitude 
of believers as they were uttered by an 
inspired Apostle (so Felten, Rendall). — 
■fjpav 4>a>viqv : the same phrase is used in 
Luke xvii. 13, so in Acts ii. 14, xiv. 11, 

21-25. nPAEEIS AII02T0AQN 133 

AecnroTa, at) 1 6 6eos 6 iroii^o-as rbv oupavov Kal ttjv yTjc Kal tt|v 
dakacraav Kal TrdvTa toI iv aoTots, 2$. 2 6 Sia ordjJiaTOS Aaj3l& tou 
rratSos oroo euruf, " lea ti ifypuaiav eQvr\, Kal Xaol epveXeTTjcraK 

1 o 0eo9 DEP, Gig., Par., verss., Irint., Luc, so Meyer, so Hilg. ; but om. fc$BA, best 
MS. of Vulg., Boh., soTisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt (who refers the construction 
of the words to Isaiah xxxvii. 16). 

2 o Sia <rro|i.aTOS Aa|3i8 tov iraiSos arow ewuv P i, 31, Chrys., so Meyer ; but tow 
omitted by ^ABDEP. o tow iraTpos tjumv 81a irvcwp.aTOS ayiow o-Top.aTOS AaweiS 
iratSos o-ow eiiruv, so fc^ABE 13, 15, 27, 29, 36, 38; so Lach., Treg., Tisch., W.H., 
R.V., Alford. o 81.0 irv. ay. 81a crop,., tow iraTpos tjawv A., so Vulg., Iren., 
apparently for improvement in order. D reads Sia irv. ay. Sia tow orofia/ros 
XaXijo-as A., omit, tow iraTpos ijuwv ; so apparently Syr. Pesch., Boh. P, Hil., 
and Aug. omit irvewaaTOS ayiow — Syr. Hard., Arm. place Sia irv. ay. after iraiSos 
o-ow ; so Par. Blass in {3 omits tow iraTpos ijuo>v an d brackets irv. ay., practi- 
cally agreeing with T.R. (see also Acta Apost,, p, 77). W.H. mention the 
extreme difficulty of the text and hold that it contains a primitive error (so also 
Holtzmann), and each makes an attempt at solution, App., Select Readings, p. 92. 
Felten follows the solution offered by Westcott. Weiss, Apostelgeschichte, pp. 39, 
40 (1S93), speaks of irvewuaTos o/yiow as perfectly senseless (so too Zockler, who 
follows T.R.) and regards the expression as an old gloss for oroua A., but which 
afterwards came into the text with the latter words ; or some scribe, as he thinks, 
may have introduced 81a irv. ay. expected by him from i. 2, 16 (see also Blass, in 
loco), and then continued the text lying before him. Weiss therefore follows P 
although it omits tow iraTpos np-wv, which Weiss retains and reads o tow iraTpos 
T]|t<i>v Sia o-Top.. A. iraiSos o-ow etirwv. Wendt and Alford maintain that the more 
complicated readings could scarcely have arisen through additions to the simpler 
text of T.R. and that the contrary is more probable. 

xxii. 22, JiraCpeiv, and also in Luke xi. vi. 10 of God, and 2 Pet. ii. 1 of Christ 

27. Both phrases are peculiar to St. (where the metaphor of the master and 

Luke, but both are found in the LXX, slave is retained), and see Jude ver. 4, 

and both are classical (Friedrich, Das R.V. (although the name may refer 

Lucasevangelium, p. 29, and Plummer to God) ; and so in writings ascribed to 

on Luke xi. 27). — A4<nrora k.t.X. : the men who may well have been present, and 

words form the earliest known Psalm of have taken part in the Hymn. The word 

Thanksgiving in the Christian Church, is also used of the gods in classical 

In its tenor the Hymn may be compared Greek ; but the Maker of heaven and 

with Hezekiah's Prayer against the earth was no " despot," although His 

threats of Assyria, Isa. xxxvii. 16, 20. rule was absolute, for His power was 

It begins like many of the Psalms (xviii., never dissociated from wisdom and love, 

xix., liii.) with praising God as the cf. Wisdom xi. 26, Aco-iroTa <j>i\6\|/wx«. 

Creator, a thought which finds fitting On the use of the word in Didache, x., 

expression here as marking the utter 3, in prayer to God, see Biggs' note. 

impotence of worldly power to with- Ver. 25. The words form an exact 

stand Him. The word A^o-itoto, thus quotation from the LXX (Psalm ii. 

used in the vocative in addressing God 1). Xva, ti, again in quotation, vii., 

here and in Luke ii. 29 only (found 26 ; cf. Luke xiii. 7, 1 Cor. x. 29 ; twice 

nowhere else in Gospels, although several jn Matt. ix. 4, xxvii. 46, quotation ; 

times in the Epistles), expresses the W.H., Blass (Weiss, lvaT<[), sc, -ye'v^Tai, 

absolute control of a Master over a Blass, Grammatik des N. G., p. 14, and 

slave, cf. also Luke ii. 29, where t6v Winer-Schmiedel, p. 36. — t<f>pwagav: in 

8o0\6v o-ow answers to it, as here tois the active form the verb occurs once in 

8ovX.ois in ver. 29. It also expresses LXX, viz., in this passage, as a transla- 

here as often in the LXX the sovereignty . c *;„._ . > •, c 

rr> j *• *■ t u o in' tion of u;!n. 9pwa<ro-oiMu, primarily of 

of God over creation, cf. Job v. 8, Wis- ^5^) Tr ~ v » 

dom vi. 7, Judith ix. 12. So Jos., Ant., the snorting and neighing of a high- 

iv., 3, 2, puts it into the mouth of Moses, spirited horse, then of the haughtiness 

Tt is very rarely used in the N.T. as a and insolence of men ; twice it is used as 

name of God or of Christ, but cf. Rev. a dep. in LXX, 2 Mace. vii. 34, R. ; iii. 2, 




<evd; 26. irap&rrno-ae 01 PacnXeis ttjs yr\S, Kal 01 apxorres owrjx- 
Q-ncrav cirl to auTO Kara tou Kupiou, Kai KaTa tou Xpiorou auTOu. 
27. <rvv(\x^ r \ <rav Y^P 1 ' 7T ' aXr]6eia$ em to^ ayioi/ iraiSd aou, Irjaoui', 
o* lvpio" a S) 'HpoiStjs T6 Kal n6rrios 2 fliXaTOS, ow cOceai Kai Xa.019 

1 «ir' aX^eeias; ^ABDE, Vulg., Syr. P. H., verss., Eus., Ir., Tert.; so Tisch., 
W.H. R.V., Weiss, Wendt, Hilg. add ev tjj iroXei Tavrj) (wanting in the Psalm). 

2 riiXaTos; but B* lleiXaTos, so Tisch., W.H. ; see on iii. 13. 

2, and so in profane writers. — SOvtj, i.e., 
the Gentiles, see on ver. 27. Xaos might 
be used, and is used of any people, but 
it is used in Biblical Greek specially of 
the chosen people of God, cf. Luke ii. 
32, Acts xxvi. 17, 23, Rom. xv. 10, and 
it is significant that the word is trans- 
ferred to the Christian community, which 
was thus regarded as taking the place of 
the Jewish theocracy, Acts xv. 14, xviii. 
10, Rom. ix. 25, i Peter ii. 10; Hort, 
Ecclesia, pp. 11, 12, Grimm, sub v., Xa<5s ; 
so too in the LXX, eOvos in the plural 
is used in an overwhelming number of 
instances of other nations besides Israel, 
cf. Psalm lvi. (lvii.) 9, Zech. i. 15; in 
N.T., e6vr) = pagans, Rom. iii. 29, and 
Roman Christians, Rom. xv. 27, cf. pop- 
ulus, the Roman people, as opposed to 
gentes, Lucan, Phars., i., 82, 83 (Page) ; 
Kennedy, Sources of N. T. Greek, p. 98. 
Ver. 26. irap&rr»](rav : not necessarily 
of hostile intent, although here the con- 
text indicates it ; R.V., " set themselves 
in array," lit. "presented themselves," 

an exact rendering of the Hebrew 22' 1 , 

which sometimes implies rising up against 
as here, Psalm ii. 2, and cf. 2 Sam. 
xviii. 13 (R.V. margin). Of the generally 
accepted Messianic interpretation of the 
Psalm, and of the verses here quoted, 
there can be no doubt, cf. Edersheim, 
Jesus the Messiah, ii., 716 (appendix on 
Messianic passages), and Wetstein, in 
loco. The Psalm is regarded as full of 
Messianic references (Briggs, Messianic 
Prophecy, pp. 132-140, and 492, 493), 
cf., e.g., the comment on this verse of 
the Psalm in the Mechilta (quoted in 
the Yalkut Shimeoni, ii., f. 90, 1 Sch. 
p. 227), Perowne, Psalms (small edition), 
p. 16 ; and Edersheim, u. s. The Psalm 
carries us back to the great Davidic pro- 
mise in 2 Sam. vii. n-16, and it reflects 
the Messianic hopes of the Davidic period. 
That hope the N.T. writers who quote 
this Psalm very frequently or refer to 
it, cf. xiii. 33, Heb. i. 5, v. 5, see ful- 
filled in Christ, the antitype of David and 

of Solomon . Thus the gathering together 
of the nations and their fruitless decrees 
find their counterpart in the alliance of 
Herod and Pilate, and the hostile com- 
bination of Jew and Gentile against the 
holy Servant Jesus, the anointed of God, 
and against His followers ; although the 
words of the Psalm and the issues of the 
conflict carry on our thoughts to a still 
wider and deeper fulfilment in the final 
triumph of Christ's kingdom, cf. the 
frequent recurrence of the language of 
the Psalm in Rev. xii. 5, xix. 15, and cf. 
i. 5, ii. 26, 27. 

Ver. 27. 7<ip: confirms the truth of 
the preceding prophecy, by pointing to its 
historical fulfilment, and does not simply 
give a reason for addressing God as 6 
fLiTwv — to emphasise this fulfilment 
o-vvtjx* ' s a g a i n quoted, and placed first 
in the sentence. — lir' aXr]0e(as, of a 
truth, i.e., assuredly, Luke iv. 25, xx. 21, 
xxii. 59, Acts x. 34 ; so too in LXX, 
Job ix. 2, and also in classical Greek. 
The phrase is characteristic of St. Luke, 
and is only used elsewhere in N.T. in 
Mark xii. 14, 32, the usual expression 
being Iv a\i\6eia, never used by St. 
Luke (Friedrich). — iraiSa, see on iii. 13. 
— ov expiorag: showing that Jesus = 
tov XpKTTov named in the quotation 
just made, cf. Luke iv. 18, and Isa. lxi. 1 
and Acts x. 38. Nosgen compares also 
John x. 36, and refuses to limit the re- 
ference to iii. 21. The words may no 
doubt be referred to the Baptism, but 
they need not be confined to that. — 
'HpwStjs = PwriXeis of the Psalm, {"1. 
rieiXaTos = apxovTes, but Nosgen, re- 
ferring to iii. 17, regards the apx> as in- 
cluded in the Xaoi. 'Hp. instead of 
'Hpu>iSi]s, Blass, in loco, and Grammatik 
des N. G., pp. 7, 8, the iota subscript 
W.H. thus accounted for ; Winer-Schmie- 
del, p. 41. — cOvcciv Kal Xaois M. : the 
first word = the centurion and soldiers, 
those who carried out the orders of Pilate ; 
Xaoi the plural (quoted from the Psalm) 
does not refer with Calvin to the differ- 
ent nationalities out of which the Jews 

26— 30. 



'lo-parjX, 28. iroiTJcrai octo t) x e ^P trou KC " ^ PouXq ctou * irpoupicre 
yevia&ai. 29. Kal tci vuv, Kupie, ImSc em Tas direiXds auTw»', Kal 
80s tois SouXois o-ou p-CTa TTapprjo-ias irdaTjs XaXeiv -rov Xoyoi' ctou, 
3O. €V TW TTjl' X e *-P^ CT0U ^KTCll'Ctl' CT€ els "aerif, Kal CTrjaeia Kal 
Te'para yiecaflai Sid toO 6y6p.aTOS tou dyiou iraiSos ctou 'Itjctou. 

1 <rov omit A*B, Arm., Lucif. (Cod. Am. of Vulg.), so W.H., Weiss, Wendt; 
retained by ^AaDEP, Vulg., vers., Irint., so Tisch. Here, as commonly, Tisch. 
follows J»$, W.H., B — and difficult, as often, to decide; insertion appears more 
obvious than omission. 

who came up to the Feast were gathered, 
but possibly to the tribes of Israel, 

Grimm-Thayer, sub, \a6%, like D^ED^, 

Gen. xlix. 10, Deut. xxxii. 8, Isa. iii. 13, 
etc., R.V., " the peoples of Israel ". St. 
Luke's Gospel alone gives us the narrative 
of Herod's share in the proceedings con- 
nected with the Passion, xxiii. 8-12 ; see 
Plumptre, in loco, and Friedrich, Das 
Lucasevangelium, pp. 54, 55. 

Ver. 28. iroiTJo-ai, infinitive of pur- 
pose, see on iii. 2 ; but even this purpose 
was overruled by God to the accomplish- 
ment of His will, cf. Luke xxii. 22, xxiv. 
26, ctvvtjXOov (t€v Yap Iksivoi 015 ex^pot 
. . . iiroiovv 8e a <rv c^ovXov, Oecum. 
— ^ \eip ctov, a common expression to 
signify the controlling power of God, cf. 
in the N.T. (peculiar to St. Luke's 
Gospel and the Acts) the phrases x ei P 
Kvpiov, Luke i. 66, Acts xi. 21, xiii. n. 
— t| PovXtj : only used by St. Luke, cf. 
Luke vii. 30, Acts ii. 23, xiii. 36, xx. 27. 
— irpowpiae : only in St. Luke and St. 
Paul, but never in LXX or Apocrypha, 
Rom. viii. 29, 30, 1 Cor. ii. 7, Ephes. i. 
5, 11, but the thought which it contains 
is in striking harmony with St. Peter's 
words elsewhere ; cf. ii. 23, x. 42, and 
1 Pet. i. 2, 20, ii. 4-6 — see above on Peter's 
speeches — cf. Ignat., Ephes., tit. — t| 
xeip connected with p. by Zeugma, since 
only povXij directly suits the verb ; cf. 
1 Cor. iii. 2, and Luke i. 64. (The two 
verses (27, 28) are referred by Hilgenfeld 
to the " author to Theophilus". In his 
view there is a want of fitness in intro- 
ducing into the Church's prayer the 
words of the Psalm, and their reference 
to the closing scenes of the life of Jesus ; 
he thinks with Weiss that in the avTwv of 
ver. 29 there is quite sufficient reference 
to the words of the Psalm.) 

Ver. 29. to. vvv (cf. iii. 17) only used 
in the Acts v. 38, xvii. 30, xx. 32, 
xxvii. 22, but frequently found in classical 
writers (Wetstein), cf. also 1 Mace. vii. 

35, ix. 9; 2 Mace. xv. 8, Klostermann, 
Vindicice Lucanw, p. 53. As elsewhere 
St. Peter's words have a practical bearing 
and issue, ii. 16, iii. 12 (Felten). — eiriSt : 
only used here and in Luke i. 25, and 
both times of God ; so in Homer, of the 
gods regarding the affairs of men (and 
so too in Dem. and Herod.), cf. the use 
of the simple verb iSciv in Gen. xxii. 14, 
and also of liriSeiv in Gen. xvi. 13, 1 
Chron. xvii. 17, Ps. xxx. (xxxi. 7), 2 
Mace. i. 27, and viii. 2. — t6v Xoyov <rov : 
a characteristic phrase in St. Luke, cf. 
his use of 6 \6y. tov 0eov, ver. 31, four 
times in his Gospel, and twelve times in 
Acts, as against the use of it once in St. 
Mark, St. John and St. Matthew, xv. 6 
(W.H.). The phrase is of frequent oc- 
currence in St. Paul's Epistles, and it is 
found several times in the Apocalypse. — 
p.€Ta irapp-r)o*ias, see above on iv. 13. 
There is an antithesis in the Greek 
words, for boldness of speech was usually 
the privilege, not of slaves, but of freemen 
— but it is the duty of those who are in 
the service of Christ (Humphry, Acts, 
in loco). 

Ver. 30. Iv tu k.t.X., iii. 26 : a He 
braistic formula; for similar expres- 
sions used of God cf. Exodus vii. 5, 
Jeremiah xv. 6, Ezek. vi. 14, etc., most 
frequently in the act of punishment ; but 
here the context shows that it is for 
healing, Luke v. 13, vi. 10 ; '* while thou 
stretchiest forth thine hand " — the con- 
struction is very frequent in Luke and 
the Acts, see Burton, N. T. Moods and 
Tenses, p. 162, and Friedrich, p. 37. 
Commenting on the prayer, St. Chry- 
sostom writes : " Observe they do not say 
' crush them, cast them down,' ... let 
us also learn thus to pray. And yet how 
full of wrath one would be when fallen 
upon by men intent upon killing him, 
and making threats to that effect ! how 
full of animosity ! but not so these saints." 
— yLyvarQai.: A. and R.V. make yiv. to 
depend upon 86s> but better to regard it 




31. Kal SeTjOcVrwi' afirwi' eo-aXcoflrj 6 toitos kv a> rjo-af aumrjyfieVoi, 
icai eirX^aOTjCTaK airarrcs nueufiaros 'Ayiou, Kal eXaXoue tok X6yop 
tou 0eoo p-crd irappijaias. 1 

1 At end of ver. D (E, Ir., Aug.) adds iravri toi 0c\ovti iri<rrcvciv (last word omitted 
by Aug.) ; so Hilg. Chase points out that Syriac often inserts "will" when nothing 
corresponding in Greek, but see Harris on a primitive Latin redaction, Four Lectures, 
etc., pp. 89, 90. 

as infinitive of purpose, subordinate to 
kv tu k.t.X. (see Wendt and Page). 
Weiss regards from Kal <rrjfi.. to yiy. as 
the reviser's insertion. — els teuriv : St. 
Luke alone employs the good medical 
word iaa-is, see ver. 22, and Luke xiii. 
32, so whilst lacrOai is used only three 
or four times by St. Matthew, two or 
three times by St. John, and once by St. 
Mark, it is used by St. Luke eleven times 
in his Gospel, and three or four times in 
the Acts. The significant use of this 
strictly medical term, and of the verb 
l&o-dai in St. Luke's writings, comes out 
by comparing Matt. xiv. 36, Mark vi. 
56, and Luke vi. 19, see Hobart. latriv 
— 'Irjo-ov, paronomasia ; Wordsworth. 
In this ver., 30, Spitta, agreeing with 
Weiss as against Feine, traced another 
addition in the reviser's hand through 
the influence of source B, in which the 
Apostles appear, not as preachers of the 
Gospel, but as performers of miraculous 

Ver. 31. Sct)0cvto>v, cf. xvi. 26, where 
a similar answer is given to the prayer 
of Paul and Silas : the verb is character- 
istic of St. Luke and St. Paul, and is 
only used by these two writers with the 
exception of one passage, Matt ix. 38 ; in 
St. Luke's Gospel it is found eight times, 
and in Acts seven times, and often of 
requests addressed to God as here, cf. x. 
2, viii. 24, Luke x. 2, xxi. 36, xxii. 32, 1 
Thess. iii. 10. See on aiTcw, Grimm- 
Thayer (Synonyms). This frequent 
reference to prayer is characteristic of 
St. Luke both in his Gospel and the 
Acts, cf. Acts i. 14, ii. 42, iv. 31, vi. 4, x. 
2, xiii. 3, xiv. 23, xvi. 13, 25, xxviii. 8 ; 
Friedrich, Das Lucasevangelium, pp. 59, 
60. — e<ra.\ev6r\, xvi. 26 ; Luke (vi. 38, 48, 
vii. 24) xxi. 26 ; Heb. xii. 26, 27 ; in the 
O.T. we have similar manifestations of 
the divine Presence, cf. Ps. cxiv. 7, 
Amos ix. 5, where the same word is used ; 
cf. also Isa. vi. 4, Hag. ii. 6, Joel iii. 16, 
Ezek. xxxviii. 19. For instance of an 
earthquake regarded as a token of the 
presence of a deity, see Wetstein, in 
loco; Virgil, JEneid, iii., go; Ovid, Met., 
xv., 672, and so amongst the Rabbis, 

Schbttgen, Hor. Heb., in loco. In the 
Acts it is plainly regarded as no chance 
occurrence, and with regard to the 
rationalistic hypothesis that it was merely 
a natural event, accidentally coinciding 
with the conclusion of the prayer, Zeller 
admits that there is every probability 
against the truth of any such hypothesis ; 
rather may we see in it with St. Chrysos- 
tom a direct answer to the appeal to the 
God in whose hands were the heaven 
and the earth (cf. Iren., Adv. Haer., iii., 
12, 5). " The place was shaken, and that 
made them all the more unshaken " 
(Chrysostom, Theophylact, Oecumenius). 
— <rvvi)Yp.c'voi., " were gathered," so in 
ver. 27 ; the aorist in the former verse 
referring to an act, but here the perfect 
to a state, but impossible to distinguish 
in translation, Burton, N. T. Moods 
and Tenses, p. 45. That the shaking is 
regarded as miraculous is admitted by 
Weiss, who sees in it the reviser's hand 
introducing a miraculous result of the 
prayer of the Church, in place of the 
natural result of strengthened faith and 
popular favour. — icai eirXijo-0T}o-av, ver. 8. 
So here the Holy Ghost inspired them 
all with courage: He came comfortari, 
to strengthen ; they had prayed that they 
might speak the word uei-a irapp. and 
their prayer was heard and fulfilled to 
the letter (ver. 31) as Luke describes 
" with simple skill ". — eXaXovv : mark 
the force of the imperfect. iir\t\<r%. 
(aorist), the prayer was immediately 
answered by their being filled with the 
Holy Ghost, and they proceeded to 
speak, the imperfect also implying that 
they continued to speak (Rendall) ; there 
is no need to see any reference to the 
speaking with tongues. Feine sees in 
the narrative a divine answer to the 
Apostles' prayer, so that filled with the 
Holy Ghost they spoke with boldness. 
And he adds, that such divine power must 
have been actually working in the 
Apostles, otherwise the growth of the 
Church in spite of its opposition is inex- 
plicable — a remark which might well be 
considered by the deniers of a miraculous 
Christianity. It is in reality the same 

3i— 31 



32. TOY Be 7tXt]8ous tuc irioreucrdrraji' r^v r\ KapSia Kal f\ »|/ux^l 
jxia 1 ■ Kal ou8e ets ti twk uirap)(oi'Tu>»' auTw IXeyef iSio^ eti/ac, &W 
*)»' auTOts airan-a KOivd. 33. <al ueydXif) Suirifxei direoiSotu' to 
aapTupiof oi dirocrToXoi ttjs deaardcrews tou Kopiou 'Itjo-ou, X^P l 5 

1 After fua DE, Cypr., Amb., Zeno. insert KaL ovk t)v SiaKpio-is (xwpio-uos, E) ev 
avTois ovSeuia (tis, E) ; so Hilg. Belser (so too Zockler) again sees an original reading 
which, beautiful as it is, was sacrificed to brevity ; but Weiss objects that the words 
are no explanation of the preceding words, which point, as the context shows, to a 
fulness of love rather than to the mere absence of division. But it is possible that 
the words may at first have been written in close connection with what follows as a 
fuller picture of the iJ/vxtj p.ia and afterwards abbreviated. Chase suggests Syriac — 
assim. to John ix. 16, where Greek has o-xio-ua — see further on this and other points 
in connection with parallel passage in ii. 44 IT., Harris, Four Lectures, etc., pp. 57, 85. 

argument so forcibly put by St. Chrysos- 
tom : "If you deny miracles, you make 
it all the more marvellous that they 
should obtain such moral victories — 
these illiterate men 1 " Jiingst refers the 
whole verse to a redactor, recording that 
there was no one present with reference to 
whom the irappijo-ia could be employed. 
But the distinction between the aorist 
€ir\yj«r. and the imperfect IXdXovv shows 
that not only the immediate but the 
continuous action of the disciples is 

Ver. 32. Zl marks no contrast between 
the multitude and the Apostles ; it intro- 
duces a general statement of the life of 
the whole Christian community, cf. xv. 
12, 30. On St. Luke's frequent use of 
words expressing fulness, see iv. 32. 
Deissmann, Neue Bibelstudien, p. 5g 
(1897), points out that in the inscriptions 
•n-X-fjOos with a genitive has a technical 
significance, not only in official political 
life, but also in that of religious com- 
munities, cf. Luke i. 10, xix. 37, Acts 
ii. 6, but especially xv. 30 ; so too iv. 32, 
vi. 2, 5, xv. 12, xix. 9, xxi. 22, where the 
word = not Menge or Masse, but Gemeinde. 
— KapSia Kal ij/vxT r" a • *' ' s difficult to 
distinguish precisely between the two 
words, but they undoubtedly imply en- 
tire harmony in affection and thought 
according to a common Hebrew mode of 
expression ; cf. passages in the LXX in 
which both \|m>xi7 and KapSia occur as 
here with uia, 1 Chron. xii. 38, 2 Chron. 
xxx. 12 (Wetstein) ; but in each passage the 

Hebrew word is the same, ^H, and it 
would include not only affection and 
emotion, but also understanding, intelli- 
gence, thought; cf. Phil i. 27, ii. 2, 20. 
" Behold heart and soul are what make 
the together ! " Chrys. 8vo <j>iXoi, t|/vxt| 
u£a, Plutarch, cf. instances in Blass, in 
loco, from Aristotle and Cicero. Grotius 

comments "erant ut Hebraei loquuntur 

ttn ttPNe".-- «a °v« ci?, -and 

not one of them said," R.V., i.e., not one 
among so many ; of. John i. 3. ovSe ev, 
" not even one thing " ; cf. Rom. iii. 10 ; 
see above on ii. 45 and J. Lightfoot, Hor. 
Heb., in loco. On the difference between 
the classical and N.T. use of the infinitive 
after verbs of declaring, see Viteau, Le 
GrecduN. T.,pp. 51, 52, 153, 155 (1896) ; 
except in Luke and Paul the infinitive 
tends to disappear, whilst these two 
writers retain the more literary usage. 

Ver. 33. direStSovv to papi-vpiov, 
" gave the Apostles their witness," R.V. 
See ver. 12. to jxapT., prop., " res quae 
testimonio est," but sometimes in N.T. 
pro uap-rupia (Blass). dircS., however, 
implies paying or rendering what is due ; 
it suggests that there is a claim in response 
to which something is given (Westcott 
on Heb. xiii. 11); cf. Matt. xii. 36, Luke 
xii. 5g, xvi. 2, xx. 25, Rom. xiii. 7, 1 Cor. 
vii. 3, etc. This was its first and strict 
significance in classical Greek, cf. also 
its use in LXX, frequently. The Apostles 
therefore bear their witness as a duty to 
which they were pledged, cf. i. 8, 22, iv. 
20 ; Kal ws irepl o<j>\?iuaTOS Xiyti avro, 
Oecum. — ovvapci firydX^) : the words 
may include miraculous powers, as well 
as stedfast witness. But the tc must 
not, as Weiss maintains, be so taken as 
to indicate that xdpi? p-eydXi] was the 
result, as in ii. 47. For if we regard 
xdpis as referring to the favour of the 
people (as in the former narrative in ii.), 
the yap in ver. 34 seems to point to the ' 
love and liberality of the Christians as its 
cause. But many commentators prefer 
to take xdpis as in vi. 8 (and as in Luke 
ii. 40, Hilgenfeld), of the grace of God, 
since here as there it is used absolutely, 
and ver. 34 would thus be a proof of the 
efficacy of this grace, cf. 2 Cor. ix. 14 




tc fieyaXil r\v iirl irciKTas aurous. 34. oo8e y^P e^Se^S tis uirr^pxci' 1 
iv auTois * ocrot yap KTi^Topes x u> P*- (oy *J oi*iwf uirfjpxov, TruXourres 
e^epok" Tas Tiu.ds tui' TrtTTpaorcop.ecwi', 35. Kal eTi0oue irapa tous 
TToSas Ttov diroaToXwi' • SieoiSoro 2 8e eKaa™ kciGoti. av tis XP e ^ a " 

1 tis vir-rjpxev DEP, Chrys. ; tis tiv fc^AF* 15, 69, so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss; 
Tjv tis B. D reads 00-01 terqTopes rjo-av oik. t] \d>p. ■uirrjpxov iruXovvTes xai <j>€povTes 

combination, so Hilg. ; Harris thinks erant Lat. brought in T)<rav out of place, while 
Chase refers to fusion of true Greek text with Syr. trans. Whatever theory we adopt 
it seems that both tjo-av and vKi\p\ov got into the text, and that alteration was made 
so as to include them both. Blass's theory seems difficult to accept although St. 
Luke, with whom virapx«iv is such a favourite word, might conceivably have written 
vttt)pxov itu>\ovt€s Kai <{>epovTes in a rough draft. 

2 SteSiSoTo B 3 P ; SieSiSe-ro ^AB^E, so Tisch., W.H., Weiss, Winer- Schmiedel, 
p. 121 ; Blass, Grammatik, p. 48; Kennedy, Sources of N. T. Greek, p. 159. 

xdpis* as Bengel maintains, may include 
grace, favour with God and man, as in 
our Lord Himself, Gratia Dei et favor 

Ver. 34. oi>8£ yap IvSeijs : cf. Deut. 
xv. 4, where the same adjective occurs ; 
cf. xv. 7, 11, xxiv. 14, Isa. xli. 17. No 
contradiction with vi. 1, as Holtzmann 
supposes ; here there is no ideal immunity 
from poverty and want, but distribution 
was made as each fitting case presented 
Uself: "their feeling was just as if they 
were under the paternal roof, all for a 
while sharing alike," Chrys., Horn., xi. — 
00-01 ■yap . . . ■uirfipxov, " non dicitur : 
omnes hoc fecerunt [aorist] ut jam nemo 
vel fundum vel domum propriam haberet, 
sed : vulgo [saepe] hoc fiebat [imperfect] 
ad supplendum fiscum. communem pau- 
peribus destinatum ; itaque nunquam 
deerat quod daretur," Blass, in loco, cf 
remarks on ii. 47. — tois t<ov iriirpao-- 
Kap.evb>v, " the prices of the things which 
were being sold ". The language shows 
that we are not meant to infer that the 
men sold all that they had (cf. Wetstein, 
especially Appian, B. Civ., v., p. 1088, 
Tiftas Toiv en irnrpcMTK.). iruXovvres et 
•n-nrpao-K. both imperfect (Blass), and see 
also Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 
5 8. — KTTJropes in N.T. only here, rarely 
elsewhere, see instances in Wetstein ; 
not in LXX, but cf. Symmachus, Joel 
i. 11. 

Ver. 35. The statement marks, it is 
true, an advance upon the former nar- 
rative, ii. 44, but one which was perfectly 
natural and intelligible. Here for the 
first time we read that the money is 
brought and laid at the Apostles' feet. 
As the community grew, the responsi- 
bilities of distribution increased, and to 

whom could the administration of the 
common fund be more fittingly committed 
than to the Apostles ? The narrative 
indicates that this commital of trust was 
voluntary on the part of the Ecclesia, 
although it was marked by an act of 
reverence for the Apostles' authority. 
The fact that Barnabas is expressly 
mentioned as laying the value of his field 
at the Apostles' feet, may be an indica- 
tion that the other members of the com- 
munity were acting upon his suggestion ; 
if so, it would be in accordance with what 
we know of his character and forethought, 
cf. ix. 27, xi. 22-24, Hort, Ecclesia, pp. 
47, 48. There is no reason to reject this 
narrative as a mere repetition of ii. 44, 
45. The same spirit prevails in both 
accounts, but in the one case we have 
the immediate result of the Pentecostal 
gift, in the case before us we have the 
permanence and not only the vitality of 
the gift marked — the Christian com- 
munity is now organised under Apostolic 
direction, and stress is laid upon the 
continuance of the " first love," whilst 
the contrast is marked between the self- 
sacrifice of Barnabas and the greed of 
Ananias and Sapphira, see Rendall, Acts, 
p. 196, and also Z'6ck\zi,Apostelgcschichte, 
p. 198, in answer to recent criticisms. — 
irapa tovs irdSas : the Apostles are repre- 
sented as sitting, perhaps as teachers, 
xxii. 3, cf. Luke ii. 46, and also as an 
indication of their authority : the expres- 
sion in the Greek conveys the thought 
of committal to the care and au- 
thority of any one, cf. v. 2, vii. 58, 
xxii. 20, so Matt. xv. 30, or that of re- 
verence and thankfulness. Oecumenius 
sees in the words an indication of the 
great honour of the Apostles, and the 




36. 'iwcrrjs 1 8^ 6 liriK\T]0€ts BapedjSas uiro iw diro<rr(5Xa)f (o ctrri 
p.eOepp.n/'Oi', Yios TrapaKX^a-ews), AeuiTTjs, Kinrpi.09 tw yeVei, 

1 l<do-r)« P 1, 13, 31, Sah., Syr. Hard., Chrys., Theophy., Meyer, Alford ; Iworjcj) 
NABDE, Vulg., Boh., Syr. Pesh., Arm., Aeth., Epiph., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., 
Weiss, Wendt, Hilg. — see Blass, Grammatik, p. 30. 

reverence of those who brought the 
money. Friedrich notes the expression 
as characteristic of St. Luke's style, since 
it is used by him five times in the Gospel, 
six times in Acts, and is found in the 
N.T. only once elsewhere, see above, cf. 
Cicero, Pro Flacco, 28, and instances in 
Wetstein. — SleSiScto : impersonal, or rh 
dpyvpiov may be supplied, Viteau, Le 
Grec du N. T., p. 57 (1896), and in St. 
Luke's Gospel twice, xi. 22, xviii. 22 ; 
only once elsewhere in N.T., John vi. n ; 
on the abnormal termination ero for oto, 
cf. LXX, Kennedy, Sources of N. T. 
Greek, p. 159, cf. Exodus v. 13, cSiSoto, 
but A -€to ; Jer. lii. 34, eSiSoto, but 
AB J S -ero ; 1 Cor. xi. 23, Winer-Schmie- 
del, p. 121. — Ka8<$-ri : only found in St. 
Luke in N. T., twice in Gospel, four 
times in Acts ; Luke i. 7, xix. 9, Acts ii. 
24, 45, iv. 35, xxii. 31 ; on the imperfect 
with av in a conditional relative clause, 
Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, pp. 13, 
125, and Viteau, Le Grec du N. T., p. 
142 (1893), cf. ii. 45. 33 b -35 are ascribed 
by Hilgenfeld to his " author to Theo- 
philus, 11 ' but this reviser must have been 
very clumsy to introduce a notice involv- 
ing a general surrender of all landed 
property, as Hilgenfeld interprets the 
verse, which could not be reconciled with 
St. Peter's express words in v. 4 — words 
which, on Hilgenfeld's own showing, the 
reviser must have had before him. 

Ver. 36. 'Iwaijs Se : Se introduces the 
special case of Barnabas after the general 
statement in ver. 34. — 6 ciriic., cf. i. 
23. On what occasion this surname 
was conferred by the Apostles nothing 
certain is known (air<$ as often for 
tnrd, ii. 22), although the fact that it 
was conferred by them may indicate 
that he owed his conversion to them. 
Possibly it may not have been be- 
stowed until later, and reference may 
here be made to it simply to identify 
him (Nosgen). — BapvafJas : most com- 
monly derived from HN'Qi "")2l (" quod 

T ~ 

neque ad sensum neque ad litteras pror- 
sus convenit," Blass) = properly vib% 
irpocjvrjTcias. But St. Luke, it is argued, 
renders this vlds irapaKXijcews, because 
under the threefold uses of prophecy, 

1 Cor. xiv. 3, the special gift of irapaKXtjais 
distinguished Barnabas, cf. Acts xi. 23. 
So Harnack (whose full article " Barna- 
bas " should be consulted, Real-Ency- 
clopadie fur prot. Theol. und Kirche," 
xv., 410) explains it as indicating a 
prophet in the sense in which the 
word was used in the early Church, 
Acts xv. 32 (xi. 23), irapdicX.-r]o-i.s = edify- 
ing exhortation. But not only is "^ 

an Aramaic word, whilst HN'Oi is He- 
brew, but the above solution of St. Luke's 
translation is by no means satisfactory 
(see Zockler, in loco). In 1 Cor. xiv. 3 
irapaK. might equally mean consolation, 
cf. 2 Cor. i. 3-7, and it is translated 
" comfort " (not " exhortation ") in the 
R.V. In St. Luke's Gospel the word 
is used twice, ii. 25, vi. 24, and in both 
passages it means comfort, consolation, 
cf. the cognate verb in xvi. 25. Another 
derivation has been suggested by Kloster- 
mann, Probleme itn Aposteltexte, pp. 8-14. 
He maintains that both parts of the 

word are Aramaic, "^ and fc^rTO, 

solatium, and that therefore St. Luke's 
translation is quite justified. Blass 
however points out that as in the for- 
mer derivation so here there is a diffi- 
culty in the connection between Bap- 
vdBas and the somewhat obscure Aramaic 
word. In the conversion of Barnabas, 
the first man whose heart was so touched 
as to join him, in spite of his Levitical 
status and culture, to ignorant and un- 
lettered men, the Apostles might well 
see a source of hope and comfort (cf. 
Gen. v. 29), Klostermann, p. 13. It is 
also worthy of note that the LXX fre- 
quently uses irapaK\T]o-is as a translation 
of the common Hebrew words for com- 
fort or consolation ; cf. Job xxi. 2, Ps. 
xciii. 19, Isa. lvii. 8, Jer. xvi. 17, etc., and 
cf. Psalms of Solomon xiii., title, irapd- 
k\t)otis twv SikclCcov. On the whole" 
question, Deissmann, Bibelstudien, p. 
175 ff., should be consulted. Deissmann, 
referring to an inscription recently dis- 
covered in Northern Syria, in the old 
Nicopolis, probably of the third or 
fourth century a.d., explains the word 
as follows ; The inscription contains the 



IV. 37- 

37. uirdpxon-os aurw dypou, 1 irwX^aas Tj^eyice to xP^H- a J Kai eOtjice 
irapa 2 tous iroSas twc &ttoot6\<i>i\ 

1 aypov ; D has x&>piov, but aypos only here in Acts. For x<»piov cf iv. 34, v. 3, 8. 

2 irapa BP, Chrys., so W.H. (so Lach.) ; irpos ^E 15, 18, 37, so Tisch., Weiss, 
Wendt ; cf. ver. 35 and v. 2. 

name Papvepovv, which D. considers 
rightly = Son of Nebo ; cf, e.g., Sym- 

machus, Isa. xlvi. 1, who renders *Q2, 

Nebo (transcribed by the LXX, Aquila 
and Theodotion, Na|3a>), by N«Povs. The 
view of the connection or identity of 
{3apva|3as with f3apve|3ov? is facilitated 
by the fact that in other words the e 
sound in Nebo is replaced by o ; cf. Ne- 
buchadnezar = LXX N a Povxo8ovo<rop, 
so iWbuzaradan = LXX Na (3ov£apSav. 
Very probably therefore f3apva{3ovs will 
occur instead of PapvefJovs — and the Jews 
themselves might easily have converted 
PapvaPovs into (Sapvapds — as being the 
constant termination of Greek names. 
In his Neue Bibelstudien, p. 16, Deiss- 
mann is able to refer to an Aramaic in- 
scription from Palmyra, dating 114 a.d., 
with the word Barnebo, and cf. also 
Enc. Bibl., i., 484. — AeveiTTjs : although 
the Levites were not allowed to hold pos- 
sessions in land, since God Himself was 
their portion (Num. xviii. 20, Deut. x. 9), 
yet they could do so by purchase or in- 
heritance, cf. Jer. xxxii. 7-12, or it is pos- 
sible that the field of Barnabas may not 
have been in Palestine at all (see Bengel, 
but, on the other hand, Wendt, in loco), 
and that the same Messianic regulations 
may not have applied to the Levites in 
other countries (Wetstein). It would 
also seem that after the Captivity the 
distribution of land, according to the 
Mosaic Law, was no longer strictly ob- 
served (Overbeck, Hackett (Hastings' 
B.D.), " Barnabas," e.g., Josephus, a 
Levite and Priest, has lands in the 
vicinity of Jerusalem, and gains others 
in exchange for them from Vespasian, 
Vita, 76. — Kvirpios tu> yivti : soon 
after the time of Alexander, and pos- 
sibly before it, Jews had settled in 
Cyprus, and 1 Mace. xv. 23 indicates 
that they were there in good numbers. 
This is the first mention of it in the N.T. ; 
see also xi. 19, 20, xiii. 4-13, xv. 39, xx. 
16, and the geographical notices in xxi. 
3, xxvii. 4. From the neighbouring 
island, Cyprus, Barnabas might well 
have been sent to the famous University 
of Tarsus, and so have made the ac- 
quaintance of Saul. In this way the 

previous acquaintance between the two 
men goes far to explain succeeding 
events, ix. 27 : see " Cyprus," B.D. 
(Hastings), Hamburger, Real-Encyclo- 
padie des fudentums, i. 2, 216. — yivei, 
" a man of Cyprus by race," R.V. not 
" of the country of Cyprus": -ye'vei re- 
fers to his parentage and descent, cf 
xviii. 2, 24. 

Ver. 37. dypov, better " a field " R.V. ; 
the possession was not great, but if the 
field lay in the rich and productive island 
of Cyprus, its value may have been con- 
siderable. — to xp^r 1 * 1 : rarely in this 
sense in the singular, only here in the 
N.T., and never in Attic Greek, but cf. 
Herod., iii., 38, and instances in Wet- 
stein, and see Blass, in loco. The money, 
i.e., the proceeds, the money got (German 
Erlos). Lumby suggests that the word 
may be used here to indicate the en- 
tirety, the sum without deduction, in 
contrast to the action of Ananias and 
Sapphira, v. 2. The same unselfish 
spirit manifested itself in Barnabas at a 
later date, when he was content to live 
from the produce of his hands, 1 Cor. ix. 
6. Possibly at Tarsus, so near his own 
home, he may have learnt with Saul in 
earlier days the craft of tent-making, 
for which the city was famous (Plumptre). 
In connection with this passage, and ix. 
26, see Renan's eulogy on the character 
of Barnabas. In him Renan sees the 
patron of all good and liberal ideas, and 
considers that Christianity has done him 
an injustice in not placing him in the 
first rank of her founders, Apostles, p. 
191, E.T. 

Chapter V. — Ver. 1. 'Avtjp Si t»s : 
in striking contrast to the unreserved 
self-sacrifice of Barnabas, St. Luke places 
the selfishness and hypocrisy of Ananias 
and Sapphira. It is in itself no small proof 
of the truth of the narrative, that the 
writer should not hesitate to introduce this 
episode side by side with his picture of 
the still unbroken love and fellowship of 
the Church. He makes no apology for 
the facts, but narrates them simply and 
without comment. — ' Avavias — written 
in W.H. (so Blass) 'A., prob. Hebrew 

rP22n = Hananiah = to whom Jehovah 

V. i- 4 . 



V. 1. 'Arr)p 8e tis 'Avavtas l 6v6fiari, ow laTr^ctpt) rfj yuvatKt 
auToG, eTrwXtjo-e KTTjfJia, 2. Kal ivo<T<$>L<Ta.To diro rf)s Tiu-fjs, owetoutas 
Kal ttjs yueatKos auTOu, Kal iviyicas jxe'pos n irapa tous Tr68a$ rutv 
dirooToXue eflirjKei'. 3. cTire 8e 2 rieTpos, 'Arabia, Start eirXrjpcjo-cf 6 
ZaTai/ds TTjf KapStac aou, \J/euaa<T0at ae to ili/euua to "Aytof, Kal 
yoo-<j>io-ao-0ai diro rfjs tijjltjs tou \Q)piou ; 4. ouy). jxcVow crol eucye, 
Kal TrpaO^ ec rfj cttj e|ouata uTTfjpxe ; ti on efioo iv ttj tcapSia ctou 

1 Av. ovouoti jf^BEP, so Tisch., W.H., Weiss, Winer- Schmiedel, p. 256 ; ov. Av. 
AD, Vulg., Chrys. lax^etpY) AP, so Tisch., W.H., so Blass in ; Xair^eipa B, so 
Weiss. Many variations: j$ Iap.<£iprj, D o-a<j><f>vpa, corr. Za<{>({>ipa (so Hilg.) ;' E has 
latfxjupfl ; see comment. 

* fleTpos DP ; but 6 fl. ^ABE, Chrys., so Tisch., W.H., Wendt, Weiss. 

has been gracious (the Hebrew name of 
Shadrach, Dan. i. 6, LXX, Jer. xxviii. i, 
Tob.v. 12, (Songof the Three Children, ver. 
66) (Lumby, but see also Wendt, note, in 
loco). — Zairc^etpf), so also W.H., either 
from adir<f>ctpos (cro.p.9., so here Zap.<{>., 

fr«$*, Blass), a sapphire, or from the 

Aramaic fcO^StZ?, beautiful. The latter 

T • - " 

derivation is adopted by Blass (Gram* 
matik des N. G., p. 8), and Winer- 
Schmiedel, p. 76. It is declined like 
airetpa, jxaxatpa, Acts x. I, xii. 2, etc., 
in N.T., and so makes dative fj, Winer- 
Schmiedel, pp. 80, 93, and Blass, u. s. 
— KTfjp.a = x<>>p£ov, ver. 3 : but may 
mean property of any kind. It is used 
in the singular several times in the LXX, 
as a possession, heritage, etc., Job xx. 
29, Prov. xii. 27, xxxi. 16, Wisdom viii. 
5, Ecclus. xxxvi. 30, li. 21, etc. 

Ver. 2. cvo<r<t>taaTO : may merely 
mean from its derivation, to set apart 
vdo-<f>i. But both in LXX and N.T. it is 
used in a bad sense of appropriating for 
one's own benefit, purloining, Josh. vii. 
1, of Achan, 2 Mace. iv. 32, so here and 
in ver. 3, and Tit. ii. 10, cf. also a similar 
use of the word in Jos., Ant., iv., 8, 29 (so 
in Greek authors, Xen., Polyb., Plut.). 
— diro : the same combination in Josh, 
vii. i (cf. ii. 17 above, Ikxcu dirJ, cf. 

Hebrew Yfo, See Bengel's note, in loco, 

on the sin of Achan and Ananias). — 
o-w£i8vii]s : it was thus a deliberate and 
aggravated offence. On the irregular 
form, instead of -vtas, cf. the LXX, Exod. 
viii. 21, 24, 1 Sam. xxv. 20; and see also 
Winer-Schmiedel, p. 81, note, and Blass 
on instances from the papyri, in loco. — 
irapa tovs iroSas : a further aggravation 
(' v - 35)» since the money was brought 
ostentatiously to gain a reputation for the 

donors. Blass well comments : " in con- 
ventu ecclesiie hoc liberalitatis documen- 
tum editum " ; cf. Calvin, who in marking 
the ambition of Ananias to gain a repu- 
tation for liberality adds : " ita fit ut 
pedes Apostolorum magis honoret quam 
Dei oculos ". 

Ver. 3. Start : not simply "why ?" but 
" how is it that ? " R.V., cf. Luke ii. 49 ; 
the force of the Greek seems to emphasise 
?he fact that Ananias had it in his power 
to have prevented such a result, cf. 
James iv. 7, 1 Peter v. 9. — lirXi^pw<rev, 
occupavit (cf. John xvi. 6), so that there 
is room for no other influence, Eccles. ix. 
3. On the Vulgate, tentavit, which 
does not express the meaning here, see 
Felten's note. — ff/evtraadat, sc, vtrre, 
often omitted; cf. Luke i. 54, the 
infinitive of conceived result, see Burton, 
N. T. Moods and Tenses, pp. 148, 154. 
The verb with the accusative of the 
person only here in N.T., but in LXX, 
Deut. xxxiii. 29, Psalm lxv. 3, Isa. lvii. 
11, Hos. ix. 2, 4 Mace. v. 34, etc., and 
frequently in classical writers. 

Ver. 4. ovxi, " id quaerit quod sic esse 
nemonegat," Grimm, "while it remained, 
did it not remain thine own ? " R.V. 
Very frequent in Luke as compared 
with the other Evangelists, see also vii. 
50. This rendering better retains the 
kind of play upon the word u^vu, to 
which Weiss draws attention, and com- 
pares 1 Mace. xv. 7 for the force of ejtcvev. 
— irpaOev, i.e., the price of it when sold 
(rectius irpaOevTOS to dpyvptov, cf. Viteau, 
Le Grec du N. T., p. 57 (1896)) ; so avTa. 
in ii. 45 is used for the prices of the 
possessions and goods sold. The whole 
question, while it deprived Ananias of 
every excuse, also proves beyond doubt 
that the community of goods in the 
Church of Jerusalem was not compulsory 

1 4 2 



tA irpayfia touto 1 ; ouk eijieu'craj df0pc5irois, dMct tw 0ew. 5. i.Ko6u»v 
8e 'Acacias toOs Xoyous toutous, ireawc e|e<J/u|c • kcu eyeVcTO 4>o|3o9 

1 to irpayaa touto ; but D, Par., Sah. read iroiT)o~ai (to) irovrjpov tovto — irpayua 
once elsewhere in Luke's Gospel i. 1, once in St. Matt., four times in St. Paul. 
Av. fr$ABEP, Chrys. prefix article, so Tisch., W.H., Weiss, Wendt. irecrwv ; D, Par., 
so Hilg., prefix irapaxprjaa — and Par. also adds after weo-. eiri ttjv yi)v, cf. ix. 4, 
read by Blass in 0. TavTo om. ^*ABD, verss., Orig., Lucif., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., 
Wendt, Weiss ; cf. ver. 11 end. 

but voluntary. — e|ovo-£a, power or right 
(e'leo-Ti) : " The Ecclesia was a society 
in which neither the community was lost 
in the individual, nor the individual in the 
community," Hort, Ecclesia, p. 48. — ri 
oTi, sc, rl «rriv Sti, cf. Luke ii. 49, and 
Viteau, Le Grec du N. T., p. 101 (1893), 
Blass, Grammatik des N. G., p. 173. — 
Zdov Iv T'jj KapSia o-ov, xix. 21, and Luke 
xxi. 14. The phrase is rightly described 
as having a Hebraistic colouring, cf. 
LXX, 1 Sam. xxi. 12, Dan. i. 8, Hag. 
ii. 16, 19, Mai. i. 1, and the Homeric 
Bia-Bai Iv 4>pecr£, Iv 6v|tu PaMeo-Oau 
— to irpayp,a tovto : so frequently 
in LXX, Gen. xliv. 15, Exod. i. 18, 
Josh. ix. 24, 1 Chron. xxi. 8; Viteau, 
Le Grec du N. T., p. 149 (i8g6). — ovk 
exj/evo-o) : the words do not here of course 
mean that Ananias had not lied unto 
men, but an absolute negative is employed 
in the first conception, not to annul it, 
but rhetorically to direct undivided atten- 
tion to the second, cf. Matt. x. 20, Mark 
ix. 37, 1 Thess. iv. 8, Winer-Moulton, 
lv. 8, 6. The dative of the person is 
found after o|/ev8ecr8ai in the LXX, but 
not in classical Greek. The sin of 
Ananias was much more than mere 
hypocrisy, much more than fraud, pride 
or greed — hateful as these sins are — the 
power and presence of the Holy Spirit 
had been manifested in the Church, and 
Ananias had sinned not only against 
human brotherhood, but against the 
divine light and leading which had made 
that brotherhood possible. In the words 
there lies an undeniable proof of the 
personality anddivinity of the Holy Ghost, 
and a refutation of Macedonius long 
before he was born (see Bede's note 
in loco, and on patristic authorities, 
Felten). We cannot satisfactorily ex- 
plain the words by supposing that offence 
against the public spirit of that Church 
is meant, and that the sin against the 
Holy Ghost may be identified with this. 
Ver. 5. aKovuv, " as he heard these 
words" = aeTa^v olkovuv, so Weiss, Blass, 
Rendall. — e|e'x|/v$cv : only found here, in 
ver. 10 of Sapphira, and xii- 23 of the 

death of Herod, in the N.T. ; not found 
in classical writers, and only twice in the 
LXX, Judg. iv. 21 where A reads it to 
describe the death of Sisera, but = a He- 
brew word which may only mean to faint, 
to faint away ; Ezek. xxi. 7 (12) where it 

translates a Hebrew word HPO meaning 

T T 

to be faint-hearted, to despond, to be 
dim. But as Blass points out it is used 
by Hippocrates ; indeed it would seem 
that its use is almost altogether confined 
to medical writers (Hobart, Zahn). It 
is therefore a word which may probably 
be referred to St. Luke's employment of 
medical terms ; Hobart, Medical Lan- 
guage of St. Luke, p. 37, for instances of 
its use not only in Hippocrates but in 
Galen and Aretaeus (Lumby refers to 
Acta Andr. et Matth. Apocr., 19, where 
the word is also used of men suddenly 
falling down dead). In classical Greek 
airoi\ivxeiv (fBiov), or airotj/. absolutely is 
the term employed. There can be no 
doubt that the narrative implies the 
closest connection between the guilt of 
Ananias and his sudden death. It there- 
fore cannot be regarded as a narrative of 
a chance occurrence or of the effect of a 
sudden shock caused by the discovery of 
guilt in St. Peter's words. No one has 
shown more clearly than Baur (Paulus, 
L, 27-33, especially against Neander) that 
all such explanations are unsatisfactory 
(see also Zeller and De Wette). In 
the early history of the Church, Origen, 
Tract, ix. in Matt., had espoused the 
view that Ananias had died overcome by 
shame and grief at the sudden detection 
of his sin. But no such explanation could 
account for the death of Sapphira which 
Peter foretells as about to follow 
without delay. That the narrative is not 
without historical foundation is frankly 
admitted by Wendt, and also by Baur, 
Zeller, Overbeck, and most recently 
by Weizsacker, Holtzmann, Spitta. But 
this stern condemnation of any attempt 
to lie unto God is a stumbling-block even 
to those who with Wendt recognise not 
only some historical fact underlying the 




{ie'yas eirl irdrras tous dicouoeTas TaoTa. 6. dfaordcTes 8c oi 
cewTepoi oweVrciXav auTOf, Kal efevcyKaJTes €0aij/a»'. 7. 'EyeVero 

narrative, but also the danger and culpa- 
bility of the action of Ananias and his 
wife. It may however be justly ob- 
served that our Lord Himself had con- 
demned no sin so severely as that of 
hypocrisy, and that the action of Ananias 
and Sapphira was hypocrisy of the worst 
kind, in that they sought by false pre- 
tences to gain a reputation like the 
Pharisees for special sanctity and charity; 
the hypocrisy of the leaven of the Phari- 
sees had entered the Church (Baum- 
garten), and if such a spirit had once 
gained ground in the Christian com- 
munity, it must have destroyed all 
mutual affection and all brotherly kind- 
ness, for how could men speak the truth, 
every one with his neighbour, unless their 
love was without hypocrisy ? Rom. xii. 9 ; 
how could they claim to be citizens of a 
city, into which none could enter who 
" made a lie " ? Rev. xxi. 27, xxii. 15. The 
sin before us was not one sin but many 
(Chrys., Horn., xii., on ver. 9), and in its 
deliberateness it came perilously near 
that sin against the Holy Ghost which, 
whatever else it may mean, certainly 
means a wilful hardening against divine 
guidance. For further considerations on 
the necessity of this unhesitating con- 
demnation of such a sin at the outset of 
the life of the Church, see St. Chrysos- 
tom's remarks. We must guard against 
supposing that St. Peter had imprecated 
the death-penalty upon Ananias (as 
Porphyry asserted, see against such a 
view, Jerome, Epist., 130). St. Jerome 
speaks of Ananias and Sapphira as not 
only deceitful, but also as timid stewards, 
keeping back a part of the price " through 
fear of famine which true faith never 
fears ". On his judgment that the aveng- 
ing stroke was inflicted, not in cruelty to 
them, but as a warning to others, see 
below. — Kal iyivtro $6flo<i ue'yas k.t.X., 
i.e., upon all who were present, as distinct 
from ver. n — but see Page's note. Over- 
beck, with De Wette, regards the re- 
mark as proleptical, as if the writer 
hurried to describe the impression made 
— but why should the words not include 
the judgment uttered by St. Peter? for 
the construction see Luke i. 65, iv. 36. 
On the characteristic reference to <|>6Bos 
as following upon the exhibition of divine 
miraculous power both in St. Luke's 
Gospel and the Acts, see Friedrich, 
Das Lucasevangelium, p. 77, and above 
on ii. 43. 

Ver. 6. dvacrravTes, see on ii. 14. — 
ot vcuTcpoi : the fact that they are called 
simply veo.vio-Koi in ver. 10 seems deci- 
sive against the view that reference is 
made to any definite order in the Church. 
Nor is it certain that we can see in the 
fulfilment of such duties by the vewTepoi 
the beginnings of the diaconate, although 
on the natural distinction between irpeo-- 
Pvrepoi and veuTEpoi it may well have 
been that official duties in the Church 
were afterwards based, cf. 1 Tim. v. 1, 
Tit. ii. 1-6, 1 Pet. v. 5, Clem. Rom., i., 3 ; 
iii., 3 ; xxi., 6 ; Polycarp, Epist., v., 3 (cf. 
Luke xxii. 26). In comparatively early 
days it belonged to the duties of the 
deacons to provide for the burial of the 
strangers and the poor, but it seems 
hardly probable that ol veurepoi were 
appointed as a separate body to bury the 
dead, before any attempt had been made 
to relieve the Apostles of the more 
pressing duty of distributing the public 
funds, vi. 1. On the other hand it is 
possible that the company of public 
"buriers" whom the prophet saw in 
vision, Ezek. xxxix. 12-16, may have 
become quite customary in N.T. days. 
R.V. margin renders simply " the younger 
men". — truvco-TeiXav, "wrapped him 
round," R.V., probably in their own 
mantles (for no formal laying-out in robes 
can be supposed by the context), for which 
irepio-TeXXw would be the usual word, 
cf. Eur., Troad., 378 (see Grimm, Blass, 
Weiss). But Meyer on the other hand 
is against the parallel, and argues, fol- 
lowing Grotius, that the word should be 
rendered "placed him together," i.e., 
laid out or composed his limbs, so that 
he might be carried out more con- 
veniently (so too Overbeck, Holtzmann, 
Zockler). Vulgate, amoverunt, followed 
by Luther, Erasmus, Beza, cannot be 
said to be supported by any parallel use 
of the word (Par. 2 also same verb as Vulg.). 
The word is frequently used by medical 
writers in various senses, one of which, 
to bandage, to compress by bandaging, 
is that which seems to afford a possible 
parallel to its use here, Hobart, Medical 
Language, etc., pp. 37, 38. The use of , 
the word by Josephus, Ant., xviii., 3 ; xix., 
4, is not sufficient to justify us in tak- 
ing it here to express all the prepara- 
tions for burial. — ilevcyicavTCS : outside 
the walls of the city, the usual place for 
graves — only prophets and kings had 
their graves in the city — Hamburger, 




8e <»>s wpwy Tpiwv 8idffTT](xa, Kal ^ yuvri auTou pq ei8uia to y^Y ^ 5 
eio-qXOei'. 8. direKpi^T] 8c aurjj 6 rieTpo?, 1 Eiire uoi, el toctoutou to 
XwpiW &tt£'8oo-0€ ; q 8e etire, Nal, toctoutou. 9. 6 8e l"l£rpos cure 
Trpos atm'p, Ti on owccJxjjeqOq 2 up,ir ircipdaai to m'cGu.a Kupiou ; i8ou 
01 iroSes t£>v Qaty&vTOH' toi/ dfSpa o-ou ctti tt) 0upa, Kal e^oicxouai ae. 
IO. eirecrc 8c Trapa)(pqp.a irapd tous iroSas auTou, Kal i^i^u^ev • 
cicrcXOocTes 8« ol veaviaKOi eupov auTq»- ceKpde, Kal e^eee'YKarres 

1 For siire p.01 €w • . • aireS. D reads €ir«pwTT)o-&> o*f «i apa to \. too*. aircS., so 

Hilg. ; cf. Sah. 

2 o-uv€<f>covT)8i-i, D has o-vve^wvqo-ev, so Hilg. ; but in p Blass has T.R. (see Chase on 
retrans. from Syriac — possibly active may be a retranslation of Latin convenit, Harris). 

Real-Encyclopddie des Judentums, i., 4, 
475, " Grab " ; Edersheim, Jewish Social 
Life, p. 169, cf. the use of «K<|>£pa> and 
€KKO(xi£ci> in classical Greek, Latin, efferre. 
— eOav|/av: partly for sanitary reasons, 
partly to avoid defilement ; the interval 
between death and burial was very brief, 
especially in Jerusalem (Numb. xix. 11, 
Deut. xxi. 23 ; Hamburger, u. s., i., 2, 
161, " Beerdigung," with reference to 
this passage, Edersheim, u. s., p. 168; 
for the existing custom in Jerusalem of 
speedy burial, see Hackett, in loco, and 
Schneller, Kennst du das Land ? (eighth 
edition), p. 188). 

Ver. 7. iyivero Si . . . Kal, cf. for 
construction Luke v. 1, 17, viii. 1, 22, 
ix. 51, xiv. 1, etc. Hebraistic, if not 
strictly a Hebraism ; on kou thus uniting 
two co-ordinate statements with iyivero 
see Plummer's valuable note, p. 45 ; St. 
Luke, first edition ; and on the use of Kai 
see Simcox, Language of the N. T., pp. 
161, 162; Blass, Grammatik des N. G., 
pp. 256, 257. — 8tdomj(i.a : as if a nomina- 
tive absolute, here parenthetical from 
is, cf. Luke ix. 28. Cf. Viteau, Le Grec du 
N. T., p. 83 (1896). St. Luke alone uses 
SidoTqpa (only here in N.T.), cf. Polyb., 
ix., 1, 1 ; Sidomjua T«Tpa€T^s> and the 
verb Siio-Ttjpi, cf. Luke xxii. 59, xxiv. 
51, Acts xxvii. 28. In Apocryph. Act. 
Andrea, 14, we have qpiwpiov Sidorqua 
(Lumby), and in LXX, cf. Ecclesiast., 
prol. , 24, 3 Mace. iv. 17. — <I>s = wo-ef, 
fere, cf. i. 15, ii. 4, etc. — o>pwv Tpiuv: 
Nosgen supposes the approach of the 
next hour of prayer in this mention 
of the time, pi) pro ov (Blass), see also 
Lumby's note. 

Ver. 8. too-ovtov, monstrat pecuniam, 
Blass, so Zockler, Holtzmann, Felten, 
Weiss, and others : genitive of the price. 
The position of the word in the question 
is emphatic, cf. Luke xv. 29. Blass 

would render non pluris (Bornemann, 
tantilli), but this is implied rather than 
expressed by the word here (see Wendt's 
note for classical instances). The question 
of St. Peter and the emphatic reply of 
Sapphira show that opportunity was 
given her by the inquiry to retract, and 
that she wilfully persisted in her sin 
(Chrys. ; so Calvin, " tempus illi ad 
resipiscendum datur "). 

Ver. 9. t! oti, ver. 4. arvve<J><i>vq6q : 
only here in the N.T. in the passive, for 
its use in the active, xv. 15. Blass main- 
tains that this passive usage o-vp.<J>o>v€iTaC 
tmti is Latin rather than Greek (con- 
venit inter aliquos), and that it may have 
arisen from the intercourse between 
Greeks and Romans, see in loco, and 
Grammatik des N. G., pp. 112, 235 ; in 
LXX only in the active. Cf. also Viteau, 
Le Grec du N. T., p. 155 (1893). " The 
aggravation was that they committed the 
deed as with one soul, just as upon a 
settled compact between them," Chrys., 
Horn., xii. ; cf. the plural d,ire8oo-8e. — 
Tmpdcrat : the rendering " to tempt," 
does not seem to express the idea so well 
as " to try," to make trial whether the 
Holy Ghost would discover their de- 
ception, whether He knew all things : 
cf. xv. 10, and in LXX, Exod. xvii. 2, 7, 
Ps. lxxvii. (lxxviii.) 41, 56, etc. (in Rev. 
ii. 2 the same verb as here = " try," A. 
and R.V.). — ISov, see on i. 10. oi irdSes* 
cf. Luke 1. 79, Rom. iii. 15, x. 15. A 
Hebraistic expression — the whole de- 
scription is full of dramatic intensity — 
the returning steps of the veiorepoi are 
heard liri T-jj 0vpa. But Alford thinks 
that they were probably bare-footed, and 
that the words mean that the time was 
just at hand for their return, cf. James 
v. 9. — !|o(crovo-iv ire, see on ver. 6. 

Ver. 10. irapaxpiipa, see on iii. 7. 
The introduction of the word shows that 

8-i 3 . 



iQa\\iu.v l irpos t6v dVSpa aor»]S- II. *al eyeee-To 4>6j3o$ p.£yas e$* 
oXrjv ttjv eKKXrjo-iav, Kal eirl iraVras tous aicouorras TauTa. 

12. Aid 8e twv j(eipwi' Taiv dirocrToXujv eyiveTO aTjfxcia Kal TepaTa 
iv tw Xaw TroXXd • (kcu rjcrav 6p.o0up.a8di' diravTes 2 iv tq area 
ZoXoutirros • 13. twv Se Xonrwc ouSets eToXu-a xoXXdaOai aurois, 

1 e^vevKavTes, D reads <rw<rrciXovT€s elrjveyicav; so Hilg. 

2 airavTes, D, Sah., Aeth. add ev tg> icpoi — E ev tu> vau o-vvT)yu.evoi. But the words 
ev t<i) iepo> are not received by Blass in f$ ; /Icta Apost. in loco, he says : " cf. ii. 43, 
videtur interpolatio esse ; nam sec. iii. 10, hsec porticus extra t6 Updv erat, cf. ver. 
21". Zo\op.wvToS) see above, iii. II. 

the writer regarded the death as super- 
natural, see above on ver. 5. irpos, by, 
beside her husband = irapd with dative, 
Blass, Grammatik des N. G., p. 135, note ; 
Winer- Moulton, xlix. h. Although the 
whole narrative shows that in each case 
the death was caused by the judgment of 
God, yet nothing whatever is said as to 
the world beyond the grave : " As it is, 
both the man himself is benefited, in that 
he is not left to advance further in wick- 
edness, and the rest, in that they are 
made more earnest," Chrys., Horn., xii. 
Wendt points out that the punishment 
inflicted by St. Paul, 1 Cor. v. 5, was of 
a wholly different kind, because it had 
the avowed aim of saving the spirit of 
the sinner in the day of the Lord by de- 
livering him over to Satan for the destruc- 
tion of the flesh ; but it should not be 
forgotten that St. Peter himself speaks 
of a judgment according to men in the 
flesh, which has its issue in a life accord- 
ing to God in the spirit (1 Pet. iv. 6). 
St. Augustine's words may fairly be 
quoted not against but in favour of 
applying to the cases before us the prin- 
ciple of judgment employed by St. Paul: 
" Credendum est autem quod post hanc 
vitam eis pepercerit Deus. . . . Correpti 
sunt mortis flagello, ne supplicio puni- 
antur seterno," Serm., de Verbis Act. 
v., 4, cf. Origen, Tract, viii., in Matth., 
and Jerome, Epist., cxxx. See Speaker's 
Commentary, in loco, and Bengel, Felten, 
Zockler, Plumptre. Felten's reverent 
thoughts, p. 124, may well be compared 
with the remarks of Dr. Pusey on the 
case of Ananias, What is of Faith ? etc., 
p. 14. 

Ver. 11. <{><S|3os p.e'yas : evidently one 
purpose in the infliction of this stern 
penalty was at once obtained, see above 
on ver. 5. — e^' oXtjv ttjv €Kic\T]<r£av : St. 
Luke, as it seems, uses the word eic- 
K\r]o-ia here for the first time. Dr. Hort 
thinks that he may employ it by anti- 

cipation, and that we cannot be sure that 
it was actually in use at this early date 
(Ecclesia, p. 49), but, as the same writer 
reminds us, our Lord's saying to St. 
Peter, Matt. xvi. 18, must have had its 
influence upon the minds and teaching 
of the Apostles. Moreover, we can see 
a special fitness in the employment here, 
after the preceding description, not only 
of the growth, but of the organisation of 
the Christian community, iv. 32 ff., and 
of the judgment which followed upon the 
attempt to challenge its powers and to 
violate its harmony, cf. Bengel's note, in 
loco. The context too probably marks 
a distinction between the members of 
the 6Kic\T)<ria and those without (Weiss, 
Hort, Blass). 

Ver. 12. 8e: merely transitional ; fyi- 
v£to marking the continuance of the 
miracles ; Std twv \eipuv characteristic 
of St. Luke in Acts, cf. ii. 23, vii. 25, xi. 
30, xiv. 3, xv. 23, xix. 11. On Luke's 
fondness for this and similar phrases 
with x e ^p> see Friedrich, Das Lucasevan- 
gelium,p. 8 ; Lekebusch, Apostelgeschichte, 
p. 77. Such phrases, cf. Sid ardpaTds 
tivos, are thoroughly Hebraistic ; so also 
in iii. 13, Luke iii. 21, Kara. irpdo-mTrov, 
and for other instances, Blass, Gramma- 
tik des N. G., pp. 126, 147. — Ztoij Zo\., 
iii. 11. — SiravTes, cf. ii. 1, including other 
believers as well as the Apostles, see 
below. 6p.o0vu.a8ov, see i. 14. 

Ver. 13. twv 8e Xonr&iv : variously 
interpreted (1) of the rest of the believers 
in contrast to the Apostles, but this 
is unnatural, as the Apostles are not 
elsewhere regarded as objects of fear to 
their fellow-believers, and airavrts above 
certainly need not — aTrdo-ToXoi as Hilgen- 
feld interprets it. See, however, Alford, 
in loco, and Gore, Church and the Minis- 
try, p. 256, note. J. Lightfoot applies 
oiravTes to the hundred-and-eight (the 
Apostles making up the hundred-ard- 
twenty), who durst not join themselves 






dXX' eWydXuye*' outous o Xaos • 14. fiaXXov 8e irpoaeTiOerro 
iritrrcoorrcs r(x> Kopiw, ttXi^Ot] deSpuy tc ical yuvaiKuyv •) 15. wore 
Kcrrd 1 tAs irXaTcias cK^epeif tous dcrOcycis Kal Ti0eV<u em kXicwi' 
xal Kpappdrwv, fra cpxop.eVoo fleTpou k&v tj cxid €iuo-iadcrj| Tiki 

1 Kara (ras) D*P 1, Chrys., Theoph., so Meyer; kcu eis t<xs fc$ABD 2 (E), Tisch., 
W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt. kXivojv EP, Chrys., Theodrt. ; tcXivapiuv fc^ABD, 
Cyr.-Jer., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt, Hilg. Kpaf3f3aru>v B 3 EP ; Kpa^aTTuv 
^AB*D, so W.H., Weiss, Hilg. ; but see Blass, Grammatik, p. 12, who reads in |3, 
Kpaf3aros (grabatus), and Winer-Schmiedel, p. 56. cirurKiao"[) fc^ADEP, so Tisch. 
(W.H. alt.), Weiss, Hilg. ; eirio-Kicurei B 13, 31, W.H. following B, Wendt (probable). 
At end of verse D, Par. (Gig. 1 , Wern.) add airtj\Xa<r<rovTO -yap airo ira«rrjs ao-0€veias 
t)v «tx« ckootos avrwv, whilst E (Vulg., Lucif.) adds k<u pvo-Oaxriv oiro iraonrjs a«r- 
9<=veias i\s eixov. Variations between D and E may be due to retranslation from 
Latin, see Harris ; Chase from assim. of Acts xix. 12, through Syriac ; an explanatory 
addition of the result of Peter's shadow falling upon them according to Weiss, Codex 
D, p. 64 ; but Belser sees in vv. 15 and 16 in |J original, revised in a. 

in the dignity and office of Apostleship, 
properly so called, having seen the judg- 
ment that one of the Twelve had brought 
upon Ananias, one of their own number 
(as Lightfoot ranks Ananias amongst the 
hundred-and-twenty) ; (2) of non-believ- 
ers as contrasted with airav-res; this is 
adopted by Blass, but it obliges him to 
translate KoXXa<r8ai, se eis immiscere = 
interpellate, vexarc, whereas the word is 
more often used, as he admits, both in the 
Acts and in the LXX ot friendly inter- 
course p^1> Deut. x. 20, 2 Sam. xx. 
2, 2 Kings xviii. 6, Ps. cxviii. (cxix.) 31, cf. 
Acts viii. 29, ix. 26, x. 28, xvii. 34 ; (3) of 
the rest including 6 Xaos, who stood 
aloof from joining their lot, but at the 
same time regarded them with respect ; 
(4) of the rest, i.e., rulers, scribes, priests, 
men of position, as contrasted, dXXd, with 
the Xa6s, the populace, cf. iv. 21, where 
the same contrast is marked (so Hort, 
Page, Rendall), see also Luke xxi. 38. 
For KoXXao-Oai see further on ver. 36. 

Ver. 14. jiaXXov 8« irpoa-trlBevro : the 
favour of the people which still protected 
the Church (cf. ver. 17) resulted in further 
increase of believers, "were the more 
added," um so mehr; imperfect, signifying 
the continuous growth of the Church ; on 
the verb see ii. 41. itXtj8ti, plural (only 
here in N.T.), because not only men as 
in iv. 4, but women also (Weiss), but 
Bengel " pluralis grandis: jam non initur 
numerus, uti 4, 4," to the same effect 
Blass, " saepe fiebat ut magnus numerus 
accederet, inde plur. hie tantum N.T.". 
On St. Luke's characteristic fondness 
for this and similar words see iv. 32. 
-yvvaiKuv : this mention of women forms 
as it were an introduction to the further 

mention in vi. 1 ff., cf. viii. 3, where 
women are again mentioned amongst the 
victims in the general persecution of the 
Church (see Plumptre's note, in loco). 
This constant reference to the share of 
women in the ministry of the Gospel and 
the life of the Church is characteristic of 
St. Luke in both his writings. 

Ver. 15. wore kou els, " insomuch 
that they even," R.V. — Kara, T.R., so 
Alford, Meyer, " all down the streets," 
as if the streets were entirely beset with 
sick folk (see Holtzmann, in loco). — 
irXc.T€ia<;, feminine of the adjective 
•jtXotvs, sc, 686s, a broad way, so here, 
the open streets, in classical Greek, and 
frequently in LXX, chiefly for Hebrew, 

^n~% Tobit xiii. 17, Judith i. 14, vii. 

14, 22, 1 Mace. i. 55, ii. 9, 3 Mace. i. 18, 
used by St. Luke three times in his 
Gospel, x. 10, xiii. 26, xiv. 21, but only 
here in Acts, see below on ix. 11. 
For tcXivcivread icXivapCwv, which is found 
only here in N.T., not at all in LXX, 
and very rarely in other Greek authors, 
Aristoph., Frag., 33, d, and Arrian, 
Epict. Diss., iii., 5, 13, where it is used 
for the couch of a sick person ; Artem., 
Oneir., ii., 57. As Dr. Hobart points 
out, St. Luke employs no less than four 
different words for the beds of the sick, 
two in common with the other Evangel- 
ists, viz., kXivi] (not in John), and Kpd- 
Pottos (not in Matthew). But two are 
peculiar to him, viz., kXiviSiov (Luke v. 
19, 24), and tcXivdpLov only here. 
Neither word is found in the LXX, but 
kXiviSiov, although rare elsewhere, is 
used in Artem., also in Plutarch, and 
Dion. Hal. (Antiq. Rom., vii., 68), for a 
litter for carryingthe sick, Hobart, Medical 




auTwf. 16. owqpxcro 8e Kal to ttXtjOos rStv ire'pil iroXewv ci« 
'lepoucraXf^p., 4>epovT€S dcrOeveis Kal 6)(XoufieVou$ uir6 "itve.uu,dT(i>K 
anaQaproiV, omves eOepaireuoiro airan-es. 1 

1 eis DEP demid., Arm., Chrys., so Meyer ; om. fr$AB vers., so Tisch., W.H., 
R.V.. Weiss, Wendt. oinves eSepairevovTo airavrcs, D, Par. (Gig., Lucif.) read kou 
iuvto iravTes ; both verbs almost equally common. At end of verse " duo codices 
Bergeri " add et magnificabant Dominum J. C, added by Blass in (J (Greek) ; cf. 
Acts xix. 17. 

Language, etc., pp. 116, 117. Dr. Kennedy 
sees in kXiviSiov an instance of rare 
words used by the comic poets, especi- 
ally Aristophanes, found also in the 
N.T., and almost nowhere else, and 
hence a proof of the " colloquial " lan- 
guage of the N.T. writers (Sources of 
N. T. Greek, pp. 76-79). But the fact re- 
mains that the word in question is found 
only in St. Luke, and that both it and 
xX.ivo.piov were employed for the couch 
of a sick person. — epx»p«vov FleTpou, 
genitive absolute, " as Peter came by," 
R.V. (very frequent in Luke), it does 
not mean, as Felten admits, that none 
of the other Apostles possessed such 
powers. — k&v = Kal lav — even if it 
were only his shadow, " at the least his 
shadow," R.V., cf. Mark v. 28, vi. 56, 2 
Cor. xi. 16 ; the usage is not unclassical, 
Soph., Elect., 1483 ; Simcox, Language 
of the N. T., p. 170 ; Viteau, Le Grec du 
N. T., p. 118 (1893). — cirio-Kid<rr) with 
dative, Luke i. 35, Mark ix. 7 ; B so W.H., 
future indicative aev, a construction com- 
mon with Situs in classical Greek (Page) ; 
for other examples of the future indicative 
with tva see Viteau, Le Grec du N. T., p. 
81 (1893), of which several are found 
in the N.T., although not in classical 
Greek ; cf. Luke xiv. 10, xx. 10, 1 Cor. 
ix. 18, 1 Pet. Hi. 1, Acts xxi. 24, W.H. ; 
John vii. 3, Gal. ii. 4, etc. ; Burton, 
u. s., p. 86. Undoubtedly this action of 
the people showed the lively power of 
their faith (Chrys., Theod., Aug.), but 
the further question arises in spite of the 
severe strictures of Zeller, Overbeck, 
Holtzmann, as to how far the narrative 
indicates that the shadow of Peter actu- 
ally produced the healing effects. Ver. 
16 shows that the sick folk were all 
healed, but Zockler maintains that there 
is nothing to show that St. Luke endorses 
the enthusiastic superstition of the people 
(so J. Lightfoot, Nosgen, Lechler, Ren- 
dall). On the other hand we may com- 
pare Matt. ix. 20, Mark vi. 56, John ix. 5, 
Acts xix. 12; and Baumgarten's comment 
should be considered that, although it 
is not actually said that a miraculous 

power went forth from Peter's shadow, 
it is a question why, if no such power is 
implied, the words should be introduced 
at all into a narrative which evidently 
purports to note the extraordinary 
powers of the Apostles. The parallels 
just instanced from the Gospels could, of 
course, have no weight with critics who 
can only see in such comparisons a 
proof that the Acts cannot rise above the 
superstitious level of the Gospels, or who 
start like Renan with " an absolute rule 
of criticism," viz., the denial of a place in 
history to all miraculous narratives. (J 
adds dirrjXXcunrovTo -yap k.t.X. : but 
even here, as Blass says, Luke does not 
distinctly assert that cures were wrought 
by the shadow of Peter, although there 
is no reason to deny that the Evangelist 
had this in mind, since he does not hesi- 
tate to refer the same miraculous powers 
to St. Paul. Hilgenfeld refers w. 14-16 
to his " author to Theophilus," and sees 
in the expressions used in ver. 16 a re- 
miniscence of Luke vi. 17. 

Ver. 16. 8c Kal : very common in 
St. Luke, Luke ii. 4, iii. 9, v. 10, ix. 61, 
xiv. 12, etc., and also nine times in Acts. 
St. John uses it frequently, but seldom 
in Matt, and Mark ; used for the sake 
of giving emphasis. — ire'pi.| only here, 
strengthened lor ircpi, not in LXX, but 
see Hatch and Redpath, found in Acta 
Andr. et Matt ft. Apocr., 26 (see Lumby's 
note), in classics from ^Eschylus. — 
rCtv it. iroXeuv, " the cities round about 
Jerusalem," omitting els before 'lepovcr. 
- — oxXovpcvous : only here in N.T., cf. 
Luke vi. 18, ol cvoxXoupevoi (W.H., 
R.V.) viro irv. axaO. Both verbs are 
peculiar to St. Luke in the N.T. in con- 
nection with disease (cvoxXciv is used in 
Heb. xii. 15 in a different sense), and 
both were often used by medical writers. 
In Tobit vi. 8, 6xMI tne simple verb is 
used of the vexing and disturbing of an 
evil spirit, and cvoxXciv is used several 
times in the LXX, of being troubled with 
sicknesses, Gen. xlviii. 1, 1 Sam. xix. 14, 
xxx. 13, Mai. i. 13. So J. Weiss, who is 
by no means inclined to overrate Dr. 




17. 'Acatrras 1 81 6 dpyiepcos Kal irdrres 01 <roc auT<2>, rj oucra 
aZpc<n$ TWk laSSouKaiwy, cTr\^<T0t]aa>' £tj\ou, 18. Kal eire'f3a\of Ta$ 
Xeipas outwk ^irl tous airoaTaXous, Kal cOckto auTOus «y Tripi^o-ei 

j ova<rras> Par. reads Anas, " cod. Dubl. ap. Berger " (Blass) ; so also Prov. after 
avaor. 8€ — Blass follows Par. in |J. avao-ras is no doubt a very common word, but 
it is quite characteristic of St. Luke. Western reading may have possessed the true 
text, cf. iii. 6, but if Arvas is original then avacrras is a corruption, not a revision. 

Hobart's work, regards the use of the 
two verbs just mentioned as the employ- 
ment in St. Luke of technical medical 
terms, Evangelium des Lukas, pp. 273, 
274 (1892) ; found in Hipp., Galen, Dios- 
corides, cf. in the latter, Mat. Med., iii., 
116, TOvsviro|T)pasPTjxos Kal opOoirvoias 
dxXovp.^vovs 9€paire'U€L, see also Luke vi. 
19, viii. 46, for a like effect following on 
the manifestation of the miraculous powers 
of Christ. 

Ver. 17. avacrTas, see on i. 15, 
cf. vi. 9 : it may denote a hostile inten- 
tion (but need not force this), Mark iii. 
26, Luke x. 35, Matt. xii. 41, in LXX, 
Job xvi. 8 ; see Overbeck, Blass, Weiss ; 
6 o-pXm *■'•» Annas not Caiaphas, iv. 6. — 
iravTts 01 ariiv aiiTu : the context seems 
to imply that more are included than 
referred to in iv. 6. — f\ ovcra atpe«ris(= 01 
elcriv aipeoas), a rare employment of the 
relative in the N.T., but found in Luke 
and Paul, most of all in the latter ; cf. 
Acts xvi. 12, 1 Cor. iii. 17, Gal. iii. 16, 
Ephes. iii. 13, vi. 2, Phil. i. 28, etc. (cf. 
Rev. iv. 5, v. 9) ; Viteau, he Grec du 
N. T., p. 192 (1896). — atpco-is: (1) a 
choosing, choice, so in classical writers, 
cf. also LXX, Lev. xxii. 18, 21, 1 Mace, 
viii. 30; (2) that which is chosen, a 
chosen method of thought and action ; 
(3) later, a philosophic principle ; those 
who have chosen certain principles, a 
school, a sect, so six times in Acts. It 
is used thrice elsewhere in N.T., 1 Cor. 
xi. 29, Gal. v. 20, 2 Pet. ii. 1 in the 
plural, of factions or parties within the 
Church ; in its later ecclesiastical use, 
applied to doctrines, "heresies," which 
tended to cause separation from the 
Church. The word need not therefore 
be used in a bad sense, although it is so 
used of the Nazarenes, cf. xxiv. 5,14, xxviii. 
22, whilst on the other hand St. Paul 
uses it of the Pharisees, xxvi. 5 (cf. xv. 5), 
in no depreciatory sense (cf. its use by 
Josephus of the Sadducees, Ant., xx., 9, 1). 
Lumby gives a disparaging use of the 
word in Apocr. Act. Phil, in Hellad., 10, 
see his note. It is not expressly said by 
St. Luke that Annas was a Sadducee, 
although he seems to imply it. But this 

is not in itself inconceivable (see iv. 1) 
in spite of the strictures of Zeller and 
Overbeck ; Josephus distinctly says, u. s., 
that the son of Annas who bore his 
father's name was of the sect of the 
Sadducees, and if he mentions this as 
something peculiar, and as showing why 
the younger Annas was so bold and 
insolent (Zeller, cf. Nosgen's note, in 
loco), yet there is no difficulty in sup- 
posing that the elder Annas was at least 
associated with the Sadducees if only 
for political reasons. — £»]Xov: jealousy, 
R.V., so rightly A.V in xiii. 45 ; Wycliffe 
" envy," cf. Rom. xiii. 13, 1 Cor. iii. 3, 
2 Cor. xi. 2, Gal. v. 20, James iii. 14, 16, 
Clem. Rom., Cor., iii., 4 and iv.-vi. (cf. 
Numb. xxv. 10, 11, 1 Mace. viii. 16, ovk 
icrri 4>0ovos oiiSs i^Xos ev avTois, and 
ii. 54, 58, Psalms of Solomon, ii., 27), and 
in some places of the jealousy which God 
has, as in 2 Cor. xi. 2, Numb. xxv. 10, 
11, and cf. Psalms of Solomon, ii., 27, 
iv., 2, 1 Mace. ii. 54. But <j>6ovos is 
capable only of an evil signification. By 
Aristotle £-J)X.os is used in its nobler sense 
(Rket., ii., 11), as opposed to to 4>0oveiv, 
but it seems to be used by other writers 
as = <j>6oYos or coupled with it. The 
meaning is defined by the context. 
Trench, N. T. Synonyms, i., 99. Here 
the envy and jealousy of the Sanhedrim 
was provoked by the popular favour 
shown to the disciples, and hence to 
their doctrine of the resurrection. 

Ver. 18. !-!re'@a\.ov xas x £ ^P a S : a 
phrase used twice in St. Luke's Gospel, 
and three times in the Acts, cf. Gen. 

xxii. 12. Cf. Hebrew k>& T Pl^tT. 
— Iv T^pi^o-ci Sri|Aocria, " in public ward," 
R.V. St|)a. used here as an adjective, 
only found in N.T. in Acts, in the three 
other passages used as an adverb, xvi. 
37, xviii. 28, xx. 20 (2 Mace. vi. 10, 3 
Mace. ii. 2), cf. Thuc, v., 18, where to 
S-rjjioo-Lov = the public prison. See note 
above on iv. 3. Hilgenfeld is so far 
right in pointing out that the two im- 
prisonments, iv. 3 and v. 18, are occa- 
sioned by two different causes, in the 
first case by the preaching of the Apostles 

17 — 20. 



Stjiaochci. 1 19. ayyeXos Se Kupiou Sia ttjs yuicros T]foi|e t&s dupas 
ttjs 4 >(J ^ a ' c, nS> e^ayaycuy tc (Xutous elite, 20. flopeueo-Oe, kcu onraOerres 

1 awruf om. fc^ABD 15, Vulg., Syr. Pesh., Arm., Lucif., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., 
Weiss, Wendt; but retained by EP, verss., Bas., Chrys., Meyer. At end of verse D 
adds Kai. £-iropev0Tj eis ettacr-ros «ts Ta iSia, so Hilg. ; cf. John vii. 55 ; see Harris and 
Chase, who both think that the gloss comes from John, /. c, but the resemblance is not 
verbal, eig Ta tSta is characteristic of St. John, but it is also found in Acts xxi. 6. 

to the people, and in the second by the 
reverence which their miracles gained 
from the people. 

Ver. 19. ayyeXos 8« K. : the narrative 
must be accepted or rejected as it stands. 
As Wendt, following Zeller in earlier 
days, candidly admits, every attempt to 
explain the narrative by referring the 
release of the prisoners to some natural 
event, such as an earthquake or lightning, 
or to some friendly disposed person, who 
with the assistance of the gaoler opened 
the prison doors, and who was mistaken 
by the Apostles for an angel in the dark- 
ness and excitement of the night, is 
shattered at once against the plain mean- 
ing of the text. Nor can it be deemed 
satisfactory to believe that St. Luke has 
unconsciously given us two narratives of 
the liberation of St. Peter, here and in 
xii., and that the former is merely an 
echo of the later deliverance transferred 
to an earlier date (Weiss, Sorof, Holtz- 
mann). But St. Luke had the best 
means of knowing accurately the events 
narrated in xii. from John Mark (see below 
on chap, xii., and Ramsay, St. Paul, etc., 
p. 385), Introd., p. 17, and there is no 
ground whatever for supposing that xii. 
is simply an embellished version of this 
former incident. Attempts have been 
made to show that St. Luke introduces 
the same doubling of narratives in his 
Gospel (Wendt, Holtzmann), e.g., the 
sending forth of the disciples in ix. 3 and 
x. 1, but the former chapter is concerned 
with the mission of the Twelve, and the 
latter with that of the Seventy. Further 
objections have been made as to the use- 
lessness of the miracle — the disciples are 
found, to be imprisoned again 1 But not 
only was the miracle a source of fresh 
strength and faith to the disciples, but — 
as Hilgenfeld notes — their release can 
scarcely be described as purposeless, since 
it called forth a public transgression of the 
command of silence imposed upon the two 
chief Apostles, iv. 17-21. Moreover, the 
deliverance was another indication to the 
Sadducees, if they would have accepted 
it, that it was useless for them to attempt 
to stay the movement. " Quis ergo usus 

angeli ? " asks Blass ; and he answers : 
" Sed est aliquis: augetur enim aposto- 
lorum audacia (21), turn ira adversariorum 
magis accenditur ; nihilominus Deus suos 
perire non patitur ". That the Sadducees 
should ignore the miracle (ver. 28) is 
surely not strange, although it may well 
have influenced their subsequent delibera- 
tions ; that the action of the Sadducees 
should now be more coercive than on the 
former occasion was only natural on the 
part of men who feared that vengeance 
would be taken on them for the death of 
Jesus by an uprising of the people 
(w. 28 and 26). — 8ta vvkt^s = vtjktos, 
v-oKTwp (cf. Luke ii. 8) in classical Greek. 
The phrase is used four times by St. 
Luke in Acts, cf. xvi. 19, xvii. 10, xxiii. 
31, and cf Luke v. 5 (and ix. 37, D, 
81a ttjs T|uc'pas) : nowhere else in N.T. 
In all the passages Meyer thinks that 
the expression means throughout the 
night, but such a meaning would be in- 
consistent with the context at all events 
here and in xvi. 19 ; and xvii. 10 is 
doubtful. — See Blass, Grammatik des 
N. G., p. 129, "by night" (nachts). 
Simcox speaks of this expression in Acts 
as an "almost adverbial phrase," Lan- 
guage of N. T., p. 140. 

Ver. 20. riopcvecrOc: characteristic of 
St. Luke both in Gospel and Acts. The 
word appears here in Acts for the first 
time, and it is found in St. Luke's Gos- 
pel about fifty times, and in this book 
nearly forty (Friedrich, Lekebusch). — 
orraOevTes, ii. 14, on this pictorial use ot 
the word, see Page's note, and Friedrich, 
Das Lucasevangelium, p. 42 ; so also 
avacrras, iirurras, £-y€p0e£s, Ka0i<ras, 
<TTpa<{>£is — here it intimates the boldness 
with which the Apostles were to proclaim 
their message. — ev tu> Upu> : they were to 
speak not only boldly but publicly. — ttjs 
£wTJs to.i5tt|s (cf. xiii. 26, ttjs «rwnr|p(as 
TavTTjs, and Rom. vii. 24), i.e., the life 
to which the whole Apostolic preaching 
referred, the life which the Sadducees 
denied, bestowed by Him who was 
Himself the Resurrection and the Life, 
cf iii. 15, iv. 12. This or a similar ex- 
planation is accepted by Holumana, 



XaXeire if tw icpw tw Xaw irdrra to. pi^jxaTa rfjs £wt]S Taurus. 21. 
dKotiaafTcs 8e €io-f)X8oy otto tw 5p0poy els to UpoV, Kal coioaaKoy. 1 
irapayekop.evos Be 6 dpxiepeus Kal ol aw aoTw, owcKaXeo-ay 2 to 
owcSpioe Kal irao-ac ttjc Y e P°uo"iai' Twf uiwk 'lapar|X, Kal direoTeiXay 

1 axovaavTCS 8e, E, Pesh. read e^eXSovTes Se e< ttjs 4>v\olkt)s, received by Blass in 
P; but cf. xvi. 40 ; may have been omitted on revision, or added for exactness. After 
cSiSacrKov Prov., Wern. add ev tu ovofian K. I. ; c/. iv. 18, ix. 27. 

2 For <ruv€KaX.c<rav D has eyepOcvTes to irpui Kai <ru-yKa.Xco-ap.evot (so also Hilg.) ; 
may be addition for sake of clearness, or omitted in revision ; assim. to our Lord's trial 
and the Jewish authorities seems unnecessary. 

Wendt, Weiss, Zockler, Blass. On the 
attempt to explain the words as simply 
= these words of life, see Winer-Moulton, 
xxxiv. 3, b., and see also Grimm, sub v. 
p^p.a. ■ 

Ver. 21. virb tov opOpov, " about day- 
break," R.V., i.e., without delay they 
obeyed the angel's command (Weiss). 
The words may also indicate the custom- 
ary usage of Palestine where the heat 
was great in the daytime. The people 
rose early and came to our Lord to hear 
Him, Luke xxi. 38 (John viii. 2). vtrb 
= sub, circa (of time), so in classical 
Greek, Blass, Grammatik des N. G., p. 
132. The first sacrifice took place in 
the Temple very early, Edersheim, 
Temple and its Services, p. 132, and it 
may be that the Apostles went to catch 
the people at the hour of their early 
devotions (Plumptre). — vir6 is used no- 
where else in the N.T. with an accusative 
in this sense, cf. Tobit vii. 11, S, at; virb 
ttjv vvKTa, 3 Mace. v. 2. — wapayev6p.€vos : 
having come, i.e., to the place where the 
Sadducees met, not merely pleonastic ; the 
verb may fairly be regarded as character- 
istic of St. Luke in both his writings — it 
occurs eight times in his Gospel and thirty 
in the Acts, and frequently absolutely 
as here — elsewhere in N.T. only eight or 
nine times, frequent in LXX. — to o~wve- 
Spiov k«i iroo-av tJjv -ycpovo-iay : does 
vcpovcrta represent an assembly or body 
in addition to the o-vvc8piov, or do the 
two words represent the same Court ? 
The word y«p. appears nowhere else in 
the N.T., but in the LXX it is used in 
several places of the Jewish Sanhedrim, 
1 Mace. xii. 6, 2 Mace. i. 10, iv. 44, xi. 
27, Jud. iv. 8, xiv. 4, xv. 8. In the N.T. 
the Sanhedrim is also called irpeo-pv- 
Te'piov, Luke xxii. 66, Acts xxii. 5. If 
the two words denote the same body ko.i 
must be regarded as merely explicative 
(so Wendt as against Meyer) to empha- 
sise the solemn importance and repre- 
sentative nature of the assembly (so 

Grimm-Thayer to signify the full San- 
hedrim sub v. yep. and so apparently 
Blass). If we adopt RendalPs view xai 
may still be explicative, but in another 
way, specifying the comprehensive char- 
acter of this meeting as compared with 
the hasty and informal gathering in iv. 
5, 6 (cf. Kuinoel's view, in loco). The 
difficulty has caused others to suggest 
that -yep. refers to men of age and ex- 
perience who were asked to join the 
Council as assessors, or to some other 
assembly larger than the Sanhedrim and 
only summoned on special occasions. 
For the former view, Lumby and 
Plumptre (see also Page's note) refer 
to Mishna, jfoma, i., 1, where men- 
tion is made of "the chamber of the 
assessors," parhedrin — irapeSpoi. Fur- 
ther we may note, Schiirer, Jewish People, 
div. ii., vol. i., p. 172, E.T., in a note on 
this passage points out that as there can 
be no doubt as to the identity of the two 
conceptions o-v»' v j.iov and -ycpovaia (so 
too Zockler and Weiss, in loco), Kai 
must be taken as explanatory, or St. 
Luke makes a mistake in assuming 
that the o~uvc'8piov was of a less compre- 
hensive character than the yepovcrta, 
" the Sanhedrin and all the elders of the 
people together ". Schiirer prefers the 
latter alternative, but the former may 
reasonably be maintained not only from 
the Greek text but also because St. 
Luke's information admittedly derived 
from a Jewish-Christian source is not 
likely to have been inaccurate. Hilgen- 
feld agrees with Weiss that in the source 
the O.T. expression yepovcrta, Exod. iii. 
16, iv. 29, xii. 21, stood alone, but that 
the reviser prefixed the usual expression 
o-vvc'Spiov which in v. 27 and 34 is found 
without any addition. On " Synhedrion," 
see Hamburger, Real-Encyclopadie des 
yudentums, ii., 8, 1149, and " Aelteste," 
i., 1, pp. 59, 60, and O. Holtzmann, 
Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte, pp. 175, 
176 (i8g5). — SeojiwTiipior, xvi. 26 ; Thuc 

21 — 25. 

riPAEEis AnorroAQN 

15 1 

eis to Sefffj.oj-rripLov', dx^TJ^ai auTOtis. 22. ol 8e oinrjpcTac irapa- 
yec6u.ecoi l oux eupoc au-rous eV ttj <puXaKT) ■ dKacrrpeiJ/arres 8e 
a.TrrjyY€iXac, Xe'yoeres, 23. "Oti to p.eV Scafiwr^piof KCKXeia- 
u.eVoe eV Trdarj da^iaXeia, icai toos <j>uXaKa$ e|<i> 2 eorwTas irp6 tuc 
8upwc ■ dkoi$a»T€s Se, eaw ouSeVa 24. us 8e tjKouaai' 
tous Xoyous toutous o tc tepeus icai 6 OTpaTTjyos 3 tou lepou kou 01 
dpxtepels, SiTjTropoui' irepl auTue, ti &v yeVoiTO touto. 25. irapa- 
yecop-ecos 8e' Tts dir^YyeiXec auTois Xe'ywc, "Oti ISou, 01 dcSpes ous 
eQeade iv ttj (puXaxr], eio-lr eV tw lepw earwTes ko.1 SiSdcrKoeTes tok 

1 After irapayevoucvoi D adds icai avoi|avrcs ttjv ^vXaKijv, so Par., Vulg., Syr. 
H. mg. ; cf. ver. 23, assimilation or revision ? 

2 e|w om. NABDEP, Vulg., verss., Chrys., Lucif., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, 
Wendt, Hilg. irpo EP, Vulg.-Clem., Boh., Syr. Hard., Chrys. ; eiri JtfABD, so 
"ad" d, e, am.fu. demid., Sah., Syr. Pesh., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt. 

3 o t« icpcvs Kai o «rrpaTi]yos P 13, 31 (E), so Meyer ; o t« <TTpaTT)yos, om. itpevs 
Kat o J^JABD, Vulg., Sah., Boh., Arm., Syr. Pesh., Aeth., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., 
Weiss, Wendt, Alford, Hilg. (other variations in Wendt and Alford). 

vi. 60 and LXX, Gen. xxxix. 20-23, x ^- 
3-5. On the jurisdiction of the Sanhe- 
drim and its right to order arrests by its 
own officers, and to dispose of cases not 
involving capital punishment, Schiirer, 
Jewish People, div. ii., vol. i., 187, 188, 
E.T., O. Holtzmann, u. s., p. 173. 

Ver. 22. virrjpcTat : apparently some 
of the Temple guard, ver. 26 ; see above 
on 6 <TTp*TTjYos> iv. 1, and Edersheim, 
Temple and its Services, pp. 119, 120. In 
the N.T. the word is not used of the 
military. — dva<rrpe\|»avT€s : used only 
here in this sense (xv. 16 is not strictly 
a parallel), cf. LXX, Gen. viii. 9, 1 
Kings xxi. (xx.) 5, and frequently. 

Ver. 23. iv »d<rTj dercfcaXeitj., " in all 
safety," R.V. (not cum omni diligentia, 
Vulgate) ; " in omni firmitate," Flor. ; 
in LXX generally ueTa with genitive ; 
cf. 2 Mace. iii. 22, xv. 1, pcra wa'o-T|s 
dar<£. The Vulgate is misleading; the 
words mean not that the prison had been 
carefully shut, but that it was found in a 
state of perfect security. 

Ver. 24. o tc lepevs Kal 6 aTpaTTiyos 
tov lepov Kal ol dpx- '■ if we retain 6 
Upcvs it must mean the high priest, ver. 
27, cf. 1 Mace. xv. 1; Jos., Ant., vi., 
12, 1. But Weiss and Wendt both fol- 
low W.H. and R.V., and omit Wpeus Kal 
6 (so Blass P). 6 orpaT. and ol apx> are 
thus closely united by there icai, inasmuch 
as the former in the flight of the prisoners 
had the greatest responsibility, and the 
apx« had occasioned the imprisonment, 
ver. 17. The orpar. tov Up. was pre- 

sent at the meetings of the Sanhedrim, 
and assisted in their deliberations. — 
dpxiepels: see on iv. 1. The word is 
probably used as including the heads of 
the twenty-four courses, those who had 
been high priests and still retained the 
title, and also those referred to in iv. 6. 
Schiirer, Jewish People, div. ii., vol. i., 
203-206 ; O. Holtzmann, Neutestament- 
liche Zeitgeschichte, p. 142. — SiTjiropovv, 
ii. 12, "were much perplexed," R.V. — See 
on irepl avruv, sc, Xo-yoi : not the Apostles, 
as Alford and Meyer. — ri av ye'voiTo 
tovto, " whereunto this might grow," so 
A. and R.V. Blass interprets quoniodo 
hoc factum esse posset, cf. x. 17 ; Gram- 
matik des N. G., p. 173. St. Luke alone 
uses the optative with av in the N.T., 
cf. Luke i. 62, vi. 11, ix. 46, Acts v. 24, 
viii. 31, x. 17, xvii. 18 (Luke xv. 26, xviii. 
36, Acts xxvi. 29, doubtful text) ; Burton, 
N. T. Moods and Tenses, pp. 80 and 133 ; 
see also Viteau, he Grec du N. T., p. 66 


Ver. 25. ISov . . . etoiv: on the 
characteristic use of the verb clvai after 
ISov or iSc in St. Luke's writings as 
compared with other N.T. writers and 
the LXX, see Viteau, Le Grec du Ns T., 
pp. 200, 205 (1896) ; cf. ii. 7, xvi. 1, and 
Luke ii. 25, vii. 25, xi. 41, etc. — Trapa-yev., 
see on ver. 22. — «rT<I>Tes, cf. ver. 20. 
antitheton : posuistis (Bengel). 

Ver. 26. tjyayev: but imperfect with 
W.H. and Weiss, so Blass "quia modus 
quo res gesta est describitur ; perfecta 
res indicatur, ver. 27, dyayovTes".- 



k adV. 26. Tore direXflwv 6 oTpa-rnyos o-uv tois uTrnp^Tais, r^yayei' 
auTOU9, ou fie-ra 0ias, ecpojSoucTO ydp Toy XaoV, Iva utj \i.Oaa0olCTii'. ! 
27. dyayorrcs &e auTous eoTrjo-av ey tw oweSpud • *al eTTTjpwTTjaef 
aui-ous 6 dp)(iepcu9, 2 Xeywi', 28. Ou 3 irapayycXia TrapTiyyciXaucv up.ic 
(IT) 8iodo-K€iv €irl tw ocofxan toutw ; Kal 1800, Tr€TrXT)pwKaT€ 4 ttjv 
'lepouaaX^p. ttjs oi&ax'fjs up,aty, Kal pouXccrde CTrayaycIv e<J>' r^jids to 

JriYaYev AEP, Vulg., Chrys., Lucif. ; D* TiYayov ; tiyev ^BD 2 , so Tisch., W.H., 
Weiss. £({>o|3owto . . . Xidao-Oaxriv, Flor. om., represents <|>o|3ovp.evos p/rjiroTe \i0ao-9T) 
vtto tov Xaov ; D <f>of3ovu.evos Y a P« iva om. fc^BDE 5, 13, 40, 96, so Tisch., W.H., 
R.V., Wendt, Weiss, Hilg. ; but ins. AP, Chr., Theophyl., T.R., Meyer. 

2 apxicpevs; D, Gig., Par., Lucif. have icpevs, Flor. praetor = <rTf>a.Tt)yos, instead; 
other additions in Flor., but no difference in sense. 

3 ov N 3 DEP, Flor -. p ar-. Sah., Syrr. P. and H., Arm., Aeth., Ath., Bas. ; but om. 
N*B 13, Gig., Vulg., Boh., Ath., Cyr., Lucif., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt 
(who thinks with Alford that it was suggested by cttt|putt|o-cv) ; Blass retains the 
negative, so Hilg. 

4 ir€Tr\T|p(i»KaT6 BDEP, Bas., Tisch., Weiss, W.H., Hilg. ; eirXripuo-aTe fc$A 15, 
Chrys., Cyr. In Western text Flor., Pesh. insert vp.€is 8e instead of Kai before i8ov, 
and D*, Flor., Gig., Sah. read ckcivov for tovtov, emphasis. 

fi€To (3ias, " but without violence," R.V. 
Weiss compares with the whole phrase 
rj-yev . . . 0Cas (Exod. xiv. 25) ; (Jia 
three or four times in Acts only, xxi. 35, 
xxiv. 7 (omit W.H., R.V.), xxvii. 41 ; 
used in the LXX in the same sense as 
here and with the genitive, cf. Exod. xiv. 
25 {cf. i. 14), 3 Mace. iv. 7 ; classical 
usage more frequently has f3ta, Ik 0ias, 
etc. — !<})opovvTo yap : the favour of the 
people which the Apostles so fully en- 
joyed at this time might well have caused 
an outbreak of fanaticism as later in the 
case of Stephen. The subjects to l<j>of3. 
and to eoTTjaav (27) are 6 orpaT. and ot 
virTjpeTat. St. Chrysostom well com- 
ments on those who would thus fear — 
not God, but the people. On the Greek 
of the verse, see Viteau, Le Grec du N. T., 
p. 116 (i8g6). — iva p.rj Xi9ao-8too*iv : the 
readiner p,T| undoubtedly correct, so W.H., 
Wendt, Weiss, Blass. — tov Xaov : de- 
noting the persons feared, and \l6<xo\, 
the thing feared, so that the meaning is 
as in R.V., "for they were afraid that 
they should be stoned by the people," or 
J<|>opovvTo -yap tov Xaov may be taken as 
parenthetical (so Weiss), and XiOao*. 
as limiting tjycv . . . |3ias. In the N.T. 
after verbs of fearing the subjunctive 
only is used where after secondary tenses 
we should have expected the optative, or 
sometimes the subjunctive is explained 
as implying more certainty of a result. 
Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, pp. 95, 
96. — Xidaxr. : very seldom in Attic Greek, 

where we should expect KaraXeveiv ; only 
twice in LXX, 2 Sam. xvi. 6, 13, where 
usually Xi6of3oXcw (not used in classical 
writers, but six or seven times in N.T.) ; 
but Xi6d£€iv is found eight or nine times 
in N.T. 

Ver. 27. «rTT|<rav, cf. iv. 7, during 
the investigation the judges would sit, 
vi. 15, xxiii. 3, the accused, the witnesses, 
and those speaking, stood, Mark xiv. 57, 
60, Acts iv. 7, v. 27, 34, vi. 13, xxiii. 9, O. 
Holtzmann, N eutestatnentliche Zeitges- 
chichte, p. 177. 

Ver. 28. irapayycXCa irapr| : 
for the Hebraism cf iv. 17, " we straitly." 
etc., R.V. (and A.V.), expressing inten- 
sity — " commanding, we commanded 
you," Wycliffe. The T.R. makes the 
clause a question, commencing with ov, 
but the evidence is too strong against it, 
evidently it was occasioned by the £irr|pu- 
TTjo-ev, but St .Chrysostom adopts it, see 
Horn., xiii., 1. Bengel remarks on irapay- 
Y«Xi<j, " pudet dicere minando, iv. 17, nam 
non poterant punire ". But St. Chrysos- 
tom rightly notes that they ought to have 
asked irus i{rjX0cTC, i.e., from the prison, 
but they ask as if nothing had happened. 
— Iirl tw 6vou.aTi Tovrq>, iv. 17, here as 
there the Council do not mention the 
name of Jesus, perhaps because they 
disdained it ; in sharp contrast stands 
not only St. Peter's mention of the name, 
but his glorying in it, ver. 30, 31. — Trjv 
'Icpovo-aXrip, : fern, here and elsewhere, 
cf. Gal. iv. 25, Rev. iii. 12, so in Matt. 

26— 30. 



al/ia tou d^pwirou toutou. 29. l d-rroicpidels 8e 6 rU'xpos kou ol 
d-rroCTToXot elirov, rieiOapxeti' Set ©ew p.aWoj' t] d^Spciirois. 30. o 
0eoc "ruy TvaTe'pwc ^fioW ^yeipcy 'Itjo-ouc, Of up.6ts Sicx^P 10,010 "®' 

1 o n., article om. fc^ABEHP, Bas., Chrys., so W.H., Weiss ; eiirov, but -ov NABE, 
so Tisch., W.H., Weiss. At the commencement of the verse qitok. . . . irpos avTor 
is omitted in D, and the words ireiOapxeuv 8«i (8« in D) follow as part of the high 
priest's remarks ; but Blass in |3, following Flor., Gig., Lucif., adds to airoK. Sc ("Wi-pos 
the words eurev irpos avrov, and proceeds " tivi irciOapxeiv Set 0€a> tj avOpioiroLS ; " 
making these words a question asked by Peter of the high priest, who replies, 
according to a further addition of Flor., Gig., o 8e eiirev "©«a>". Weiss, Codex D, 
p. 64, thinks that the emendator took offence at the repetition of iv. 19, and there- 
upon places the words irei0apx€i.v 8e (not 8<i) k.t.X. on the lips of the high priest as 
if he thus took up their own words contemptuously in addressing the Apostles, and 
the whole from |3ovXea-9e might thus originally have formed a question : " You wish 
to bring this man's blood upon us — but thus, indeed, to obey God rather than man ? 
Such blood revenge cannot surely be the command of God ; " but see further Blass, 
in loco, and Weiss, it. s. D, Flor., Gig. all add at the end of ver. 29, as introductory 
to ver. 30, o S« flei-pos tiirev irpos avrovs* 

ii. 3, Blass, Grammatik des N. G., p. 
32 ; Winer-Schmiedel, p. 153. — SiSax^js. 
" teaching," R.V., cf. Matt. vii. 28. — 
j3ov\£o-6e : the charge was untrue — the 
wish was their own, not that of the 
Apostles, cf. Matt, xxvii. 25. St. Peter's 
earnest desire was that they should be 
saved. — liro/ya'Yeiv, xviii. 6, xxii. 20, and 
2 Sam. i. 16, cf. 2 Peter ii. 1, 5 ; nowhere 
else in N.T. — 1$' -finds", to bring His 
blood upon us, i.e., the vengeance of the 
people for His murder. alp.a pro <f>6vov> 
Hebraistic — no thought of divine punish- 
ment from their point of view ; cf. LXX. 
Gen. xx. 9, Exod. xxxii. 34, Judges ix. 24, 
and cf. Josh, xxiii. 15 (in N.T., Matt. 
xxiii. 35, Rev. xviii. 24). 

Ver. 29. St. Peter as the spokesman, 
primus inter pares; the Apostles as a 
body are associated with him in his 
answer : " but Peter and the Apostles," 
R.V. A.V. renders " Peter and the 
other Apostles," and we may understand 
an ellipse of &XX01 or Xoiiroi before ol 
airoo-ToXoi, Blass, Grammatik des N.G., 
p. 286. — airoK., cf. Viteau, he Grec du 
N. T., p. 112 (1896). — irti6apx«tv: only 
used by St. Luke and St. Paul ; cf. ver. 32, 
xxvii. 21, Titus iii. 1 ; in this chapter and 
in St. Paul, in its classical use, obeying 
one in authority, or tois vop.ois> etc. 
The word is used in Polybius, and Jo- 
sephus, and frequently in Philo, but only 
three times in the LXX ; cf. 1 Esd. viii. 
94, of obeying the law of the Lord. The 
reply of St. Peter, who speaks for all the 
Apostles, is practically the same as in 
iv. 19, but still more decisive in its tone 
as was natural after the recent command, 
ver. 20. 

Ver. 30. A ©eos ray iroTe'piov r\\iuv, 
cf. iii. 13. St. Peter, as before, will not 
dissociate himself from the common- 
wealth of Israel, or his hearers from the 
message and works of the Christ. — 
■Jj-yeipev : does this word refer to the 
Resurrection, or to the sending of Jesus 
into this world, and His raising up by 
God as the Messiah ? The former is the 
view .taken by St. Chrysostom, Oecu- 
menius, Erasmus, and amongst moderns 
by Meyer-Wendt, Nosgen, Alford, Over- 
beck, Felten, Blass, Holtzmann, Weiss, 
Hilgenfeld ; but in iii. 15, iv. 10, the 
phrase istj^eiperlK vctip&v (cf. Ecclesiast. 
xlviii. 5 : 6 eyeipas veKpov ck 8avaTov), 
although in x. 40, xiii. 37, the word evi- 
dently refers to the Resurrection. Others 
interpret the word as af(am)p,i in iii. 22, 
and as in xiii. 22, Y)-yeipcv ootois tov 
AavciS (cf. Luke i. 69, vii. 16), so Calvin, 
Bengel, De Wette, Lechler, Hackett, 
Page. One of the chief arguments for 
the former interpretation is the contrast 
marked in the next clause between the 
death of the Cross and the Resurrection, 
but this contrast would still be marked 
by the following verb. Is it not possible 
that, as in the days of old God had raised 
up a Saviour, or Saviours, for Israel, cf. 
Jud. ii. 18, TJyeipc K. cutois icpiTas, Jud. 
iii. g, 15, T)Y»pc K. acoTrjpa t$ M., St. 
Peter may now speak of Him as raising 
up Mtjo-ovs, i.e., a Saviour ? see further, 
ver. 31. — Sicxcipiaao-dc, c f xxvi. 21, 
" whom ye slew, hanging Him on a tree," 
R. v ., not as in A.V., "whom ye slew 
and hanged on a tree," which would 
make the words refer to a Jewish mode 
01 punishment, for, according to Jewish 

J 54 



KpcudaaKTCS eirt £uXou • 31. toutok 6 0eos apxrjyoK Kal awTTjpa 
uij/uxre tt) 8e£ia auTou, oouvai ueTaKoiaK tw 'lapa^X Kal a<peo-iK 
uixapTt'Itv. 32. Kal impels €0"U€K auToG pdpTupes 1 tw*' piqu-aTcr.' 
tou'twc, Kal to flKcGpa 8c to AyiOK, o cowkck 6 6eds tois ireiSap- 
5(0 G a ik auTw. 

1 avTov pap-rupcs D'EHP, Syr. Hard., Aeth., Chrys; co-p.ev uap-r.,om. ovtov 
^D*, Vulg., Sah., Boh., Arm., Did., Chrys., so Tisch., W.H. text, R.V. text, Hilg. ; 
ev cwto) fxapT., so B, W.H. marg., Wendt (crit. note, p. 141) om. eo-ucv ovtov ; €<r(x«v 
cv avTu piapr. R.V. marg. ; eo-p-ev avTu p.apTvpcs Weiss, see comment. Sc D 2 EHP, 
Syr. Hard., Chrys. ; om. fc^ABD* 3 1 - Did - Chrys., so Vulg., d, Syr. Pesh., Arm., 
Aeth., Irint., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt. After papi-vpcs D, Flor., Par. 
add iravTWK ; Par. omits twv pTjp.a,Twv, Blass brackets in p. o ^AD 2 HP, so Weiss ; 
om. B 17, Mgypt., so W.H. marg., R.V. marg. ; ov DE — Harris refers to Latin quern, 
but if article originally omitted possibly the ov of o/yiov may have been repeated, and 
= an after-correction. 

law, only those were hanged who were 
already dead (Deut. xxi. 22, Josh. x. 26). 
The word which means in middle to lay 
hands upon, and so to slay, to kill, is only 
used by St. Luke (not in LXX), and for- 
cibly represents the guilt of the Jews in 
the murder of Jesus, as if they had per- 
petrated it with their own hands (cf. 
xxvi. 24), " made away with violently," 
Page ; cf. instances in Wetstein (truci- 
dastis). — Kpep-acravrts eirl £vXov, LXX, 
Gen. xl. 19, Deut. xxi. 22, 23, josh. x. 
26, Esth. v. 14, vi. 4 (Gal. hi. 13). Al- 
though St. Luke uses Kptp.acr6ei9 of 
crucifixion, Luke xxiii. 39, St. Peter 
alone uses the exact phrase of the text 
given in x. 39, and so he too has £v\ov, 
1 Pet. ii. 24, for the Cross (although St. 
Paul uses the same word, Acts xiii. 29). 
The word may therefore have a place 
amongst the many coincidences between 
St. Peter's addresses and the language 
of his Epistles, see above on pp. 121 ff. 
The fact that their victim was thus ac- 
cursed in the eyes of the law aggravated 
their guilt, and at the same sharply con- 
trasted their act and that of God ; for a 
similar contrast see iii. 14, 15. 

Ver. 31. apx^JYov nai (ruTrjpa : the 
former word as it is used here without 
any qualification, cf. iii. 15, may imply, 
like o-<iOTJpa, a reference to the earlier 
days of Israel's history, when God raised 
up for them from time to time judges of 
whom the title &px»vyos, Jud. xi. 6, II, 
might be used no less than crcorqp. In 
Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ, St. Peter 
saw the true Leader and Saviour. For 
St. Peter no less than for St. Paul the 
ascended Jesus had led captivity captive 
and received gifts for men, cf. Luke 
xxiv. 47-49. — Sij/wo-cv t{) Sclia ovtov, cf. 
ii. 33 : " exalt with his right hand," R.V., 

" at " margin. Here as elsewhere Briggs 
interprets tjj 8e£ia as local not instru- 
mental, and prefers R.V. margin, Messiah 
of the Apostles, p. 37, note ; but see note 
on ii. 33 above. The verb is used also 
by St. John, iii. 14, viii. 28, xii. 32, and 
also by St. Paul, Phil. ii. 9 (see West- 
cott on St. John iii. 14). But in the pas- 
sive (as twice in St. John) it is employed 
in the LXX of the high exaltation of the 
Servant of God, in the picture which 
had evidently passed before the eyes 
of St. Peter, Isaiah Iii. 13 ; and he sees in 
the ascension of his Lord, and His spirit- 
ual sovereignty, a fulfilment of the pro- 
phecy of the suffering Servant, who is 
also a Prince and a Saviour. 

Ver. 32. " And we are witnesses of 
these things," R.V. (W.H.), but in mar- 
gin, "witnesses in Him," ev ovtu (cf. 
Luke xxiv. 47) ; " nos in eo testes sumus," 
Iren., see also above critical notes. 
For an explanation of the reading in 
T.R. and the two genitives, see Simcox, 
Language of the N. T., p. 84, note, and 
compare 2 Cor. v. 1, Phil. ii. 30, 1 Thess. 

L3. — pTjp.aT«av: here = Hebrew "O^T, cf. 

x. 37 (Grotius, Blass), the words standing 
for their contents, i.e., the things, the 
facts. Meyer understood the facts to be 
the Resurrection and Ascension of Jesus, 
but Wendt understands them to be the 
gifts of the Messianic salvation mentioned 
in ver. 31, and compares ver. 20. But the 
use of the word in ver. 20 need not limit 
its use here: the Apostles were called 
above all things to witness to the facts of 
Christ's life, x. 37, and the J>rj in ver. 20 
depended upon the Resurrection. In Luke 
i. 37 R.V. has "no word," pt)|i.a, where 
A.V. has "no thing," cf. Luke i. 65,. 
where A.V. has "things " in the margin 




33. Ol 8e dKoucraiTes oie-rrpioyTO, Kal €J3ou\euon-o dfeXeik' auTou$. 
34. dt'aaTas 06 tis £f T(S aokeSpiw 1 ♦apiaaios, 6fdp.aTi rap.aXir)X, 

1 cv T(p cruveSpia) ; DE, Flor., Par. read (tis) ek tov oruvcSpiov, E adds o,vtuv. 

( p-rjp.aTa), and R.V. reads " sayings " in 
text : Luke ii. 15, where R.V. has " this 
thing" (prjp-a) in the text, and "saying" 
in margin; in ii. 19, 51, R.V. has "say- 
ings " in the text, " things " in the margin 
— so in LXX, the same uncertainty, cf. 
Gen. xv. 1, xviii. 14, Exod. ii. 14, 15. 
pfjp.a is used frequently by St. Luke in 
his writings, and much more so than by 
the other Evangelists ; although it is 
found in all parts of the Acts, it is notice- 
able that it is employed more frequently 
in the earlier chapters, as in the first two 
chapters of the Gospel. — icai to irvev|xa 
to ayiov 8e : on the expression see iv. 8. 
The Holy Ghost 0-vp.p.aprupct with the 
Apostles, Rom. viii. 16 (cf. Acts xv. 28). 
We may well compare with these words 
of St. Luke our Lord's parting words in 
John xv. 26, 27. Here we have also the 
twofold witness — the historical witness 
borne to the facts — and the internal 
witness of the Holy Ghost in bringing 
home to men's hearts the meaning of the 
facts (see Westcott on St. John, in loco). — 
toIs ireiOapxovo'iv auT<j> : not to be limited 
to the Apostles, although by repeating 
this verb used at the opening of the 
speech St. Peter intimates that the inraKOTj 
ttjs irio-Tews (Rom. i. 5) was the first 
requisite for the reception of the divine 
gift. In their own case the witness of 
the Spirit had been clearly shown, not 
only in the miracles which the Apostles 
had done, but also in the results of their 
preaching, in the enthusiasm of their 
charity, and we need not limit with 
Nosgen the thought of the gift of the 
Holy Spirit to the events of Pentecost. 
If this short speech of St. Peter, 29-32, 
reads like a summary of much which he is 
represented as saying on former occasions, 
we have no warrant for dismissing it as 
unhistorical, or even for supposing that 
St. Luke has only given us a summary of 
the address. It is rather " a perfect 
model of concise and ready eloquence," 
and a striking fulfilment of the Lord's 
promise, Matt. xi. 19. Nothing was more 
natural than that St. Peter and his 
fellow-Apostles, like men whose minds 
were finally made up, should thus con- 
tent themselves with an emphatic re- 
assertion of the main issues involved in 
teaching which was already widely 
known, and with a justification of their 

disobedience to man by an appeal to the 
results which accompanied their obedi- 
ence to God. 

Ver. 33. SicirptovTo : lit., were sawn 
asunder (in heart), dissecabantur, Vul- 
gate (cf. use of findo in Persius and 
Plautus), cf. vii. 54 (Luke ii. 35), Euseb., 
H. E., v., i., 6 (see Grimm, sub v.). The 
word is used in its literal sense in 
Aristoph., Equites, 768, Plato, Conv., p. 
193 a, and once in the LXX, 1 Chron. 
xx. 3. The rendering " sawed their 
teeth " would certainly require tovs 
dSdvras as in other cases where the verb 
(and the simple verb also) has any such 
meaning. Dr. Kennedy, Sources of N. T. 
Greek, pp. 72, 73, also refers to its use in 
the comic poet Eubulus (Meineke), 3, 
255, and classes it among the words 
(colloquial) common to the comic poets 
(including Aristophanes) and the N.T. 
Here we have not the pricking of the 
heart, ii. 37, which led to contrition and 
repentance, but the painful indignation 
and envy which found vent in seeking to 
rid themselves of the disciples as they 
had done of their Master. — dveXcXv : the 
verb is found no less than nineteen times 
in Acts, twice in St. Luke's Gospel, and 
only two or three times in the rest of the 
N.T., once in Matt. ii. 16, Heb. x. 9 (2 
Thess. ii. 8) ; often used as here in LXX 
and classical Greek ; it is therefore not 
one of those words which can be re- 
garded as distinctly medical terms, 
characteristic of St. Luke (so Hobart and 
Zahn), although it is much used in medical 
writers. The noun avaipewts, viii. 1, is 
only found in St. Luke, and is also 
frequent in medical writers, Hobart, 
Medical Language of St. Luke, pp. 209, 
210 ; but this word is also used in LXX 
of a violent death or destruction, cf. 
Numb. xi. 15, Judith xv. 4, 2 Mace. v. 
13. At the same time it is interesting 
to note that !irixcipe?v» another medical 
word characteristic of St. Luke, and 
used by him in the sense of attempting, 
trying, is found with avcXciv in Acts ix. 
29, cf. Zahn, Einleitung, ii., p. 384, with 
which Hobart compares 6 p.ev yap larpos 
aveXtlv cirixeipci to vo'o-ijp.a (Galen), see 
in loco. 

Ver. 34. avao-Tas, see ver. 17. — 
o~uve8pia>: the word is used here and in 
ver. 27 above, without -yepo-ucria, and 

i 5 6 


fOfj.o8i8d<TKa\os Tt|Xios Trajri tw Xaw, eKeXeucrei' ?|w (3pa)(u ti tous 
dirooroXous * iroiTJaai, 35- elire tc irpos auTou's, 2 "AySpes 'lo-paY)XiTai, 
Trpoaex€T€ eauTOis em toIs dyOpciirois toutois ti fieXXeTe Trpdacreii'. 

1 ti HP (put by many before iroi/qo-ai) ; om. fc^ABDE, vers., Chrys., so Tisch., 
W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt, Hilg. tovs o/ttoo-toXovs DEHP, Par., Flor., Gig. 
(Vulg. am.corr. tol.), Sah., Syrr. P. and H., Aeth., Chrys. ; tovs av0pwirovs 
NAB (Vulg.), Boh., Arm., Chrys., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Wendt, Weiss, so also 
Blass in p ; cf. w. 35, 38, but here in narrative avOpuir. seemed undignified word. 

2 clvtovs ; D (Flor.), Sah. has tovs apxovTos *ai tovs o-vveSpovs (-tovs), d has 
" concilium," Flor. " ad totum concilium ". lo-paTjXirai, see above. 

this seems to indicate that in ver. 21 the 
Sanhedrim is meant, and no additional 
council. — rau.aA.ujX : it has sometimes 
been urged that Saul, the persecutor, 
could not have been the pupil of such a 
man as is here described — a man who 
was so liberal in his religious opinions, 
and so adverse to political agitation. 
But whatever may have been the extent 
of his liberality, Gamaliel remained firmly 
attached to the traditions of the fathers, 
and whilst we may see in his recorded 
principle his abhorrence of wrangling and 
over-scrupulosity, we may also see in it 
a proof of his adherence to traditionalism: 
" Procure thyself a teacher, avoid being 
in doubt; and do not accustom thyself 
to give tithes by guess" (Edersheim, 
History of the Jewish Nation, p. 128). 
But in itself there is nothing strange in 
the fact that Saul should surpass the 
zeal of Gamaliel, for not only does his- 
tory often show us how one side of the 
teaching of a master may be exaggerated 
to excess by a pupil, but also the specific 
charge against Stephen of destroying the 
Temple and of changing the customs of 
Moses had not been formulated against 
St. Peter and his brother-Apostles, who 
still attended the Temple worship, and 
whose piety gained them the regard of 
the people. That charge against the 
first martyr was nothing less than the 
charge brought against Jesus of Naza- 
reth : the burning words and scathing 
denunciations of Stephen could only be 
answered, as those of Jesus had been 
answered, by the counter charge of blas- 
phemy, and the punishment of death 
(see Sabatier's VApbtre Paul, 21 ff.). 

Gamaliel appears as an ordinary mem- 
ber, and there can be no reasonable doubt 
that the high priest was always the Pre- 
sident during the Roman-Herodian period. 
Not until after the destruction of Jeru- 
salem, when the priesthood had lost its 
importance, was a Rabbi chosen as 
President of a reconstituted Sanhedrim. 

For a summary of the views for and 
against the Rabbinic tradition that this 
Gamaliel was the President of the San- 
hedrim, see Appendix iii., " The President 
of the Sanhedrim," by the late Rev. H. 

A. White, in Dr. Edersheim's History 
of the Jewish Nation, p. 522 ff. The 
influence of Gamaliel may easily be 
understood (1) when we remember that 
whilst the apx<.«peis belonged chiefly if 
not exclusively to the Sadducees, the 
Pharisees who also had seats in the 
Sanhedrim (cf. Acts xxiii. 6, and Jos., 

B. J., ii., 17, 3, Vita, 38, 39, C. Apion, ii., 
22) possessed practically a predominating 
influence in the Council. The remark 
of Jos., Ant., xviii., 1, 4, gives us, as 
Schiirer says, "a deep insight into the 
actual position of matters," Schiirer, 
Jewish People, div. ii., vol. i., p. 178 ft'., 
E.T., and O. Holtzmann Neutest. Zeit- 
geschichte, p. 175. (2) But we have also 
to take into account the personal influ- 
ence of the man, which was no doubt 
at its height about the time described in 
Acts v. — he died a.d. 57-58. Not only 
was he the first teacher of the seven 
to whom the title Rabban was given 
(higher than that of Rab or Rabbi), but 
Jewish tradition respecting him shows the 
dignity and influence which attached to 
his name, Hamburger, Real-Encyclopadie 
des Judentums, ii., 2, 236, and see on 
the titles given to Gamaliel, Derenbourg, 
Histoire de la Palestine, pp. 239-246, and 
Schiirer, u. s., p. 364. We may see a 
further proof of his influence in the fact 
that a certain proviso with regard to the 
determining leap year, which was passed 
in the Sanhedrim in his absence, was only 
to come into force if it received the 
confirmation of Gamaliel (Edajoth, vii., 7). 
So far then St. Luke's account of the 
weight which would be carried by Ga- 
maliel in the assembly is amply justified, 
and Schiirer's description of the constitu- 
tion of the Sanhedrim, u. s., p. 174 ff., is 
sufficient reply to the strictures of Jiingat 




36. irpo yap toutwv t<2v rjp.Epwi' av4crTr\ ©euSas, \dyuv etveu Ti^a 
lauToy, 1 w irpoaeKoX\^0r] 2 dpi8p.6s dy8pu>y wcrel TerpaKOcrioji' • 05 
dnrjpeOr), 3 Kal -jrdrres ocroi eire^ocTO auTw SieXuStjcraf Kal eyeVotTo 

1 eavTov NA*BCHP, Vulg., Sah., Boh., Syr. Hard., Arm., Eus., Chrys., so Tisch., 
W.H., R.V. ; eavTov p.eyav (or peyav ca-uTov) A 2 DE tol., Flor., Gig., Syr. Pesh., 
Cyr., Or., Hier. 

- TrpotreKoWTjeTj 13, Chrys., Cyr.; ttpoo-ckXiOt] fc^ABC 2 17, 31, Cyr., so Tisch., 
W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt (Blass in 0), Hilg. ; irpocreK^e-rj C*D*EHP— irpoo-eKXi6Tj 
orig. only here in N.T., others = interpretations of it. oxrei S5HP, Cyr.; but o>s 
J^cABCDE, Chrys., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Hilg. 

3 ovfipeflTj, instead D has SieXvfhj avros 81' avrov (SieXvO-qcrav omitted below). 
Eus. and Par. read KaTeXvOrj (the latter dissolutus est = SicX. or kcitcX.) ; see Blass, 
who maintains with Belser that this word rather than avrjpeeT] is required by Gamaliel's 
argument, but why ? avTio, after this word 8teX. omitted by D, kcu om. in d, and kcu 
cyiv. in Par. 1 but SieX. (dissoluti sunt) retained. (Weiss holds that the corrector 
refers os the subject of kotcXvOt] not to 6ev8as but to apiOpos.) 

against Gamaliel's appearance as a mem- 
ber of the Council, cf. Derenbourg, u. s., 
pp. 201, 213. On the words attributed 
to Gamaliel see below. — vop.oS18do-1ca.Xo? : 
only in St. Luke and St. Paul, cf. Luke 
v. 17, 1 Tim. i. 7, almost = ypap,p,aT€vs, 
vcjjukos, not found in LXX. — ^pa\v (ti) : 
= " a little while," R.V., Luke xxii„ 
58, "a little space," A.V. ; ambiguous, 
in classical Greek the word might be 
used as either ppo-xv, a short distance, 
Xen., Anab., iii., 3, 7, or Iv (3paxei> " in a 
short time," Herod., v., 24, cf. Thuc, vi., 
12. In Acts xxvii. 28 the word may 
be taken either of space or time (see 
Blass). In the LXX it is used of space 
in 2 Sam. xvi. 1, and 2 Sam. xix. 36, 
and most likely of degree in Psalm viii. 
6 (although the expression may be taken 
of time, cf. Heb. ii. 7, 9, R.V.), and of 
time in Psalm xciii. 17, and in Isa. lvii. 
17 (Weiss, Westcott ; but see Hatch and 
Redpath, doubtful). But whether we 
take the word of space or time in this 
passage, it is noteworthy that St. Luke 
alone of the N.T. writers can be said to 
use (Jpo-xv temporally (in Hebrews it is 
a quotation), Friedrich, and so Kloster- 
mann, Vindicicz Lucance, p. 54. — e|a> 
iroistv (hinausthun) : only here in this 
sense, cf. Blass, in loco, for classical 
instances, and cf. Psalm cxli. 8 (Sym- 
machus) — Weiss, Wendt. 

Ver. 35. avSpes 'lo-paTjXtiTai, see on 
ii. 22. irpocrex £T e ^o-vtois : phrase only 
found in St. Luke, cf. Luke xii. 1, xvii. 
3, xxi. 34, and Acts xx. 28. irpocrcx«.v 
without the pronoun is found six times 
in Matthew alone of the Evangelists, but 
in LXX frequently used in the phrase 
irpo'crexe crea-urw. The phrase may be 
connected with itr\ tois dvOputrois tov- 

tois, " as touching these men, what 
you are about to do," R.V., hence the 
reading dir6 t<Sv, etc., E. Or we may take 
it with |xe'XXeT£ irpdcrcrciv, " what you 
are about to do to these men ". In 
favour of the latter it may be said that 
the construction irp dacm v ti ciri tivi is 
very common, whereas irpoo-e'xtiv eavrols 
is never found in construction with !ir£, 
and that this rendering rightly marks 
the evidently emphatic position of rots 
dvOpuirois (so Weiss, Wendt, Holtz- 
mann, Hackett). — ti pcXXeTC irpdcro-civ, 
quid acturi sitis, Vulgate. Burton, N. 
T. Moods and Tenses, p. 36, ficXXciv 
never found with future infinitive except 
in the phrase piXXciv lo-co-dai used in 
Acts, almost always has a present in- 
finitive, although its force is akin to 
that of the future (Grimm-Thayer) ; also 
Simcox, Language of the N. T., p. 120. 
p-eXXeiv is used over thirty times in Acts 
in all its parts, and is found very often in 
St. Luke's Gospel. 

Ver. 36. irpo ydp toutwtuv r)p.(pws : 
Gamaliel appeals to the experience of 
the past — the phrase is placed first with 
emphasis, cf. xxi. 38; on St. Luke's 
fondness for phrases with ^p.epa see 
above, and Friedrich, pp. 9, 89. But 
whilst Gamaliel appeals to the past, his 
appeal is not to a remote but to a near 
past which was still fresh in the memories 
of his generation, perhaps because, as<St. 
Chrysostom urges, such recent examples 
p.aXtcTTa irpos iricrriv rjcrav Icrxvpd. — 
dveo-Tj), cf. vii. 18, like the Hebrew 

Q^p, and so constantly in LXX, Exod. 
i. 8, Deut. xiii. 1, xxxiv. 10, Judg. ii. 10, 
iv. 9, v. 7, etc. — ©svSas: St. Luke evi- 
dently places Theudas before Judas. But 

i 5 8 



eiS ouock. 37. p.€Ta toGtoc aviart] 'lou'Sas 6 TaXiXalos, £v tcus 
TJjiepcus tt^s diroYpa<f>f|s, tal direcrTTjo-e Xade iKakOf 1 oiricrw auTOu • 

1 iKavov om. ^A*B 81, d, Vulg., Eus., Cyr. ; so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt. 
•rroAvv in CD, so Hilg., but not retained by Blass in ($. airuXeTo, Par. reads KaTeXvOrj ; 
"recte," says Blass, who receives ico/reX. in (J. This will be only consistent with the 
former rejection of avj]pe0T]. 

a difficulty arises from the fact that the 
only Theudas of this period known to us 
is placed by Josephus in the reign of 
Claudius, about the year 44, 45. He 
gave himself out as a false prophet, 
gathered round him " a great part of the 
people," and persuaded them to follow 
him to the Jordan with a promise that 
its waters should miraculously divide 
before him as in the days of Moses. But 
the Roman procurator, Cuspius Fadus, 
sent a troop of horse to meet him, some 
of his followers were slain, others taken 
captive, whilst he himself was made 
prisoner and beheaded, and his head 
sent to Jerusalem, Jos., Ant., xx., 5, 1. 
But a serious chronological discrepancy 
must be faced if the Theudas of Josephus 
is the Theudas of St. Luke. Gamaliel 
speaks of a Theudas who arose before the 
days of the enrolment, R.V., which 
marked the attempt of Judas, i.e., about 
6-7 a.d. But are they tbe same? As 
early as the days of Origen their identity 
was denied (c. Cels., i., 57), see "Acts," 
B.D. 2 , Bishop Lightfoot, p. 40, and in 
comparing the two accounts in Josephus 
and Acts there is no close resemblance 
beyond the name, see Nosgen, in loco, 
and Belser, Theol. Quartalschrift, i., p. 
70 (1896). St. Luke speaks definitely of 
400 followers ; Josephus evidently con- 
siders that the pretender was much more 
successful, so far as numbers were con- 
cerned, for he writes : ireiflet tov irXcur- 
tov oxXov. These and similar discrep- 
ancies are also well insisted upon by 
Zahn in his recent Introduction, ii., 416, 
417 (1899), and his own conclusion is 
that only such ordinary words are com- 
mon to the two accounts as Luke, dvjj- 
peSt) ; Jos., avciXc ; Luke, eirtiflovTo ; Jos., 
.€irci0€ ; and that we cannot get beyond 
the bounds of possibility that the two 
authors refer to the same fact (on Zahn's 
criticism of Krenkel's view of the depen- 
dence of Luke on Josephus in the narra- 
tive, see u. s.). In referring to the ap- 
pearance of the many false Messiahs, 
such as the Theudas of Josephus, Ant., 
xx., 5, 1, Dr. Edersheim, Sketches of 
Jewish Social Life, p. 66, remarks : " Of 
course this could not have been the 

Theudas of Acts v. 36, 37, but both the 
name and the movement were not solitary 
in Israel at the time" ; see also Ramsay, 
Was Christ born in Bethlehem ? p. 259. 
And no testimony could be stronger than 
that of Josephus himself to the fact that 
at the time of the Advent Judaea was 
full of tumults and seditions and pre- 
tenders of all kinds, Ant., xvii., 10, 4, 8 ; 
B. J., ii., 4, 1. The view has been main- 
tained by many commentators that the 
Theudas of Josephus may reasonably be 
supposed to be one of the many false 
teachers and leaders mentioned by the 
Jewish historian and not always by 
name, who pandered to the feverish 
hopes of the people and gave themselves 
out as of kingly rank — (so recently Belser, 
Felten, Page, Plumptre, Knabenbauer). 
The name Theudas contracted from Theo- 
dorus may not have been so common as 
that of Simon or Judas (although on the 
other hand,see Nosgen, Apostelgeschichte, 
p. 147) — " Josephus describes four men 
bearing the name of Simon within forty 
years, and three that of Judas within 
ten years, all of whom were instigators 
of rebellion" — but it was the Greek 
equivalent to several familiar Hebrew 
names, e.g., Jonathan, Matthias ; and 
Bishop Lightfoot allows that there is 
something to be said for Wieseler's sug- 
gestion that on the ground of the name 
the Theudas here may be identified with 
Matthias, the son of Margalothus, an in- 
surgent in the time of Herod, prominent 
in the pages of Josephus, Ant., xvii., 6, 2 
(see also Zockler on the whole question, 
Apostelgeschichte, p. 197, 2nd edit.). We 
must admit the objection of Wendt that 
this and other identifications of names 
and persons cannot be proved (and some 
of them certainly are very precarious, as 
Alford pointed out), but we cannot sup- 
pose that St. Luke could have made the 
gross blunder attributed to him in the 
face of his usual accuracy (see Blass, 
Acta Apostolorum, p. 90), or endorse with 
Schiirer what he calls "the slight autho- 
rity of the Acts in such matters " (Jewish 
People, div. i., vol. ii., p. 169). If it is 
hardly possible that Josephus can have 
been mistaken, although some writers 




KaKeli'os dirwXeTO, icai Trdtrcs ocroi e-rrciOorro cwtw StccncopTricrd'ncrai'. 
38. Kal tol vuf Xcya* ufiif, diroaTijTe diro t£)v di'Opwirwi' tootwi', Kai 

have held that it is by no means impos- 
sible that even here he may have been 
(cf. Alford, Rendall, Belser, and com- 
pare the remarks of Zahn, ubi supra), 
we may at least claim the same proba- 
bility of freedom from error for St. Luke, 
" temporum bene memorem se scriptor 
monstrat : quo minus est probabile eum 
de Theuda tarn graviter errasse quam 
p'.erique putant " (Blass), and see the 
recent remarks of Ramsay, Was Christ 
born at Bethlehem ? p. 252 ff. It cannot 
be said that some recent attempts at a 
solution of the difficulty are very pro- 
mising; for whilst H. Holtzmann severely 
blames Blass for maintaining that some 
Christian had interpolated the name 
Theudas in the text of Josephus (see 
Blass, in loco, and p. xvi., edit, min.), 
he himself is prepared to endorse the 
view recently maintained amongst others 
by Clemen that the writer of Acts in his 
mention of Theudas gives us a vague 
but yet recognisable recollection of Jos., 
Ant., xx., 5, 1 ; see in loco and Theol. 
Liter aturzeitung , 3, 1896, and 13, 1897. 
B. Weiss thinks that the notorious diffi- 
culty may easily be got rid of by suppos- 
ing that the reviser inserted the example 
of Theudas in the wrong place, Einlei- 
iung in das N. T., p. 574. — Xfywv «Iva£ 
nva tavrov : of consequence, really 
" somebody," cf. viii. 9 (and R.V.) ; " ein 
grosser Mann," Blass, Grammatik des 
N. G., p. 76; so we have its opposite, 
ovSeis, cf. instances in Wetstein in 
classical Greek ; so in Latin quidam, 
aliquis, Juvenal, i., 74 ; Cicero, ad Atti- 
cum, iii., 15 ; and cf. also 1 Cor. iii. 7, 
Gal. ii. 6, vi. 3 ; Viteau, Le Grec du 
N. T., p. 148 (1893). And yet the jealous 
eye of the Pharisees was blind to the dif- 
ference between such a man as Theudas, 
whom Gamaliel so contemptuously de- 
scribed, and the Apostles who sought not 
their own honour (Nosgen) ; cf. Vulgate, 
"dicens se esse aliquem," so Rhem. and 
Wycl., " saying that he was somebody ". 
— Trpocr6KoX\i)9Y] : better reading irpocrc- 
•cXiOtj, a word not found elsewhere in 
N.T., cf. 2 Mace. xiv. 24 ; and so also in 
LXX, cf. Ps. xxxix. (xl.) 2, Symma- 
chus; cf. Polyb., iv., 51, 5; so also 
-rrpdo-KXio-is ; for its further use see Clem. 
Rom., Cor., xlvii., 4. — were! (is) TCTpa- 
tcocrtwv, S ee above on "Theudas". — 
6.vr)f>iQr\, see also on avaipc'w, ver. 33, 
often of violent death in Acts. The 
two clauses stand in sharp contrast — the 

one emphasises the large number which 
joined Theudas, the other the fact that 
notwithstanding he was slain ; cf. iv. ic. 
— SieXvdtjcrav k.t.X. : nowhere else in 
N.T., but its use is quite classical, cf. 
Thuc, ii., 12 ; Xen., Cyr., v., 5, 43 ; Polyb., 
iv., 2. Blass remarks that the whole 
phrase " apte de secta quae paullatim 
dilabitur, minus apte de multitudine 
per vim disjecta ". — Iy€vovto els oiiSe'v : 
phrase only here in N.T. (cf. xix. 27), 
but see in LXX, Job xxiv. 25, Isa. xl. 
17, Wisd. iii. 17, xx. 16. Y' V0 H- ai «*« 
in LXX and also in classics ; in N.T. 
cf. Luke xiii. 19, xx. 17, Acts iv. n, and 
cf. 1 Thess. iii. 5. In the first passage 
it is Hebraistic ; in the passage before 
us and in 1 Thess. the phrases are quite 
possibly Greek, cf. especially Simcox, 
Language of the N. T., p. 143. The 
phrase is more frequent in St. Luke's 
writings than in any other books of the 
N.T., except the Apocalypse. 

Ver. 37. MovSas 6 TaX. : here too an 
inaccuracy might have been charged 
against St. Luke, but it is to be noted 
that while Josephus speaks of Judas as 
a Gaulonite in one passage, Jos. , Ant. . 
xviii., 1, 1, he frequently, as both Belser 
and Wendt point out, speaks of him as 
a Galilean, cf. Ant., xviii., 1, 6 ; xx., 5, 2 ; 
B. y., ii., 8, 1, and 17, 8. But the name 
Galilean might easily be given to him 
because Galilee was the scene of his ex- 
ploits, or because Gamala, his home, be- 
longed to Lower Gaulonitis, which was 
reckoned as part of Galilee. The accur- 
acy ot St. Luke in the account or Judas 
is remarkable, for Gamaliel speaks of his 
insurrection as coming to nothing. He 
could so speak, say in 34 or 35 a.d., but 
not some ten years later, when the fol- 
lowers of Judas had again gathered to- 
gether, and formed a kind of school or 
party, to say nothing of the rebellion of 
his three sons, James, Simon, and later. 
Menahem ; see Belser, 11. s., p. 61, so 
Lightfoot, u. s., Nosgen, and Alford's 

As we consider the characteristics of 
such men as Theudas and Judas, it <is 
difficult to suppose that the age which 
produced them could have produced the 
Messiah of the Gospels. He is, in truth, 
the Anti-Christ of Judaism. Instead of 
giving Himself out to be somebody, 
Jesus is meek and lowly of heart ; instead 
of stirring revolt in Galilee, a burning 
furnace of sedition, His blessing is upon 




idtrare. aijTous 1 ■ on iav •»] e£ d^SpoS-iruy r\ (3ou\t) aurr] f\ to eoyo*' 
touto, KO/raXuGqcreTai ■ 39. €i 8e en 0eou eorii', ou SucaaOe tcaraXGcrai 

1 After a4>tT. a-uTovs (W.H., R.V.) DE, Flor. insert uyj (juavav-res tos x £l P as (E has 
poXvvovTes), d non coinquinatas manus, e non coinquinantes manus, Flor. non macu- 
Letis manus vestras. Blass and Hilg. follow D. Chase thinks that the gloss arose 
in Syriac hy assim. of O.T. passages, cf. Isa. lix. 3 ; but see Harris, Four Lectures, 
etc., p. 79 ff., as against this, and for the possible deriv. from Syriac through the 
trans, of 8vvT)<re«r0e (W.H., R.V.), and for theories that the gloss has moved away 
(as in other instances according to H.) from its right place. Belser sees in each 
word of the |3 recension in w. 38 and 39 "the stamp of originality". Mr. Harold 
Smith suggests that there was a gloss on cao-arc (a^eTt) avrovs from ver. 33 : utj avai- 
P ovvt€s— MHANAIPOYNTEC— then at) became repeated— MHMHANAIPOYNTEC— 
the second y.-t\ became Ml (by itacism), while AIP dropped out after AN. This pro- 
duces MHMIANOYNTEC which would easily be read jitj uiavavTes — ras x €l P a< * 
being added for sense, avaipciv is very common in Acts. 

the peace-makers ; instead of seeking a 
kingly crown, like Judas the Gaulonite, 
He withdraws from those who would 
take Him by force, and make Him a 
king ; instead of preaching revolt and 
licence in the name of liberty for merely 
selfish ends, He bade men render unto 
Caesar the things that are Caesar's ; in- 
stead of defiantly bidding His followers 
to be in subjection to no man, and in- 
augurating a policy of bloodshed and 
murder, He bade them remember that 
whilst One was their Master and 
Teacher, they all were brethren. 
Schiirer, jfewish People, div. ii., vol. hi., 
p. 80, E.T. , well points out that we have a 
literary memorial of the views and hopes 
of the Zealots in the Assumption of 
Moses, which goes so far as to prophesy 
that Israel will tread on the neck of the 
eagle, i.e. , the Romans, x. 8 ; but see 
also edition of Assumption of Moses by 
Prof. Charles, p. 42. 

Ver. 37. iv Tats ^aipais t!]s airoy., 
see Blass, in loco, on St. Luke's accuracy. 
We must be careful to distinguish this 
from Luke ii. 1. The tribal method of 
numbering which forms an essential 
part of St. Luke's story in the Gospel 
may explain why no such serious dis- 
turbance followed as resulted from the 
Roman numbering and valuation which 
marked Quirinius' second Roman ad- 
ministration, " the great census," tj 
airoy. (in 6-8 a.d.), taken when Judaea 
had just become a part of the Roman 
province of Syria. This "great cen- 
sus," taken after the Roman method, 
involved the imposition of a tax, Jos., 
Ant., xviii., 1, 1, and it was this impost 
which roused the indignation of Judas. 
To pay tribute to a foreign power was 
to violate an Israelite's allegiance to 
Jehovah : '• We have no Lord and Master 

but God." was the watchword of Judas 
.and his followers. For the whole subject 
see Ramsay, Expositor, April and June, 
1897, and Was Christ born at Bethlehem ? 
(1898), e.g., pp. 107, 108, 127, 139. — tea! 
air€o-TTjo-« Xabv : used here transitively, 
and here only in the N.T., cf. Deut. vii. 
4, and in classical writers, Herod., i., 76. 
The verb d4>io-rr|ui is not found in any 
ol the Gospels except St. Luke's, where 
it occurifour times, and in the Acts six 
times. It is not only one of the words 
characteristic of the two books, but also of 
St. Luke and St. Paul (so also ucdio-rr|pi, 
see on xix. 26), as it is only found once 
outside St. Paul's Epistles (in which it 
is employed four times), viz., Heb. iii. 
12 ; " drew away some of the people," 
R.V. There is no word which actually 
expresses this as in T.R., where we have 
Ixavdv = " much," A.V. — dirio~a> avrov : 
this prepositional use of 6ir. is not found 
in classical writers, where the word is 
always an adverb. In the N.T. and 
LXX the prepositional use is derived 

from Hebrew "Hn&$, c f- xx - 3°> Luke 

ix. 23, xxi. 8. Blass, Grammatik des 
N. G., p. 126. — 8ieo-Kopiricr6T]o-av : it is 
true that the sect revived under the name 
of Zealots, and played an active part in 
the Jewish wars, but there is no reason 
for charging St. Luke's account with in- 
accuracy (so Overbeck following De 
Wette). The fate of the leader and the 
dispersion of his followers was quite 
sufficient to point the moral which 
Gamaliel wished to draw. 

Ver. 38. Kat to. vvv, cf. also in iv. 
29, xvii. 30, xx. 32, xxvii. 22. Ta neuter 
accusative absolute — as respects the 
present, now, cf. 2 Mace. xv. 8 ; thus 
in all parts of Acts, Vindicia Lucana, 
Klostermann, p. 53, so Zeller, Leke- 


nPAHEis AnorroAQN 


^uto, 1 |a^itot€ Kal Geofiaxoi eupcBrjTe. 40. 'Eireia0Tj<Ta»' 8e qutu, Kai 
irpoaKaXcadfiecoi tous &ttoot6Xous, Beiparres •n-ap^YyciXcu' u,t] XaXciv 

1 avTo C*HP, Vulg. (clem, and demid.), Sah., Boh., Syr. Pesh., Chrys. ; avrovs 
fr$ABC 2 DE, Vulg. (am. fu.), Syr. Hard., Arm., Aeth., Bede, so Tisch., W.H., R.V., 
Weiss, Wendt, Hilg. — avro may have come in from to epyov tovto. Flor. apparently 
paraphrases latter part of verse, see Blass p. After av-rovs E, Gig., Wern. add ovxe 
UU.61S cuts 01 opxovrcs vfiuv ; D, Flor., Syr. Hard. mg. demid. add ovtc vp.cis ovrt 
3ao-i\€is ovTe Tvpawoi, so Hilg. Belser lays special stress on these words, whilst 
Weiss only sees here and in the following words of D unfortunate attempts at emend- 
ng ; cf. Wisd. xii. 14, ovtc PcuriXevs tj -rvpavvos, and see also below on vi. 10. D, 
Syr. Hard, mg., Flor. demid., 33 mg., 180 add air£x«o-9e ovv airo tuv avOpamtov tou- 
i uv. Weiss sees an empty repetition of ver. 38, but Belser finds in aircx* that which 
t nables the construction of the following (irjiroTe koi k.t.X. to run quite smoothly. 

bv 5ch, Fiiedrich. The expression is 
quite classical. — lao-oTe : !d«i> charac- 
teristic of Luke, and is only used once 
elsevhere in the Gospels, Matt. xxiv. 43 
(also ; n 1 Cor. x. 13), but twice in St. 
Luke's. Gospel, and seven times in Acts 
— d^ii^ii occurs only thrice in Acts; 
viii. 22, xiv. 17. — KaTaXv6t)o*ETai, "will 
be overthrown," R.V. evertere, Blass, 
so Rendull. This rendering gives the 
proper force of the word ; it is not 
as in ver. 36, which might be rendered 
" will be dissolved," but koto, indicates 
subversion, cf. Rom. xiv. 20, Acts vi. 14, 
Gal. ii. 18 ; cf. 2 Mace. ii. 22, 4 Mace. iv. 
16, and frequently ibid., Vulgate, " dis- 
solvetur ". 

Ver. 39. lav ... el 82 : it has some- 
times been thought that the change of 
mood from subjunctive to indicative, ** but 
if it is of God," as if indicating that the 
second supposition were the more pro- 
bable (cf. Gal. i. 8, 9), indicates sympathy 
on the part of Gamaliel. It is of course 
possible that he may have been rendered 
favourably disposed towards the Chris- 
tians by their strict observance of the 
Law, and by their appeal to a doctrine 
which widely divided Pharisees and 
Sadducees. Others have attributed the 
change in mood, not to Gamaliel at all, 
but to the author (so Overbeck, Holtz- 
mann), and have maintained (so Blass, 
Weiss, cf. Winer-Moulton, xli. 2) that the 
indicative may be used because the second 
is the case with which the Council had 
actually to deal, the assertion, i.e., of 
the Apostles. There may also be an 
underlying contrast between the transi- 
toriness of all mere human schemes, all 
of which would be overthrown, and the 
certainty of that which is "of God," and 
which has Him for its Author. There 
cannot be the least ground for supposing 
that Gamaliel's counsel was in its tenor 
a mere invention, as it bears the impress 

of a thorough Rabbinical wise saying, 
cf. Sayings of the Jewish Fathers, v., 
24 (Taylor, p. 93, second edition). See 
too Herod., ix., 16; Eur., Hippol., vi., 
76; for the construction, cf. Burton, 
N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 96, and 
Viteau, Le Grec du N. T., pp. 103, 113 
(1893), who compares LXX, Gen. xliv. 
23, 26. — ov 8vvao6«: R.V. and W.H., 
8vvi]ere<r9e. KoraXvaai with accusative 
of person in Xen., Cyr., viii., 5, 24 ; Plato, 
Legg., iv., p. 714, C, cf. 4 Mace. iv. 16. 
But without this addition it is usual to 
refer back to irpoere'xcTe in ver. 35 (cf. 
Luke xxi. 34) for the construction of 
pijiroTc ; but p/ij-trorc . . . evp€0TJT€ may 
be explained on the principle that a verb 
of fearing is sometimes unexpressed, the 
idea of fear being supplied by the context 
(in clauses where p,^ with the subjunctive 
is found), Burton, u. s., p. 96. — p/qiroTc,. 
"lest haply," its use in later Greek, 
Blass, Grammatik des N. G., p. 208. 
koi sometimes interpreted (so Alford, 
Wendt, Holtzmann), as if it meant not 
only against man but also against God. 
0€op,dxoi : not found elsewhere, but cf 
LXX, Job xxvi. 5, Symm., and in Prov. 
ix. 18, xxi. 16, applying the word to the 
Rephaim (see B.D. 2 " Giants ") ; in 2 
Mace. vii. 19 we have Ocopaxciv «""■« 
X<tpT]o-as. In classical Greek the same 
verb is found, see Grimm and Wendt 
for instances ; Ocopaxta, Plato, Rep., 378, 
D. (as certain books of the Iliad were 
called, especially the xix.). The toler- 
ance of the sentiments here attributed 
to Gamaliel is undoubtedly in perfect ac- 
cordance with what we know of his 
character and opinions ; the decisions 
attributed to him, e.g., that relating to 
the law of the Sabbath (Hamburger, 
Real-Encyclopddie des Judentums, ii., 2, 
237 ; see also Derenbourg, Histoire de la 
Palestine, pp. 239-246, andef. also Renan, 
Apostles, p. 153, E.T.), are marked by a 



itrl tw oyofiaTi toC 'lif|CToG, Kal atriKuaav auTous- 41. Ol fieK ou^ 1 
etropcuorro xaipoi'Te^ airo TTpoaoiirou tou owcSpiou, on uirep tou 

1 fiev ovv (Flor. St), D, Par. add airoo"ro\oi, so Hilg. ; Flor. adds airo\v8evT«s, 
cf. iv. 23 ; Blass in $ combines both. 

tendency to mildness and liberality ; and 
perhaps a still more remarkable illustra- 
tion of the same tendency is afforded by 
the enactment so often referred to him 
(Hamburger, u. s.) to allow to the poor 
of the heathen, as well as of Israel, the 
gleaning and a participation in the corn 
left standing in the corner of the fields, 
to inquire after the welfare of the Gentile 
poor, to maintain them, to visit their sick, 
to bury their dead (the prayer against 
heretics belonged not to this Gamaliel, 
but to Gamaliel II.). But the decision 
of Gamaliel was not prompted by any 
sympathy with the Christians ; it was the 
judgment of toleration and prudence, but 
certainly nothing more, although it 
scarcelyfalls under the head of" cynical " ; 
it was rather, as Ewald called it, that 
of an ordinary politician. No credence 
whatever can be attributed to the tradi- 
tion that Gamaliel became a Christian, 
or that he was secretly a Christian, al- 
though we may sympathise with St. 
Chrysostom'swords, " it cannot be that he 
should have continued in unbelief, to the 
end ". The Talmud distinctly affirms that 
he died a Jew, and, if he had betrayed his 
faith, we cannot understand the honour 
which Jewish tradition attaches to his 
name, "Gamaliel," B.D. 2 ; Schiirer, Jew- 
ish People, div. ii., vol. i., p. 364. Wendt, 
while he refuses to admit the historical 
character of the speech of Gamaliel, is 
evidently puzzled to discover any definite 
grounds for St. Luke's wilful introduction 
of the famous Rabban into the scene (so 
too Feine)^ He therefore supposes that 
the decision in ver. 38, in which he sees a 
wise saying similar to those attributed to 
other Rabbis, was assigned by tradition 
to Gamaliel, and that St. Luke, who was 
in possession of the further tradition 
that Gamaliel had given a decisive judg- 
ment in the trial of the Apostles, intro- 
duces this saying into the speech which 
he attributes to Gamaliel as fitting to the 
occasion. But there is no indication in 
our authorities that the sentiment thus 
attributed to Gamaliel was in any way 
different from what might have been ex- 
pected of him (see Schiirer, Jewish People, 
u. s.). The chief objection to the speech, 
viz., the alleged anachronism involved in 
the mention of Theudas, really begs the 

question as to its authenticity, and even 
on the supposition of an inaccuracy in the 
point mentioned, we cannot get rid of the 
fact that the attitude of Gamaliel in itself 
betrays no inconsistency. It was this 
alleged anachronism which caused Spitta 
to refer the incident of Gamaliel in this 
chapter to his inferior source B.. and to 
refuse to adopt the solution of Weiss and 
Feine, who solved the difficulty involved 
in the mention of Theudas by introducing 
the hand of a reviser. 

Ver. 40. £Trei<r0i]<ra.v 8e aii-ru : what- 
ever scruples Gamaliel may have had in 
pressing matters against the Apostles, or 
even if the teaching of Christ, as some 
have conjectured, with much of which 
he might have sympathised as a follower 
of Hillel, had influenced his mind, or if, 
like Joseph of Arimathea, he too had 
not consented to the counsel and will of 
his fellow- Sanhedrists, there is no reason 
to suppose (see above) that he ever ad- 
vanced beyond the compromise here 
suggested. It may be that Neander 
was right in his judgment that Gamaliel 
was too wise a man to render a fanatical 
movement more violent still by opposing 
it. Others however see in his words a 
mere laisser-aller view of matters, or a 
timid caution which betokened a mere 
waiter upon Providence. But at the 
same time there are occasions when 
Gamaliel's advice may not be out of 
place, see Bengel on ver. 38, and Farrar, 
St. Paul, i., no ff. — SeipavTts, Deut. xxv. 
3, 2 Cor. xi. 24: the punishment was 
for minor offences, and it was now inflic- 
ted upon the Apostles because they had 
trangressed the command enjoined upon 
them previously, iv. 18. The Pharisees, 
probably by their superior number in the 
Sanhedrim (Jos., Ant., xiii., 10, 6), were 
able to secure the following of Gamaliel's 
advice, and to prevent extreme measures 
against the. Apostles, but they were not 
prepared to disregard the previous in- 
junction of the Council which bade the 
Apostles refrain from uttering a word in 
the name of Jesus. But the Apostles 
themselves must have seen in the punish- 
ment a striking fulfilment of their 
Lord's words, as in the closing hours 
of His earthly life He foretold their 
future sufferings for His Name. The 




ocofxaTOs aoTOo x KaTTj£iw0Y]o-ai' aTiu.a<70T]ycu • 42. irao-aV tc ^p.epav iv 
to Upw Kai KaT oIkoi/ outc tirauorro SiSdartcorres k<*i euayycXi^ojJLet'ot 
'iTjaout' TOC XpioroV.* 

1 After ovo|xaTos a few cursives read av-rov : but om. ^ABCDHP, Tisch., W.H., 
R.V., Weiss, Wendt. 

2 Flor., Gig. add Jesu, Par. adds Christi (see for variations Alford and Wendt). 
R.V., W.H., Weiss have tov Xpiarov Itjctovv ; D, Flor., Par. tov icvpov I. X., so Hilg. 

penalty which must have been a very 
painful one, although the command not 
to exceed forty stripes often led to its 
mitigation, was often inflicted by the 
synagogues, and not only by the great 
Sanhedrim, for all kinds of offences as 
against heretics and others. These verses 
40-42, with the exception of the words 
4ir£i<r0T|orav at avr$, were referred by 
Jiingst to the redactor on the ground 
that they do not fit in well after Gamaliel's 
speech, and that the Apostles would have 
been at once released, but the Apostles 
were punished for a transgression of the 
command previously laid upon them in 
iv. 18. According to Jungst, who here 
follows Spitta, the original conclusion 
of the narrative is to be found in inserting 
after ver. 39, chap. vi. 7 ! Here we are 
told is a notice, which is quite out of 
place where it now stands, that a great 
number of the priests were obedient to 
the faith : this was the result of the 
speech of Gamaliel, and his warning not 
to be found " fighting against God " ; a 
speech delivered in the Sanhedrim in the 
midst of the priests ! 

Ver. 41. oi p.€v ovv: no answering Sc 
as after i. 6, ii. 41, but explained because 
immediately upon liropevovTo (which 
answers to aireXvcrav) follows xaipovrcs, 
marking the attitude of the Apostles, and 
showing how little they proposed to obey 
the injunction from fear of further punish- 
ment. But see also Mr. RendalPs note, 
and also his Appendix on p.ev ovv, Acts, 
p. 163, in which he examines this view 
at length ; according to him there is an 
answering 8e, but it is found in the 
antithesis to this sentence in chap. vi. 
1, the connection being that the Apostles 
now became more absorbed in their 
spiritual work, and a murmuring arose 
in consequence of their neglect of the 
distribution of the common funds. But 
this antithesis does not seem natural, and 
a censure on the Apostles is not neces- 
sarily contained in vi. i. ff. — liropcvovTo 
X<*£povT€s : " imperf. quia describitur 
modus " (Blass, Gratnmatik des N. G., 
p. 186 ; if one prophecy of their Lord had 

been already fulfilled, another was fulfilled 
in the sequel, Matt. v. n, 12, Phil. i. 
29. — KaTTi|i«eifj<rav . . . d.Tifi.aor0i}vai : 
oxymoron, cf. 2 Cor. vi. 8-10 ; cf. Bengel's 
note — he calls it " eximium oxy.". The 
verb KaTaij. is used by St. Luke in 
his Gospel, xx. 35 (xxi. 36, T. R., but not 
W.H. or R.V.), and here ; only found 
once elsewhere, 2 Thess. i. 5, in a passage 
where the thought of Christian suffering 
and inheritance is combined ; 2 Mace. 
xiii. 12, 3 Mace, iii. 21, iv. ir, 4 Mace, 
xviii. 3. aTip.a<r6TJvai only used once else- 
where by St. Luke, cf. Luke xx. n, where 
it is also found in connection with Sspw. — 
vircp tow 6vofi., "the Name" — i.e., the 
Name k<xt' !|oxiiv, cf. 3 John 7, and James 
v. 14 (ii. 7) (tov K. doubtful), cf. also 
Clem. Rom., 2 Cor. (so called), xiii., 4, 
Ignat., Ephes., iii., 1, used here as the 

absolute use of Qt2? in Lev. xxiv. 11, 16, 

by which the Jews understood Jehovah. 
See Grimm, Mayor's St. James above, 
and Taylor, Pirkc Aboth, p. 67, second 
edition ; cf. tt)s 68ov, " the Way," ix. 
2, etc. — ircurdv Te Tj(i€pav : the t« joins 
the imperfect liravovTo closely to the 
preceding, indicating the continuance 
of the work of the Apostles in spite 
of threats and blows, and of their resolve 
to welcome suffering for Christ as an 
honour = Kara irao-av T)p.e'pav. This use 
of irav€o-8ai with the participle almost 
entirely in Luke and Paul may be re- 
garded as a remains of literary usage, 
Luke v. 4, Col. i. 9, Ephes. i. 16 (Heb. 
x. 2) ; Viteau, he Grec du N. T., p. 193 
(1893). — Iv to) Up. Kai kot oIkov : the 
words may mark a contrast between the 
public preaching which was not discon- 
tinued, cf. ver. 21, and the teaching con- 
tinued at home in a household assembly, 
or Kara may be taken distributively, and 
refer to the Christian assemblies met to- 
gether in various houses in the city, as in 
ii. 46. See Zockler's note, and Edersheim, 
Jewish Social Life, pp. 259, 260. — tov 
Xp. 'I. : " Jesus as the Christ," R.V. The 
contents of the first Apostolic preaching, 
the sum and substance of the Apostles' 




VI. I. 'EN Se Tais Tiji^pais tcuJtcus ir\r\Bvv6vruv tuc (ia6r]Ta)»' ) 
^Y^cto yoYyucfAoS Tatf 'EXXijyiorwy irpos T0O5 'E^paious, 8ti -rrape- 

message to their fellow - countrymen. 
This is allowed and insisted upon by 
Schwegler, Renan, and others, but in the 
statement what an intimate knowledge 
of the life of Jesus is presupposed, and 
how great must have been the impression 
made by Him upon His daily com- 
panions ! 

Chapter VI. — Ver. 1. 8e ; cf. i. 15 
and see above in v. 41. There seems no 
occasion to regard 82 as marking a con- 
trast between v. 41 and the opening of 
this chapter, or as contrasting the outward 
victory of the Church with its inward dis- 
sensions (as Meyer, Holtzmann, Zechler, 
see Nbsgen's criticism in loco); simply 
introduces a new recital as in iii. 1. It 
may refer back to the notice in v. 14 of 
the increaseofthe disciples, and this would 
be in harmony with the context. On the 
expression iv Tats 'Hf"'p« TavT., as charac- 
teristic of Luke, see above, and Friedrich, 
Das Lucasevangelium, p. 9 ; in both his 
Gospel and the Acts expressions with 
t||xe'pa abound. Harnack admits that in 
passing to this sixth chapter " we at once 
enter on historical ground," Expositor, 
v., p. 324 (3rd series). For views of the 
partition critics see Wendt's summary in 
new edition (1899), p. 140, Hilgenfeld, 
Zeitschrift fur wissenschaft. Theol., p. 
390 ff. (1895), and also in commentary 
below. Wendt sees in vi. 1-7 the hand of 
the redactor, the author of Acts ii. 5 ; 
others suppose that we have in vi. the 
commencement of a new Hellenistic 
source ; so Feine, J. Weiss, Hilgenfeld. 
Clemen refers vi. 7, 8 to his Historia 
Petri, whilst ver. 9 commences his 
Historia Hellenistarum (w. 1-6 belong 
to a special source) ; others again see in 
chap. vi. the continuance of an earlier 
source or sources. — it\t)0vv6vt»v, when 
the number of the disciples was multi- 
plying (present part.) ; verb frequent in 
LXX, sometimes intrans. as here, Exod. 
i. 20, etc., and see Psalms of Solomon, x., 
1, and note in Ryle and James' edition ; 
cf. also its classical use in its more 
correct form, irXrjOww, in the Acts : 
vi. 7, vii. 17, ix. 31, xii. 24. On St. 
Luke's fondness for this and similar 
words (Friedrich) see p. 73. Weiss calls 
it here a very modest word, introduced 
by one who knew nothing of the conver- 
sions in many of the preceding chapters. 
But the word, and especially its use in 
the present participle, rather denotes that 
the numbers went on increasing, and so 

rapidly that the Apostles found the work 
of relief too great for them. — p.a8t]Tuv, 
the word occurs here for the first time in 
the Acts (surely an insufficient ground 
for maintaining with Hilgenfeld that we 
are dealing with a new source). The 
same word is found frequently in each of 
the Gospels, twenty-eight times in Acts 
(p.a0T]Tpia once, ix. 36), but never in the 
Epistles. It evidently passed into the 
ancient language of the early Church 
from the earthly days of the ministry of 
Jesus, and may fairly be regarded as the 
earliest designation of the Christians ; but 
as the associations connected with it (the 
thought that Jesus was the SiSdcricaXos 
and His followers His p.a0T|Tai) passed 
into the background it quickly dropped 
out of use, although in the Acts the name 
is still the rule for the more ancient times 
and for the Jewish-Christian Churches ; 
cf. xxi. 16. In the Acts we have the 
transition marked from p,a0r|Tai to the 
brethren and saints of the Epistles. 
The reason for the change is obvious. 
During the lifetime of Jesus the disciples 
were called after their relationship to 
Him ; after His departure the names given 
indicated their relation to each other and 
to the society (Dr. Sanday, Inspiration, 
p. 289). And as an evidential test of the 
date of the various N.T. writings this 
is just what we might expect : the 
Gospels have their own characteristic 
vocabulary, the Epistles have theirs, 
whilst Acts forms a kind of link between 
the two groups, Gospels and Epistles. It 
is, of course, to be remembered that both 
terms dSc\<j>ot and ayioi are also found 
in Acts, not to the exclusion of, but 
alongside with, p,a0Y)Tai (cf., e.g., ix. 26, 
30, xxi. 4, 7, 16, 17) : the former in all 
parts of the book, and indeed more 
frequently than p.a0Tjxai, as applied to 
Christians; the latter four times, ix. 13, 
32, 41, xxvi. 10. But if our Lord gave 
the charge to His disciples recorded in 
St. Matt, xxviii. 19, bidding them make 
disciples of all the nations, p.a0T]Tcvo-aT£ 
(cf. also Acts xiv. 21 for the same word), 
then we can understand that the term 
would still be retained, as it was so closely 
associated with the last charge of the 
Master, whilst a mutual discipleship in- 
volved a mutual brotherhood (Matt, xxiii. 
8). St. Paul in his Epistles would be 
addressing those who enjoyed through 
Christ a common share with himself in 
a holy fellowship and calling, and whom 



he would therefore address not as |iadi]Ta( 
but as dS«XoJ>oi and 017101. They were 
still |xa0T]Tai, yet not of man but of the 
Lord (only in one passage in Acts, and 
that a doubtful one, ix. 43, is the word 
p,a0T)Tcu or fjiaOij-nis used of any human 
teacher), and the word was still true 
of them with that significance, and is 
still used up to a period subsequent 
(we may well believe) to the writing of 
several of Paul's Epistles, Acts xxi. 16. 
How the word left its impress upon the 
thought of the Church, in the claim of 
the disciple to be as his Master, is 
touchingly evidenced by the expressions 
of St. Ign., Ephes. i. 2 ; Magn., ix., 2 ; 
Rom. iv. 2 ; Tral., v., 2 (St. Polyc, 
Martyr, xvii., 3, where the word is 
applied to the martyrs as disciples of 
the Lord, and the prayer is offered : wv 
YeVoiTO ica! "Hfias crvyicoivwvovs t€ 
koA cn/fi.p.a0Y|Ta<; 7€V€<r0ai|. — •yo-yY*'*''- 
jj.os and ■y°YY^£ €lv are D °th used by 
St. Luke (cf. Luke v. 30), by St. John, 
and also by St. Paul, Phil. ii. 14, and 
r Cor. x. 10, the noun also by St. Peter, 
i. 4, 9. The noun is found seven times 
in the LXX of Israel in the wilderness 
(cf. 1 Cor. x. 10) ; so in Phil. ii. 14 it is 
probable that the same passage, Exod. 
xvi. 7, was in the Apostle's mind, as in the 
next verse he quotes from the Song of 
Moses, Deut. xxxii. 5, LXX; so Yo-yyoo-is 
is also found in LXX with the same mean- 
ing, Numb. xiv. 27. ■yo-yYu<r|*<5s is also 
found in Wisd. i. ro, Ecclus. xlvi. 7, 
with reference to Numb. xiv. 26, 27, and 
twice in Psalms of Solomon v. 15, xvi. 
11. In Attic Greek Tov9vpio-fios would 
be used (so Tov8pi£oj and Tov0vpi£w). 
Phrynichus brands the other forms as 
Ionian, but Dr. Kennedy maintains that 
"yoyyvorp,<Js and Y<>Yyv£civ from their 
frequent use in the LXX are rather to be 
classed amongst "vernacular terms" long 
continued in the speech of the people, 
from which the LXX drew. Both words 
are probably onomatopoetic. — Kennedy, 
Sources of N. T. Greek, pp. 38-40,72, 73, 
76 ; see also Rutherford, New Phrynichus, 
p. 463 ; Deissmann, Bibelstudien, p. 106. 
Here the word refers rather to indignatio 
clandcstina, not to an open murmuring. 
— 'EXXtjviottwv. The meaning of the 
term, which was a matter of conjecture 
in St. Chrysostom's day, cannot be 
said to be decided now (Hort, Judaistic 
Christianity, p. 48). The verb 'EXXtj- 
vi£civ, to speak Greek (Xen., Anab., 
vii., 3, 25), helps us reasonably to define 
it as a Greek-speaking Jew (so also 
Holtzmann and Wendt). The term 
occurs again in ix. 29 (and xi. 20 ? see 

in loco), and includes those Jews who 
had settled in Greek-speaking countries, 
who spoke the common Greek dialect 
in place of the vernacular Aramaic 
current in Palestine, and who would be 
more or less acquainted with Greek habits 
of life and education. They were there- 
fore a class distinguished not by descent 
but by language. This word " Grecians " 
(A.V.) was introduced to distinguish them 
from the Greeks by race, but the rendering 
"Grecian Jews" (R.V.) makes the dis- 
tinction much plainer. Thus in the 
Dispersion " the cultured Jew was not 
only a Jew but a Greek as well " ; he 
would be obliged from force of circum- 
stances to adapt himself to his surround- 
ings more or less, but, even in the more 
educated, the original Jewish element still 
predominated in his character ; and if this 
was true of the higher it was still more 
true of the lower classes amongst the 
Hellenists — no adoption of the Greek 
language as their mode of speech, no sepa- 
ration of distance from the Holy City, 
no defections in their observances of the 
law, or the surrender as unessential of 
points which the Pharisees deemed vital, 
could make them forget that they were 
members of the Commonwealth of Israel, 
that Palestine was their home, and the 
Temple their pride, see B.D. 2 , " Hellen- 
ist," Schiirer, Jewish People, div. ii., 
vol. ii., p. 282, E.T. ; Hamburger, Real- 
Encyclopadie des Judentums, ii., 3, 
" Griechenthum ". But bearing this de- 
scription in mind, we can the more easily 
understand the conflict with Stephen, 
and his treatment by those who were 
probably his fellow-Hellenists. If as a 
cultured Hellenist St. Stephen's sym- 
pathies were wider and his outlook less 
narrow than that of the orthodox Jew, or 
of the less educated type of Hellenist, 
such a man, who died as St. Stephen died 
with the prayer of Jesus on his lips (see 
Feine's remarks), must have so lived in 
the spirit of his Master's teaching as 
to realise that in His Kingdom the old 
order would change and give place 
to new. But the same considerations 
help us to understand the fury aroused 
by St. Stephen's attitude, and it is not 
difficult to imagine the fanatical rage of 
a people who had nearly risen in insur- 
rection because Pilate had placed in his 
palace at Jerusalem some gilt shields in- 
scribed with the names of heathen gods, 
against one who without the power of 
Pilate appeared to advocate a change of 
the customs which Moses had delivered 
(see Nosgen, Apostelgeschichte, p. 69). — 
'Eppaiot — in W.H. with smooth breath 




OewpoofTO ev tt) StaKot'ia -rfj KaQr\ixepivf\ at X^P ai auTwv. 1 2. irpoa-'oi Se 2 01 SwSeica to ttXtjGos tw jiaOrjTuif, etiroy, Ouk 

1 At end D adds ev ttj SiaKovia tcov Epptuiov, according to Flor. on ev r. ko.8. 
SiaK. ai x* T(JV EXX. viro t<ov Siaicovuv tuv E(3p. irapeOewp. Blass in (J reads simply 
after ai x- outwv the words ■uiro tw State, tcov Eppaiuv. 

2 ovv CEHP, Vulg. ; 8c ^B, so Tisch., W.H. text, R.V. marg., Weiss, Wendt; 
8tj A, so Lach., W.H. marg. D reads ti ovv eoriv aStX<{>oi. ; ti\ io-Ke\J/., so Flor., 
Par. ; cf. xxi. 22 (Weiss). 

ing, see W.H., Introduction, p. 313, and 
Winer-Schmiedel, p. 40; here those Jews 
in Palestine who spoke Aramaic ; in the 
Church at Jerusalem they would probably 
form a considerable majority, cf. Phil, 
iii. 5, and Lightfoot's note. In the N.T. 
'lovSaios is opposed to "EXXtjv (Rom. i. 
16), and 'E|3paIos to 'EXXtjvio-tijs, Acts vi. 
1. In the former case the contrast lies in 
the difference of race and religion ; in the 
latter in the difference of customs and 
language. A man might be called 'lov- 
Saios, but he would not be 'EfJpcuos in the 
N.T. sense unless he retained in speech 
the Aramaic tongue ; the distinction 
was therefore drawn on the side of lan- 
guage, a distinction which still survives 
in our way 01 speaking of the Jewish 
nation, but of the Hebrew tongue. See 
Trench, Synonyms, i., p. 156 ff. In the 
two other passages in which 'E^p. is 
used, Phil. iii. 5 and 2 Cor. xi. 22, what- 
ever difficulties surround them, it is pro- 
bable that the distinctive force of the 
word as explained above is implied. But 
as within the nation, the distinction is 
not recognised by later Christian writers, 
and that it finds no place at all in Jewish 
writers like Philo and Josephus, or in 
Greek authors like Plutarch and Paus- 
anias (Trench, u. s.). — irpos, cf. St. Luke 
v. 30, !y<>YYu£ov irpos r. |ag.6t)tus o.vtov. 
— irap€0ea>povvTo : not found elsewhere 
in N.T. and not in LXX, but used in this 
sense in Dem. (also by Diodorus and Dion. 
Hal.) = irapopav, Attic : imperfect, denot- 
ing that the neglect had been going on for 
some time ; how the neglect had arisen 
we are not told — there is no reason to 
suppose that there had been previously 
Palestinian deacons (so Blass in |3, criti- 
cal notes), for the introduction of such a 
class of deacons, as Hilgenfeld notes, is 
something quite new, and does not arise 
out of anything previously said, although 
it would seem that in the rapidly growing 
numbers of the Church the Hebrew Chris- 
tians regarded their Hellenist fellow- 
Christians as having only a secondary 
claim on their care. Possibly the supply 
for the Hellenists fell short, simply be- 

cause the Hebrews were already in posses- 
sion. The Church had been composed 
first of Galileans and native Jews resident 
in Jerusalem, and then there was added 
a wider circle — Jews of the Dispersion. 
It is possible to interpret the incident as 
an indication of what would happen as 
the feeling between Jew and Hellenist 
became more bitter, but it is difficult to 
believe that the Apostles, who shared 
with St. James of Jerusalem the belief 
that Qp-qcTKtia consisted in visiting the 
fatherless and widows in their affliction, 
could have acted in a spirit of partiality, 
so that the neglect, if it was due to them, 
could be attributed to anything else than 
to their ignorance of the greatness of the 
need. — Siatcovia, see below on ver. 2. — 
xaflTjfiepivfi : not found elsewhere in N.T. 
or in LXX, only in Judith xii. 15. It is 
a word only used in Hellenistic Greek, 
cf. Josephus, Ant., iii., 10, 1 ; but it may 
be noted that it is also a word frequently 
employed by medical writers of a class 
of fevers, etc. See instances in Hobart, 
pp. 134, 135, and also in Wetstein, in loco. 
— at x'1P ai ' oAiTtijv : not merely a generic 
term for the poor and needy — under the 
Mosaic dispensation no legal provision 
was made for widows, but they would 
not only receive the privileges belonging 
to other distressed classes, but also speci- 
fic regulations protected them — they 
were commended to the care of the com- 
munity, and their oppression and neglect 
were strongly condemned — it is quite 
possible that the Hellenistic widows had 
previously been helped from the Temple 
Treasury, but that now, on their joining 
the Christian community, this help had 
ceased. On the care of the widow in the 
early Church, see James i. 27 (Mayor's 
note) ; Polycarp, Phil., vi., 1, where 
the presbyters are exhorted to be eisr- 
irXaYX V01 FH tt|AeXovvT«s x 1 1P a S h °P~ 
<j>avov f\ irevrjTos, and cf. iv. 3. The 
word x'HP 01 occurs no less than nine times 
in St. Luke's Gospel, three times in the 
Acts, but elsewhere in the Evangelists 
only three times in St. Mark (Matt, xxiii. 
14, omitted by W.H. and R.V.), and two 



of these three in an incident which he 
and St. Luke alone record, Mark xii. 42, 
43, and the other time in a passage also 
peculiar to him and St. Luke (if we are 
justified in omitting Matt, xxiii. 14), viz., 
Mark xii. 40. 

Ver. 2. irpo(rKaXc(ra|i.6vot Se 01 8<i- 
Seica : whatever may have been the irrita- 
tion caused by the pride or neglect of 
the Hebrews, the Apostles recognised 
that there was ground for complaint, 
and thus showed not only their practical 
capacities, but also their freedom from 
.my partiality. 01 8w8. : only here in 
Acts, but cf. 1 Cor. xv. 5, where St. 
Paul uses the title as if it were well and 
widely known, and required no explana- 
tion from him. It is found six times 
in St. Luke's Gospel, and no less than 
ten in St. Mark's. See also above i. 
26, ii. 14. — to irXtjOos = the whole 
Church, not the hundred-and-twenty, as 
J. Lightfoot. The expression is a general 
one, and need not imply that every 
single member of the Church obeyed the 
summons. For the word itXtj0os and the 
illustration of its use in religious com- 
munities on the papyri by Deissmann, 
see p. 73. The passage has been 
quoted in support of the democratic con- 
stitution of the Apostolic Church, but 
the whole context shows that the govern- 
ment really lay with the Apostles. The 
Church as a whole is under their direc- 
tion and counsel, and the Apostles alone 
determine what qualification those chosen 
should possess, the Apostles alone lay 
hands upon them after prayer : "The hand 
of man is laid upon the person, but the 
whole work is of God, and it is His hand 
which toucheth the head of the one 
ordained, if he be duly ordained " (Chrys., 
Horn., xiv.). The dignity of the Apostles, 
and their authority as leaders of the 
Church and ordainers of the Seven, is 
fully recognised by Feine, but he con- 
siders that their position is so altered, 
and the organisation of the Church so 
much more developed, that another 
source and not the Jerusalem Quellen- 
schrift must be supposed ; but if, as 
Feine allows, such passages as iv. 34, v. 
2, belong to the Jerusalem source, it 
would appear that the authority of the 
Apostles in the passage before us was 
a very plain and natural development. — 
KaTa\c(\|ravTas : on the formation of the 
first aorist see Blass, Grammatik, p. 43, 
and also Deissmann, Neue Bibelstudien, 
p. 18 ; Winer-Schmiedel, p. 109. — 
Siaicoveiv rpaire^ais : there seems to be 
an intentional antithesis between these 
words and r-jj Siaicovia tov XiS-yov in ver. 

3. The Twelve do not object to the 
work of ministering, but only to the 
neglect of ministering to the higher sus- 
tenance for the sake of the lower (Hort, 
Ecclesia, p. 206) ; thus Bengel speaks of 
the expression as used with indignation, 
" Antitheton, ministerium verbi ". 81a. 
Kovia and Siaicoveiv are used for ministra- 
tions to man, although more usually of 
man to God ; cf. Acts xix. 22, of service 
to St. Paul, 8iaicov£a, Acts xi. 29, xii. 25, 
of service to the brethren of Judaea in 
the famine, Rom. xv. 25, 31, 2 Cor. viii. 

4, ix. 1, 12, 13, of the Gentile collections 
for the same purpose, so too probably 
in Rom. xvi. 1 of the service rendered 
by Stephanas to travelling Christians, cf. 
Heb. vi. 10, and its use of the verb in 
the Gospels of ministering to our Lord's 
earthly wants, Luke viii. 3, x. 40 (both 
noun and verb), John xii. 2 ; cf. also 
Luke xii. 37, xxii. 27, Matt. iv. n, Luke 
iv. 39 ; see further on the use of the 
word in classical Greek, Hort, Ecclesia, 
p. 203. The word had a high dignity 
conferred upon it when, in contrast to 
the contemptuous associations which 
surrounded it for the most part in Greek 
society, Epictetus remarks that it is man's 
true honour to be a Sidicovos of God 
(Diss., iii., 22, 69 ; 24, 65 ; iv. 7, 20 ; cf. 
iii. 26, 28), and a dignity immeasurably 
higher still, when the Son of Man could 
speak of Himself as in Matt. xx. 28, 
Mark x. 45 ; cf. Luke xxii. 27. " Every 
clergyman begins as a deacon. This is 
right. But he never ceases to be a 
deacon. The priest is a deacon still. 
The bishop is a deacon still. Christ 
came as a deacon, lived as a deacon, 
died as a deacon : p.T| SiaKovncKjvai, 
aXXa Siaicovfjcrai " (Lightfoot, Ordination 
Sermons, p. 115). In the LXX the verb 
does not occur at all, but Sidicovos is 
used four times in Esther i. 10, ii. 2, vi. 
3, 5, of the king's chamberlains and of the 
servants that ministered to him, and once 
in 4 Mace. ix. 17 ; Siaicovia is also found 
in two of the passages in Esther just 
quoted, vi. 3 and 5, where in A we read 
ol Ik -rfjs Siaicovias (BS Sidicovoi), and 
once in 1 Mace. xi. 58, of the service of 
gold sent by Jonathan to Antiochus. 
What is meant by the expression here ? 
does it refer to distribution of moneyor 
in kind ? The word in itself might in- 
clude either, but if we were to limit 
810 r.cvia to alms, yet the use of the word 
remarked upon above renders the service 
higher than that of ordinary relief: 
" ministration,'" says St. Chrysostom 
(although he takes it of alms, Horn., xiv.), 
" extolling by this at once the doers and 




dpeoroV l<mv Tjpds, KaTaX.etycu'Tas rbv XoyoK tou 06ou, SiaKoyeTe 
Tpcure'^cus. 3* cwiaKei^ao-Se oSV, aSeX^ioi, dVopas ££ up-wf pap-rupou- 

those to whom it was done ". But 
Tpair€'£ats presents a further difficulty ; 
does it refer to the tables of exchange for 
money, a rendering which claims sup- 
port from Matt. xxi. 12, xxv. 27, Luke 
xix. 23, John ii. 15, or to tables for 
food, Luke xvi. 21, xxii. 21, 30 ? Pos- 
sibly the use of the word in some pas- 
sages in the N.T., and also the fact that 
the StaKovia was Ka0Tjp.ept.vTJ, may indi- 
cate the latter, and the phrase may refer 
to the actual serving and superintending 
at the tables at which the poor sat, or at 
all events to the supplying in a general 
way those things which were necessary 
for their bodily sustenance. Zockler, 
Apostelgeschichte (second edition), refers 
the word to the ministration of the gifts 
of love offered at the Eucharist in the 
various Christian houses (so Scaliger 
understood the expression of the Agapae). 
Mr. Humphry reminds us that the words 
were quoted by Latimer (154S) in a ser- 
mon against some bishops of his time who 
were comptrollers of the mint. 

Ver. 3. liruric€\|/ao-0€ ovv : the verb, 
though frequently used by St. Luke 
in both his writings, is not elsewhere 
used in the sense of this verse, " look ye 
out," cf. o-KeVreo-Oai in Gen. xli. 33. — 
(iapTvpovjie'vovs, cf. Heb. xi. 2, 39, and 
cf. 4, 5, and 1 Tim. v. 10, Acts x. 22, 
xxii. 12, also xvi. 2 ; cf. its use also in 
Clem. Rom., Cor., xvii., 1 ; xviii. 1, etc. ; 
Ignat., Phil., xi., 1 ; Ephes., xii. 2. See 
also the interesting parallels in Deiss- 
mann, Neue Bibelstudien, p. 93. In 
Jos., Ant., iii., 2, 5, and xv., 10, 5, it is 
used as here, but of hostile testimony 
in Matt, xxiii. 31, John xviii. 23. — 
lirra : why was the number chosen ? 
Various answers have been given to the 
question : (1) that the number was fixed 
upon because of the seven gifts of the 
Spirit, Isa. xi. 2, Rev. i. 4 ; (2) that the 
number was appointed with regard to the 
different elements of the Church : three 
Hellenists, three Hebrews, one Proselyte; 
(3) that the number was regulated by 
the fact that the Jerusalem of that day 
may have been divided into seven dis- 
tricts ; (4) that? the number was sug- 
gested by the Hebrew sacred number — 
seven ; (5) Zockler thinks that there is no 
hypothesis so probable as that the small 
Jerusalem tKicXTjo-iat kcit' oIkov were 
seven in number, each with its special 
worship, and its special business con- 
nected with alms-giving and distribu- 

tion — alms-giving closely related to the 
Eucharist or to the Love-Feasts ; (6) the 
derivation of the number from Roman 
usage on the analogy of the septemviri 
epulones advocated by Dean Plumptre, 
officials no doubt well known to the 
Libertini (see also B.D. 2 " Deacon," 
and the remarks of Ramsay, St. Paul, 
P' 375 1 on Roman organisation and 
its value). This is far more probable 
than that there should be any connection 
between the appointment of the Seven and 
the two heathen inscriptions quoted by 
Dr. Hatch (Bampton Lectures, p. 50, note 
56), in which the word Skxkovos is used 
of the assistants in the ritual of sacrificial 
and temple feasts at Anactorium in Acar- 
nania and Metropolis in Lydia (see on the 
other hand, Hort, Ecclesia, p. 210), for in 
the incident before us the word Sidxovos is 
not used at all, and later in the history, 
xxi. 8, Philip is described not by that 
title but as one of the Seven. Nor is 
there any real likeness to be found be- 
tween the office assigned to the Sevan 
and that of the Chazzan or officer of the 
Jewish synagogue (■JnrTjptTTis, Luke iv. 
2o),who corresponded rather to our parish- 
clerk or verger, and whose duties were 
confined to the synagogue ; a nearer 
Jewish parallel is to be found in the 

"•^13.31 np"T^, collectors of alms, but 

these officers would rather present a 
parallel to the tax-gatherers than to 
those who ministered to the poor (see 
" Deacon " in Hastings, B.D.). Whilst, 
however, these analogies in Jewish offices 
fail us, we stand on much higher ground 
if we may suppose that as our Lord's 
choice of the Twelve was practically the 
choice of a number sacred in its associa- 
tions for every Israelite, so the number 
Seven may have been adopted from its 
sacredness in Jewish eyes, and thus side 
by side with the sacred Apostolic College 
there existed at this period another 
College, that of the Seven. What was 
the nature of the office ? Was it the 
Diaconate in the modern sense of the 
term ? But, as we have noted above, 
the Seven are never called Deacons, and 
therefore it has been thought that we 
have here a special office to meet a 
special need, and that the Seven were 
rather the prototypes of the later arch- 
deacons, or corresponded to the elders 
who are mentioned in xi. 30 and xiv. 
23. On the other hand St. Luke, 




fieVous eirra, TrX^peis rVcujiaTOS 1 'Ayioo icai a-o<pia<;, ous KaTacmr|<Tw- 
fief " em tt]s xpeias Taunjs ' 4. iqp.€is 8e ttj irpoCTeo)(TJ icai ttj Oiatcoeia 

1 ayiou om. fc$BC 2 D 137, 180 (Vulg. am. fu. lux), Syr. Hard., Chrys. ; so Tisch., 
W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt. 

2 KaTa<TTTj<rop,«v ^ABCDE, Bas., Chrys., Wendt, Weiss, W.H ; KaTao-rna-upcv 

HP (d, e, Vulg.). 

from the prominence given to the narra- 
tive, may fairly be regarded as view- 
ing the institution of the office as estab- 
lishing a new departure, and not as an 
isolated incident, and the emphasis is 
characteristic of an historian who was fond 
of recording " beginnings " of movements. 
The earliest Church tradition speaks of 
Stephen and Nicolas as ordained to the 
diaconate, Iren., Adv. Haer., i., 26; 
iv., 15, and the same writer speaks of 
Stephen as " the first deacon," iii., 12 ; 
cf. also the testimony of St. Cyprian, 
Epist., 3, 3, and the fact that for cen- 
turies the Roman Church continued to 
restrict the number of deacons to seven 
(Cornelius, ap. Euseb. H. E,, vi., 43). It 
is quite true that the first mention of 
SloLkovoi in the N.T. (although both 
SmKovia and Siaxoveiv are used in the 
passage before us) is not found until 
Phil. i. 1, but already a deaconess had 
been mentioned in writing to the Church 
at Rome (xvi. 1, where Phoebe is called 
Skxkovos), in the Church at Philippi the 
office had evidently become established 
and familiar, and it is reasonable to assume 
that the institution of the Seven at Jeru- 
salem would have been well known to 
St. Paul and to others outside Palestine, 
" and that analogous wants might well 
lead to analogous institutions " (Hort, 
and to the same effect, Gore, The Church 
and its Ministry, p. 403). But if the 
Seven were thus the prototypes of the 
deacons, we must remember that as the 
former office though primarily ordained 
for helping the Apostles in distribution 
of alms and in works of mercy was by 
no means confined to such duties, but 
that from the very first the Seven were 
occupied in essentially spiritual work, 
so the later diaconate was engaged in 
something far different from mere charity 
organisation ; there were doubtless quali- 
fications demanded such as might be 
found in good business men of tact and 
discretion, but there were also moral and 
spiritual qualities which to a great extent 
were required of the Siaicovoi no less than 
of the 7rp£crj3vT€poi and eiricr Koiroi : there 
Was the holding the mystery of the faith 
in a pure conscience, there was the 

moral and spiritual courage which would 
enable the Siaicovoi to gain even in the 
pursuit of their Siaxovio. 1 ' great boldness 
in the faith which is in Christ Jesus," 1 
Tim. iii. 13 (Moberly, Ministerial Priest- 
hood, p. 138 ff.) ; see also on the whole 
subject, Felten, Apostelgeschichte, p. 139 
ff. ; Zockler, Apostelgeschichte, p. 206 ff. ; 
Lightfoot, Philippians, " Dissertation on 
the Christian Ministry," and Real-En- 
cvclopddie fur protest. Theol. und Kirche 
(Hauck), "Diakonen" (Heft 38, 1898). 
— o-o<J>tas : practical wisdom, prudentia, 
cf. 1 Cor. vi. 5 (Blass, so Grimm) ; in 
ver. 10 the use of the word is different, 
but in both places cro<f>ia is referred to 
the Spirit, " it is not simply spiritual 
men, but full of the Spirit and of wisdom 
... for what profits it that the dis- 
penser of alms speak not, if nevertheless 
he wastes all, or be harsh and easily pro- 
voked ? " Chrys., Horn., xiv. — ovs ko,to> 
<m]o-o|Aev (on the reading whom ye, 
which was exhibited in some few editions 
of A. V., see Speaker's Commentary, in 
loco) : the appointment, the consecra- 
tion, and the qualifications for it, depend 
upon the Apostles — the verb implies at 
all events an exercise of authority if it 
has no technical force, cf. Titus i. 5. 
The same shade of meaning is found in 
classical writers and in the LXX in the 
use of the verb with the genitive, with 
€iri, sometimes with a dative, sometimes 
with an accusative : Gen. xxxix. 4, xli. 
41, Exod. ii. 14, xviii. 21, Num. iii. 10, 
Neh. xii. 44, Dan. ii. 48, 49, 1 Mace. vi. 
14; cf. its use in Luke xii. 14, 42, 44. 
The opposite is expressed by (MTao-TTJ- 
<ra<r6ai airo ttjs XP«» Polyb., iv., 87, g ; 1 
Mace. xi. 63 (Wendt). — \peia^: the word 
might mean need in the sense of neces- 
sity, Latin opus, want, 2 Chron. ii. 16, 
Wisdom xiii. 16, 1 Mace. iii. 28, or it 
might mean business, Latin negotium,< 
officium. In the LXX it seems to be 
employed in both senses, as also in 
classical writers, but here both A. and 
R.V. render " business " (so in Polybius), 
cf. Judith xii. 10 AB., 1 Mace. x. 37, xi. 
63, xii. 45 (xpcCi is found no less than 
eight times in 1 Mace, seven times in 2 
Mace, once in 3 Mace); see Wetstein 




tou Xoyou •n , poaKapTepi^<ro(iei'. 1 5. Kal fjpeo'ci' 6 X6yos 2 ivuiriov -zrairos 
tou ir\r^6ous * Kal e|eXe|aKTO lT€<j>avoe, avSpa TT\r)pr| 3 Tuorecjs Kai 
n^eoptaros 'Ayiou, Kal ♦iXnnroe, Kal npoxopoy Kal NiKayopa, Kal 

irpo«ricopTepT)<rofi.6v ; D, Flor., Gig., Par., Vulg. read caop-cOa . . . irpoo-Kap- 
T«povvTCS. This participial construction with the substantive verb is characteristic 
of St. Luke, and occurs with the same verb as here in i. 14, ii. 42, viii. 13. 

2 o Xoyos; D, Flor. (Gig.) add ovtos ; Harris refers to retrans. from Latin, 
iravTos tov -itXt)8ovs ; D adds twv p.aOn]T(ov, so Hilg. ; Flor. substitutes ircvTwv tu>v 
p,a0T)T«)v, so Blass in p\ 

3 irXT) P ri BC corr., T.R. ; so Weiss, Wendt, W.H., R.V.; irXi]pT|s ^BC*DEHP 
so Lach. See further below. 

for uses of the word in Philo and 

Ver. 4. Y|peis 8e : in marked contrast 
to the service of tables, etc., but still every 
work in the Church, whether high or 
low, was a Siaicovia. — t-q Siatc. tov X., 
see above. — irpoo-KapTepijo-opev, "will 
continue steadfastly," R.V., see above 
on i. 14. — tjj irpoo-., "the prayer" 
(Hort) ; the article seems to imply not 
only private prayer and intercession, but 
the public prayer of the Church. 

Ver. 5. tjpeo-ev evuiriov: phrase not 
usual in classical Greek ; but Ivw. in this 
sense, so KaTcvuiriov evavri KaTtvavTi, 
derived from the LXX (evavTiov 
frequent in LXX, is also classical) ; cf, 
e.g., Deut. i. 23 A, 2 Sam. iii. 36, 1 
Kings iii. 10, xx. (xxi.) 2, Jer. xviii. 4, 
Ju. vii. 16, xiii. 20, 1 Mace. vi. 60, 
viii. 21 (evavTiov, 3), where the whole 
phrase occurs. Blass, Grammatik, p. 
125, and see on iv. 10. — irXiiOous, cf 
Deissmann, Neue Bibelstudien, p. 60, 
and above on p. 73. — E$EXe|avTo, see 
above, cf. xv. 22, 25, always in the 
middle in N.T. (Luke ix. 35 doubtful), so 
in LXX. Blass, Grammatik, p. 181, 

nearly always = Hllll. On the import- 

— T 

ance of the step thus taken as marking 
a distinct stage in the organisation of 
the Church, and in the distribution of 
work amongst the members of what was 
now a true body politic, see Ramsay, St. 
Paul, p. 372 ; Hort., Ecclesia, p. 52, and 
on its further importance in the emancipa- 
tion of the Church, see Lightfoot's " Paul 
and the Three". The choice of the 
names has often been held to indicate 
the liberal spirit in which the complaint 
of the Hellenists was met, since the Seven 
bear purely Greek names, and we infer 
that the bearers were Hellenists, "ele- 
gerunt ergo Graecos non Hebraeos, ut 
magis satisfacerent murmuri Graecorum " 
Cornelius a Lapide. But the inference 
is not altogether certain, however pro- 

bable (see Wendt, Felten), for Greek 
names, e.g., Philip, Didymus, Andrew, 
were also found amongst the Palestinian 
Jews. Bengel holds that part were 
Hebrew, part Hellenist, whilst Gieseler 
hazarded the opinion that three were 
Hebrews, three Hellenists, and one a 
proselyte. But we cannot conclude 
from the fact that they were probably 
Hellenists, that the Seven were only 
charged with the care of distribution 
amongst the Hellenist section of the 
Church, as there is nothing in the narra- 
tive to warrant this. We cannot say 
that we know anything of the Seven 
except Stephen and Philip — Stephen 
the preacher and martyr of liberty, 
Philip the practical worker (Lightfoot, 
"Paul and the Three"). Baronius 
hazarded the fanciful conjecture that 
Stephen as well as Saul was a pupil of 
Gamaliel. Both Stephen and Philip were 
said to have been amongst the Seventy, 
Epiphanius, Haer., xx., 4 (but see Hooker, 
v., Ixxviii., 5). If so, it is possible that 
they may have been sent to labour in 
Samaria as our Lord had laboured there, 
Luke ix. 52, xvii. n; and possibly the 
after work of Philip in that region, and 
possibly some of the remarks in St. 
Stephen's speech, may be connected 
with a mission which had been com- 
mitted to Hellenistic Jews. See further 
on his name and work, Dean Plumptre, 
in loco, and also below, notes on chap. 
vii. He may well be called not only the 
proto-martyr, but also the first great 
Christian Ecclesiastic (B.D. 1 "Stephen "). 
— The description given of Stephen (as 
of Barnabas, so closely similar, xi. 24, 
cf. Numb, xxvii. 18 of Joshua) shows that 
the essential qualifications for office were 
moral and spiritual ; see also below on 
•KXiirrrov. — irXijpT] : in some MSS. the 
word appears as indeclinable, W. H. 
margin, so in ver. 3, xix. 28, Mark viii. 19, 
2 John 8. Blass, Grammatik, p. 81. 
St. Luke uses the adjective twice in his 




Tifiwea icai napficcac, ical NiKoXaoe Trpoo-n.XuTOi' 'Arriox^a, 6. 085 
earr\<rav ivuiriov iw dirooToXoj*' • Kal irpocreu£'Oi iireBr\Kav auTOis 

Gospel, and eight times in the Acts ; on 
his fondness for such words, see p. 73. — 
irurTews : not in the lower sense of honesty 
or truthfulness, but in the higher sense 
of religious faith, cf. xi. 24, " non modo 
fidelitate sed fide spirituali," Bengel. — 
♦iXiinrov, cf. viii. 5, xxi. 8 : we may 
probably trace his work also along the 
coasts of Palestine and Phoenicia, cf. 
viii. 40, xv. 3, xxi. 3, 7 (Plumptre's notes 
on these passages), and no doubt St. 
Luke would have learnt from him, when 
he met him at Caesarea, xxi. 8, much that 
relates to the early history of the Church, 
Introd., 17. It would appear both in his 
case and in that of St. Stephen that the 
duties of the Seven could not have been 
confined to service of the tables. In the 
deacons M. Renan saw a proclamation 
of the truth that social questions should 
be the first to occupy the attention of 
man, and the deacons were, for him, the 
best preachers of Christianity ; but we 
must not forget that they did not preach 
merely by their method and works of 
charity, but by a proclamation of a 
Saviour and by the power of the Holy 
Ghost. In the reference to Philip in 
xxi. 8 as simply " one of the Seven " 
we may fairly see one of the many proofs 
of the unity of the authorship of Acts, 
see Salmon, Introd., chapter xviii., and 
Lightfoot, " Acts," B.D. 2 , and see further, 
Salmon in the same chapter, on the proof 
which isafforded in the account of Philip of 
the antiquity of the Acts ; see below also 
on xxi. 8. — flpoxopov: tradition says that 
he was consecrated by St. Peter Bishop 
of Nicomedia, and a fabulous biography 
of John the Evangelist had his name 
attached to it, as a companion of the 
Apostle in Asia, and his biographer — but 
we cannot attach any credence to any such 
professed information ; see Blass, in loco, 
Hilgenfeld, Zeitschrift fur wissenschaft. 
Theol., 1895, p. 426; B.D. 1 iii. sub v. 
Of Simon, Parmenas, Nicanor, it cannot 
be said that anything is known, as is 
frankly admitted by the Romanist com- 
mentator Felten. — NiK<SXaov irpoaT]XvTov 
'A. : that the name proselyte is given to 
him has been held by many to mark him 
out as the only proselyte among the 
Seven ; otherwise it is difficult to see 
why he alone is so designated (so Ramsay, 
St. Paul, p. 375, Lightfoot, Hort, Weiss, 
Felten, and amongst earlier writers, De 
Wette and Ewald). No doubt he was a 
proselyte of the higher and more com- 

plete type (a " proselyte of the gate," the 
lower type — as distinct from a " proselyte 
of righteousness " — is always in Acts 
4>o(3ov(A€vo5 or a-£|3dfi€vos tov 6e6v), but 
Ramsay sees in his election to office 
another distinct step in advance : " the 
Church is wider than the pure Jewish 
race, and the non-Jewish element is 
raised to official rank," although, as 
Ramsay himself points out, there was 
nothing in this step out of harmony with 
the principle of the extreme Judaistic 
party (St. Paul, p. 375) c f. 157). The 
case of Cornelius was of a different kind, 
see below on chap. x. But the notice is 
all the more interesting because it con- 
tains the first mention of the Church 
afterwards so important, the Mother 
Church of the Gentiles, Antioch in Syria, 
and this may point to the reason of 
the description of Nicolaus as a proselyte 
of Antioch. It was a notice of special 
interest to St. Luke if his own home was 
at Antioch, but we cannot say positively 
that the notice means that Nicolaus was 
the only proselyte among the Seven. 
That the Jews were numerous at Antioch 
and had made many proselytes we learn 
from Jos., B. f., vii., 3, 3 : of the supposed 
connection between this Nicolaus and 
the sect of the Nicolaitans, Rev. ii. 6, 
14, we may hesitate to say with Blass 
that it is worthy of no more credit than 
the notice which attaches to Prochorus, 
although we may also well hesitate to 
accept it, but it has been advocated 
by Lightfoot, Galatians, p. 297, and 
recently by Zockler, Apostelgeschichte, 
p. 199. Zockler goes so far as to see in 
the list of the Seven a copy of the list of 
the Apostles, inasmuch as the most dis- 
tinguished is placed first, the traitor last. 
But Nicolaus would be fitly placed last 
if he were the only proselyte. The 
Patristic evidence in support ol the 
connection in question is by no means 
conclusive, see Ritschl, Altkatholische 
Kirche, p. 135 and note (second edition), 
Felten, Apostelgeschichte, p. 140, and 
Wendt, in loco, Hilgenfeld, Zeitschrift 
fur wissenschaft. Theol., p. 425 (1895). 
Holtzmann on Rev. ii. 6 holds that the 
Nicolaitans, who are not to be connec- 
ted with Nicolaus the deacon, may = 
symbolically, the Bileamites, ver. 14 ; so 
Grimm, sub. v. NiKoXatnrjs, if we take 
the latter as coinciding with the Hebrew 

Q1?7!H = destruction of the people. 




tA? x € ip a 5- 7* Kai ° Xoyos T0 " ©coo 1 K]u^aee, icai £ir\T)9ueeTO 6 
apiOfios tS>v fia0T]T6Ji' iv 'lepowxaXrjfl <r4>6opa, iroXus T€ oxXos tu^ 
lepeW 8 u-iri]Kouoi' rfj iricrrei. 

1 Oeov fr^ABCHP; but DE i8o, Vulg., Par., Syr. Hard., Chrys., Or»nt-read Kvpiov. 

2 icptuv ; but fc$* Syr. Pesh., Theophyl. read lovSauuv. (See below.) 

Ver. 6. «TTT|<rav, cf. i. 23 ; for IvcJiriov, 
see above. — icai irpo<r«v£ap.evoi eirtOrjitav 
oviTois tos x*^P a 5 : change of subject. 
This is the first mention of the laying on 
of hands in the Apostolic Church. No 
doubt the practice was customary in the 
Jewish Church, Num. xxvii. 18, Deut. 
xxxiv. 9 ; see also Edersheim, Jewish 
Social Life, p. 281, and Jesus the Mes- 
siah, ii., 382, and Hamburger, Real- 
Encyclopddie, ii., 6, pp. 882-886, " Ordini- 
rung, Ordination " ; Hort, Ecclesia, p. 
216 ; Gore, Church and the Ministry, pp. 
187, 382 ; but the constant practice of it 
by our Lord Himself was sufficient to 
recommend it to His Apostles. It soon 
became the outward and visible sign of 
the bestowal of spiritual gifts in the 
Apostolic Church, cf. Acts viii. 15, xiii. 
3, 1 Tim. iv. 14, v. 22, 2 Tim. i. 6, and 
every convert was instructed in its mean- 
ing as one of the elementary teachings 
of the faith, Heb. vi. 2. That the act 
was a means of grace is evident from St. 
Paul's words, for he reminds Timothy of 
the grace thus bestowed upon him, 1 
Tim. iv. 14, 2 Tim. i. 6, and from the 
narrative of St. Luke in viii. 15, 17, and 
passages below. But that it was not 
a mere outward act dissociated from 
prayer is evident from St. Luke's words 
in the passage before us, in viii. 17, xiii. 
3, and xix. 6. See especially Hooker, v., 
lxvi., 1, 2; see below in viii. and xiii., 
and Gore, Church and the Ministry, 
especially note G. Holtzmann would 
draw a distinction between the laying on 
of hands here and in viii. 17, xix. 6. 
Here, he contends, it only corresponds 
to the customary usage at the ordination 
of a Rabbi, as the Seven had already 
received the Holy Ghost, ver. 3, 5, cf. 
xiii. 1. But ver. 8 undoubtedly justifies 
us in believing that an accession of power 
was granted after the laying on of hands, 
and now for the first time mention is 
made of St. Stephen's T€paTo icai <rr)p.cia 
peydXa (see St. Chrysostom's comment). 
Ver. 7. tuv iepiiov : the reading 
MovScuuv is advocated by Klostermann, 
Probleme in Aposteltexte, pp. 13, 14, but 
not only is the weight of critical evidence 
overwhelmingly against it, but we can 

scarcely doubt that St. Luke would have 
laid more stress upon the first penetration 
of the Christian faith into districts outside 
Jerusalem — this is represented as the re- 
sult of the persecution about Stephen, 
viii. 4 ; cf. John xii. 42 (see also Wendt, 
1899, p. 145, note). The whole verse 
shows that the yoyyvay.6% had not inter- 
fered with the growth of the Church. 
The conjecture that in the word o\X.os 
reference is made to the priests of the 
plebs in contrast to the learned priests is 
in no way satisfactory ; if this had been 
the meaning, the words would have been 
iroXXoi re Upcts tov 6\Xov, and no such 
distinction of priests is anywhere noticed 
in the N.T. , see further below. — Iv 'lepov- 
<raXT]|A : Hilgenfeld (so Weiss) considers 
that, as this notice implies that thei,^ 
were disciples outside Jerusalem, such a 
remark is inconsistent with the state- 
ments of the after-spread of the Church 
in this chapter and in viii., and that 
therefore the words iv 'I. are to be re- 
ferred to the " author to Theophilus ", 
But so far from the words bearing the 
interpretation of Hilgenfeld, the historian 
may have introduced them to mark the 
fact that the growth of the Church con- 
tinued in Jerusalem, in the capital where 
the hierarchical power was felt, and that 
the growth included the accession of 
priests no less than of laymen. — vittjkovov 
Tfl irio-rei : the imperfect may denote re- 
petition — the priests kept joining the new 
community, Blass, in loco ; cf. Rom. i. 5, 
vi. 16, 17, x. 16, 2 Thess. i. 8 — the verb 
(very frequent in LXX) is only used in 
Acts in this place in the sense given, but 
often in St. Paul's Epistles. No doubt 
when the number of Jewish priests was 
so large (according tojosephus, twenty 
thousand) both poor and wealthy would 
have been included in the statement, and 
we cannot limit it to the Sadducees. It 
must be borne in mind that the obedience 
of these priests to the Christian faith 
need not of necessity have interfered 
with the continuance of their duties in 
the Temple (so Felten), especially when 
we remember the attitude of Peter and 
John ; but the words certainly seem to 
mark their complete obedience to the 

?— o. 



8. XTE^ANOI oe Tr\r|pT|$ iricrrcws 1 uai Su^dpews eirou 1 ripara teal 
<n)|X6ia p-eyaXa iv rtf Xaw. 9. &vi<m\fxav hi nt'es twk ck ttjs aofa- 

1 irioTT€<i»s HP, Syr. Hard., Chrys. ; cf. ver. 5. x a P lT °s NABD, Vulg., Sah.. 
Boh., Syr. Pesh., Arm., Bas., Did. ; so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Hilg. Aftei 
Xao> D (Syr. H. mg.), Par. (E, Flor., Gig.), so Hilg., add 81a tov ovojxaTos kvoiov 
I. X. ; cf. iv. 30 (and in Classical Review, July, 1897, p. 319). 

faith (sec Grimm-Thayer, sub v. ir£<rris, 
i. b, a), and in face of the opposition of the 
Sadducees and the more wealthy priestly 
families, an open adherence to the dis- 
ciples of Jesus may well have involved 
a break with their former profession 
(Hort, Judaistic Christianity, p. 49, and 
Ecclcsia, p. 52). May there not have 
been many among the priests waiting for 
the consolation of Israel, men righteous 
and devout like the Pharisee priest or 
priests, to whom perhaps we owe 
that expression of the hopes of the 
pious Jew in the Psalms of Solomon, 
which approach so nearly in style and 
character to the Hymns of the priest 
Zacharias and the devout Symeon in 
the early chapters of St. Luke's Gospel ? 
see Ryle and James's edition, Psalms of 
Solomon, Introd., lix., lx. Spitta refers 
the whole verse to his source B, as a 
break in the narrative, without any con- 
nection with what follows or precedes. 
Clemen assigns vi. 1-6 to his special 
source, H(istoria) H(ellenistarum) ; vi. 7 
to his H(istoria) Pe(tri). Jiingst assigns 
vi. 1-6. 7b, c, to his source B, 7a to his 
R(edactor). The comment of Hilgenfeld 
on ver. 7 is suggestive (although he him- 
self agrees with Spitta, and regards the 
verse as an interpretation), " Clemen 
und Jiingst nicht einmal dieses Verstein 
ungeteilt ". 

Ver. 8. ir\ijpi)s mo-Tews, but xdpiTos, 
R.V. Vulgate, gratia = divine grace, 
xviii. 27, not merely favour with the 
people — the word might well include, 
as in the case of our Lord, the Xoyoi 
xdpi-ros which fell from his lips (Luke 
•v. 22). On the word as characteristic 
of St. Luke and St. Paul, see Fried- 
rich, Das Lucasevangelium, pp. 28, 96 ; 
in the other Gospels it only occurs 
three times; cf. John i. 14, 16, 17. See 
Plummer's note on the word in St. Luke, 
I. c. — 8vvd(i€is : not merely power in the 
sense of courage, heroism, but power to 
work miracles, supernatural power, cf. 
viii. 13 and Luke v. 17. That the word 
also means spiritual power is evident 
from ver. 10. — ciroici, "was doing," im- 
perfect, during Stephen's career of grace 
and power the attack was made ; notice 

imperfect combined with aorist, dve'o-- 
TT)<rov, see Rendall's note. In ver. 8 
Spitta sees one of the popular legendary 
notices of his source B. St. Stephen is 
introduced as the great miracle-worker, 
who is brought before the Sanhedrim, 
because in v. 17, a parallel incident in B, 
the Apostles were also represented as 
miracle-doers and brought before the 
same assembly ; it would therefore seem 
that the criticism which can only see in 
the latter part of the Acts, in the miracles 
ascribed to St. Paul, a repetition in each 
case of the miracles assigned in the 
former part to St. Peter, must now be 
further utilised to account for any points 
of likeness between the career of St. 
Stephen and the other leaders of the 
Church. But nowhere is it said that 
Stephen was brought before the .Sanhe- 
drim on account of his miracles, and 
even if so, it was quite likely that the 
£tj\os of the Sanhedrim would be stirred 
by such manifestations as on the former 
occasion in chap. v. 

Ver. 9. ayecTTjcav : in a hostile sense, 
cf. Luke x. 25, Mark xiv. 57, and see 
above on v. 17. — ttjs a-vvayuryTJs : in 
Jerusalem, Alexandria, Rome and the 
larger towns there was no doubt a con- 
siderable number of synagogues, but the 
tradition that assigned no less than four 
hundred and eighty to Jerusalem alone 
is characterised by Schiirer as a Talmudic 
myth (Jewish Temple, div. ii., vol. ii. , p. 
73, E.T., so too Edersheim, Jewish 
Social Life, pp. 83, 252, but see also 
Renan, Apostles, p. 113, E.T.). The 
number four hundred and eighty was 
apparently fixed upon as the numerical 
equivalent of the Hebrew word for " full," 
in Isa. i. 21, a city " fall of judgment ". 
The names which follow have been 
variously classified, but they have always 
proved and still prove a difficulty. Ram- 
say considers that the bad form of the 
list is due to the fact that St. Luke is 
here dependent on an authority whose 
expressions he either translated verbatim 
or did not understand, Expositor (1895), 
p. 35. One thing seems certain, viz., 
that AiPepT^vwv does not refer to any 
town Libertum in the neighbourhood of 




wyfjs rf|S Xeyofi^^s 1 AiPepTiewf, Kal Kvpy]vaio>y Kai AXelaySpewe, 
Koi TWf &tt6 KtXiKias Kai 'Acias, 2 <rut,r\TouvT€S tw XTCtpdVu • IO. Kai 

tt]S \cyo(1€vt]s BCDEHP, Vulg. Syrr. P.H., Arm., Aeth. (Chrys.), so Lach., 
W.H., Weiss, Wendt ; tuv Xcyopcvuv fc^A 13, 47, Gig., Sah., Boh., Chrys., so Tisch. 
2 Ao-ia« om. AD 2 d, so Lach., Hilg. brackets ; may easily have dropped out after 
KiXiKias. <rvt,r\TOvvTt%, B 3 HP. 

Carthage, which has been urged as an 
explanation of the close juxtaposition of 
Cvrene, also in Africa. The existence of 
a town or region bearing any such name 
is merely conjectural, and even if its 
existence could be demonstrated, it is 
improbable that many Jews from such 
an obscure place should have been resi- 
dent in Jerusalem. There is therefore 
much probability that St. Chrysostom 
was correct in referring the word to the 
Libertini, 'Pwftaioi aircXevOcpoi. The 
Libertini here were probably Roman 
" freedmen " who were formerly captive 
Jews brought to Rome by Pompey, B.C. 
63 (Suet., Tib., 36 ; Tac, Ann., ii., 85 ; 
Philo, Legat. ad Gaium, 23), and after- 
wards liberated by their Roman masters. 
These men and their descendants would 
enjoy the rights of Roman citizenship, 
and some of them appear to have re- 
turned to Jerusalem, where they had 
their own community and a synagogue 
called <rway. Ai{3epT{v«v (according to 
Grimm-Thayer, sub v. AiPtpr., some 
evidence seems to have been discovered 
of a "' synagogue of the Libertines " at 
Pompeii), see Schurer, Jewish Temple, 
div. ii., vol. ii., pp. 57, 276, 277; O. 
Holtzmann, Neutest. Zeitgeschichte, p. 
89 ; and Zdckler, Apostelgeschichte, p. 
201 (second edition). But a further 
question arises as to the number of 
synagogues intended. Thus it has been 
maintained that they were five in number. 
This is Schurer's decided view, Weiss, 
Meyer (in earlier editions), so Hackett, 
so Matthias, Handbuch sum N. T., V. 
Apostelgeschichte, 1897. By other writers 
it is thought that reference is made to 
two synagogues. This is the view ad- 
vocated by Wendt as against Meyer. 
Wendt admits that as in the places 
named there were undoubtedly large 
numbers of Jewish inhabitants, so it is 
possible that in Jerusalem itself they 
may have been sufficiently numerous to 
make up the five synagogues, but his 
own view is based upon the ground that 
tuv before airo K. ical 'A. is parallel with 
the twv after tiv«s (so Holtzmann, Fel- 
ten). So too Zdckler, who depends upon 
the simple icai before Kvptjvatwv and 

'A\c|. as pointing to one group with 
the Libertines; t&v airb K. ical 'Aerias 
forming a second group. Dr. Sanday, 
Expositor, viii., p. 327 (third series), takes 
the same view of two synagogues only, 
as he considers that it is favoured by the 
Greeks (so too Dean Plumptre and 
Winer-Moulton, xix., 5a, note, but see 
also Winer-Schmiedel, p. 158 ; cf. critical 
note above) . Mr. Page is inclined to think 
that three synagogues are intended: (1) 
i.e., of the Libertini, (2) another of the 
men of Alexandria and Cyrene, (3) an- 
other of the men of Cilicia and Asia ; 
whilst many writers from Calvin, Bengel 
and others to O. Holtzmann and Rendall 
hold that only one synagogue is in- 
tended; so Dr. Hort maintains that 
the Greek suggests only the one syna- 
gogue of the Libertines, and that the 
other names are simply descriptive of 
origin — from the south, Cyrene, and 
Alexandria ; from the north, Cilicia, and 
Proconsular Asia. On the whole the 
Greek seems to favour the view of 
Wendt as above ; Kal Kvprjv. Kal 'A\e£. 
seem to form, as Blass says, a part of 
the same appellation with AiPeprivwv. 
Blass himself has recenthy, Philology of 
the Gospels, p. 49 ff., declared in favour 
of another reading, AiPvcttivcdv, which he 
regards as the correct text, AiPep-rivwv 
being corrupt although differing only in 
two letters from the original. In the 
proposed reading he is following Oecu- 
menius and Beza amongst others ; the 
same reading is apparently favoured also 
by Wetstein, who gives both the passages 
to which Blass refers, one from Catullus, 
lx., 1, " Leaena montibus Libystinis," and 
the other from the geographical Lexicon 
of Stephanus Byzantinus. AiPverrivcuv 
would mean Jews inhabitants of Libya, 
not Libyans, and the synagogue in 
question bore the name of AiPvtr. koI 
KvpT)va£a)v koI 'A\e|., thus specifying 
the African Jews in the geographical 
order of their original dwelling-places. — 
KvpT|vaiuv, see on ii. g, and below, xi. 
20, xiii. 1. — 'AXc|. : probably there was 
no city, next to Jerusalem and Rome, in 
which the Jewish population was so 
numerous and influential as in Alexan- 



ouk lay^uov avTi(rrr\vai ttj o-o<f>ia * ical tw iri'cuu.aTi gj eX«£Xei. 1 1. ToVe 8 
uTre'j3aXoe at'Spas Xeyoiras, "Oti dKnKoap.ce cUjtou XaXoutros pqp.a.Ta 

1 After o-o<f>ia. DE, Flor. add tjj ovo-fl ev avru, so Hilg., and after irv«v|iaTi DE, 
Flor., Gig., Par. add to> a-yiu. (Harris regards as Montanist additions.) 

2 At end of verse io D (E), Syr. Hard, mg., Flor., Wern. add 8ia to eXe-yxeo"0ai 
vir' avrov jicra irao-qs TrappT| ; (n) |it| 8wap.6vot ovv avTO(j>da\p.6iv i-fl aXr|0€ia 
so Hilg., Blass. E, Sioti T)X€-yx 0VT0 • • • £W€i8t| ovk tjSvvavTo avriXeYsiv Tf) 
o\t)0€kx, possible influence of Luke xxi. 15, 2 Tim. iii. 8 (see Chase) ; Harris refers 
to Latin and regards as Montanistic. peTa it. irapprjo-ias characteristic of Luke 
and Paul, iv. 29, etc. ; a.vT0<p8aXp.€iv Acts xxvii. 15. Blass refers to Wisdom xii. 14 
(also in Polyb.) ; cf. also v. 39 with Wisdom l.c. 

3 Both ovv and totc are retained by Blass in (3, but see Weiss, Codex D, p. 66, 
Flor. reads tots ovv prj 8vv. 

dria. In his new city Alexander the 
Great had assigned the Jews a place : 
their numbers rapidly grew, and, accord- 
ing to Philo, two of the five districts of 
the town, named after the first five letters 
of the alphabet, were called " the Jewish," 
from the number of Jews dwelling in 
them, one quarter, Delta, being entirely 
populated by them. Julius Caesar and 
Augustus confirmed their former privi- 
leges, and they retained them for the 
most part, with the important exception 
described by Philo, during subsequent 
reigns. For some time, until the reign 
of Claudius, they had their own officer 
to represent them as ethnarch (alabarch), 
and Augustus appointed a council who 
should superintend their affairs according 
to their own laws, and the Romans 
evidently recognised the importance of a 
mercenary race like the Jews for the 
trade and commerce of the city. Here 
dwelt the famous teacher Philo, B.C. 
20-A.D. 50; here Apollos was trained, 
possibly under the guidance of the famous 
philosopher, and here too St. Stephen 
may have belonged by birth and educa- 
tion (Edersheim, Jewish Social Life, p. 
253). St. Paul never visited Alexandria, 
and it is possible that the Apostle may 
have felt after his experience at Corinth, 
and the teaching of Apollos (1 Cor. i. 
12), that the simplicity of his own mes- 
sage of Christ Crucified would not have 
been acceptable to hearers of the word of 
wisdom and the lovers of allegory. On the 
causes which tended to produce a distinct 
form of the Jewish character and faith in 
the city, see B.D. 2 " Alexandria," and 
Hastings, B.D., sub v. ; Stanley's Jewish 
Church, iii., xlvii. ; Hamburger, Real- 
Encyclopddie des Judentums, ii., 1, 47. 
We know that Alexandria had, as was 
only likely, a synagogue at Jerusalem, 
specially gorgeous (Edersheim, Jewish 
Social Life, p. 253); on the history 

of the place see, in addition to litera- 
ture already mentioned, Schiirer, Jewish 
People, div. ii., vol. ii., pp. 73, 228, 
229, 244, E.T. ; Jos., Ant., xiv., 7, 2 ; 
x., 1 ; xix., 5, 2. — KiXuaas: of special in- 
terest because Saul of Tarsus would pro- 
bably be prominent amongst "those of 
Cilicia," and there is no difficulty in 
supposing with Weiss and even Spitta 
(Apostelgeschichte, p. 115) that he be- 
longed to the members of the Cilician 
synagogue who disputed with Stephen. 
To the considerable Jewish community 
settled in Tarsus, from the time of the 
Seleucidae, Saul belonged. But whatever 
influence early associations may have had 
upon Stephen, Saul by his own confession 
was not merely the son of a Pharisee, but 
himself a Pharisee of the Pharisees in 
orthodoxy and zeal, Gal. i. 14, Phil. iii. 
5. It would seem that there was a syna- 
gogue of the Tarsians at Jerusalem, 
Megilla, 26a (Hamburger, u. s., ii., 1, 
148) ; see also B.D. 2 " Cilicia," Schiirer, 
u. s., p. 222 ; O. Holtzmann, Neutest. 
Zeitgeschichte, p. 100. The "Jews from 
Asia " are those who at a later date, 
xxi. 27, are again prominent in their zeal 
for the sacredness of the Holy Place, and 
who hurl against Paul the same fatal 
charge which he now directs against 
Stephen (Plumptre, in loco ; Sabatier, 
UApotrePaul, p. 20). — o~uv£t)tovvt€s : not 
found in LXX or other Greek versions of 
the O.T., or Apocrypha, although it may 
occur, Neh. ii. 4, in the sense of request, 
but the reading is doubtful (see Hatch 
and Redpath). In the N.T. it is used 
six times by St. Mark and four times by 
St. Luke (twice in his Gospel), and 
always in the sense of questioning, gen- 
erally in the sense of disputatious ques- 
tioning. The words of Josephus in his 
preface (sect. 5), B. J., may help us to 
understand the characteristics of the 
Hellenists. The same verb is used by 

i 7 6 



PXdc^Tjfjia 1 €is Mwafjv 2 KaiToe ©ecV 12. au ve k ii-t] a a i' tc TovXaor Kal 
tous irpeaPoTe'pous Kal too? YP a f JL F aT€ ^, Kal €ttictt<£»t€s au^piraaaK 

pXa«r«|>tifia ^ABCEHP, so Tisch., W.H., Weiss; 0Xao-<|>T|p.ias N* D > Vulg., 
Flor., Gig., so Blass in (3, and Hilg. 

Mwo-riv ; but Mg»wt)v ^ABCDH, so Tisch., W.H., Weiss, Hilg. 
Winer-Schmiedel, pp. 51, 52, and note 43.) 

(See esp. 

St. Paul himself, as in this same Jerusa- 
lem he disputed, possibly in their syna- 
gogue, with the Hellenists on behalf of 
the faith which he was now seeking to 
destroy, Acts ix. 29. In modern Greek 
the verb has always the meaning to dis- 
cuss, to dispute (Kennedy). 

Ver. 10. Kal ovk mtxvov avTiorfjvai : 
the whole phrase is an exact fulfilment 
of Luke xxi. 15, cf. 1 Cor. i. 17, ii. 6. 
irveiua, as Wendt points out, was the 
Holy Spirit with which Stephen was 
filled, cf. 3, 5. Vulgate renders " Spiritui 
Sancto qui loquebatur," as if it read 8 ; 
see critical notes. 

Ver. 11. vvi^akov: only found here 
in N.T., not in LXX in this sense; sub- 
ornaverunt ; Vulgate, submiserunt (Suet., 
Ner., 28), cf. Appian, B. C, i., 74, 
\iir€pXi]6T)o - av Ka-rrj-yopoi, and Jos., B. y., 
v., 10, 41, p.T)vvr»]S tis viroPXriTos. — 
pijuara 0Xao-<pT)p.ia$ = pXacr^t^xa, He- 
braism, cf Rev. xiii. 1, xvii. 3, Winer- 
Schmiedel, p. 266. — els Mwvo-rjv Kal TOV 
©tov : Rendall draws a distinction be- 
tween XaXovvTOS • • • els and XaXuv 
pi](xaTa Kara in ver. 13, the former denot- 
ing charges of blasphemy about Moses, 
and the latter against, etc., cf. ii. 25, 
Heb. vii. 14, but it is doubtful whether 
this distinction can be maintained, cf 
Luke xii. 10 and xxii. 65. The R.V. 
renders both prepositions against: cf. 
Dan., LXX, vii., 25, and iii. 29 (96; 
LXX and Theod.). 

Ver. 12. <rw€Kivq«ray : not found in 
LXX or other Greek versions of O.T., or 
in the Apocrypha, cf Polyb., xv., 17, 1, 
so too in Plutarch. As this word and 
o~uvt] pirao-av are found only in St. Luke 
it is perhaps worth noting that they are 
both frequent in medical writers, see 
below. — tov Xaov: a crafty design to 
gain the people first, not only because 
they had hitherto favoured the Nazarenes, 
but because the Sanhedrim would be 
more inclined to take action if they felt 
that the people were with them, cf. iv. 
26. — €irurravTes> see on iv. 1. — cruv^p- 
irao-av, "seized him," R.V. ; "caught," 
A.V., signifies rather capture after pur- 
suit than a sudden seizure (Humphry) ; 

only in St. Luke in the N.T., once in his 
Gospel, viii. 29, and Acts xix. 2g, xxvii. 
15. In the first passage it is used of the 
demoniac of the country of the Gerasenes ; 
many times the evil spirit o-vvTjpTraKet, 
avTov; see 2 Mace. vii. 27, Prov. vi. 25, 
2 Mace. iv. 41, 4 Mace. v. 4. The word 
is also quite classical, see Hobart, Medi- 
cal Language, pp. 204, 243 ; on the 
hostility against Stephen and its causes, 
see above. At this word «ruvtjpir. Hil- 
genfeld would stop, and the rest of the 
verse, tj-yoYov to vii. 2, is referred by 
him to his " author to Theophilus ". The 
leading Stephen before the Sanhedrim 
is thus excluded by Hilgenfeld, because 
nothing is said of the previous summon- 
ing of the Council as in iv. 5, 6 ! and the 
introduction of false witnesses and their 
accusation is something quite different 
from the charge of blasphemous words 
against Moses and God 1 In somewhat 
the same manner Spitta refers vi. 1-6, 
9- 1 2a, to his source A, and sees so far 
a most trustworthy narrative, no single 
point in which can fairly be assailed by 
criticism, Apostelgcschichte,^. 115, whilst 
vi. 7 f., I2b-i5 constitute B, a worthless 
document on account of its legendary 
and fictitious character — instituting a 
parallel between the death of Stephen 
and that of Christ, and leaving nothing 
historical except the fact that Stephen 
was a conspicuous member of the early 
Church who died as a martyr by stoning. 
But whilst Hilgenfeld and Spitta thus 
treat the passage beginning with Kal 
Tj-yaYov, Jungst refers these verses and 
the rest of the chapter as far as ver. 14 
to his source A, whilst the previous part 
of ver. 12, <rvv€KivT|<rav — avToV, is in 
his view an insertion of the Redactor. 
Clemen regards the whole incident of the 
bringing before the Sanhedrim as a later 
addition, and as forming part of his 
Historia Petri, the revolutionary nature 
of Stephen's teaching being placed in the 
mouth of false witnesses, and the fana- 
ticism of the Jews being lessened by their 
susceptibility at any rate to the outward 
impression made by their opponents (ver. 




outoV, Kal Tjyayo*' el? to owe'Spiov, 13. e<m\<r&v tc pdpTupas i^uSeiS * 
Xe'yorras, 'O dVOpwiros outos oii iraueTai pTjpaTa f3Xdo-(|>T|p.a 2 XaXaJe 
Kcrra tou tottou toG uyiou toutou icai tou vou.ou • 14. &KT]Koap.€f yap 
auTou Xeyoiros, On 'lr)o-ous 6 Na^ojpaio? outos fcaraXoo-ei Toy tottoi' 

1 \|/ev8ei9 ; D, Flor. add Kara ovtov, so Hilg. ; fc^ABCD om, 

2 pXao-^Tj^a, om. Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt, Hilg. 

Ver. 13. oCtos: here and in ver. 14 
used contemptuously, iste, so Vulgate ; 
cf. vii. 40, xviii. 18, xix. 26, 6 flavXos 
ovtos. — ov irawcrai XaXuv : the words 
in themselves are sufficient to indicate 
the exaggerated and biassed character 
of the testimony brought against Stephen 
— " invidiam facere conantur," Bengel, 
pXd<r<f>t)|ia omitted, see above. — p-dp- 
rupas \jjcvSeis* " false," inasmuch as 
they perverted the meaning of Stephen's 
words, which were no blasphemy against 
Moses or against God, although no 
doubt he had taught the transitory 
nature of the Mosaic law, and that the 
true worship of God was not confined 
to the Temple (see Weizsacker, Apos- 
tolic Age, i., 64, 83, E.T., and Wendt, p. 
148 (1899)). So also in the very same 
manner Christ's words had been per- 
verted (John ii. 21, cf. Mark xiv. 56, 
Matt, xxvii. 63), and it is likely enough 
that the spirit of His teaching as to the 
Sabbath, the laws of purifying, the ful- 
filling of the law, breathed again in the 
words of His disciples. But such utter 
ances were blasphemous in the eyes of the 
Jewish legalists, and Stephen'sown words, 
vii. 48, 49, might well seem to them an 
affirmation rather than a denial of the 
charges brought against him. — koto, tov 
tottou tou dytov toutov : if toutou is 
retained (W.H.), phrase could refer not 
only to the Temple as the holy place, but 
also to the place of assembly of the Sanhe- 
drim, where according tover. 15 the charge 
was brought, which was probably situ 
ated on the Temple Mount on the 
western side of the enclosing wall, 
Schurer, Jewish People, div. ii., vol. i., 
p. 190, E.T., so Hilgenfeld and Wendt, 
and also Blass, who adds " itaque etiam 
tovtou (B, cf. 14) recte se habet," 
although he omits the word in his own 
text. Weiss thinks that the word dropped 
out because it could have no reference 
to a scene in the Sanhedrim. 

Ver. 14. 6 Na£. outos : not part of 
the words of Stephen, but of the wit- 
nesses — see however Blass, in loco. — 
Kal icaTaXvo-ci ; the closest similarity 

to the words in Mark xiv. 58 (cf. 
Matt. xxvi. 61), and in both passages 
the same verb KaTaXuciv is used. It is 
also found in all three Synoptists in our 
Lord's prophecy of the destruction of 
the Temple, Matt. xxiv. 2, Mark xiii. 2, 
Luke xxi. 6, and we find it again in the 
bitter scorn of the revilers who passed 
beneath the cross (Mark xv. 29, Matt, 
xxvii. 40). The prophecy, we cannot 
doubt, had made its impression not only 
upon the disciples, but also upon the 
enemies of Jesus, and if St. Stephen did 
not employ the actual words, we can 
easily understand how easily and plau- 
sibly they might be attributed to him. — 
d\X.d£ei to I8tj, cf. Ezra vi. n, Isaiah 
xxiv. 5. «f8os is used by St. Luke seven 
times in Acts, three times in his Gospel, 
and it is only found twice elsewhere in 
the N.T., John xix. 40, Heb. x. 25; in 
the Books of the Maccabees it occurs 
three or four times, in Wisdom iv. 16 
(but see Hatch and Redpath), in Bel 
and the Dragon v. 15, in the sense of 
custom, usage, as so often in the classics. 
Here it would doubtless include the whole 
system of the Mosaic law, which touched 
Jewish life at every turn, cf. xv. 1, xxi. 
21, xxvi. 3, xxviii. 17. For the dignity 
which attached to every word of the 
Pentateuch, and to Moses to whom the 
complete book of the law was declared 
to have been handed by God, see Schurer, 
Jewish People, div. ii., vol. i., p. 307, E.T., 
and Weber, Judiscka^Theologte, p. 378 
(1897). We have moreover the testi- 
mony of Jewish literature contemporary 
with the N.T. books, cf., e.g., Book of 
Jubilees, placed by Edersheim about 50 
a.d., with its ultra-legal spirit, and its 
glorification of Moses and the Thorah, 
see too Apocalypse of Baruch, e.g., xv., 5 ; 
xlviii., 22, 24 ; li., 3 ; lxxxiv., 2, 5. 

Ver. 15. aTtvCo-avTfs, see above on i. 
10. — (Ltrei Trpoo-toTTOv dyyiXov, cf. LXX, 
Esth. v. 2, where Esther says to the king 
in reverence clSdv <j* tcvpic, ws SvyeXov 
Gcov ; in 2 Sam. xiv. 17, 20, the refer- 
ence is not to outward appearance, but 
to inward discernment (see Wetstein, 

i 7 3 


VI. 15 

TooTOf, koI &\\d£ei to ?8t) o -irapeScoKCf ^aiy Mwucrfjs. 15. Kal 
aTcvurarres els outov * ottoitcs 01 Kade^ouewu eV tw <tuv eopiu», eiSoc 
to irpoo-wiroi' auTou wacl irpoawiroc dyyeXou. 2 

1 arevto-avTes «is avrov, but in D T)Tevi£ov Se avTo> ; and at the end of verse 
D, Flor. add «o-to»tos ev pecro) avTov ; cf. iv. 7, etc. (and see below). 

2 On the words in Flor., " stantis inter illos," see esp. Harris, Four Lectures, etc., 
p. 70 ff. Blass regards the words as favourable to his theory and as part of Luke's 
own text. Hilg. retains them. Harris sees in them an instance (amongst many 
in D) of a wrongly inserted gloss from vii. 1 ; cf. Mark xiv. 60. 

who refers also to Gen. xxxiii. 10, and 
quotes other instances from the Rabbis, 
e.g.. Dixit R. Nathanael: parentes Mosis 
viderunt pulchritudinem ejus tanquam 
angeli Domini : and we have the same 
expression used by St. Paul in Acta 
Paidi et Thekla, 2 ; ay/eXo-ii irpoVwirov 
elx«v. See too Schottgen, in loco. R. 
Gedalja speaks of Moses and Aaron 
when they came to Pharaoh as angels 
ministering before God). At such a 
moment when Stephen was called upon 
to plead for the truth at the risk of his 
life, and when not only the calmness 
and strength of his convictions, but also 
the grace, the beauty of his Master, and 
the power of His spirit rested upon him, 
such a description was no exaggeration, 
cf. a striking passage in Dr. Liddon's 
Some Elements of Religion, p. 180. It 
was said of the aged Polycarp, as he 
faced a martyr's death : to -n-pocrwirov 
avi-rov xdpiTos «irX.T)povTo, and " to have 
lived in spirit on Mount Tabor during 
the years of a long life, is to have caught 
in its closing hours some rays of the 
glory of the Transfiguration". But if 
the brightness on the face of St. Stephen 
is represented by St. Luke as super- 
natural (as Wendt admits), we are not 
called upon to conclude that such a 
description is due to the glorification of 
the Saint in Christian legend: "the 
occasion was worthy of the miracle," 
the ministration of the Spirit, ■q Siatcovia 
tov irv£v|*a.Tos, in which St. Stephen 
had shared, might well exceed in glory ; 
and a brightness like that on the face of 
Moses, above the brightness of the sun, 
might well have shone upon one who 
like the angels beheld the face of the 
Father in heaven, and to whom the glory 
of the Lord had been revealed : " As if 
in refutation of the charge made against 
him, Stephen receives the same mark of 
divine favour which had been granted 
to Moses" (Humphry). St. Chrysostom 
speaks of the face of Stephen as being 
terrible to the Jews, but lovable and 

wonderful to the Christians (cf. Theophy- 
lact, in loco). But although St. Stephen's 
words must afterwards have proved 
terrible to his opponents, we scarcely 
associate the thought of terror with the 
verse before us ; we may speak of such 
faces as that of the proto-martyr as 
alSeo-ipa but scarcely as <|>o{Bepd. It is 
possible that the representation of St. 
Stephen in sacred art as a young man 
may be due to this comparison of his face 
to that of an angel, angels being always 
represented as in the bloom of youth 
(Dr. Moore, Studies in Dante, first series, 
p. 84). 

Chapter VII. — Ver. 1. The question 
of the high priest breaks in upon the 
silence (Holtzmann). St. Chrysostom, 
Horn., xv., thought that the mildness of 
the inquiry showed that the assembly 
was overawed by St. Stephen's presence, 
but the question was probably a usual 
interrogation on such occasions (Felten, 
Farrar). — On cl see i. 6, and Blass, 
Grammatik, p. 254. 

Ver. 2. "Av8p€S o8«X<j>ol ical ircrrcpcs, 
cf. St. Paul's address, xxii. 1, and also 
note on xxiii. 1. On St. Stephen's 
speech see additional note at the end ol 
chapter. — 6 ©eos ttjs 8<S£t]s : lit., " the 
God of the glory," i.e., the glory peculiar 
to Him, not simply tv8o£os, a reference 
to the Shechinah, Exod. xxiv. 16, 17, 
Ps. xxix. 3, Isa. vi. 3, and in the N.T. 
cf. 1 Cor. ii. 8, and James ii. 1 (John i. 
14). The appearances to Abraham and 
Moses were similar to those later ones 
to which the term Shechinah was ap- 
plied. Such words were in themselves 
an answer to the charge of blasphemy ; 
but Stephen proceeds to show that this 
same God who dwelt in the Tabernacle 
was not confined to it, but that He 
appeared to Abraham in a distant heathen 
land. u>4>0t] : there was therefore no 
need of a Temple that God might appear 
to His own (Chrys., Hom.,xv. ; see Blass, 
in loco). — t<S irarpl T|p.a>v : emphatic, 
cf. vv. 19, 38, 39, 44, 45 ; St. Stephen 

vii. i_a. nPAHEis AnorroAQN 179 

VII. 1. Eiire 8e o apxiepeus, Ei apa raura ootws «X CI > 2 - ° ^^ 
e«f»T], *Ay8pes aSeXcpol xai Trarepcs, dKouaaTC. 6 0e6s tt]s 86|rjs 5<|>6r| 
tw -nrarpl ^pf 'A|3paau. * ovti eV rrj MeaoiroTapia, irpiv fj KaTOiKTJaai 

J vii. 2-4. For T.R. Blass reads (2) (ovti ev tt| Meo-oiroTauia ev Xappav peTa to 
airoSaveiv tov iraTepa avTov) ; (3) Kai eiirev irpos avTov " E|e\8e airo . . . Scc|(» " ; 
(4) Kai peTWKiaev awrov. In Par. we read " cum esset in Mesopotamia in Charran 
postquam mortuus est pater ipsius, et dixit . . . monstravero, et inde transtulit eum," 
etc. This reading agrees almost entirely with that adopted by Blass, but it contains 
the word bracketed by him in ver. 2, and also apparently kukciOcv (et inde) (see 
below). The difficulties in these verses are attributed by Blass and Belser to 
Alexandrian copyists. An explanatory note was added very early to ver. 2 ore 
A. c|e\0ev «k ytjs XaXSaiuv Kai tear— <KT)<r6v ev Xappav xaxa t|v peTa to axodaveiv 
tov iraTepa avTov. These words (which may easily have been derived from the 
narrative in Genesis) were thought by the Alexandrian copyists to be the additional 
words of Luke himself, and they inserted them (inferserunt in ver. 4, Blass) in ver. 4 
as they could not add them at the end of ver. 2, ot« being changed into totc, ABpaau, 
being omitted, and KaKci0cv being substituted for kokci, whilst the words peTa to 
airo8. tov iraTepa avrov, originally belonging to ver. 2 (so Par. above), were then 
omitted altogether and added in the text after KatceiOev ; then between the words 
Meaoir. and ev Xappav, which are joined together in Par., these copyists (audacis- 
sitnum, Blass) inserted irptv rj KaToiKijo-ai avTov, no doubt with the view of showing 
that Stephen referred not only to the later injunction from Haran to Canaan but to 
the earlier one from Ur to Haran. But there is no need to suppose that the text 
was thus tampered with (see Wendt's note, p. 154, edit. 1899), and whatever 
difficulties this part of the speech contains, they may be easily explained on the 
supposition that Stephen in these verses, as elsewhere, was expressing himself in 
accordance with well-known traditions. In support of his view Blass (so Belser) 
appeals to Irenaeus, iii. 12, who quotes the whole passage from vii. 2, 6 6eos tt)s 8., 
to ver. 8, t6v 'lo-aaic, omitting what Par. omits, and thus being in agreement with 
it on the whole in Belser's judgment. But Blass admits that Irenaeus (who 
apparently leaves out all not in LXX) also omits words which occur in ver. 2, 
partly in all authorites and partly in Par. (Gig.) : ovti ev Tfl M. ev Xappav ueTa 
to airoO. tov iraTepa avTov: "delenda igitur haec quoque" (see above) " neque ea 
quidquam desiderabit," Blass, Praef. xv. (Acta Apost. secundum formam quae 
videtur Romanam). Belser is not prepared to go so far as this, but he sees in the 
original text of Luke a much simpler version of Stephen's speech ; no reference is 
made to the original dwelling-place of Abraham in Ur, and only the call given to 
him in Mesopotamia (in Haran) is specified. According to Belser the original text 
reads thus : (Ver. 2) b 9et>s ttjs 8o|tjs o>4>6ti t<j> iraTpi T)pwv A. ovti er tjj M. peTa to 
airo6aveiv tov iraTepa ovtov, (Ver. 3) Kai eiirev irpos avTov • e|e\de 6k ttjs -yris cov 
Kai ttjs ai>YY €V€la S < row > Kal Sewpo eis ttjv yrjv, tjv av 0-01 8ei|c». (Ver. 4) Kai peTu- 
Kierev avrov eis ttjv -yi]v TavTtjv, etc. (Beitrdge zur Erkldrung der Apostelgeschichie, 
p. 48). See further on Gen. xii. 1-3 and the quotation here, in the passages in Philo', 
and in Clem. Rom., Cor., x. , 2, Hatch, Essays in Biblical Greek, p. 154. 

thus closely associates himself with his he dwelt in Haran, but in Gen. xii. 1 

hearers. Wetstein comments : " Ste- after he removed thither. But, at the 

phanus ergo non fuit proselytus, sed same time Gen. xv. 7, cf. Josh. xxiv. 3, 

Judaeus natus," but it would seem Neh. ix. 7, distinctly intimates that Abra- 

from Wetstein himself that a proselyte ham left " Ur of the Chaldees : ' (see 

might call Abraham father ; cf. his com- " Abraham," Hastings' B.D., p. 14, and 

ment on Luke i. 73, and cf. Ecclus., xliv., Sayce, Patriarchal Palestine, pp. i6f> 

21; Speaker's Commentary, "Apocry- 169, as to its site) in accordance 

pha," vol. ii. ; see also Lumby's note, in with the choice and guidance of God. 

loco, and cf. Schiirer, Jewish People, St. Stephen applies the language of 

div. ii., vol. ii., p. 326, note, E.T. — what we may describe as the second to 

Meo-oiroTapia : a difficulty at once arises the first call, and in so doing he was 

in comparing this statement with the really following on the lines of Jewish 

Book of Genesis. Here the call of Abra- literature, e.g., Philo, De Abrah., ii., n, 

ham is said to have come to him before 16, Mang., paraphrases the divine counsel^ 




aurbv eV Xappdy, 3. Kal eiire irpo? auTOe, ""E^cXOc ^k ttjs yfjs <rou 
Kal eK tt)S eruyycfeias aou, Kal Seupo €is yTJy {jy av crot 0€i£w." 4. 
tote e^eXOwe ck yfjs XaXSaiWK, KaTUKYjaeK eV Xappdc ■ K&KeiOei', 
p,€Ta to dirodai'Cii' TOf iraTtpa aurou, p.eTWKtaei' auTOP els tyji' yrjy 

and then adds Sia tovto -rrjv TrpuTT)v 
diroiKtav euro ttjs XaXSaiwv y^js CIS ttjv 
Xappaiwv XeycTai iroieltrOai. Moreover 
the manner of St. Stephen's quotation 
seems to mark the difference between 
the call in Ur and the call in Haran (R.V., 
not Charran, Greek form, as in A.V.). 
In Gen. xii. 1 we have the call to Abra- 
ham in Haran given as follows : <fgeX6e 
etc ttjs yfjs crov icai Ik ffjs (rvyyevelas crov 
Kal Ik tov oikov tov iraTpos cov. But 
the call in Ur, according to St. Stephen's 
wording, is one which did not involve 
the sacrifice of his family, for Abraham 
was accompanied by them to Haran, 
and so the clause Ik tov oikov k.t.X. 
is omitted because inappropriate. Of 
course if we omit Ik before ttjs avy- 
yeveias (see critical notes), St. Stephen's 
words become more suitable still to the 
position of Abraham in Ur, for we should 
then translate the words, " from thy 
land and the land of thy kindred " (Ren- 
dall, cf. Lightfoot, Hor. Heb.). St. 
Stephen may naturally have referred 
back to Abraham's first migration from 
Ur to Haran, as desiring to emphasise 
more plainly the fact that since the call 
of God came to him before he had taken 
even the first step towards the Holy 
Land by settling in Haran, that divine re- 
velation was evidently not bound up with 
any one spot, however holy. — Xappav, 
Gen. xi. 31, xii. 5, xxvii. 43, LXX, 
in the old language of Chaldea = road 
(see Sayce, w. s., pp. 166, 167, and 
"Haran" Hastings* B.D., and B.D. 2 , i. 
(Pinches)), in Mesopotamia; little doubt 
that it should be identified with the Carres 
of the Greeks and Romans, near the scene 
of the defeat of Crassus by the Parthians, 
B.C. 53, and of his death, Lucan, i., 104 ; 
Pliny, N.H., v., 24 ; Strabo, xvi., p. 747. 
In the fourth century Carra was the seat 
of a Christian bishopric, with a magnifi- 
cent cathedral. It is remarkable that 
the people of the place retained until a 
late date the Chaldean language and the 
worship of the Chaldean deities, B.D. 2 , 
" Haran," and see Hamburger, Real- 
Encyclopddie des Judentutns, i., 4, p. 499, 
and references cited by him for identifi- 
cation with Carra (cf. Winer-Schmiedel, 

P- 57)- 

Ver. 4. p.«ra to airoOavctv : St. Stephen 
apparently falls into the same chronologi- 

cal mistake as is made in the Pentateuch 
and by Philo (De Migr. Abrah., i., 463, 
Mang.). According to Gen. xi. 26 
Terah lived seventy years and begat 
Abraham, Nahor, Haran ; in xi. 32 it is 
said that Terah's age was 205 years when 
he died in Haran ; in xii. 4 it is said 
that Abraham was seventy - five years 
old when he left Haran. But since 70 
+ 75 = 145, it would seem that Terah 
must have lived some sixty years 
after Abraham's departure. Perhaps the 
circumstance that Terah's death was 
mentioned, in Gen. xi. 32, before the 
command to Abraham to leave Haran, 
xii. 1, may be the cause of the mistake, 
as it was not observed that the mention 
of Terah's death was anticipatory (so 
Alford). Blass seems to adopt a some- 
what similar view, as he commends the 
reading in Gigas : " priusquam mortuus 
est pater ejus," for the obedience of the 
patriarch, who did not hesitate to leave 
even his father, is opposed to the obsti- 
nacy of the Jewish people (see Blass, in 
loco). Other attempts at explanation 
are that reference is made to spiritual 
death of Terah, who is supposed to have 
relapsed into idolatry at Haran, a view 
which appears to have originated with 
the Rabbis, probably to get rid of the 
chronological difficulty (Lightfoot, Hor. 
Heb. ; Meyer-Wendt, in loco), but for 
which there is absolutely no justification 
in the context ; or that Abraham need 
not have been the eldest son of Terah, 
but that he was mentioned first because 
he was the most famous, a view adopted 
with more or less variation by Words- 
worth, Hackett, and recently by Felten 
(see too B.D. 2 , p. 16, note), but apparently 
in opposition to the authority of Ham- 
burger, who states that Terah was seventy 
yearsold when Abraham was born, that he 
was alive when Abraham departed at the 
age of seventy-five, being released from 
the duty of caring for his father by the 
more imperative command to obey the 
call of God. Lumby quotes from Midrash 
Rabbah, on Genesis, cap. 39, that God 
absolved Abraham from the care of his 
father, and yet, lest Abraham's departure 
from Terah should lead others to claim 
the same relaxation of a commandment 
for themselves, Terah's death is men- 
tioned ii Holy Scripture before Abra- 




TaoTTjf cts *\v ojifis vuv KaTOiKciTC * • 5- Kai °" K cSwKCf auTw icXqpo- 
voplav iv auTjj, ouoc f3r)p.a ttooos ■ icai* einrjYY<iXaTO auTw Soufai eis 
Kardcr^eaiv auTr^f, Kal tw cnrcpfiaTi auTOu per auTcV, ook oVtgs 
auT(i riKvou. 6. cXdXTjac 8c outo>s 6 ©eos, *'"Oti eaTai to airepu,a 
auToo irdpoiKoi' eV yYJ dXXoTpia, Kai SouXajaoucru' auTo 8 Kat KaKwaouoxc, 

1 After KaToiKEiTc DE, Syr. Hard, mg., Aug. add kcu oi ira-rcpcs vp.a>v (tjjjlwv) 
irpo v(i<dv (t|p.uv) ; Weiss (Codex D, p. 67) points out that the addition demands 
KaTiatoicrav ; the words might have been easily added, cf. O.T. phraseology. 

2 For tcai e-n-qy. D, Gig., Vulg. read oXX* ewrjY., so Hilg. 

3 avro ; D, Gig., Vulg. read avrovs, so Hilg. ; cf. LXX, Gen. xv. 13. 

ham's departure, cf. Gen. xi. 32, and xii. 
1. One other solution has been attempted 
by maintaining that ficrcpKiorcv does not 
refer to the removal, but only to the quiet 
and abiding settlement which Abraham 
gained after his father's death, but this 
view, although supported by Augustine 
and Bengel, amongst others, is justly 
condemned by Alford and Wendt. The 
Samaritan Pentateuch reads in Gen. xi. 32, 
145 instead of 205, probably an alteration 
to meet the apparent contradiction. But 
it is quite possible that here, as elsewhere 
in the speech, Stephen followed some 
special tradition (so Zockler). — pc-rd with 
infinitive as a temporal proposition fre- 
quent in Luke (analogous construction in 
Hebrew), cf. Luke xii. 5, xxii. 20, etc., 
cf. LXX, Baruch i. 9 ; Viteau, he Grec 
du N. T., p. 165 (1893). — pcTUKurev, 
subject 6 ©eos : cf. for a similar 
quick change of subject vi. 6. Weiss 
sees in this the hand of a reviser, but the 
fact that Stephen was speaking under 
such circumstances would easily account 
for a rapid change of subject, which would 
easily be supplied by his hearers; verb 
only in ver. 43 elsewhere, in a quotation 
— found several times in LXX, and also 
in use in classical Greek. 

Ver. 5. KXrjpovouiav: the field which 
Abraham bought, Gen. xxiii. 9-17, could 
not come under this title — the field was 
Abraham's purchase, not God's gift as 
ic\T)povop.ia (see Meyer - Wendt, and 
Westcott, Heb. vi. 12, additional note, 
also Bengel, in loco) ; ver. 16 sufficiently 
shows that Stephen was fully acquainted 
with Abraham's purchase of the field. — 
ov8e |3tj|ia -iroSos, cf. Deut. ii. 5, xi. 24, 
same Hebrew (cf. Heb. xi. 9), " spatium 
quod planta pedis calcatur " (Grimm) ; 
cf. also its use in Xen. It may have been 
a kind of proverbial expression, cf. Gen. 
viii. 9 (Schottgen). — Kal eirrjYYsiXaTo, 
cf. Gen. xii. 7 (xvii. 8, xlviii. 4), so that 
here again God appeared unto Abraham 

in what was a strange and heathen land. 
See also for verb, James i. 12, ii. 5. On 
the force of the word see p. 54. — tl? 
Karaa^ea-iv : "in possession," R.V., the 
A.V. renders the word in its secondary 
or derivative sense, which is found in 
ver. 45. — ovk ovtos aviT« Wkvov ; the 
faith of Abraham " tecte significatur " 
(Blass), first because nothing was given 
— there was only a promise — and secondly 
because the promise was made while yet 
he had no child. 

Ver. 6. Se : not in contrast to the 
fact just mentioned that Abraham had 
no child, but introducing a fuller account 
of God's promise. The quotation is 
from LXX, Gen. xv. 13, with a few 
alterations ; in LXX and Heb., the second 
person, not the third, is used ; instead of 
ouk 181a in LXX, aXXorpia, cf. Heb. xi. 
9 ; and instead of avrovs, axiro corre- 
sponding to o-rre'pp.a. Wendt takes on 
as "recitantis," and not with Meyer as 
a constituent part of the quotation itself, 
LXX : fiyvuHTKiov yv<i><rQ on k.t.X. — 
irdpoiKov in LXX as a stranger or so- 
journer in a country not one's own, 
several times in combination with tv 7-5 
dXXoTpia, cf. Gen. xxi. 23, 34, xxvi. 3, 
and in N.T. cf. this passage and ver. 29. 
In Eph. ii. 19, 1 Pet. ii. 11, the word is 
also used, but metaphorically, although 
the usage may be said to be bastfd on 
that of the LXX ; cf. Epist. ad Diognet. 
v., 5, and Polycarp, Phil.., inscript. See 
Kennedy, Sources of N. T. Greek, p. 102. 
— €tt| TtTpatcocria : so too Gen. xv. 13. 
The period named belongs not only bo 
KaKciorovcriv but also to eo"rai, as Meyer 
rightly observes. But in Exod. xii. 40 
four hundred and thirty years are men- 
tioned as the sojourning which Israel 
sojourned in Egypt, and in both passages 
the whole space of time is so occupied ; 
or, at all events it may be fairly said 
that this is implied in the Hebrew text 
in both Gen. xv. 13 and Exod. xii. 40 : 




Jtt) T6TpaK<5<Tia. 7. Kal to efl^os, J cav 1 oouXeu'coKn, Kpivw tyw, 
etire*' 6 Oeos • " Kcti (xeTa TauTa e^eXeucrorrai, teal XaTpeucouai fioi 
ev tw Toira) tootw." 8. Kal eouKev auTu Sia0r|KT)v TTepiTOfjiT)S ' Kai 
outws ey£wi}<T* t6v 'icraaK, Kal irepi^rcuev aurov ttj ir]p.€pa rj] oyoot] • 

1 eav ^ACEHP, so Tisch., W.H. alt., Weiss ; ov BD, so W.H. SovXcvowi 
fc^BEHP, d, Vulg., Chrys., Lach., Weiss, Wendt, so in LXX, Gen. xv. 14; 
SovXeverowo-i ACD 26, 96, Sah., Ir., so Tisch., Alford, W.H., R.V., so Blass in fJ 
(see his Proleg. to Acta Apost., p. 35, and Grammatik, p. 212). In vii. 3 on the 
contrary the LXX has tjv av croi 8ci|<o ; only ^ reads €ov, perhaps anticipating the 
reading in w. before us (Weiss). Winer-Schmiedel, p. 52, points out that SovXtv- 
j-overiv, though well attested, is open to suspicion. 

cf. also for the same mode of reckoning 
Philo, Quis rer. div. her., 54, p. 511, 
Mang. But neither here nor in Gal. 
iii. 17 is the argument in the least degree 
affected by the precise period, or by the 
adoption of one of the two chronological 
systems in preference to the other, and 
in a speech round numbers would be 
quite sufficient to mark the progressive 
stages in the history of the nation and of 
God's dealings with them. For an ex- 
planation of the point see Lightfoot, 
Gal. iii. 17, who regards the number in 
Genesis as given in round numbers, but 
in Exodus with historical exactness (to 
the same effect Wendt, Felten, Zockler). 
But in the LXX version, Exod. xii. 40, 
the four hundred and thirty years cover 
the sojourn both in Egypt and in Canaan, 
thus including the sojourn of the Patri- 
archs in Canaan before the migration, 
and reducing the actual residence in 
Egypt to about half this period, the 
Vatican MS. reading four hundred and 
thirty-five years after adding xal Iv 
Ytt Xavaav (the vtorAfive, however, ire'vTe, 
being erased), and the Alexandrian MS. 
reading after Iv Xavaav the words avroi 
Kai oi TraT^pes avruv, making the re- 
vision in the chronology more decisive. 
This is the chronology adopted in Gal. 
iii. 17, and by Josephus, Ant., ii., 15, 2 ; 
but the latter writer in other passages, 
Ant., ii., 9, 1, and B.J., v., 9, 4, adopts 
the same reckoning as we find here in 
Acts. But see also Charles, Assumption 
of Moses, pp. 3, 4 (1897). 

Ver. 7. The oratio recta is introduced 
by the words elirev 6 ©eos . . • Kpiv<i 
eyd> emphatic, cf. Rom. xii. 19. In this 
verse the quotation is a free rendering of 
Gen. xv. 14, the words &8e ucto. airocr- 
kcvtjs iroXXrjs being omitted after l£cX., 
and the latter part of the verse being 
apparently introduced from Exod. iii. 12. 
And so at length, after so long a time, 
God appointed for Himself a "holy 

place," cf. vi. 13 (Blass). — cj> eav SovXev- 
<r<ucn, cf. LXX, Gen. xv. 14, and see 
critical note above, cf. also Burton, N. T. 
Moods and Tenses, p. 123. 

Ver. 8. 8ia6i]KT)v, fozdus (Grimm, 
Blass), the same word is used in LXX, 
Gen. xvii. 10, and with two or three 
exceptions uniformly in LXX for " cove- 
nant," so too in the Apocrypha with 
apparently two exceptions. The ordinary 
word for " covenant," «ruvOi]Kt|, is very 
rare in LXX (though used by the later 
translators, Aquila, Sym., Theod., for 

r*pHH, but see also Ramsay, Expositor, 

ii., pp. 322, 323 (1898)). But the word SiaO. 
would be suitably employed to express a 
divine covenant, because it could not be 
said that in such a case the contractors 
are in any degree of equal standing 
(<ruv0i]ic»|). In the N.T. the sense of 
" covenant " is correct (except in Gal. 
iii. 15 and Heb. ix. 16). But in classical 
writers from the time of Plato SioB^kt; 
generally has the meaning of a will, a 
testament, a disposition of property, and 
in the Latin renderings of the word in 
the N.T. we find uniformly testamentum 
in cases where the sense of " covenant " 
is beyond dispute (Luke i. 72, Acts iii. 
25 d. dispositionis ; and here d. has dis- 
positionem, also in Rom. xi. 27), cf, e.g., 
in this verse, Vulgate and Par. No 
doubt the early translators would render 
SiaG^KT) by its ordinary equivalent, al- 
though in the common language it is 
quite possible that testamentum had a 
wider meaning than the classical sense 
of will, see Westcott, Hebrews, additional 
note on ix. 16 ; Lightfoot on Gal. iii. 15 ; 
A. B. Davidson, Hebrews, p. 161 ; and 
"Covenant" in Hastings' B.D. and 
Grimm-Thayer, sub v.; Hatch, Essays 
in Biblical Greek, pp. 47, 48 ; and more 
recently Ramsay, Expositor, ii., pp. 300 
and 321 ff. (1898). 

Ver. 9. ttlXwaavTcs, c f Gen. xxxvii. 




Kal o 'laaciK tok taKoSp, Kal 6 'laK&P tous SwSeKa iraTpidpxas. 9. 
Kal 01 iraTpiapxcn ^nXwaafTes toc 'lwo-Y)<f» dire'Soi'TO els AtyuTTTOc • 
10. Kal TJf 6 0e6s p.€T aoToC, Kal e£eiXeTo auToy ck irao-wc tuc 
0Xi<J/ea>y aoTOo, Kal eSwKey aoTw x t *P lt ' Ka ' 1 fo<J>iae cfacTioy 4>apau> 
PaatXe'ws Aiyuirrou, Kai KaTe'arTjo-ee auTOf ^'oi' * 7r ' AayuitTov 
Kal 8Xoy t6i> oikoi' auTOU. II. rjXSe 8e Xipos e<t>' oXt^ tt]c yrjy 
AiyuTTTOU Kal Xaeadr, <ai 8XuJns peydXtj ■ Kal oux eupiCKOf x°P T a<r- 
p.aTa 01 iraTe'pes r\fiCtv. 1 2. aKouaas 8e MaKwf? ovTa atTa * ey AiyuirTw, 
t^aTveaTeiXc tous iraTc'pas ^pwt' TrpwTOf ■ 13. Kal iv tw oeu-repw 
di'cyi'upiaOT] 'Ig><tt)<$> tois d8eX<pois auTou, Kal <|>af€poi' eyefCTO t« 

1 ovra HP, Chrys. ; trina t^ABCDE 5, 8, so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt, 
Hilg. (see Wendt, crit. note, p. 168, and Field, Otium Norvic, iii., 76). 

11, and so in Gen. xxvi. 14, xxx. 1, Isa. 

xi. 13, Ecclus. xxxvii. 10; used also in a 
bad sense in Acts xvii. 5, 1 Cor. xiii. 4, 
lames iv. 2, and so in classical writers. 
It may be used here absolutely, as in 
A.V. (see Grimm, Nosgen), or governing 
'\uoti$, as in R.V. — dire'S. els, cf. for 
construction Gen. xlv. 4. 

Ver. 10. rjv 6 0cos fier' o-vtov, cf. 
Gen. xxxix. 2, 21, 23 {cf. Luke i. 
28, 66). — e^ciXero . . .Ik: the same 
construction in Gen. xxxii. II, Exod. iii. 
8, and in N.T., Acts xii. 11, xxvi. 17, 
Gal. i. 4 ; so in classical Greek. The 
middle force of the verb in the sense of 
causing to be saved is lost. — x*P ls > c f- 
ii. 41. The word means primarily, as the 
context shows, favour with man, cf. Gen. 
xxxix. 21 ; but this xdpis was also a divine 
gift : ISukcv. It is significant also that 
Pharaoh speaks of Joseph, Gen. xli. 38, 
as a man in whom the spirit of God is, 
although no doubt the expression refers 
primarily to Joseph's skill in foretelling 
and providing against the famine. — 
<xo<inav : in interpreting the king's de- 
cree, Gen. xli. 25 ff. — cvawriov, so in 
Gen. xxxix. 21. — {Jao-. Aly. : without the 
article as in Hebrew (Blass), cf. Gen. 
xli. 46; see also Winer-Schmiedel, p. 
185. — Kal KaT&miaev, sc, Pharaoh, cf. 
change of subject as in ver. 4, in which 
Weiss also sees the hand of a reviser, 
but see above. The same word is used 
in Gen. xli. 43, and cf. for T)Y 0, V tV0V tne 
same chap., ver. 41, where the sense of 
the title is shown — the exact word is used 
of Joseph in Ecclus. xlix. 15 (t|yov(1€vos 
a8tX.<j>wi') ; in N.T. four times in Luke, 
see Luke xxii. 26, Acts vii. 10, xiv. 12, 
xv. 22 ; elsewhere only in Hebrews, cf. 
xiii. 7, 17, 24. 

Ver. 11. Aip.os> cj. Luke iv. 25, where 

€irt follows. — x°P T< *°~P' a '''a : sustenance, 
R.V., fodder, provender for their cattle, 
cf. Gen. xxiv. 25, 32, xiii. 27, Judg. xix! 
19 ; only here in N.T., cf. Polyb., ix., 43. 
The want of it would be a most pressing 
need for large owners of flocks. Blass 
takes it as meaning frumentum, corn, 
food for man as well as for beasts, since 
XopTd£€iv, both in LXX and N.T. (Mark 
viii. 4, cf. vii. 27, 28), is used of the food 
of man, cf. Kennedy, Sources of N. T. 
Greek, pp. 82, 156. 

Ver. 12. <riTo, but o-iTia in R.V. 
(Blass follows T.R.), cf. LXX, Prov. xxx. 
22 = properly food made of corn opposed 
to xopTos (<riTa not elsewhere in N.T., 
but in LXX to. ctito., corn, frumenta). 
In Gen. xiii. 2 we have o-itos. But as 
Wendt points out, in the words which 
follow : irpiacr0€ ■pH-iv paKpa (?p&>jj.aTa we 
have what may well correspond to otitic 
— ovto: on the participle after verbs of 
sense, e.g., 6pu», olkovu, olSa, in classical 
Greek, construction same as here — 
especially in Luke and Paul in N.T., cf. 
Viteau, Le Grec du N. T., p. 196 (1893). 
— irpojTov = "the first time," R.V. = to 
irporepov opposed to iv tw Sev-rcpu, ver. 
13, which is only found here in N.T. : 
generally Sevrepov (cf. Ik SevTepov, 1 
Mace. ix. 1 and Dan. ii. 7 (LXX)). 

Ver. 13. i.veyvo>picr6v) : the compound 
verb apparently from LXX, Gen. xlv. 1. 
— <J>av€p6v iyiv., cf. Luke viii. 17, iv. 36, 
i. 65, vi. 49, etc. ; on Luke's fondne'ss 
for periphrasis with, see Plummer 
on Luke iv. 36. — to -yevos toO 'I. : R.V. 
" race," so ver. 10, cf. iv. 36, because 
wider than avyye'veiav, "kindred," in 
ver. 14. R.V. "became manifest" 
strictly; the captain of the guard, Gen. 
xli. 12, had previously mentioned that 
Joseph was a Hebrew, but the fact which 

1 84 



4>apai> to yeVos tou 'iwo-f^. 1 14. aTroarciXas 8c 'Iwo-tj^ u,eT6Ka\earaTO 
Toy "irarcpa aoToo laKaj(3, ical irao-a? rr]v ouyyeYcicu cxutou, iv »|/u)(ais 
epSojx'pKOk'TaireWc.* 15. KaTE^T) 8c 'laxuip cis Aiyoirrok', 8 Kal ctc- 

1 to ycvos tov lajo-T)4> DHP, Chrys., so Hilg. ; om. Iu»cn)4> BC 47, so Lach., W. H., 
Wendt, Weiss, to -yevos av-rov fr<$AE 40, Vulg., Arm., so Tisch., Blass ; ttjv o-vyy. 
avrov — a-uTov om. J^ABCHP, Vulg. (am. fu. demid.), Syr. Hard., Arm., Chrys., so 
Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt. 

2 DH, Gig. read cv eP8. icai ttcvtc vjrvxan {cf. Deut x. 22), so Blass and Hilg. 

3 cis Ai/yuTTov om. B (W.H. in brackets) — Wendt regards as an addition from 
LXX— but retained in ^ACDEHP, Vulg., Syrr. (P.H.), etc. ; so Weiss and Hilg. 

had been only mentioned incidentally 
" became manifest " when Joseph's 
brethren came, and he revealed himself 
to them, so that Pharaoh and his house- 
hold were aware of it, ver. 16. It was 
not until later that five of Joseph's 
brethren were actually presented to 
Pharaoh, xlvii. 1 ff. (Hackett). 

Ver. 14. jxcTCKaXt'o-aTo : four times in 
Acts, and nowhere else in N.T., cf. x. 
32, xx. 17, xxiv. 25, only once in LXX, 
H. and R., cf. Hosea xi. 2, A ; so cLo-ko.- 
Xcofiai, only once in N.T., cf. Acts x. 23 ; 
not in LXX or Apocrypha. Both com- 
pounds are peculiar to St. Luke in N.T., 
and are frequent in medical writers, to 
' ' send for " or to " call in " (although Polyb. 
in middle voice, xxii. 5, 2, in same sense) 
a physician, Hobart, Medical Language, 
etc., p. 219. In Attic Greek we should 
have |j,cTairqi,irco-9ai. — IVt|/vx<*iS €|38o|i,if- 
kovto, itcVtc: ev = Hebrew 2, c f- Deut. 

x. 22, in (consisting in) so many souls, 
cf. Luke xvi. 31. Here in Deut., LXX, 
as also in Hebrew, we have the number 
given as seventy (although in A, seventy- 
five, which seems to have been intro- 
duced to make the passage similar to 
the two others quoted below) who went 
down into Egypt. But in Gen. xlvi. 27, 
and in Exod. i. 5, LXX, the number is 
given as seventy-five (the Hebrew in 
both passages however giving seventy as 
the number, although in Gen. xlvi. 26 
giving sixty-six, making up the seventy by 
adding Jacob, Joseph, and his two sons). 
For the curious Rabbinical traditions 
current on the subject, see Lumby, Acts, 
p. 163. In Gen. xlvi. 27 the LXX make 
up the number to seventy-five by adding 
nine sons as born to Joseph while in 
Egypt, so that from this interpolation it 
seems that they did not obtain their 
number by simply adding the sons and 
grandsons, five in all, of Ephraim and 
Manasseh from Gen. xlvi. 20 (LXX) to 
the seventy mentioned in the Hebrew 

text, as Wetstein and others have main- 
tained. But there is nothing strange 
in the fact that Stephen, as a Hellenist, 
should follow the tradition which he 
found in the LXX. Josephus in Ant., 
ii., 7, 4 ; vi., 5, 6, follows the Hebrew 
seventy, and Philo gives the two num- 
bers, and allegorises about them. See 
Meyer-Wendt, p. 174, note, Hackett, 
Lumby, in loco, and Wetstein. Nothing 
in the argument is touched by these varia- 
tions in the numbers. 

Ver. 15. The frequent mention of 
Egypt may perhaps indicate that Stephen 
meant to emphasise the fact that there, 
far away from the land of promise, God's 
Presence was with the chosen race (who 
were now all in a strange land) and His 
worship was observed. — ficTCTcfltjo-av : 
only here in this sense in N.T. Some 
have supposed that only 01 "jro/repes and 
not avTos is the subject ; this would no 
doubt avoid the first difficulty of the 
verse, viz., that Jacob was buried in 
Shechem, whereas according to Gen. 1. 
13 he was laid to rest in the cave of 
Machpelah. But a further difficulty 
must be met. Joseph is the only son of 
the Patriarch who is expressly stated to 
have been buried in Shechem, Josh. xxiv. 
32, and of the removal of the bodies from 
Egypt nothing is said. But the silence 
as to the latter fact need not trouble us, 
as whether we accept the tradition men- 
tioned by Josephus or by St. Jerome, 
they both presuppose the removal of the 
bodies of the Patriarchs to the promised 
land, cf. the discussion on Exod. xiii. 19. 
Mechilta (Lumby, p. 164), Wetstein, in 
loco, and see also the tradition in the 
Book of Jubilees, chap, xlvi., that the 
children carried up the bones of the sons 
of Jacob, and buried them in Machpelah, 
except those of Joseph. But another 
tradition is implied in Sot. 7 b. Accord- 
ing to Josephus, who probably repeats a 
local tradition, Ant., ii., 8, 2, they were 
buried at Hebron. But according to 

14— 18. 



XeuTrjerei/ auTos Kal oi TraT^pes r\fi!av • 16. Kal fj,eT€T^0T]<rai' J cis Zv)(4\i, 
Kai 6Te'0T]orat' iv tu (j.yrj|AciTi o wn^aaTO 2 'Aj3pad|i ti|itjs dpyupiou irapd 
tuc otaif 'EfXfxop 3 tou 1u\4\i.. 17. Ka0u>s Se r\yyit,ev 6 XP 0,,0 S ttjs 
iirayye\ias tjc wp.ocrei'* 6 ©605 tw 'A|3padu,, Tju^rjaet' 6 Xaos kcu 
€TT-\T]0ut'0Tj iv AiyuTTTW, 1 8. dxpiS 5 ou avicrrq |3acriXeus eTepos, os ouk 

1 (X€T«T«0ij<rav ; but in D p.€TT)xfl*io-av, so Hilg. and Blass, who thinks |xctctc6, 
suggested by €T€0. below — but D stands alone. 

2 o (ovtjo-. HP, Chrys. ; o> ^ABCDE, so Tisch., W.H., Weiss, Wendt, Hilg. 

3 ev for tov is read by fr^BC, and so Tisch., Blass (a and {}), Weiss. 

4 upoo-cv HP 31, 61, Syrr. Pesh. Hard, text, Boh., Chrys. ; iop.oXoyT]o-€v fc^ABC 15, 
36, Vulg., Sah., Arm. (Syr. Hard, mg.), Aeth., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt 
(gloss, after LXX), rare in sense of " promised," and so eirijyyeiXaTo DE tol. (Syr. 
Hard, marg.), also Hilg., gloss for topoX. corrupted into wpocre. 

5 a X pis i^AB 3 EHP; axpi B*CD, so Tisch., W.H., Weiss, Hilg. (see Grimm- 
Thayer, sub v., on the two forms and Winer-Schmiedel, p. 63). After ercp. fc^ABC, 
so W.H., R.V., Weiss, add eir' AiyvirTov. 

St. Jerome their tombs were shown at 
Shechem, and the Rabbinical tradition 
mentioned by Wetstein and Lightfoot 
places their burial there, a statement 
supported by a Samaritan tradition exist- 
ing to this day (Palestine Exploration 
Fund, December, 1877, see Felten and 
Plumptre, in loco). When we consider 
the prominent position of Shechem as 
compared with Hebron in the time of 
Joshua, there is nothing strange in the 
fact that the former place rather than 
Machpelah should have been chosen 
as the resting-place not only of Joseph 
but also of his brethren. Plumptre has 
ingeniously contended that St. Stephen 
might have followed the Samaritan 
tradition, cf. Acts vi. 5, and see Ex- 
positor, vol. vii., first series : " The 
Samaritan element in the Gospels and 
Acts," p. 21 ff., although we need not 
suppose that in this reference to the 
hated Samaritans Stephen proposed to 
show that not even they had been re- 
jected by God. There is certainly no 
difficulty in supposing that here and else- 
where Stephen might easily have adop- 
ted some popular tradition, and at all 
events the fact that the mistake, if it is 
one, is left unnoticed by the historian is 
a plain proof of the truthfulness of the 
record. But a further difficulty. Abra- 
ham purchases the cave of Machpelah, 
but from Ephron the Hittite, Gen. xxiii. 
16. The sons of Hamor sell a field, but 
to Jacob — a field at Shechem, Gen. xxxiii. 
19, Josh. xxiv. 32. How can we explain 
this with reference to the statement in the 
text? Shechem was the earliest settle- 
ment of Abraham when he entered 
Canaan, and there he built an altar, Gen. 

xii. 6, 7. But no devout Hebrew wor- 
shipper, with all his reverence for holy 
places, would be content to see the altar 
so consecrated belonging to others, and 
so exposed to desecration ; the purchase 
of the ground on which an altar stood 
would therefore seem to follow as a kind 
of corollary from the erection of an altar 
on that ground. This is at all events 
a more satisfactory solution than omitting 
the word 'Appadp or exchanging it for 
'laicaip (see Hackett). Of course the read- 
ing of R.V., W.H. (as above), prevents 
a further difficulty as to the rendering 
of toC Iv>x€|a if the reading tov 1v\eft. is 
retained, cf. Wendt, critical note, p. 157 
(edition 1899), who follows A.V. in sup- 
porting " the father of Sichem," so 
Hackett, but see on the other hand 
Plumptre, Acts, in loco, and Felten, in 
loco. For the way in which the two 
purchases and the two burials may have 
been confused in popular tradition, see 
Zockler, Apostelgeschichte, p. 302, 2nd 
edit. (cf. Bengel, Stier, Ndsgen). 

Ver. 17. Ka0«i>s: not "when" as in 
A. V., but "as" R.V., prout, quemadmo- 
dum, cf. Mark iv. 33 : " in the degree 
that " : Felten thinks that it is temporal, 
as in 2 Mace. i. 31. — ttjs eira-yycXias, 
cf. ii. 33. — rjs: Attic attraction. — 
wp.o(rcv: but if we read with R.V., 
etc., (dpoXdyrjcrcv " vouchsafed," so in 
classical Greek, cf. Jer. Ii. 25 (LXX), 
Matt. xiv. 7 (upoo-ev, a gloss from the 
LXX according to Wendt). — rjv^crev 6 X. 
Kal €itXt)8vv8t], cf. Exod. i. 7, so in a 
strange land the blessing was continued 

Ver. 18. Cf. Exod. i. 8, and Jos., Ant., 
ii., 9, 1. After Ircpos add kir' Aly., see 




t^Sei TO\>'\i»cTy\$. 19. outos 1 KdTao-o^tcrdpeyos to yefyog f\\i.5>v, exaKwae 
tous iraTepas i^fxtof , tou iroieit' eicOeTa to. {3pe<pr| auTwy, cis to p.T) 
^woYOveiaOat. 20. 'Ek w icaipw iy€Vvr\Qr\ Mwcrfjs, 2 ital r^k dorcios tw 

1 ovtos, D reads *ai, so Hilg. 

2 Mtoo-Tjs AEP; Muivo-t]s ^BCDH, W.H., Weiss. 

above. eVepos not aXXos, probably mean- 
ing the native sovereign after the expulsion 
of the Shepherd Kings, " Joseph," B.D. 2 ; 
" Egypt," B.D. 2 , pp. 886, 887 ; Hambur- 
ger, Real-Encyclopddie des Judentums, i., 
5, pp. 759, 760 ; Sayce, Higher Criticism 
and the Motiuments, p. 237. — &xpi? ov : 
only in Luke amongst the Evangelists, 
Luke xxi. 24, Acts vii. 18, xxvii. 33. 
Sayce, following Dr. Naville, argues in 
favour of Ramses II. as the Pharaoh of 
the Oppression, see u. s. and Expository 
Times, January and April, 1899, but see 
on the other hand the number of February, 
p. 210 (Prof. Hamond), and Expositor, 
March, 1897, Prof. Orr on the Exodus. 
Joseph settled under the Hyksos or 
Shepherd Kings, but the words "who 
knew not Joseph " should apparently 
refer, according to Dr. Sayce, not to the 
immediately succeeding dynasty, i.e., the 
eighteenth, in which a Canaanite might 
still have occupied a place of honour, 
but rather to the nineteenth, which led 
to the overthrow of the stranger, and 
to a day of reckoning against the Heb- 
rews. But it becomes difficult to speak 
with absolute confidence in the present 
state of Egyptological research, see Ex- 
positor, u. s., p. 177. ovk rjSst : in Robin- 
son's Gesenius, p. 380, the word is taken 
literally, or it may mean " who does not 
know Joseph's history or services"; 
others take it " who had no regard for 
his memory or services". Hamburger 
understands by it that Joseph was quite 
forgotten under the new national dynasty, 
whilst Nosgen refers to the use of olSa 
in Matt. xxv. 12. 

Ver. 19. KaTa<ro(f>i<rdp.£V09 : in Exod. 
i. 10 we have the same verb " let us deal 
wisely with them " here translated " deal 
subtilly " ; Vulgate, " circumveniens," cf. 
Rhemish version: "circumventing our 
stock " (yivo<s, as in iv. 36) ; cf. Judith v. 
11, x. 19, in both passages the same verb 
is used, translated (R.V.), v. 11, "dealt 
subtilly " — the Syriac, probably nearest to 
the Hebrew, "dealt wisely with them," 
i.e., the Egyptians dealt so with the 
Hebrews. In the second passage, R.V., 
word is rendered "might deceive " ; same 
verb in Syriac as in Exod. i. 10, Heb. ; 

Speaker's Commentary, " Apocrypha," i., 
p. 290. Josephus and Philo use verb in 
same sense as in text ; see for the force and 
meaning of KaTa here, Page and Rendall. 
— eKdKuxre, cf. Exod. i. n, where the 
same word is used of task-mastersaffiicting 
the people with burdens. For other ways 
in which Pharaoh is said to have afflicted 
the people, see Jos., Ant., ii., 9, 1. — tov 
iroi€iv k.t.X., " that they [or he, margin] 
should cast out their babes," R.V. But 
a comparison with Exod. i. 22 (LXX) 
justifies us in taking these words, as in 
R.V. margin, as describing the tyranny of 
Pharaoh, not as declaring that the parents 
themselves exposed their children. For 
the construction see Blass, Grammatik, 
p. 231 ; cf. 1 Kings xvii. 20, etc., genitive 
of result, see Page on iii. 12, and in loco, 
and Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 
157. — eK0£Ta: only here in N.T. and not 
in LXX, but used with yoVos in Eur., 
Andr., 70. — els to : expressing the pur- 
pose, cf. Luke v. 17. — luoyovelfrOac : in 
the active the verb is used three times, in 
Exod. i., of the midwives saving the 
Hebrew children alive, ver. 17, 18, 22 
(cf. Judg. viii. 19, etc.), vivum conservare. 
In the N.T. the word is only used by St. 
Luke here and in his Gospel, chap. xvii. 
33, and once by St. Paul, 1 Tim. vi. 13 
(see R.V. margin). St. Chrysostom com- 
ments on the thought that where man's 
help was despaired of, and the child was 
cast forth, then God's benefit did shine 
forth conspicuous, Horn., xvi. 

Ver. 20. ev a> K<up<I>, cf. i. 7, iii. 19, 
characterising the time, comp. Bengel, 
tristi, opportuno : on the name Mwuo-fjs 
see Blass, Grammatik , p. 10, and Ham- 
burger, Real-Encyclopddie des yndcntums, 
'•> 5> P- 768, and critical notes. — ao-r«ios 
t<J» ©eu : if we render the expression as in 
A. and R.V., " exceeding fair," the dative 
to ©e<j> is used as an equivalent of the 
Hebrew expression employed almost in 

a superlative sense, O^i"! •£$ • Jonah 

iii. 3, iroXis pey. tu 0«u>. Or the ex- 
pression may be rendered " fair to God," 
i.e., in the judgment of God ; cf. Swa/rot 
t<j> ©«i, 2 Cor. x. 4 and James ii. 5, tovs 
ittwjcovs T S* Koo"p<|>. Page and Wendt 

ig — 22. 



©€w • 05 &verpaj>r\ \i.r\vas Tpets iv tw oikw tou iraTpds auTOU. 21. 
cKTeOe'ira 8e auTcV, 1 deeiXcro auToe t) Quya.TX]p 4>apaoj, ical dv60p^\|/aTO 
auTOK laurrj eis uioV. 2 2. Kal eiraiSeudT] Mgjctyjs ttcictt] aocpi'a 

1 DE, Syr. Hard. mg. add irapa (E eis) tov iroTapov after €kt. . . . ovtov, Blass 
in 0, so Hilg. aveiXe-ro ; but -oto in ^ABCDE (H) 61, so Tisch., W.H., Weiss, 
Hilg., Winer-Schmiedel, p. 112. 

compare JEsch.,Agam., 352, and see also 
Simcox, Language of the N. T., p. 81. 
acrxcios, lit., belonging to the city (op- 
posite to o-ypoiKog), witty, clever ; then, 
elegant, pretty ; Vulgate, elegans, used 
as a general word of praise: applied to 
Moses here, in Exod. ii. 2, and Heb. xi. 
23, and also by Philo, cf. also Jos., Ant., 
ii., 97, and see Hamburger, u. s., i., 5, p. 
773 > Jalkut Rubeni, f. 75, 4. For other 
instances of the use of the word see LXX, 
Num. xxii. 32, Judges iii. 17, and Judith 
xi. 23, Susannah, ver. 7 ; in the last two 
passages used of physical fairness, pretti- 
ness {cf. Arist., Eth. Nic, iv., 3, 5, and 
instances in Wetstein). In 2 Mace. vi. 
23 it is also used, and do-reCcosin 2 Mace, 
xii. 43 in the general sense of right and 
good, honestly. — aveTpd<£i] p.'ijvas Tpcis> 
cf. Exod. ii. 2, verb used only by St. 
Luke, twice in this chapter, and in xx. 3, 
once in Luke iv. 16, but cf. margin, W.H. 
— not used in LXX, but in Wisdom vii. 
4 (where A has dveo-Tp.), and see also 4 
Mace. x. 2 and xi. 15 (but A.R., Tpa<J>.). 
The word is used in classical Greek, as 
in Wisdom vii. 4 and here, of a child 
nourished to promote its growth (although 
sometimes with the idea of improving the 
mind, cf. Acts xx. 3). In the N.T. it is 
peculiar to St. Luke, and it is just the 
word which a medical man would use, 
frequently found in medical writings, op- 
posed to laxvaiw ; see L. and S., sub 
v., and Hobart, Medical Language, p. 

Ver. 21. «kt«6. : the regular word for 
exposure of children in classical Greek; 
see also Wisdom xviii. 5, peculiar to 
Luke in N.T., and only here in this 
sense ; cf. Exod. ii. 3, and (3 critical note 
above. — dveiXe-ro — same word in Exod. ii. 
5. The verb, though very frequent in Luke 
in the sense of to kill, is only used here 
in the sense of A. and R.V., Vulgate, 
sustulit — but cf. Aristoph., Nub., 531 ; 
Epict., Diss., i. 23, 7. caurQ : as in con- 
trast to the child's own mother. Ac- 
cording to tradition, Pharaoh's daughter 
designed him for the throne, as the 
king had no son, Jos. , Ant., ii., 9, 7. — 
els ■uiov, Exod. ii. 10 ; cf. xiii. 22, 47 ; 
Simcox, Language of N. T., p. 80. 

Ver. 22. eirai8cv0T|, cf. xxii. 3 here 
with instrumental dative, or, better, dative 
of respect or manner ; not mentioned in 
Exodus, but see Philo, Vita Moys., ii., 
83, Mang., and also Schiirer, Jewish 
People, div. ii., vol. i., p. 343, E.T. ; cf. the 
knowledge of magic ascribed to Pharaoh's 
wise men in Exod. vii. n, and " Jannes 
and Jambres," B.D. 2 , and also 1 Kings 
iv. 30, and Isa. xix. 2, n, 12 ; Ham- 
burger, Real-Encyclopadie des Jndcn- 
tums " Zauberei," i., 7, 1068, and re- 
ferences in Wetstein, in loco. iraiScvw, 
both in LXX and N.T., used in the 
sense of training ; cf. Prov. v. 13 (Jos., 
C. Apion, i., 4), 1 Tim. i. 20, Titus ii. 
12, and also in the sense of chastising, 
so often in LXX and in N.T., and also 
similarly used in classical Greek. The 
passage is also important because it 
helped to fix the attention of cultivated 
early Christian writers upon the wisdom 
of Greek poets and philosophers, and to 
give a kind of precedent for the right 
pursuit of such studies ; cf. Clem. Alex., 
Strom., i., 5, 28; vi., 5, 42; Justin 
Martyr, Dial. c. Tryph., c., 1-4 ; see 
Dean Plumptre's note, in loco. — rjv 8e 
Svvar&s, cf. xviii. 24, and especially 
Luke xxiv. 19 ; see also Ecclus. xxi. 
7, Judith xi. 8. If avrov is retained, the 
mode of expression is Hebraistic (Blass). 
There is no contradiction with Exod. iv. 
10, and no need to explain the expression 
of Moses' writings, for Stephen has in 
his thoughts not so much, as we may 
believe, the oratorical form as the power- 
ful contents of Moses' words (e.g., his pro- 
phetical teaching, Hamburger," Moses," 
Real-Encyclopadie des jfudentums, i., 5, 
772). Josephus speaks of him as ir\ij0«i 
opaXctv iriOavuTaros, Ant., iii., 1, 4 (see 
also Jos., Ant., ii., 10, 1, for the tradi- 
tional exploits of Mo?es, and Hamburger, 
u. s., p. 771). 

Ver. 23. £9, cf. 1. 10, Lucan. The 
exact age is not mentioned in O.T., but 
it was traditional (Weiss refers its men- 
tion to the reviser, perhaps introduced 
as a parallel to ver. 30). According to 
the tradition, which Stephen apparently 
followed, Moses lived forty years in 
Pharaoh's palace, but soma accounts 



AlyuTrTiwv • f)v 8c Su^o/ros eV Xoyois *ai iv epyoi?. 23. 'Qs &e 
CTrXripooTO auTw Te<7aapaKorra€TT]s * XP°"°S> cW|3t| ctti ttjv KapSian 
aoTou €iriaK6\J/a<r0ai tous d8eX4>ous cujtou tous 010C19 'icrparjX. 24. 



Kai lOwy Tii'a adiKOuu.cvov * f|u.uvaTO Kat eTroiTjcrev eKOiKTjaif toj 


1 Tto-a-apOKOVTacTtjs B 3 EHP, so Hilg. ; but Tco-crcpaKov. fc$AB*C, so Tisch., W.H., 
Weiss (Winer-Schmiedel, pp. 45, 54). 

2 After aSucovpcvov, DE, Gig., Syr. Hard. mg. read ck tov yevovs avTov, so Hilg. 

give twenty years ; his dwelling in Midian 
occupied forty years, and he governed 
Israel for the same period, xiii. 18. See 
Midrash Tanchuma on Exod. ii. 6 (Wet- 
stein, with other references, so too Lum- 
by).— lirXrjpovTo, "but when he was 
well-nigh," etc., R.V., lit. " when the age 
of forty years was being fulfilled to him " 
(imperf. tense), cf. Luke xxi. 24, Acts 
ii. 1, ix. 23, xxiv. 27, and ver. 30 below; 
so repeatedly in LXX. — ave'p-t] eiri tt|v 
xapSiav avrov, cf. 1 Cor. ii. 9 for the 
expression, probably taken from LXX, 
Isa. lxv. 17, cf. Jer. iii. 16, xxxii. 35, 
Ezek. xxxviii. 10, and 2 Kings xii. 4. 
The phrase is an imitation of the Hebrew. 
Gesenius compares the phrase before us 
with Heb., Ezek. xiv. 3, 4 ; see also 
Viteau, Le Grec du N. T., p. 66 (1896).— 
ciruTKcil/ao-Oai, cf. Luke i. 68, 78, and vii. 
16, cf. Exod. iv. 31, of God visiting 
His people by Moses and Aaron (Acts 
xv. 14). In each of these passages the 
verb is used of a divine visitation, and 
it is so used by St. Luke only amongst 
N.T. writers, except Heb. ii. 6 = Ps. viii. 
5, LXX. It is used elsewhere in Matt. 
xxv. 36, 43, James i. 27, Acts vi. 3, xv. 36 
(cf. Judg. xv. 1). The word is used of 
visits paid to the sick, cf. Ecclus. vii. 35, 
and so in classical Greek (see Mayor on 
James i. 27), often in medical writings 
and in Plutarch (Grimm, sub v., and 
Kennedy, Sources ofN. T. Greek, p. 105) ; 
mostly in the LXX, as always in the 
N.T., in good sense (Gen. xxi. 1, Ps. 
viii. 4, lxxix. 14, Ecclus. xlvi. 14, Judith 
viii. 33, but also with reference to divine 
punishment, Ps. lxxxviii. 31, 32, Jer. ix. 
9, 25, xi. 22, xxxiv. (xxvii.) 8, etc.), cf. its 
use in Psalms of Solomon, where it is 
generally employed with reference to 
divine visitation, either for purposes of 
punishment or deliverance. In modern 
Greek = to visit, same sense as in LXX 
-•and N.T. ; Kennedy, u. s., p. 155. For 
its old English sense of visit, as looking 
upon with kindness, Lumby compares 
Shaks. , Rich. II., i., 3, 275 : "All places 
that the eye of heaven visits". — tovs 

aScX4>ovs ovtov : though in a king's 
palace, and far removed in one sense 
from his people, Moses remembers that 
he is an Israelite, and that he has breth- 
ren ; while others forgot their brother- 
hood he reminded them of it : " motivum 
amoris quod Moses etiam aliis adhibuit 
ver. 26," Bengel, cf. Exod. ii. 10, and 
Heb. xi. 24, 25. 

Ver. 24. dSucovu-cvov, " wronged," i.e., 
by blows, Exod. ii. 11. — TJp.vva.To : only 
here in N.T. (sc, tov dSiKovvra) ; in 
active the verb means to defend, " de- 
bebat scribere TJp.we," says Blass, but in 
the middle it means defence of oneself, 
or of a friend, with the collateral notion 
of requital or retaliation on an enemy 
(see Rendall). In the middle it has also 
the meaning of avenging, and therefore 
might mean here "he took vengeance 
on" or "he repulsed" (cf. Josh. x. 13, 
2 Mace. x. 17, Wisdom xi. 3, and Jos., 
Ant., ix., 1, 2), although this is expressed 
in the next words. — eiroir|crcv £k8ikt)ctiv, 
cf. Luke xviii. 7, 8, xxi. 22 ; lit., " wrought 
an avenging," Rom. xii. 19 (cf. Heb. x. 
30), 2 Cor. vii. 11, 2 Thess. i. 8, 1 Pet. 
ii. 14. This and similar expressions are 
common in LXX, Judg.xi. 36, Ps. cxlix. 7, 
Ezek. xxv. 17, 1 Mace. iii. 15, vii. g, 24, 
38 ; IkS. in Polybius with irouicrGai, iii., 
8, 10. — iea.Ta.Trovovn.evy : only here and in 

2 Pet. ii. 7 ; cf. 2 Mace. viii. 2 (R has tcara- 
itot ovp,., of the Jews oppressed, trodden 
down, in the days of Judas Maccabaeus), 

3 Mace. ii. 2, 13 ; used in Polyb. and 
Josephus, etc. The exact word is found 
in Didache, v., 2. — rrardgas : lit., to strike, 
hence to kill, in Biblical language only, 
cf. Exod. ii. 12 and 14, and ver. 28 below : 
so also in Matt. xxvi. 31, Mark xiv. 27 
(Zech. xiii. 7, LXX). The verb is very 
frequent in LXX. " Smiting the Egyp- 
tian," R.V. — tov AI7. : not previously 
mentioned, but implied in dSiK., which 
involves an oppressor ; as in ver. 26 the 
facts are regarded by St. Stephen as 
known to his audience. 

Ver. 25. £vop.i(c 8e: a comment by 
St. Stephen, but we are not told upon 




KQTa-rroi'oufxeVw, iraTa^as Toy AiyoirTioi'. 1 25. ct'op.ij^c 8e owicfai 
toos d8e\cj)0us auTOu, oti 6 6(69 Sid. j(etpos auTOu SiSaio'ie auTois 
aurrnpiat' • 01 Be 00 ouvr\Kav. 26. ttj T€ emoucnr] f^fiepa aJ^Or] aoTOis 
paxou-cVois, Kai orui/^Xaaei' 2 auTous ets elp-f]vr\v, ei-nw, " "A^Spes, 
dSe\<}>oi core ufxeis 3 ■ ivari cLSikcitc dXXyjXous ; " 27. 6 Se dSiKwr t6i> 
Tr\r\ariov diruaaTO auToV, eiTroJe, " Tis <xc Ka-rcoTnoree ap^o^Ta Kal 

1 After Aiyuirrtov, D (Wer.) add koi tKpv\\>iv av-rov ev tjj app.u» ; cf. Exodus ii. 12 
(Blass rejects, Hilg. retains). 

2 avvr\\acrtv AEP, Chrys., some verss. , so Meyer, Alford ; o-vvrjXXacrcrev fr^BCD e 
Vulg., Syrr. (P. and H.), Sah., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt, Hilg. After 
paxofxcvois D adds ti&tv outovs aSucovvras (not retained by Blass but by Hilg.). 

3 vjieis HP, Boh., Syr. Hard., Aeth. ; om. ^ABCDE 27, 61, Vulg., Sah., Arm., 
Chrys., so Tisch., W. H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt. For avSpcs aScX^oi &rrt, D, Prom, 
read ti itouitc, avSpc? a8tX<f>oi; 

what grounds Moses based his expecta- 
tion (see however Lumby's note, in 
loco). The verb is found in Luke ii. 44, 
iii. 23, and seven times in Acts, but else- 
where in the Gospels only three times 
in St. Matthew; it is used three times 
by St. Paul. It is frequently found 
in ii. and iv. Mace, twice in Wis- 
dom and once in Ecclesiasticus. — Sia 
\tipos clutov, ii. 23. SiScnai, " was 
giving them," R.V. (not " would give," 
A. V.), as if the first step in their deliver- 
ance was already taken by this act, so 
<rvvievai," understood," R.V. (not" would 
understand," A.V.). In Jos., Ant., ii., g, 
2, 3, reference is made to the intimation 
which was said to have been vouchsafed 
by God to Amram the father of Moses 
that his son should be the divine agent 
who was expected to arise for the de- 
liverance of the Hebrews, and whose 
glory should be remembered through 
all ages. It has been sometimes 
thought that St. Stephen had this 
tradition in mind. — ol 8e ov o-uvtjkov: 
Mr. Page notes the rhetorical power in 
these words, cf. ver. 53 «ai ovk £<f>vXd- 

Ver. 26. w<J>0n : Wendt commends 
Bengel, who sees in the word the thought 
that he appeared ultro, ex improviso, cf. 
ii. 3, vii. 2, Heb. ix. 28. — avvijXaacv : 
but if we read avvijXXaa-acv, see critical 
note as imperfect, de conalu, cf. Matt. 
iii. 14, Luke i. 59, xv. r4, Acts xxvi. 
11, see Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, 
p. 12, from <rvvaXXd<ro"<>>, only found 
here in N.T., not in LXX or Apocrypha, 
but in classical Greek, cf. Thuc, i., 24. 
— IvaTi = iva ti ytvtjxai ; cf. iv. 25, 
and Luke xiii. 7 (Matt. ix. 4, xxvii. 
46, 1 Cor. x. 29), and with the words 

ivaTi dSiKciTc aXXrjXovs ; Exod. ii. 
13 (Moulton and Geden); used several 
times in LXX, also by Aristoph. and 
Plato. Like the Latin ut quid ? see 
Grimm, sub v., and for spelling; and comp. 
also Blass, Gram,, p. 14, and Winer - 
Schmiedel, p. 36. — avSpcs, aSeXcjicu eaTe : 
the fact of their brotherhood aggravated 
their offence ; it was no longer a matter 
between an Egyptian and a Hebrew as 
on the previous day, but between brother 
and brother — community of suffering 
should have cemented and not destroyed 
their sense of brotherhood. Hackett and 
Alford take avSpcs as belonging to 
a8eX(j>oi (not as = Kvpioi, ' Sirs' in A. and 
R.V.), men related as brethren are ye, cf. 
Gen. xiii. 8. 

Ver. 27. airwo-a-ro for Attic airewaaTo 
(see also ver. 45), not found in the O.T. 
parallel, but added by Stephen, cf. ver. 
38, compare LXX, Jer. iv. 30. The 
word may be introduced to empha- 
size the contumaciousness of the people, 
which in Stephen's narrative is the 
motive of the flight of Moses ; in Exodus, 
Moses flees from fear of Pharaoh, and 
the answer of the Hebrew demonstrates 
to him that his deed of yesterday was 
known — but there is no contradiction in 
the two narratives. The matter would 
become known to Pharaoh, as the words 
of the Hebrew intimated ; it could not 
be hidden ; and in spite of the attempt 
at concealment on the part of Moses by 
hiding the body in the sand, his life was 
no longer safe, and so he fled because he 
had nothing to hope for from his people. 
Stephen's words would be quite consis- 
tent with the narrative in Exodus (N6»- 
gen, Apostelgeschichte, p. 163, as against 




SiKaorrjt' £4>' T^fids 1 ; 28. ur) dvcXcii' ue <ru OeXeis, ov rpoitov dveiXes 
X©es " TOf AiyuTmok ; " 29. 3 e'4>uye 8e Mwcrfjs ey tw Xoyw toutw, kcu 
eve'ccTO Trdpoitcos eV ttj MaSidu, 00 iy4vvr\<Tev ulou? 8uo. 30. Kai 
n\r]p<i}d4vT<DV erw Teaaapdicoi'Ta, (i4>0n aiiTu iv ttj epr|p.u> tou opous 

1 T)(ias DE, Chrys., so Meyer, Hiig. ; i\\i.av fc^ABCHP 13, 61, so Tisch., W.H., 
R.V., Weiss, Wendt. 

2 x e €S AEHP, Chrys; cx e « ^B*CD 34, so Tisch., W.H., Weiss (Winer- 
Schmiedel, p. 54). 

3 D reads ovtws koi e^vyaSevo-ev M«\io-t|s (Kai ovtus d), so Hilg. ; E reads e^uya- 
Sevtrev 8e Mwv<rrjv ; Gig. has fugatus est autetn M. ; and Par. effugavit autem se M. 
Weiss (Codex D, p. 67) inclines to consider <jruyaS. as the original reading (so Zockler), 
and to take it trans., understanding o aSiica>v as the nom. 4 >v Y a ^ cvu nowhere else 
in N.T. ; in LXX found both trans, and intrans. but gen. the latter; commoner £<j>vy€v 
max be corruption of it here ; <t>vyaSevu frequent in Letters of Pseudo-Heraclitus. 

Ver. 28. Cf. Exod. ii. 14. 

Ver. 29. kv To> Xo'yw tout&> • vVeiss 
points out that Moses fled on account 
of this word, because he saw that his 
people would not protect him against 
the vengeance of Pharaoh. Jos., Ant., 
ii., 11, 1, makes the cause of the flight 
of Moses not the words which told him 
that his deed was known, but the jealousy 
of the Egyptians, who represented to 
the king that he would prove a seditious 
person. — MaSidp. : generally taken to 
mean or to include the peninsula of 
Sinai (Exod. ii. 15, and iii. 1), and thus 
agrees with the natural supposition that 
his flight did not carry Moses far 
beyond the territory of Egypt (cf. Exod. 
xviii. 1-27). The name Midianites would 
be applied to the descendants of Abra- 
ham's fourth son by Keturah, who in 
various clans, some nomadic, some mer- 
cantile (e.g., those to whom Joseph was 
sold), may be described as Northern 
Arabs. (Dr. Sayce, u. s., p. 270, main- 
tains that Moses to get beyond Egyptian 
territory must have travelled further than 
to the S. peninsula of our modern maps, 
and places Sinai in the region of Seir, 
with Midian in its close neighbour- 
hood.) Amongst one of these tribes 
Moses found a home in his flight, 
Hamburger, " Midian," Real-Encyclo- 
padie des yudentums, i., 5, 755. Hac- 
kett, Acts, p. 104, " Midian," B.D. 1 . 
— ov e-yc'w., cf. Exod. ii. 22, iv. 20, 
xviii. 3. Weiss thinks the notice due 
to a reviser, who wished to show 
that Moses had given up his people, 
and made himself a home in a strange 

Ver. 30. irXTipwOevTttv, see ver. 23, 
cf. Exod. vii. 7, " fulfilled," R.V. «54>9t|, 
ver. 2, so the second fundamental re- 

velation of God to Israel took place in 
ihe wilderness far away from the Pro- 
mised Land (Weiss), see also ver. 33. — 
Tetro-apdicovTa, cf. i. 3. — Zivd : there is 
no contradiction between this and Exod. 
iii. 1, where the appearance is said to 
take place in Horeb, for whilst in the 
N.T. and Josephus Sinai only is named 
for the place of the law-giving, in the 
O.T. the two names are interchanged, 
cf. also Ecclus. xlviii. 7. According to 
Hamburger the two names are identical, 
signifying in a narrower sense only one 
mountain, the historical mountain of the 
giving of the law, but in a wider sense 
given to a whole group of mountains. 
Thus Hamburger declines to accept the 
view that Horeb was the name of the 
whole ridge of mountain-cluster, whilst 
Sinai specially denotes the mountain of 
the law-giving, since Horeb is also used 
for the same event (cf. Exod. iii. 1, xvii. 
6, xxxiii. 6), Real-Encyclopadie des yuden- 
tums, i., 7, 940. See also B.D. 1 , " Sinai," 
Wendt, edition (1899), in loco; Schaff- 
Herzog, Encyclopaedia, iv., " Sinai " (also 
for literature) ; and Grimm-Thayer, sub v. 
According to Sayce, Higher Criticism and 
the Monuments, p. 263 ff., Sinai is a moun- 
tain of Seir, rather than of the Sinaitic pen- 
insula so called. The same writer lays 
stress upon the fact that Sinai is associ- 
ated with Seir and Edom, Deut. xxxiii. 
2, Judg. v. 4, 5, and maintains that it is 
nowhere in the O.T. transported to the 
Sinaitic peninsula of our modern maps. 
The word Ziva is an indeclinable noun 
to (sc, opos) ; Josephus to Zivaiov and 
to Iivaiov opos ; Grimm-Thayer, Winer- 
Schmiedel, p. 91, Blass, Gram., 8, 32; 
and see also Sayce, u. s., p. 268, 269, 
and Patriarchal Palestine, p. 259, who 
renders as adjective " (the mountain) 

«8— 33- 



Ilea ayyeXos Kupioo * iv <J>Xoyi irupos 2 Pdrou. 31. 6 8e MwaTjs iSwv 3 to opajxa • irpoo-epxopeVou 8e auTOu KaTavoijo-ai, eyeVeTO 
<^o)vr\ Kupiou irpos auToV, 32. " 'Eyw 6 ©eos tuc TraTe'ptov crou, 6 
©eos APpaap. Kal 6 ©eos 'lo-aait Kal 6 ©e6s 'laKcSp." eVTpop.05 8e 
yefou.ei'os Mwo-fjs ook eToXu.a KaTavofjaai. 33. etire Se auTu 6 
Kopios, " Auaoc to uTr68if]p.a twc ttoSwv <tou • 6 yap tottos iv <o 

1 Kvpiov om. fc$ABC 61, 81, Vulg., Sah., Boh. ; so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Blass (a 
and (3, although found in D), Weiss, Wendt (prob. added from Exod. iii. 2) ; Hilg. 

2 ev <j>XoYi irvpos ^BDHP, Sah., Boh., Syr. Hard., Arm., Aeth., Chrys., so 
W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt, and Hilg.; ev irvpt dAo-yos ACE, Vulg., Syr. Pesh. 
(so LXX, Exod. iii. 2, varies : ev irvpi 4>Xoyos in B ; ev 41X071. irvpos AF). 

= ABC 13, Vulg., Chrys., so Lach., Meyer, W.H., R.V. ;;ev 
fc^DEHP 1,31,61, Aug., so Tisch., Weiss (Wendt doubtful), Hilg. Blass and Hilg. 
both read atojicoa (D) for i)Kov<ra ; cf. Exod. iii. 7. 

which belongs to Sin," i.e., like desert 
which it overlooked, to the worship of 
the Babylonian Moon-God Sin in that 
region.— ayyeXos : in Exod. iii. 2 " the 
angel of the Lord," but in ver. 7 "the 
Lord said," so here in ver. 31 "the voice 
of the Lord said," cf. ver. 33. For the 
same mode of expression cf. Acts xxvii. 
23 with xxiii. n. In this Angel, the 
Angel of the Lord, cf. Exod. iii. 2 with 
vv. 6, 14, and Gen. xxii. 11 with ver. 12; 
the Angel of the Presence, Exod. xxxiii. 
11, cf. Isa. lxiii. g (ver. 38 below), 
although Jewish interpreters varied, 
the Fathers saw the Logos, the Eternal 
Word of the Father. See references in 
Felten, in loco, and Liddon, Bampton 
Lectures, Lect. ii., and "Angel," B.D. 2 . 
Otherwise we can only say that Jehovah 
Himself speaks through the Angel 
(Weiss, Blass, in loco). — ev (j^cyl irvpos 
0a.Tov : words interchanged as in LXX 
A, Exod. iii. 2 ; according to Hebrew 
irvpos eK tov pd/rov — irvpos here = an 
adjective, tubus incensus (Blass, Weiss) ; 
cf. 2 Thess. i. 8, ev irvpl 4>Xov6s. For 
gender of pd/ros see ver. 35. 

Ver. 31. KoTavoTJo-ai : this careful ob- 
servation is implied in the narrative of 
Exodus though the word is not employed. 
It is a favourite word with St. Luke, and 
is used by him four times in his Gospel 
and four times in Acts, elsewhere in 
Gospels only in Matt. vii. 3 (five times in 
Epigtles). On its force see Westcott on 
Heb. iii. 1: "oculos vel mentem de- 
figere in aliquo " Grimm ; properly = 
to take notice of, so in classical Greek ; 
it is used also in the sense of ob- 
serving, looking at, cf. James i. 27 ; and 
in a general sense, to see, cf. LXX, Ps. 

xciii. 9, cf. xc. 8 ; and also, to consider, 
Heb. x. 24 (Mayor, note on James 
i. 27). In the LXX, where it is fre- 
quent, it is used with both shades of 

Ver. 32. evTpo(Aos vev. (cf. x. 4, !p.<j>o- 
Pos y€v.)> xv '- 2 9> c f Exod. iii. 6, ex- 
pression used only in Acts in these two 
passages (Heb. xii. 21, quotation from 
LXX). eu.<{>oPos is found five times in 
Luke, in Gospel xxiv. 5, 37, in Acts x. 
4, xxiv. 25 (only once elsewhere, in Rev. 
xi. 33, with eye'vovTo), and in each pas- 
sage with Yevd;j.£vos. evTpop,os, Dan. 
(Theod.) x. 11, Wisdom xvii. 10, 1 Mace, 
xiii. 2, and in Ps. xvii. (xviii.) 7, lxxvi. 
(-vii.) 18, evTpojxos iyevr^9y\ r\ y'i — l he 
word is also used by Plutarch. 

Ver. 33. Xfjo-ov, cf. Josh. v. 15, Xvo-ov 
A., cf. Exod. iii. 5 ; in classical Greek, 
Xvo-ai, omitting o*ov. On the custom of 
worshipping bare-footed, as the priests 
when actually engaged in the Temple, 
or as the Arabs enter their mosques with 
bare feet, or the Samaritan the holiest 
place on Gerizim, see instances, both 
classical, Juvenal, Sat.i vi., 158, and from 
Josephus and others, Wetstein and 
Wendt, in loco. The latter refers to an 
Egyptian custom the order o£ Pytha- 
goras avvird8i)Tos 0ve Kal irpoo-Kvvei, 
Jamblich., Vit. Pyth., 23, and cf. 18 in 
Wetstein. — to virdSi^fxa, cf. xiii. 25, and 
John i. 27, where in each passage the 
singular is used. Both Weiss and Wendt 
note the significance of the verse — a 
strange land is consecrated (cf. vi. 13, 
toitos ayios) by the presence of God — 
the Jews thought that the Temple was 
the only holy place, cf. add. note for 
significance in connection with the aim 


iipaheis AnorroAQN 


lorrnKas yrj dyia carie. 34. iowv elooe ttji' KtxKWO-if tou Xaou pou 
tou ev AtyuTTTw, Kal too o-reyayuou auTwv i^Kouaa • Kai KarefSr]? 
e^eXcVOai aoToos • Kai vuv Scupo, aTroaTeXw 1 ae eis AiyuTTTOv. 35. 
toutov t6k Mwuctyjc ov T\pvi)o-avTO cittoVtcs, " Tis ae KaTeaTtjcre^ 
apxoj'Ta Kal oiKaaTrjv 2 ; " toutov 6 ©cos apxovTa 3 Kai XoTpwTTjf 
direaTeiXey 4 eV X el P L dyyeXou tou o^OefTOS aoTw eV ttj BaTw. 36. 
ootos e^qyayee aoTous, Troii^o-as TepaTa Kal aT|ueia eV yrj AiyuirToo 
Kal iv 'EpuUpa OaXdoxrn, Kal iv ttj epqpw cttj Tco-o-apaKorra. 

1 airoarcXu HP.; airo<rT«iXe* ^ABCDE- 61, Chrys., so Tisch., Alford, W.H., 
R.V., Wendt, Weiss, Hilg. 

2 SiKao-Ttjv, fc<$CD 61, Gig., Par., Syr. Hard. mg. add «4>' r\y.uv (e4>' t)jaos in E and 
Chrys.), so Hilg., but text in ABHP, Vulg., Syr. Hard, text, so Tisch., W.H., 
R.V., Blass, Weiss. 

3 apxovTa, before this word Kai inserted by fc$ABDE 15, 18, 61, Syr. Hard. ; so 
Tisch., W.H., R.V., Blass, Wendt, Weiss, Hilg. 

4 aireo-TctXev CHP, Chrys., so Blass; aireoraXKev ^ABDE, so Tisch., W.H., 
R.V., Weiss, Wendt, Hilg.; ev fc^HPd, Svr - Pesh., Boh., Arm., Aeth., Meyer; <rvv 
ABCDE, Vulg., Sah., Syr. Hard., Chrys., so Tisch., Alford, W.H., R.V., Weiss, 
Wendt, Hilg.; tv probably from confusion with last syll. in aireoraXKtv. crw 
X«ipi only here in N.T. ; w x ei P l not uncommon. 

of St. Stephen's speech, and St. Chiysos- 
tom's comment in loco. 

Ver. 34. ISwv cISov : Hebraism, so 
LXX, Exod. iii. 7, and so frequently, 
e.g., Ps. xl. 1, cf. Matt. xiii. 14, Heb. 
vi. 14 (Gen. xxii. 17), the participle with 
the verb emphasising the assurance. But 
similar collocations are not wanting in 
classical Greek, see Page, in loco, and 
Wendt, who compares 1 Cor. it. 1. The 
phrase I8£>v cISov occurs in Lucian, Dial. 
Mar., iv., 3 (Wetstein). " I have surely 
seen," R.V., so in A. and R.V., Exod. 
iii. 7, see Simcox, Language of N. T., p. 
130, and Viteau, Le Grcc du N. T., p. 
217 (1896). — koi vvv Stvpo airooreXw, but 
cf. Exod. iii. ro ; airoo-TeiXw ; see critical 
notes. On the hortatory subj. in first 
person singular with Sevpo or ti<f>es pre- 
fixed, see Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, 
p. 74, cf. Matt. vii. 4, Luke vi. 42, but 
translated by the revisers, " I will send," 
with an imperative force as of a divine 
command (see Rendall's note, in loco). 
For classical instances cf. Wendt, in loco. 

Ver. 35. towtov: followed by the 
triple oxitos, a significant and oratorical 
repetition — anaphora or repetition of the 
pronoun, cf u. 23, v. 31 (so Bengel, 
Blass, Viteau, see also Simcox, Language 
of the N. T., pp. 65, 66). It plainly ap- 
pears to be one of the purposes, although 
we cannot positively say the chief pur- 
pose, of the speech to place Moses in 
typical comparison to Jesus and the be- 

haviour of the Jews towards Him, ver. 
25. — (koi) apxovra nai XvTpwrrjv : Moses 
was made by God a ruler and even more 
than a judge — not SiKacrnis but XvTpw- 
ttjs. But just as the denial of the Christ 
is compared with the denial of Moses, 
cf tjpvi^travTo and TJpvtjo-ao'Oe in Acts iii. 
13, so in the same way the Xvrp&>cris 
wrought by Christ is compared with that 
wrought by Moses, cf. Luke i. 68, ii. 38, 
Heb. ix. 12, Tit. ii. 14 (so Wendt, in loco) 
"omnia quae negaverant Judaei Deus 
attribuit Moysi " (Blass). XvTpo-njs in 
LXX and in Philo, butl not in classical 
Greek. In the Sept. the word is used of 
God Himself, Ps. xix. 14, lxxviii. 35 (cf. 
Deut. xiii. 5, and Psalms of Solomon, ix. 
1). — ev x ci pi> c f x '- 2I > but <r " v * s c ' oser 
to the classical o-vv 9eois with the help- 
ing and protecting hand, cv x ei P l = 
"PS, cf. Gal. iii. 19. — Tfj Pa-rco : 6 

Attic, r\ Hellenistic, but in N.T. it varies, 
in Luke xx. 37 feminine, in Mark xii. 26 
(and in LXX) masculine (W.H.) ; Blass, 
Gram., p. 26; Grimm-Thayer, sub v. 

Ver. 36. On ovtos see ver. 35. — 
efijyayev, Exod. iii. 10, Kal c|d|€is tov 
Xaov uov. — 'EpvOp^ 0aXd<r<rrj in LXX 

frequent, P]^D D^ sometimes with, 

sometimes without the article, here as in 
the Heb. without: cf. the parallel in 
Assumption of Moses, iii., 11 (ed. Charles), 
and see below on ver. 38. 




37. Outos ecrrii' 6 Mwuoyjs o ctiTuv tois oiots 'lapatjX, " npo(J>^Tt|K 
up-iy d^aarr^cret Kupios 6 ©eos up.£>y ' ck tu^ dSeX^cor ufiwc, 6s c'u.e • 
aurou dicouaeijfle." 2 38. ootos f<m.v 6 yeyou.ei'os £v ttj eKicXrjata iv 
ttj epT^p.w p,€Ta too dyyeKou tou 3 XaXouvTos auTw iv tw opei Ztm Kal 

1 Kvpios CEHP, Boh., Syr. Hard., Aeth., Chrys., so LXX, Deut. xviii. 15; ora. 
J^ABD 6i, Vulg., Sah., Aeth., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt, Hilg. vuwv 
(1) om. ^ABCD 61, Vulg. verss., Chrys. ; so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss. 

2 o.vtov aKovo-co-0c CDE, Gig., Par., Wern., Vulg., Syrr. (P. and H.), Boh., Arm., 
Aeth.; om. J^jABHP 61, Sah., Chrys., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Blass, Weiss, Wendt 
(cf. Deut. xviii. 15, and Acts iii. 22). 

3 ayyeXov tov om. Gig., " recte ut videtur," according to Blass, cf. ver. 44 — 
Blass brackets in |3. 

Ver. 57. ovtcJs, cf. ver. 35, cf. Deut. 
xviii. 15, and iii. 22, above. The introduc- 
tion of the prophecy may mean that St. 
Stephen wished in this as in the pre- 
ceding and following verse to emphasise 
the position and the work of Moses, and 
to mark more strongly the disobedience 
of the people. Blass regards ovtos eoriv 
6 M. k.t.X. as intended to show that 
Moses, whom the Jews accused Stephen 
of injuring, was himself by his own 
words a supporter of the claims of Christ : 
"hie est ille M. qui dixit". 

Ver. 38. ovtos: again emphatic use. 
— eKKXijo-ux: "in the congregation," 
R.V. margin : held in the wilderness for 
the giving of the law, although the word 
does not occur in Exod. xix., but cf. 
Deut. xxxi. 30, Josh. viii. 35 (ix. 2). 
By Wycliffe the word was translated 
" Church " here, but afterwards " con- 
so in Tynd., Cranm., Gen., 
again rendered "Church," 
cf. Heb. ii. 12, and on the word see above 
on v. 11, Hort, Ecclesia, p. 3 ff. , and 
B.D. 2 "Church". In Heb. ii. 12, R.V. 
reads " congregation " in text (but 
"Church" in margin), following Tynd. 
and Cranm., and Ps. xxii. 22 from which 
the quotation is made (where both A. 
and R.V. have " congregation "). Schmie- 
del would dismiss the word as a later 
gloss, which has been inserted here in a 
wrong place, see Wendt (edit. i8gg), 
p. 160, note. — yev6fL. . . . pcra, cf. ix. 
19, xx. 18 (Mark xvi. 10) ; no Hebra- 
ism, cf. o~vv in Luke ii. 13.— tov d-yyeXov 
tov XaX., but in Exodus Moses is said to 
speak with God, cf. ver. 30 above, and 
see also ver. 53, "who was with the 
angel . . . and with our fathers," i.e., who 
acted as the mediator between the two 
parties, who had relations with them both, 
cf. Gal. iii. ig,and Philo, Vit.Moys.,m.,ig, 
whereMosesis called jj.£o-ittjs ical SiaXXaic- 

until A.V. 

•njs, cf. also Heb. ii. 2, and Jos., Ant., xv., 
5,3; the latter passage represents Herod 
as saying that the Jews learned all that was 
most holy in theix law 81' dyycXuv irapd 
tov ©«ov (see Westcott Hebrews, and 
Wetstein on Gal. iii. 19). On the title 
u.€o-£tt)s as given to Moses, see further 
Assumption of Moses, i., 14, and Charles' 
note and introd. ixiii., but it does not 
follow that the inference is justified that 
the Apocryphal Book in question was 
known to the writer of St. Stephen's 
speech. Dr. Charles maintains this on 
the ground of three passages, but of (1) 
it may be said that the term |A€o-ity]s 
evidently could have been known from 
other sources than Acts, (2) the parallel 
between ver. 36 and Assumption of 
Moses, iii., 11, is, as Dr. Charles admits, 
an agreement verbally "for the most 
part," but the words " Egypt, the Red 
Sea, and the wilderness for forty years " 
might often be used as a summary of 
the history of Israel at a particular period, 
whilst the context with which the words 
are here associated is quite different from 
that in Assumption of Moses, I.e., and (3) 
there is no close resemblance between the 
prophecy from Amos quoted in ver. ^3 
below and the prophecy in Assumption 
of Moses, ii., 13 ; in both the phraseology 
is quite general. Perhaps the omission 
of the word fitra before tu>v ira.T€p<ov 
gives emphasis to the privilege of " our 
fathers," when one can speak of bein» 
with the angel and with them, Simcox, 
Language of the N. T., p. 159. Thus 
Moses prefigures the Mediator of the 
new coventant, cf. Heb. viii. 15, ix. 15, 
xii. 24, and the mention of this honour 
bestowed upon Moses emphasises still 
more fully the indignity which he re- 
ceived from his countrymen, cf. St. 
Chrysostom on the force of ovtos in this 
verse. — Xoyio, cf. Rom. iii. 2, as in LXX 




t«v iraTe'pwe rjp.wi', os eoe'|aTO Xoyia £<2>fTa Souvai rjp.iv. 1 39. <J ouk 
TjOe\r]<rav' utt^kooi yeve'crOai ol iraTe'pes rjpwi', dXX' 2 dirwrjavTO, Kal 
eo-Tpdcprpav 3 Tats KapSi'ais auTwv €ts AiyuTrToy, 40. eiirovTCS tu 
Aapwf, " rioiTjCTOi/ 8eous ot irpotropeucrofTat rjauv • 6 yap 
Ma>a% outos, os e^yaycc rjpds ck yfjs AiyoTrroo, ouk otoapev ti 
yeyovev 4 aurw." 41. icai epocr)(OTrotr|0"av iv Tais rjpepais tK6ivais, 
Kai dvrjyayov Quaiav tw eiowXw, Kal eu<ppaivovro iv tois epyois twv 
>(eipwi/ auTwc. 42. "EorpevJ's Se 6 ©eos, Kal irape'owKev auTous 
XaTpeueiv -rfj oTpana tou oupavou ■ K.a6iiS ^eypairTai iv (Si'^Xw twv 
Trpo^TjTaJf, " My) o-<f>dyia Kal duaias Trpoo-rjveyKaT^ p.01 !ttj rcaaapd- 

1 r\\iit.v ; but jf$B read vp.iv, so W.H. text, Weiss. 

2 aXX' ; but aXXa in ^ABCDEH, so Tisch., W.H., Weiss, Hilg. 

3 etrrpatfiTjo'av, D reads air€0-Tpa<j>i]o-av, so Hilg. rais KapSiais DE, Vulg., Arm., 
Syr. Pesh., Chrys., Irenint. ; S o Meyer ; ev pref. in fc^ABC, so W.H., R.V., Weiss. 

4 eyevero NABC, so W.H., R.V., Blass (cf. Exod. xxxii. 1, pr. R.V.). 

of the words of God, cf. Numb. xxiv. 4, 
16, and chiefly for any utterance of God 
whether precept or promise, only once of 
human words (Ps. xviii. (xix.) 14); so 
Philo speaks of the decalogue as to, StKa 
Xdyia, and Jos., B. J., vi., 5, 4, of the 
prophecies of God in the O.T., and Philo 
writes to \<$-yiov tov irpo<pi]Tov (i.e., 
Moses), Vit. Moys., iii., 35, see Grimm- 
Thayer, sub v., Xoyiov, lit., a little word, 
from the brevity of oracular responses. — 
£uivTa: "vim vitalem habentia," Blass, 
cf. Heb. iv. 12, 1 Pet. i. 23, cf. Deut. 
xxxii. 47. The words again show how 
far St. Stephen was from despising the 
Law of Moses, cf. Heb. iv. 12, "living," 
R.V. ("quick," A.V.) ; 1 Pet. i. 3, and 
ii. 5, where R.V. has "living" instead 
of "lively"; in Ps. xxxviii. 19 "lively" 
is retained in R.V. (see also in Exod. i. 
19, in contrast to feeble, languid), cf. 
Spenser, Faerie Queene, iii., 8, 5. Here 
the word has the sense of living, i.e., 
enduring, abiding, cf. " thy true and 
lively [living] word " in prayer for the 
Church Militant, cf. 1 Pet. i. 23, R.V. 

Ver. 39. coTpd<j>T|o-av, i.e., in their 
desires after the Egyptian gods, cf. ver. 
40, not " turned back again," but 
simply " turned " (Rendall, in loco). The 
words cannot be taken literally (as Corn, 
a Lap. and others), or we should have 
to render " who may go before us in our 
return to Egypt," which not only is un- 
supported by the Greek, but cf. Exod. 
xxxii. 4, 1 Kings xii. 28 ; see also on this 
verse, Exod. xvi. 3, Num. xi. 4, 5, but 
the desires there expressed marked a later 

Ver. 40. irpoTTopewcovTat (Exod. xvi. 
3, Num. xi. 4, 5), only elsewhere in N.T., 
in Luke i. 76, with which cf. Deut. xxxi. 
3. The words in Acts are taken from 
Exod. xxxii. 1, 23 ; frequent in LXX, 1 
Mace. ix. n (but see H. and R.), and 
also in Xen. and Polyb. — ovtos, iste, cf. 
vi. 14, the same anacoluthon as in LXX, 
Exod. xxxii. 23, so in the Heb., " who 
brought us up " : no mention of God — 
they ascribed all to Moses (Chrysostom) ; 
see Viteau, Le Grec du N. T., p. 135 

Ver. 41. !p,oo-xo-7roii|o~av : not in LXX 
or in classical Greek; in Exod. xxxii. 2, 
liroiTjorav \i.6cr\ov. — avV]Ya"yov 0vo-iav, 
cf. 1 Kings iii. 15 (and 2 Sam. vi. 17, A.), 
for similar use of the word, " quia victima 
in aram tollitur," Grimm. — ev$paivovTo, 
cf. Exod. xxxii. 6 and 18 ; the word is 
very frequent in LXX, and several 
times with Iv, cf, e.g., 2 Chron. vi. 41, 
Ecclesiast. xiv. 5, 1 Mace. iii. 7 ; x a ^P clv 
Iv, Luke x. 20 ; used only by St. Luke 
amongst the Evangelists, six times in his 
Gospel, twice in Acts (but ii. 26 is a 
quotation). Bengel points out that God 
rejoices in the works of His own hands, 
and men in the work of God's hands, 
but not as here — half irony in the words. 

Ver. 42. €<rrpei|/€ : properly intransi- 
tive. Weiss takes it transitively: God 
turned them from one idol worship to 
another ; but here probably means that 
God turned away from them, in the sense 
that He cared no longer for them as be- 
fore ; so Grimm, sub v. ; or that He 
actually changed so as to be opposed to 
them ; cf. Josh. xxiv. 20, Heb., so Wet 




KOi'Ta iv ttj epi^uw, oikos 'lo-pai^X ; 43. icai dyeXd|3eT€ -ri\v (TKr\vx\v 
tou MoXox, Kai to do-Tpoi' tou 6eoo up.uii' 'Pe^df, 1 tous tuttous 
ous eiroi^craT€ TrpoCTKuecif auTois ■ kcu p.eToiKici ujxds e-rreKeiea 2 

1 vuwv J^ACEHP, Vulg., Boh., Syr. Hard., Aeth., Chrys. (so LXX, Amos v. 26), 
so Blass ; om. BD 15, 18, Syr. Pesh., Sah., Arm.. Ir., Or., Philast., so Tisch., W.H., 
R.V., Weiss, Wendt, Hilg. Pe|A<f>av r, 31, Or., Chrys. ; Pcu<f>ap. D, Flor., Gig., 
Par., Wern., Vulg., Iren., so Blass in P, and Hilg. ; P«4>av ^ 3 ACE, Syrr. (P. and 
H.), Boh., Sah., so R.V. ; Po^av N* 3, so Tisch.; Pou.<|>a B, so W.H., Weiss. 
In LXX Pai<{>av or Pe<}>av. Wendt prefers PofxAav or Poix^a. 

- eircKeiva ; D 1 , Gig., Par. read cm to fJiept), so Blass in a and p, so Hilg., cf. 
LXX ; originality of Western reading not imposs., or em ra p-eptj may have been 
substituted for a phrase unique in N.T. (see also Wendt, p. 163, edit. 1S99). 

stein " Deus se ab iis avertit," and cf. 
LXX, Isa. lxiii. 10. — irapcSuicev, cf. Rom. 
i. 24, and elaere in xiv. 16 ; Ephes. iv. 19, 
" gave themselves up", lavrovs irapeSu- 
«av, from the side of man. — Xarpetjciv Tfj 
o-rpanqi tov ovp., cf. Deut. xvii. 3, 2 
Kings xvii. 16, xxi. 3, 2 Chron. xxxiii. 3, 5, 
Jer. viii. 2, xix. 13, a still grosser idolatry : 
" antiquissima idolatria, ceteris speci- 
osior " Bengel. The created host was 
worshipped in place of Jehovah Sabaoth, 
" the Lord of Hosts ". The word, 
though used always in the N.T. of religi- 
ous service, is sometimes applied to the 
worship of idols, as well as of the One 
God ; cf. Rom. i. 25 (LXX, Exod. xx. 5, 
xxiii. 24, Ezek. xx. 32), so Xa/rpeia is 
used of the worship of idols in 1 Mace. i. 
43 ; see Trench, Synonyms, i., p. 142 ff. — 
ev (3i(3\o> twv irpo<J>. : here part of the 
Hebrew Scriptures which the Jews 
summed up under the title of " the Pro- 
phets," as a separate part, the other two 
parts being the Law and the Hagio- 
grapha (the Psalms, Luke xxiv. 44) ; 
or Twelve Minor Prophets which pro- 
bably formed one book. — Mtj o-fyayia. 
ic.t.X. : a quotation from Amos v. 25-27, 
with little variation — the quotation in 
ver. 42 is really answered by the 
following verse. The question does 
not mean literally that no sacrifices were 
ever offered in the wilderness, which 
would be directly contrary to such pas- 
sages as Exod. xxiv. 4, Num. vii. 9. The 
sacrifices no doubt were offered, but 
how could they have been real and 
effectual and acceptable to God while in 
their hearts the people's affections were 
far from Him, and were given to idol 
deities ? (irj, expecting a negative an- 
swer = num. (see Zockler's note, in 
loco). — oikos : nominative for vocative, 
as often, as if in apposition to the 
tifiels contained in irpoo~r)veY»caT€ (Blass). 
Some emphasise poi = mihi soli, or 

suppose with Nosgen that the question 
is ironical. 

Ver. 43. The answer of God to His 
own question : icai should be explained 
" ye actually took up" ("yea," R.V., in 
Amos v. 26); dveXdprre, "ye took up," 
i.e., to carry in procession from one halt- 
ing place to another, ttjvo-ktjvtjv, properly 

o-KTjvq = ]"^5D which has sometimes 

been explained as the tent or tabernacle 
made by the idolatrous Israelites in 
honour of an idol, like the tabernacle of 
the covenant in honour of Jehovah, but 
R.V. renders " Siccuth your king " (mar- 
gin, " the tabernacle of your king "), 
Amos v. 26, see below. — tov MoX6\ : s 

in LXX, but ift Hebrew, 035">Q i-e., 

your king (as A.V. in margin, Amos v. 
26). The LXX, either as explanatory, or 

perhaps through another reading Q3 7?2 

2 Kings xxiii. 13, here render by the name 
of the idol. Sayce also (Patriarchal 
Palestine, p. 258) renders " Sikkuth your 
Malik," i.e., the Babylonian god Sik- 
kuth also represents "Malik," the king, 
another Babylonian deity ( = Moloch of 
the O.T.). Most commentators maintain 
that ver. 26 (Amos v.) is not in the 
original connected with ver. 25 as the 
LXX render, referring the latter verse 
back to Mosaic times. The LXX may 
have followed some tradition, but not only 
does the fact that the worship of Moloch 
was forbidden in the wilderness seem to 
indicate that its practice was a possibility, 
but there is also evidence that long be- 
fore the Exodus Babylonian influence 
had made itself felt in the West, and the 
statement of Amos may therefore mean 
that the Babylonian god was actually 
worshipped by the Israelites in the wil- 
derness (Sayce, u. s., p. 259). In margin 
of R.V. we have "shall take up," i.e., 




BaBuXwcos" 44. *H <TKr\VT) tou apTupiou r\v ir Tots irarpdaiv 
^pi; iv tt] ipr\[i.w, Ka0a>s 8i6T(i|aTO 6 \a\&>f tw Mucrtj, iroiYJacu. 

carry away with you into exile (as a 
threat), while others take the verb not in 
a future but in a perfect sense, as refer- 
ring to the practice of the contemporaries 
of the prophet: "de suo tempore haec 
dicit Amos" (Blass). Siccuth or rather 
Saccuth is probably a proper name (a 
name given to Nin-ip, the warlike sun- 
god of Babylonia (Sayce)), and both it 

and Kewan (Kaivan), W^ represent 

Babylono-Assyrian deities (or a deity), 
see Schrader, Cun. Inscript. and the O. T., 
ii., 141, 142, E.T. ; Sayce, w. 5., Art. 
"Chiun" in Hastings' B.D., and Felten 
and Wendt, in loco. For the thought 
expressed here that their gods should 
go into captivity with the people, cf. Isa. 
xlvi. 2. — icol to a<rrpov . . . c Pep<J)ttv, 
T.R.— but R.V. 'Pe4>av, on the reading 
see critical notes, and Wendt, p. 177. 

For the Hebrew (Amos v. 26) W^ 

Chiun, the LXX has 'Pai<j>dv. How can 
we account for this ? Probably LXX 
read the word not Chiun but Kewan 

7"P3 (so in Syr. Pesh., Kewan = Saturn 

*vour idol), of which 'Pauftdv is a corrup- 
tion through Kaujxiv (cf. similar change 

of ^ into "l in Nah. i. 6, \tffcO in LXX 
apxds as if ^fcO> Robinson's Gesenius, 
p. 463). Kewan = Ka-ai-va-nu, an 
Assyrian name for the planet Saturn, 
called by the same name in Arabic 
and Persian (Hamburger, Real-Encyclo- 
padie des jfudentums, i., 2, 216, and 
Art. " Chiun," u. s.) ; and this falls in 
perfectly with the Hebrew, " the star of 

your god " (your star-god) — D^Pf^^ 

11213 the previous word, Q^QT'S, 

"your images," being placed after the 
two Hebrew words just quoted, cf. LXX 
(but see also Sayce, w. 5., who renders 
" Chiun, your Zelem," Zelem denot- 
ing another Babylonian deity = the image 
or disc of the sun). It seems plain at 
all events that both in the Hebrew and 
in the LXX reference is made to the 
divine honours paid to the god Saturn. 
In the words " ye took up the star," 
etc., the meaning is that they took up the 
star or image which represented the god 
Saturn — your god with some authorities 

(so in LXX, see Blass, in loco). vp.wv, 
i.e., the deity whom these Israelites thus 
placed on a level with Jehovah. If we 

take "pV?) Chiun = the litter, or pedestal, 

of your gods, i.e., on which they were 

carried in procession, as if from ^3 ( a 

meaning advocated by Dr. Robertson 
Smith), and not as a proper name at all : 
" the shrines of your images, the star 
of your God," R.V. margin, Amos v. 26, 
we may still infer from the mention of a 
star that the reference is to the debase- 
ment of planet worship (so Jerome con- 
jectured Venus or Lucifer). It is to be 
noted that the vocalisation of Siccuth 
and Chiun is the same, and it has been 
recently suggested that for the form of 
these two names in our present text we 
are indebted to the misplaced zeal of the 
Massoretes, by the familiar trick of fitting 
the pointing of one word to the consonant 
skeleton of another — here the pointing is 

taken from the word 2$^j5U?> " abomina- 
tion," see Art., "Chiun," u. s. — tovs 
tuitovs, simulacra : in LXX, in opposi- 
tion to o-ktjvt) and oorrpov. If the ctktjvi) 
is to be taken as meaning the tent or 
tabernacle containing the image of the 
god, it might be so described, tvitoi is 
used, Jos., Ant., i., 19, n ; xv. 9, 5, of the 
images of Laban stolen by Rachel. — 
irpocrKvveiv oaitois : not in LXX, where 
we read tovs tuttovs avTwv ovs eirotrjcrare 
cau-roig. — lireK€iva papvXivos: in LXX 
and Hebrew "Damascus", citek. onty 
here in N.T., but in classical authors, 
and in LXX, Gen. xxxv. 16 (21), Jer. xxii. 
19 (and Aquila on passage in Genesis). 
" Babylon " may have been due to a slip, 
but more probably spoken designedly: 
" interpretatur vaticinium Stephanus ex 
eventu" (as the Rabbis often interpreted 
passages), see Wendt, in loco, and Light- 
foot. It may be that St. Stephen thus 
closes one part of his speech, that which 
shows how Israel, all through their 
history, had been rebellious, and how 
punishment had followed. If this con- 
jecture is correct, we pass now to the way 
in which Stephen deals with the charge 
of blasphemy against the temple. 

Ver. 44. Here again we notice that 
the first sanctuary of the fathers was not 
the temple, nor was it erected on holy 
ground, but ev tjj epi^ftw according to 


iipaheis AnorroAQN 


au-rf^i' Kara t6v tuttov qv ewpdicei • 45. rjv Kal cio^yaYOf 8ia8e|dp.evoi 
ot TraTe'pes i\p.£>v p.€Ta 'Itjctoo, iv tt] KaTaaxe'crei twv IQvCtv wv «|a>o-€v 1 
6 ©eos diro Tvpoaciirou twv TraTepwv T^p-coe, ews TaJy iqu.ep(ilv AafJiS ■ 
46. os eupe X'^P 11 ' cecjiuoi' tou ©eou, ical Y}Ti]0"aTO cupels aKr'jvwu,a 

1 €|o)o-ev ^ 3 ABCDHP, Chrys., so W.H., Weiss, Hilg. ; «ge«<rev N*E 5, Tisch. 

so Blass, Grammatik, p. 37. 

God's direct command. — i) o-kt|vt) tov 
|iapr. : it is possible that there was in the 
speaker's mind a contrast to the o-ktjvt] 
in ver. 43, but the connection is not 
clearly drawn out, do-vvSeTtos, " ut in 
oratione concitatiore " (Blass). — i\ ct.tov 
(xapTvptoti, " the tabernacle of the testi- 
mony". The same phrase in LXX is 
used (incorrectly as Meyer noted) to 
translate the Hebrew tabernacle of the 
congregation or tabernacle of meeting, 
i.e., of God with His people, cf. Exod. 
xxvii. 21. But the tabernacle was justly 
called p-opTvpiov, because it contained 
" the ark of the testimony," LXX, Exod. 
xxv. 9 (10), ki|3<i>to5 papTvpiov, and so 
frequently in the rest of the book, and 
xxxi. 18, Tas 8vo irXdtcas tov p,apTvpiov. 
The tabernacle might properly be so 
called as a witness of God's presence, 
and a testimony to the covenant between 
God and His people. See also Westcott 
on Heb. viii. 5, additional note. — 8ie- 
Ta£a.To, cf. xx. 13, xxiv. 23 ; only in St. 
Luke and St. Paul in N.T., except once 
in Matt. xi. 1 ; in Gospel four times, in 
Acts four or five times, and frequent in 
LXX. Grimm compares disponere (ver- 
ordnen). — icadus 8. 6 XaXuv: "even as 
he appointed who spake," R.V. ; " per 
reverentiam appellatio siletur " Blass ; 
cf. Exod. xxv. 40, Heb. viii. 5. — Ka-ro. 
tov tvttov, cf. Wisdom ix. 8, where the 
command is given to Solomon. — p.ip.T]|ia 
ctktjvtjs a-yias rjv irpoi]Toi|ia<ras : " ac- 
cording to the figure," r ..V., i.e., pattern, 
likeness, cf. ver. 43 and Rom. v. 14. 
Again we see how far Stephen was from 
denying the divine sanction given to 
Moses for the tabernacle. In the thought 
thus implied lies the germ of Hooker's 
great argument, Eccles. Pol., iii., n 

Ver. 45. 8iaSc|ducvoi : having received 
in their turn, i.e., from Moses, only here 
in N.T., cf. 4 Mace. iv. 15; so also in 
classical Greek, in Dem. and in Polyb. , 
cf. SiaSox^s, "in their turn," Herod., 
viii., 142 : (on the technical meaning of 
SidSoxos, to which in the LXX SiaSexo- 
pevos is akin to the term of a deputy, or 
of one next to the king, see Deissmann, 

Bibelstudien,pp. 111, 112). — perd 'It|o-ov, 
cf. Heb. iv. 8, where Syr. Pesh. has 
"Jesus the son of Nun " (but not here). 
— Iv T[j KaTao-xe'<r€i to>v eOvwv ; " when 
they entered on the possession of the 
nations," R.V., lit., in the taking posses- 
sion of the nations, i.e., of the land in- 
habited by the nations (Wendt). A.V. 
follows Vulgate ; frequent in LXX, cf. 
Jos., Ant., ix., 1, 2, and Test. xii. Patr., x., 
used by Philo in the sense of a portion 
given to keep (Grimm-Thayer). — S>v : 
Attic attraction, cf. i. 1. — diro irpo<r«i- 
irov : for a similar phrase cf. Deut. xi. 23, 
xii, 29, 30, etc., and frequently in LXX, 

Hebrew ^Sft. — f»s twv t||a. a - = to be 
connected with the first part of the verse, 
" which also our fathers brought in . . . 
unto the days of David" (inclusively), 
see Wendt, in loco, i.e., " et mansit 
tabernaculum usque ad tempora Davidis" 
(Blass). Rendall takes the words as 
closely joined to 2>v e£&<r€v, but the 
clause iv e|wcrev . . . ^jtwv is rather 

Ver. 46. 8s evpe x<xpi.v, cf. Luke i. 30, 
Hebraistic, cf. Gen. vi. 8; it may be 
tacitly implied that had the temple been 
so important as the Jew maintained, 
God would have allowed the man who 
found favour before him to build it ; on 
the phrase evwir. K. or 6cov see above 
on iv. 10. — TJTtjcraTo evpciv, i.e., CK^vup.a, 
cf. iii. 3 ; TJpuTa \af3ctv, and instances in 
Wetstein, " asked to find," not only 
"desired," LXX, 2 Sam. vii. 2 ft'., 1 
Chron. xxii. 7, Ps. lxxxi. 5. — o-icrjvup.a : 
perhaps used by David (as in the 
Psalm quoted) in his humility (Meyer) ; 
used of the temple in 1 Esdras i. 50. 
David of course desired to build not a 
cktjvi], which already existed. — t$ 9cw 
'laKwfj, see critical notes. < 

Ver. 47. ZoXop-uv, see above on iii. 11. 
— SI : " But " or " And " — 81, adversative 
as in A. and R.V., cf. 2 Chron. vi. 7-9, 
where Solomon is represented as claim- 
ing God's promise that he should build the 
house — afavourdenied to hisfather David. 

Ver. 48. dXX' ovx : But the presence 
of the Most High (in contrast to the 




tu 06W 1 MaKwP" 47. IoXo|j.wv- 8e wKoSojxTjcrei' 8 aoTw oTkoc. 48. *A\V 
ou)( 6 ovj/toros ef )(etpoTrotr]TOis faois* KaToucei, Ka0a»s 6 Trpocfvrj-rris 
Xe'yei,, 49. " 'O oupayos p.01 BpoVos, ^ Be ytj uiroiroSioe t£>v iroSwv 
p.00 • ttoioi' oticoy otKoSop.i]CTe7e p.01 ; Xe'yei Kopios " t) ti's * tottos tt|s 

J flew fc$ 8 ACEP, Vulg., Syrr. (P. and H.), Sah., Boh., Arm., Aeth., Chrys. ; oucw 
fc^BDH, so Weiss (Apostelgeschichte, p. 7), so also Hilg. W.H. (Appendix, 92) 
think that although Oe<ii is a very ancient correction of oiku the latter can hardly 
be genuine and that there is apparently a primitive error, and with this judgment 
Wendt agrees. Hort suggests Kvpico, and concludes that twoiku may have come 
from tu ia< (so too Wendt), and refers to LXX, Ps. exxxi. 5 ; but we have still to ask 
if the expression " Lord of Jacob" ever occurred, whilst no doubt " God of Jacob. ' 
" House of Jacob " are familiar expressions. In LXX, Ps. exxxi. 3, we have o-Kipupa 
oikov, and a similar expression may have been the orig. reading here ; again, in Ps. 
xxiv. 6, Heb., we have "Jacob" = " the God of Jacob" (see LXX), and it has been 
suggested that some such abbreviation or mode of speech lies at the bottom of the 
difficulty here. Blass holds that oiku comes from the next verse " corrupte " (orig. 
a gloss on o-ic-nv<«»p,a). 

2 Xo\op.»v BDEHP, so Blass in (J, Weiss ; ZoXopuv W.H., Hilg. ; ZaXupuv AC, 
so Tisch. ; IaXop.a>v fc$. (See Winer- Schmiedel, p. 93 ; Blass, Gram., p. 29.) 

3 wKo8o|Mj<rev ^AB 3 CEHP, so Tisch. ; oiicoSop.Ti<r€v BD, so W.H., Weiss, Blass 
in p\ Hilg., but see W.H., App., 170. (Winer-Schmiedel, p. 100 ; Blass, Gram., 
P- 37-) 

* vaois om. fc$ABCDE ; so Tisch., W.H. , R.V., Blass, Weiss, Wendt, Hilg. (cf. 
xvii. 24). 

* tis ; D, Flor. read votos, so Blass in {}, and Hilg. — assim. either to preceding 
•rroiov or to LXX. 

smallness of any building made by hands) 
was not so confined — the previous words 
must not be misunderstood by Stephen's 
hearers. Solomon's oucos might have 
given the idea of greater permanency, 
but still Isaiah had taught, lxvi. 1, 2, and 
even the builder of the temple, Solomon 
himself, had acknowledged that God was 
not confined to any single place of wor- 
ship, 1 King viii. 27, 2 Chron. vi. 18 
(Hackett), cf. also David's prayer, 1 
Chron. xxix. 10-19.— 4v x el P°' ,rol1 l Tol ' s 
vaots KaTOixet — omit vaois, probably 
an exegetical addition, cf. xvii. 24, where 
the word is found. The omission makes 
the contrast with oIkos still more em- 
phatic. "But Solomon ... a house, 
howbeit the Most High dwelleth not in 
houses made with hands " (R.V.). For 
X€ipoiroii)Tos and a.\eip. see Westcott 
on Heb. ix. 11, 24. Both words occur 
in Mark xiv. 58, in the charge of the 
false witness against our Lord. In the 
LXX x«ipo , srofrr)Tos is used several times 
of idols made with hands, and occasion- 
ally found in classical Greek. Weiss 
compares as a parallel with its use here 
Isa. xvi. 12 (see R.V.), but the meaning 
is doubtful. — 6 •5\J;io-tos, emphatic — 
Solomon's building a house must not be 

misunderstood — see too ver. 49. & 
ity., xvi. 17, used here absolutely (cf. 
Luke i. 32, 35, 76, vi. 35, without the 
article), so often in LXX, 2 Sam. xxii. 
14, Ps. xvii. 13, and often in Psalms, 
Isa. xiv. 14, Ecclus. xii. 6, etc. R.V. 
writes " Most High," instead of A.V. 
" most High," thus making the proper 
name of God more emphatic, cf. Winer- 
Schmiedel, p. 172 — so in classical Greek 
Zeis fixjutrros ; 6 v\|/uttos 6e<Js in Greek 
inscriptions of Asia Minor ; for the Hebrew 
equivalents, see Grimm-Thayer, sub v. 
St. Stephen's words apparently impressed 
at least one of hit. nearers, for the same 
thought is reproduced in the words of 
St. Paul at Athens, where he asserts the 
same truth, and makes St. Stephen's 
words as it were his text to emphasise the 
real power and worship of God: " atque 
similiter hie Judaei atque illic Grseci 
castigantur" (Blass), cf. the teaching of 
our Lord in John iv. 21 (and see Plump- 
tre's note on this passage in Acts). 
— KaOus 6 irpocj)., Isa. lxvi. 1, 2 (LXX). 
The quotation is almost identical with 
few slight changes, as e.g., 

Ver. 49. tis t<5itos for iroios, and ov\\ 
introducing the conclusion instead of-ydp- 
Although Solomon had expressed this 




1 . 

KaTairauacws p-ou ; 50. ooxl ^ X CI P H ,ou ^ironrjac TauTa irdrra 
51. 2K\ir]poTpd)(T]Xoi Kal dTrepiTjXTjTot Ttj KapSia 2 Kttl TOLS (iortf, UUCIS 
del tw flyeujia-ri tw Ayico drrnrnrreTe, <I>s 01 iraTepes up.wy ical 
uu-eis. 8 52. riwa TCtv irpcxpTjiw ouk eoiwfaf 01 iraTepes uawy 4 ; *al 
dire'tcTeifai' toos irpoKaTaYY et ^ a »' T ttS we pi ttjs eXeuaewc too SiKaiou, 

1 Flor. omits whole verse, but Blass and Hilg. retain it. 
decisive for retention. 

Variation from LXX 

2 (tj|) KapSia EHP 61, Flor., Gig., Syr. Pesh., Sah., Boh., Eus., Lucif., so Blass, 
Meyer, Alford ; KapSiais (^)ACD 7, 14 (Chrys.), Cyr. (Vulg., Syr. Hard., Arm., 
Aeth.), so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt, Hilg. ; KapSias B, W.H. mar°-. Mever 
and Alford retain KapSia because (they think) KapSiais was introduced to suit plural 
subject, but cf Ezek. xliv. 7. KapSia? in LXX, Jer. ix. 26, but the reading can 
scarcely be original here on account of the following dat. tois uxriv (Wendt). But 
on the whole W.H.'s decision is best. 

3 icai vucis om. D 2 , Flor., Gig., but Blass retains ; Hilg. omits. 

4 ot iraTepes vuojv ; D, Flor. read crccivoi. 

same truth in the dedicatory prayer of 
his temple, St. Stephen appeals to the 
great Messianic prophet. It is not, as 
some have thought, the worthlessness of 
the temple, but rather its relative value 
upon which Stephen insists. Those who 
take the former view of the words must 
suppose that St. Stephen had forgotten 
that Solomon had given utterance to the 
same thought at the moment when he 
was consecrating the temple (so Wendt, 
Felten, McGiffert, in loco). Weiss sees 
in the question another proof of the 
thought running through the whole ad- 
dress, that God's presence, with the bless- 
ings which He confers and the revelations 
which He imparts, is not confined to the 
temple : cf. the use of the same quotation 
as here against the Jews, Epist. Barn., 
xvi., 2, after the destruction of the temple. 
Ver. 51. <rK\i)poTpdxii\oi <al dxepi-r- 
pv»|Toi t§ KapSia, cf. Exod. xxxiii. 3, 5, 
xxxiv. 9, Deut. ix. 6, Baruch ii. 30, etc., 
Ecclus. xvi. 11 (cf. Cicero, Verr., hi., 95, 
" tantis cervicibus est "). Both adjectives 
had been used to describe the sins of 
Israel in former days. On this reading 
see above and Wendt, critical note, p. 
190, cf. Kennedy, Sources of N. T.Greek, 
p. 116. For the expression direp., cf. 
Deut. x. 16, Jer. iv. 4, and airep. Ta ura, 
Jer. vi. 10. In the N.T. cf. Rom. ii. 25, 
29 (which sounds like another echo of 
St. Stephen's teaching), cf. also Epist. 
Barn., ix. (Jer. iv. 4). Similar expres- 
sions occur in Philo and the Rabbis, and 
also 1 Mace. i. 48, ii. 46, and see further 
Deissmann, Bibelstudien, pp. 150, 151. 
Many writers have maintained that St. 
Stephen's sharp and abrupt declaration 

marks the increasing impatience of his 
hearers at this point, as if the speaker 
felt that the murmurs of his audience 
would not allow him much more speech. 
But on the othet hand St. Stephen's 
whole speech led up to this point, and 
his words were not so much an inter- 
ruption, but a continuance and a sum- 
mary of what had gone before. No doubt 
the speech was left unfinished : " cujus 
cursus ad Iesum tendebat" (Blass); 
since in His rejection the obstinacy of 
the people which had marked and marred 
their history had reached its climax ; and 
the indignant words of St. Stephen bring 
to mind the indignation of a greater than 
he against the hyprocrisy and wilfulness 
of the nation — " the wrath of the Lamb " 
against the Pharisees and the oppressors 
(Briggs, Messiah of the Apostles, p. 68). 
— del : " summa tractationis — semper 
quotiescumque vocamini " Bengel. — dv- 
TiiriiTTeTe, cf. Num. xxvii. 14, of Israel 
striving against God, and also in Polyb. 
and Plut. 

Ver. 52. tivo tuv irpo^>. — do-vvSerus, 
to mark the vehemence of the speech, as 
above, verse 51 : cf. 2 Chron. xxxvi. 16 for 
the general statement, and for individual 
cases, Jeremiah, Amos, and probably 
Isaiah, the prophet just quoted. We 
may compare the words of our Lord, 
Matt. v. 12, Luke xiii. 34, and also Luke 
xi. 49, Matt, xxiii. 29-37 where the same 
words eSiw£av and dirtKTtuvav are used 
of the treatment of the prophets. — Kal 
direK. : " they even slew " — perhaps the 
force of Kai (Wendt), "they slew them 
also " (Rendall). — IXeweus : only here in 
the N.T., not in LXX or Apocrypha, or 




ou vuv ujicLS upoSoTai Kal (po^el? y€yivt\<r6e l • 53. oitivcs eXdpeTC 
to*' vopof eis StaTayds ayyekw, Kal ouk e^uXdsaTe. 54. 'Akouovtcs 
8c Taura, Steirptoi'TO tcu$ xapSiats auTbie, Kai e|3puxov toos o86rras 

1 Y€ Y «vT)o-e£ HP, Chrys. ; eyevevQt ^ABCDE, Orig., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., 

Blass, Weiss, Wendt, Hilg. 

in classical writers, but found in Acta 
Thomce 28, and in Iren., i., 10, in plural, 
of the first and second advent of Christ 
(see also Dion. Hal., iii., 59). — toii Sitcaiov, 
see Acts iii. 14 and note. It has been 
suggested that it is used here and else- 
where of our Lord from His own em- 
ployment of the same word in Matt.xxiii. 
29, where He speaks of the tombs tov 
SiKaiwv whom the fathers had slain 
whilst the children adorned their sepul- 
chres. But it is more probable that the 
word was applied to our Lord from the 
LXX use of it, cf. Isa. liii. 11. Even 
those Jews who rejected the idea of an 
atoning Messiah acknowledged that His 
personal righteousness was His real 
claim to the Messianic dignity, Weber, 
Jiidische Theologie, p. 362 ; Taylor, Say- 
ings of th.ej eivish Fathers, p. 185, second 
edition. We cannot forget that one of 
those present who heard St. Stephen's 
burning words was himself to see the 
Just One and to carry on the martyr's 
work, cf. xxii. 14, ISetv tov Sikcuov k.t.X. 
— vvv eye'vec-fle : "of whom ye have now 
become," R.V., the spirit of their fathers 
was still alive, and they had acted as 
their fathers had done ; vpeis again em- 

Ver. 53. oinves, quippe qui (" ye who," 
R.V.), as often in Acts and Epistles not 
simply for identification, but when as 
here the conduct of the persons already 
mentioned is further enlarged upon (Al- 
ford), cf. viii. 15, ix. 35, 'x. 41, 47, and 
Winer-Schmiedel, p. 235, but see also 
Blass, Gratnmatik, p. i6g. — els Sio/reryas 
dyyeXwv : " as it was ordained by angels," 
R.V. els : at the appointment of, cf. its 
use in Matt. xii. 41, or better els as in 
ver. 21 = received the law as ordinances 
of angels (vojiov being regarded as an 
aggregate of single acts and so with 
plural " ordinances "), so Rendall, who 
takes els = u>s, and Page, cf. Heb. xi. 8, 
i.e., it was no human ordinance. But 
see on the other hand Wendt's note, p. 
192, where he points out that the law was 
not received as commands given by angels 
but by God. This was undoubtedly the 
case, but St. Stephen was here probably 
referring to the current tradition in Philo 

and Josephus, and LXX, Deut. xxxiii. 2. 
etc Se£iu»v axiTo€ ay-yeXoi pei"' atrrov, cf. 
Ps. lxvii. 17 ; Philo, De Somn., p. 642 
Mang., so Jos., Ant., xv., 5, 3, and also 
Booh of Jubilees, chap. i. (see Wetstein 
and Lightfoot (J. B.) on Gal. iii. 19). 
Others again take els = ev, " accepistis 
legem ab angelis promulgatam" = Sio/rao-- 
ctovtojv dyye'Xcdv, so Blass. Certainly it 
does not seem possible to take SiaTayq 
= Siaraf is = agmen dispositum {cf. Ju- 
dith i. 4, viii. 36), and to render " prae- 
sentibus angelorum ordinibus," so that 
here also els — ev (Meyer and others). 
Lightfoot (J.) takes the "angels" as = 
Moses and the Prophets ; Surenhusius as 
= the elders of tie people, whilst St. 
Chrysostom sees a reference to the angel 
of the burning bush. It must not be 
thought that St. Stephen is here de- 
preciating the Law. From a Christian 
standpoint it might of course be urged 
that as Christ was superior to the angels, 
so the introduction of angels showed the 
inferiority of the Law to the Gospel (cf. 
Heb. ii. 2, Gal. iii. 19), but St. Stephen's 
point is that although the Law had 
been given with such notable sanctions, 
yet his hearers had not kept it, and that 
therefore they, not he, were the real 
law-breakers. — ovk e<j>vXa$a.Tc : " cum 
omnibus phylacteriis vestris," Bengel. 
Note the rhetorical power of the words 
cf. ver. 25 (Page). 

Ver. 54. No charge could have been 
more hateful to such an audience, cf. our 
Lord's words, John vii. 19 ; see Schurer, 
Jewish People, vol ii., div. ii., p. 90 ff. , 
E.T. Schurer twice quotes St. Paul's 
words, pp. 96, 124, {JtJXov 0eov exovciv 
dXX' ov Kar' irriyvwriv ; no words could 
better characterise the entire tendency 
of the Judaism of the period. — Sieirpiovro, 
c f' v - 33- — «Ppt>x<>v : not elsewhere in 
N.T., in LXX, Job xvi. 10 (9), Ps. xxxiv. 
(v.) 16, xxxvi. (vii.) 12, cf. cxi. (xii.) 10; 
Lam. ii. 16, cf. Plutarch, Pericles, 33 
(without oSoVras, intransitive). The 
noun Ppvxtj is found in the same sense, 
Ap. Rh., ii., 83, of brute passion, not the 
despair so often associated with the 
cognate noun ; cf. Matt. viii. 12, xiiu 42, 




eir' auToV. 55. 1 e Yirapx««*i' Se irX^prjs n^eufjuiTo? 'Ayiou, aTceuras cis 
toc oupavcV, eI8e 86£ak 0eou, Kal 'irjcroui'''-' loTWTa ck Se^iwr tou Qeou, 3 
56. Kal euree, 'loot, vewpw tous oupaeous dyecoyueVous, Kal rov uioy 
tou dcQpoSirou €K 8e£(.(oy IcrrcoTa tou 0€ou. 57. Kpd|arr£9 be <pwfTJ 
pveydXirj, oweaxoc TO - wta auTwy, Kai wpp.Tjaai' 6p.06up.aS6f eir' auToV ■ 

1 virapxwv 8e •7rXt]p^s Fl. A., Flor. represents 6 S« virapxiuv (or &>v) ev irvevpan 
ayia) ; possibly assim. to Apoc. i. 10, iv. 2, as it has been thoughtfully suggested 
that to be " in the spirit " would account for his vision, whereas the expression in 
T.R. would not seem to account for it. 

2 lt]0-ovv ; D, Flor., Gig. add tov Kvpiov, so Hilg. 

3 For tov Qeov Par., Wern. read virtutis Dei ; Const. Apost. njs 8vvaucu«, " recte 
ut videtur " Blass, so in p ; cf. Matt. xxvi. 64, Luke xxii. 69. 

Ver. 55. aTevio-as, cf. i. 10, els tov 
ovpavov, cf. John xvii. 1, " ubi enim est 
oculus, ibi est cor et amor ". In the 
power of the Holy Ghost, with which 
Stephen is represented as being full, as 
in life so in death, he saw 8o£av Oeov, in 
which He had appeared to Abraham, 
cf. ver. 2, irXi^pTjs, " crescente furore hos- 
tium, in Stephano crescit robur spiritus, 
omnisque fructus Spiritus," Bengel. — 
'Itjo-ovv lo-TWTa : elsewhere He is repre- 
sented as sitting, ii. 34. If St. Luke had 
placed this saying in the mouth of St. 
Stephen in imitation of the words of 
Jesus, Matt. xxi. 64, Mark xvi. 19, Luke 
xxii. 69, he would, without doubt, have 
described Him as sitting, cf. also the 
expression "Son of Man," only here 
outside the Gospels, and never in the 
Epistles (Rev. i. 13, a doubtful instance), 
a noteworthy indication of the primitive 
date and truthfulness of the expression 
and the report. See especially Wendt's 
note on p. 194 (1888). Standing, as if 
to succour and to receive His servant, 
tva Seilfl ttjv dvTi\rn|»iv tt|V €is avrov 
(Oecum., and so Chrys.) ; " quasi obvium 
Stephano," Bengel, so Zockler, and see 
Alford's note and Collect for St. Stephen's 
day. St. Augustine represents Christ as 
standing: "ut Stephano stanti, patienti, 
et reo, ipse quoque stans, quasi patiens 
et reus compatiatur". Alford supposes 
reference in the vision to that of Zech. 
iii. 1. — ck Scliwv : as the place of honour, 
cf. 1 Kings ii. 19, Matt. xx. 21. The 
Sanhedrin would recall the words " the 
Son of Man," as they had been spoken 
by One Who was Himself the Son of 
Man, and in Whom, as in His follower, 
they had seen only a blasphemer. On 
the expression " Son of Man " cf. Charles, 
Book of Enoch, Appendix B, p. 312 ff., 
and Witness of the Epistles, p. 286 

Ver. 57. Kpd£avTes : so as to silence 
him. — o"uveo-x°v to ura atrrwv : in order 
that the words which they regarded as 
so impious should not be heard, cf. Matt. 
xxvi. 65. Blass compares the phrase 
LXX, Isa. Hi. 15, Kal o-kvc'Iovo-l j3a.cri.Xeis 
to crTop.a avTwv. — wpp,i)o"av ... eir' 
avTov, cf. 2 Mace. x. 16, and in several 
places in 2 Mace, the verb is found with 
the same construction (although not 
quite in the same sense). 

Ver. 58. e£<o T-fjs -n-oXcus : according 
to the law, Lev. xxiv. 14, so in Luke iv. 
29, our Lord is cast out of Nazareth to 
be stoned. — cXi0o(36Xow : as guilty of 
blasphemy. St. Stephen's closing re- 
marks were in the eyes of his judges a 
justification of the charge ; imperf. as 
in ver. 59, see note below. The judicial 
forms were evidently observed, at least 
to some extent (Weiss attributes the 
introduction of the witnesses to a re- 
viser), and whilst the scene was a 
tumultuous one, it was quite possible that 
it was not wholly bereft of judicial appear- 
ances. — fidp-rupts : whose part it was to 
throw the first stone, cf. Deut. xvii. 7 
(John viii. 7). — aireBevro to IfidTia 
axiTwv : to perform their cruel task with 
greater ease and freedom, cf. xxii. 20. — 
vcaviov : only used in Acts, where it 
occurs three or four times, xx. 9, xxiii. 
17 (18), several times in LXX. It has 
been thought (Wendt) that the term 
could not have been used of Saul if he 
had been married, or if he was at this 
time a widower, but if vcavCas might be* 
used to denote any man of an age between 
twenty-four and forty, like Latin adule- 

scens and the Hebrew ^J72, Gen. xli. 

12 (Grimm-Thayer), Saul might be so 
described. Josephus applies the term to 
Agrippa I. when he was at least forty. 
Jos- Ant., xviii., 6, 7. See further on 




58. Kal eKf3aXoires e£w Tfjs iroXews, eXi0o36Xoui'. ical 01 u.dpTup€5 l 
direOerro to. l^idna auiw 2 irapa tous iroSas veaviou KaXoup-cVou 

pap-rupcs, Gig., Par. falsi testes ; cf. vi. 12. Blass rejects in 0. 
avTuv ; B has cavruv, so Weiss, but W.H. as in T.R. 

xxvi. 10. — lavXou : " If the Acts are the 
composition of a second-century writer 
to whom Paul was only a name, then the 
introduction of this silent figure in such 
a scene is a masterpiece of dramatic 
invention " (Page, Acts, Introd., xxxi.) ; 
for the name see below on xiii. 9, and 
also on its genuineness, Zahn, Einleitung 
in das N. T., ii., 49, as against Krenkel. 
Of Saul's earlier life we gather something 
from his own personal notices, see notes 
on xxii. 3, xxiii. 6, xxiv. 14, xxvi. 4, and 
cf. ix. 13. He was a Hebrew sprung 
from Hebrews, Phil. iii. 5 ; he was a Roman 
citizen, and not only so, but a Tarsian, 
a citizen of no mean city; cf. for the 
two citizenships, xxi. 39 (ix. 11) and 
xxii. 27, " Citizenship," Hastings' B.D. ; 
Zahn, u. s., p. 48; Ramsay, St. Paul, 
p. 30. Zahn, u. s., pp. 35, 49, maintains 
that Saul's family had only recently 
settled in Tarsus (but see Ramsay, u. s.), 
and defends the tradition that his parents 
had come there from Gischala, their son 
being born to them in Tarsus. On Saul's 
family and means see notes on xxiii. 16 
and xxiv. 26. But whatever his Roman 
and Tarsian citizenship may have con- 
tributed to his mental development, 
St. Paul's own words clearly lead us to 
attach the highest and most significant 
influence to the Jewish side of his 
nature and character. Paul's Phari- 
saism was the result not only of his 
training under Gamaliel, but also of 
the inheritance which he claimed from 
his father and his ancestors (xxiii. 6, 
$api(rai<i>v not $api<raiov, cf. Gal. i. 14). 
His early years were passed away from 
Jerusalem, xxvi. 4 (the force of T€ (R.V.) 
and the expression Iv tu eflvei p.ov, Zahn, 
u. s., p. 48), but his home-training 
could not have been neglected (cf. 2 
Tim. i. 3), and when he went up to 
the Holy City at an early stage to study 
under Gamaliel (xxii. 3, avaT£0pap.pivos, 
on its force see Sabatier L Apotre 
Paul, p. 30) he " lived a Pharisee," and 
nothing else than his well-known zeal is 
needed to account for his selection to his 
dreadful and solemn office at St. Stephen's 
martyrdom. As a Pharisee he had been 
" a separated one," and had borne the 
name with pride, not suspecting that a 
day was at hand when he would speak of 

himself as a^capio-pevos in a far higher 
and fuller sense, Rom. i. 1, Gal. i. 15 
(Zahn, u. s., p. 48) ; as a Pharisee he 
was "separated from all filthiness of 
heathenism " around (Nivdal), but he was 
to learn that the Christian life was that 
of the true " Chasid," and that in contrast 
to all Pharisaic legalism and externalism 
there was a cleansing ourselves from all 
filthiness of the flesh and spirit, a per- 
fecting holiness in the fear of God — God 
Who chooseth [before all temples the 
upright heart and pure (Edersheim, 
"Jewish Social Life, p. 231). On the 
question whether St. Paul ever saw our 
Lord in the flesh, see Keim, Geschichte 
jfesu, i., 35, 36, and references, and for 
the views of more recent writers, Witness 
of the Epistles (Longmans), chaps, i. 
and ii. 

Ver. 59. Kal IX16. tov X. time. : im- 
perf., as in ver. 58, " quia res morte de- 
mum [60] perficitur," Blass. Iitik., pre- 
sent participle, denoting, it would seem, 
the continuous appeal of the martyr to 
his Lord. Zeller, Overbeck and Baur 
throw doubt upon the historical truth of 
the narrative on account of the manner 
in which the Sanhedrists' action is 
divided between an utter absence of 
formal proceedings and a punctilious 
observance of correct formalities ; but 
on the other hand Wendt, note, p. 195 
(1888), points out with much force that 
an excited and tumultuous crowd, even 
in the midst of a high-handed and illegal 
act, might observe some legal forms, and 
the description given by St. Luke, so 
far from proceeding from one who 
through ignorance was unable to dis- 
tinguish between a legal execution and a 
massacre, impresses us rather with a sense 
of truthfulness from the very fact that no 
attempt is made to draw such a distinc- 
tion of nicely balanced justice, less or 
more. The real difficulty lies in the 
relations which the scene presupposes 
between the Roman Government and the 
Sanhedrim. No doubt at this period the 
latter did not possess the power to inflict 
capital punishment (Schurer, Jewish 
People, div. ii., vol. i., p. 187, E.T.), as 
is evident from the trial of our Lord. 
But it may well be that at the time of 
Stephen's murder Roman authority was 

5 8. 



somewhat relaxed in Judaea. Pilate had 
just been suspended from his functions, 
or was on the point of being so, and he 
may well have been tired of refusing the 
madness and violence of the Jews, as 
Renan supposes, or at all events he may 
well have refrained, owing to his bad 
odour with them, from calling them to 
account for their illegal action in the 
case before us (see McGiffert, Apostolic 
Age, p. 91). It is of course possible 
that the stoning took place with the con- 
nivance of the Jewish authorities, as 
Weizsacker allows, or that there was an 
interval longer than Acts supposes be- 
tween the trial of Stephen and his actual 
execution, during which the sanction 
of the Romans was obtained. In the 
absence of exact dates it is difficult to 
see why the events before us should not 
have been transacted during the inter- 
regnum between the departure of Pontius 
Pilate, to answer before Tiberius for his 
misgovernment, and the arrival of Mar- 
cellus, the next Procurator. If this was 
so, we have an exact historical parallel 
in the illegal murder of James the Just, 
who was tried before the high priest, and 
stoned to death, since Ananias thought 
that he had a good opportunity for his 
violence when Festus was dead, and 
Albinus was still upon his road (Jos., 
Ant., xx., 9, 1). But if this suggestion 
of an interregnum is not free from diffi- 
culties, we may further take into con- 
sideration the fact that the same Roman 
officer, Vitellius, prefect of Syria, who 
had caused Pilate to be sent to Rome 
in disgrace, was anxious at the same 
time to receive Jewish support, and 
determined to effect his object by every 
means in his power. Josephus, Ant., 
xviii., 4, 2-5, tells us that Vitellius 
sent a friend of his own, Marcellus, to 
manage the affairs of Judaea, and that, 
not content with this, he went up to 
Jerusalem himself to conciliate the Jews 
by open regard for their religion, as well 
as by the remission of taxation. It is 
therefore not difficult to conceive that 
both the murder of Stephen and the per- 
secution which followed were connived 
at by the Roman government; see, in 
addition to the above references, Rendall's 
Acts, Introd., p. 19 ff. ;Farrar, St. Paul, 
i., p. 648 ff., and note, p. 649. But this 
solution of the difficulty places the date 
of Saul's conversion somewhat late — a.d. 
37 — and is entirely at variance with the 
earlier chronology adopted not only by 
Harnack (so too by McGiffert), but here by 
Ramsay, St. Paul, 376, 377, who places 
St. Stephen's martyrdom in a.d. 33 at 

the latest. In the account of the death 
of Stephen, Wendt, following Weiss, 
Sorof, Clemen, Hilgenfeld, regards vii. 
58b, viii. ia, 3, as evidently additions of 
the redactor, although he declines to 
follow Weiss and Hilgenfeld in passing 
the same judgment on ver. 55 (and 56, 
according to H.), and on the last words 
of Stephen in ver. 59b. The serond 
I\i6o(3o\ovv in 59b, which Hilgenfeld as- 
signs to his redactor, and Wendt now 
refers to the action of the witnesses, 
as distinct from that of the whole crowd, 
is repeated with dramatic effect, height- 
ened by the present participle, eirttc., 
"ruthless violence on the one side, an- 
swered by continuous appeals to heaven 
on the other"; see Rendall's note, in 
loco. — eiriK. : " calling upon the Lord," 
R.V. (" calling upon God," A.V.), the 
former seems undoubtedly to be rightly 
suggested by the words of the prayer 
which follow — on the force of the word 
see above, ii. 21. — Kvpie 'Itjo-ot), 8e§ai to 
•jrvevfia (jiov ; a direct prayer to our 
Lord, cf. for its significance and reality, 
Zahn, " Die Anbetung Jesu " (Skizzen 
aus dent Leben der alien Kirche, pp. g, 288), 
Liddon, Our Lord's Divinity, lect. vii. ; 
cf. Luke xxiii. 46. (Weiss can only see 
an imitation of Luke, and an interpola- 
tion here, because the kneeling, and also 
another word follow before the surrender 
of the spirit ; but see on the other hand 
the remarks of Wendt, note, p. 196.) 

Ver. 60. 0«is 8e to. -yoVaTa : a phrase 
not used in classical writers, but Blass 
compares Ovid, Fasti, ii., 438 ; five times 
in St. Luke's writings, Luke xxii. 41, 
Acts ix. 40, xx. 36, xxi. 5 ; only once 
elsewhere in N.T., Mark xv. 19. The 
attitude of kneeling in prayer would no 
doubt commend itself to the early be- 
lievers from the example of their Lord. 
Standing would seem to have been the 
more common attitude among the Jews, 
but cf. instances in the O.T. of kneeling 
in prayer, LXX, 1 Kings viii. 54, Ezra 
ix. 5, Dan. vi. 10, and also the expression 
used twice by St. Paul, KafAirrtiv to. 
Y<5vaTa, 1 Chron. xxix. 20, 1 Esdras viii. 
73, Isa. xlv. 23, etc., Ephes. iii. 14, and 
Phil. ii. 10 (Rom. xi. 4, xiv. 11). See 
Friedrich, Das Lucasevangelium, p. 42. — 
4>6>vfj \t.eya\r), cf. Luke xxiii. 46. The 
last final effort of the strong love which 
showed itself also in the martyr's bended 
knees (see Wendt, in loco). Eusebius, 
H. E., v., 2, tells us how the martyrs of 
Vienne and Lyons took up St. Stephen's 
words in their own prayer for their perse- 
cutors (cf. the famous instance of the 
last words of Sir Thomas More before 




lau'Xou, 59. Kai €\i8o|36\oui' t6k Zrifyavov, cmKaXoo^eKOK Kai 
\4yovra, Kupie 'Itjo-ou, Se'£ai to ireeuu-d uou. 60. 0eis Se Ta yoVaTa, 

his judges, and Dante, Purgatorio,xv., 106 
ff., on the dying Stephen) : p.f| o-ttjo-y|s 
axiTots tt)v ap.apTiav votjty|V : the nega- 
tive expression best corresponds to the 
positive acfucvai ttjv ajxapriav (Wendt), 
cf. 1 Mace. xiii. 38, 39, xv. 5, 8, where 
the contrast marked between loravai and 
a4>ie'vai seems to favour this explanation. 
Blass takes it as marking a contrast like 
that between lo-Tavai and avaipeiv, cf. 
Heb. x. 9. Weiss lays stress upon 
TavTTjv, and regards the prayer as ask- 
ing that their present sin might not be 
weighed out to them in an equivalent 
punishment, cf. Grotius on the Hebrew 

~>pvl? 1 Kings xx. 39, whilst De Wette 

(so Felten) takes it as simply "reckon it 
not," i.e., " weigh it not," cf. Zech. xi. 12. 
Schottgen sees a reference to the Rab- 
binical notion " si quis bonum aut malum 
opus facit, hoc sequitur eum, et stat 
juxta eum in mundo futuro," Rev. xiv. 13, , 
and cf. a similar view quoted by Farrar, 
St. Paul, i., 167. Rendall regards it as 
a judicial term, as if Stephen appealed 
to Christ as Judge not to impute their 
sin to the murderers in condemnation 
(Rom. x. 3). The words of St. Stephen 
again recall the words of his Master, 
Luke xxiii. 34, words which (Eusebius, 
H. E., cf. ii., 20) also formed the dying 
prayer of James, " the Lord's brother ". 
In James as in Stephen we may see 
how the true Christian character, whilst 
expressing itself in righteous indignation 
against hypocrisy and wrong, never failed 
to exhibit as its counterpart the meekness 
and gentleness of Christ. — lKoip/n0i] (cf 
1 Cor. xv. 18), a picture-word of rest and 
calmness which stands in dramatic con- 
trast to the rage and violence of the scene. 
The word is used of death both in LXX 
and in classical Greek, cf, e.g., Isa. xiv. 
8, 18, xliii. 17, 1 Kings xi. 43, 2 Mace, 
xii. 45, etc. ; Homer, Il.,xi., 241 ; Soph., 
Elect., 509. Blass well says of this word, 
" sed nullo loco seque mirandum," and 
describes the reference in Homer, Koipij- 
traro xaXiceov virvov, as " et simile et 
dissimile " : Christians sleep in death, but 
no " brazen sleep " ; they sleep kv Xpio-Ta> ; 
simple words which formed the epitaph 
on many a Christian grave — in Him, 
Who is Himself " the Resurrection and 
the Life". Page notes the cadence of 
the word expressing rest and repose, 
cf. Farrar, St. Paul, i., 167, note, and 
aKwXvTcus, xxviii. 31. 

St. Stephen's Speech. — Many and 
varied explanations have been given of 
the drift and purpose of St. Stephen's 
address. But the various explanations 
need not be mutually exclusive, and St. 
Stephen, like a wise scribe instructed 
unto the kingdom, might well bring out 
of his treasury things new and old. It is 
often said, e.g., that the address is no 
reply to the charges alleged, that it would 
be more intelligible how the charges 
were framed from a perversion of the 
speech, than how the speech could be 
framed out of the charges ; whilst, on the 
other hand, it is possible to see from the 
opening to the closing words an implicit 
repudiation of the charges of blasphemy 
against God and contempt of the law. 
The speech opens with a declaration of 
the divine majesty of Jehovah; it closes 
with a reference to the divine sanction of 
the law, and with the condemnation of 
those who had not kept it. This im- 
plicit repudiation by Stephen of the 
charges brought against him is also con- 
tained in St. Chrysostom's view of the 
purpose of the martyr, viz., that he 
designed to show that the covenant and 
promises were before the law, and sacri- 
fice and the law before the temple. 
This view, which was adopted by Grotius 
and Calvin, is in some degree retained by 
Wendt (so also Felten), who sums up the 
chief aim of the speech as a demonstra- 
tion that the presence of God is not con- 
fined to the holy place, the temple, but 
that long before the temple was built, 
and before the people had settled in the 
promised land, God had given to the 
fathers a share in the proofs of this re- 
velation, and that too in strange countries 
(although there is no reason to suppose 
that Stephen went so far as to contend 
that Jew and Gentile were on a precisely 
equal footing). But Wendt is conscious 
that this view does not account for the 
whole of the speech, and that it does not 
explain the prominence given in it to the 
obstinacy of Israel against the revelation 
of God vouchsafed to Moses, with which 
the counter accusation against Stephen 
is so closely connected (see Spitta's severe 
criticism, Apostclgeschichte, pp. in, 112, 
and Weizsacker's evident failure to main- 
tain the position that the climax of the 
whole address is to be found in the de 
claration about Solomon's temple, which 
he is obliged to explain as a later thought 
belonging to a later time, Apostolic Age, 

59— 6o. 



i., pp. 68-71, E.T.). Thus in his last 
edition, p. 151 (1899), he points out that in 
section w. 35-43, as also in w. 25 and 27, 
the obstinacy of the people against Moses, 
sent to be their deliverer, is evidently 
compared with their obstinacy in reject- 
ing Jesus as the Messiah, and in vv. 51- 
53 the murder of Jesus is condemned as 
a fresh proof of the opposition of the 
people to God's revelation to them : here 
is a point of view which in Wendt's 
judgment evidently had a share in the 
composition of the address. Wendt 
urges his view against the older one of 
Meyer and to some extent at all events 
that of Baur, Zeller and Overbeck, that 
the central point of the speech is to be 
found in ver. 51, to which the whole pre- 
ceding sketch of the history of the people 
led up : however great had been the 
benefits bestowed by God upon His 
people, on their part there had been from 
the beginning nothing in return but a 
corresponding thanklessness and resist- 
ance to this purpose. McGiffert, Apos- 
tolic Age, pp. 87, 88, also recognises that 
the theme of the address is to be found 
in vv. 51-53, but he also admits the 
double purpose of St. Stephen, viz., not 
only to show (as Meyer and others) that 
at all stages of their history Israel had 
been stiffnecked and disobedient, but also 
(as Wendt) to draw a parallel between 
their conduct and the treatment of Jesus 
by those whom he is addressing. 

This leads us to a consideration of the 
view of Spitta as to the main purpose of 
St. Stephen's speech. Whatever may 
be thought of its merits, it gives a unity 
to the speech which is wanting in many 
earlier and more recent expositions of it, 
as Hilgenfeld recognises, although he 
himself holds a different view, and one 
essentially similar to that of Baur. Ac- 
cording to Spitta, in w. 2-16 we have 
an introduction to the chief section of 
the address which begins with ver. 17, 
ko.9u>s 8e •fJYY l E €V 6 xp° v °S t^JS iira.y. 
Moses, ver. 20, was the person through 
whom God would save His people, and 
lead them to His true service in the 
promised land, w. 7, 35, 38, 44. If we 
ask why Moses occupies this important 
place in the speech, the answer is found 
in ver. 37, which forms the central point 
of the description of Moses, and divides 
it into two parts (a verse in which Cle- 
men and Hilgenfeld can only see an 
interpolation of a redactor, and in which 
Weiss finds something suspicious, see 
Zockler's note, in loco). In the first 
part, 17-36, we are told how Moses by 
divine and miraculous guidance grows up 

to be the deliverer of Israel. But when 
he would commence his work of deliver- 
ance his brethren will not understand 
his aim and reject him, 23-28. In the 
wilderness he receives a fresh commis- 
sion from God to undertake the delivery 
of the people, 29-34. But this Moses 
(owtos) who was thus repulsed God had 
sent to be a ruler and deliverer — this 
man was he who led these people forth — 
and it was this Moses who said to the 
children : " A prophet" etc., v. 37. Why 
is this prophecy introduced except to 
support the inference that as Moses, a 
type of the Messiah, was thus repulsed, 
and afterwards raised to be a ruler and 
deliverer, so must, according to Moses' 
own words, the Messiah of Israel be 
first rejected by His people ? In the next 
division, w. 38-50, the same parallel is 
again instituted between Moses and the 
Messiah. The former had delivered a 
law which consisted of "living oracles," 
but instead of receiving it, Israel had 
given themselves up to the worship of 
idols, 35-43 ; instead of establishing a 
worship well-pleasing to God, those who 
came after Moses, not content with the 
tabernacle, which was not confined to 
one place, and which represented the 
heavenly archetype, had built a temple 
which called forth the cutting words of 
the prophet, 47-50. In his explanation 
of these last verses there lies at least 
one weakness of Spitta's explanation, 
for he does not seem in his disapproval 
of the temple to allow that it had even 
a relative value, and that Solomon was 
well aware that God did not dwell only in 
temples made with hands. But Spitta's 
main point is to trace again a connection 
with the verse which forms his centre, 
ver. 37 (Deut. xviii. 15). As Moses in 
vain communicated a spiritual law and a 
corresponding worship to a people whose 
heart turned after idols and the service 
of a temple, so the Messiah must also 
experience that the carnal mind of the 
people would oppose His revelation of 
the divine will in relation to a rightful 
service. Thus the whole speech be- 
comes a proof of the Messiahship of 
Jesus as against those who appealed to 
the authority of Moses, and saw in Jesus 
a twofold cause of offence: (1) that He 
was rejected by His people and crucified ; 
(2) that He had treated with impiety 
that which they held most sacred — the 
law and the temple. 

In all this Spitta sees no direct answer 
to the false witnesses ; but the speech, 
he maintains, is much rather an answer 
to the two causes of offence which must 


nPAEEis AnorroAQN 

VII. 60. 

EKpate $wr\ \ieyd\r\, 1 Kupic, fit) ottJctyjs auTois tx)v au-apTiaf raur-qy. 
ical touto ei-nw eicoifAY)8r]. 2 SauXos 8e f\v owcuSokw^ ttj di-aipe'crei 

1 D, Vulg., Gig. (not Flcr.) add Xtytov, so Blass in {J, and Hilg. ; prob. assim. to 
more usual Xeywv after Kpo?«tv where the words are given. 

2 £koi|ati0t), Par., Wern., Vulg. add in Domino, but not Blass. 

have been discussed in every synagogue, 
and which the infant Church must have 
been obliged to face from the first, especi- 
ally as it took its stand upon the proof 
that Jesus was the Christ. Stephen in 
his disputations, vi. 9, must have often 
faced opponents who thus sought to 
invalidate the Messianic claims of Jesus; 
what more natural than that he should 
now repeat before the whole assembly 
the proofs which he had before given in 
the synagogue, where no one could re- 
sist the spirit and the wisdom with which 
he spake ? In this way Spitta maintains 
that the charges in w. 52, 53 occupy 
their proper place ; the Jews had rejected 
the prophets — Moses and his successors 
— finally they rejected the Messiah, 
whom the prophets had foretold (Apostel- 
geschichte, p. 105 ff.). Whatever stric- 
tures we may be inclined to pass upon 
Spitta (see, e.g., Wendt in new edition, 
1899, pp. 150, 151), it is not unlikely 
that he has at all events grasped what 
others have failed to see, viz., that in the 
nature of the case, Stephen in his airo- 
Xoyia, or counter-accusation — whichever 
it was — could not have been unmindful 
of the Prophet like unto Moses, whom 
Moses had foretold: his dying prayer 
revealed the Name, not uttered in the 
speech, which was enshrined in his in- 
most heart ; Jesus was the Christ — He 
came ov Ka/raXvaai dXXa irXT]pu<rai, 
whether that fulfilment was made by a 
spiritual temple or a spiritual law. In 
thus keeping the thought of Jesus of 
Nazareth prominent throughout the 
speech, whilst not actually uttering His 
Name, in thus comparing Moses and 
Christ, Stephen was answering the 
charges made against him. " This 
Nazarene " (so it was said in the charge 
made against Stephen) "would destroy 
this place and change the customs," etc. 
— the prophet Moses had given the 
people living oracles, not a law which 
should stifle the spirit in the letter ; the 
prophet Isaiah had spoken of a presence 
of God far transcending that which filled 
any earthly temple ; and if these prophets 
had pointed on to the Messiah, and if 

the Nazarene were indeed the Christ thus 
foretold, what wonder that He should 
reveal a commandment unto life, and a 
worship of the Father in spirit and in 
truth ? Nor must it be forgotten that 
if Stephen was interrupted before his 
speech was concluded, he may well have 
intended to drive home more closely 
the manifest fulfilment in Christ of the 
deliverance dimly foreshadowed in the 
work of Moses and in the freedom 
from Egyptian bondage. This was the 
true parallel between Moses and the 
Messiah on which the Rabbis were wont 
to dwell. Thus the Messiah, in com- 
parison with Moses, was the second, but 
in comparison with all others the great, 
deliverer ; as Moses led Israel out of 
Egypt, so would the Messiah accomplish 
the final deliverance, and restore Israel to 
their own land (Weber, yildiscke Theo- 
logie, pp. 359, 364 (1897)). It is to be 
observed that Spitta warmly supports the 
historical character of the speech, which 
he ascribes without interpolations to his 
source A, although in w. 55-60 he refers 
some " insertions " to B. His criticism 
as against the tendency critics, especially 
Overbeck, is well worth consulting (pp. 
1 10-123), an d he quotes with approval the 
judgment of Gfrorer — " I consider this 
speech unreservedly as the oldest monu- 
ment of Gospel history". So too 
Clemen, pp. 97, 288, allows that the 
speech is essentially derived, with the 
exception of ver. 37, as also the whole 
chapter with the exception of ver. 60, from 
an old written source, H.H., Historia 
Hellenistarum ; and amongst more recent 
writers, McGiffert holds that whilst 
many maintain that the author of the 
Acts composed the speech and put it 
into the mouth of Stephen, its contents 
are against such a supposition, and that 
Luke undoubtedly got the substance of 
the discourse from an early source, and 
reproduced it with approximate accuracy 
(p. 89 and note). So Weiss refers the 
speech to his Jewish-Christian source, 
and refuses to admit that with its pro- 
found knowledge of the O.T. it could 
have been composed by the author of 

VIII. i. 



VIII. 1. 'EyeVcTO 8c eV eKCikt] -rfj Tjp.epa Siwyfios pt'yas eirl ttji' 
ckkXtjcti'cii/ TTjf eV 'lepoaoXi/fiois ■ irdrrcs tc 8i€<nrdpT]<ya»' Kara -ras 

the book. The attempt of Feine (so 
also Holtzmann and Jiingst) to split up 
the speech into two distinct parts is 
based upon the idea that in one part 
an answer is made to the charge that 
Stephen had spoken against God, and 
that the other part contains an answer 
to the charge that he had spoken against 
the temple. The first part is contained 
in vii. 2-21, 29-34, 44"5°> an< i tne 
second part in vii. 22-28, 35-43, 51-53- 
The latter sections are taken from Feine's 
Jerusalem source ; they are then added 
to those which belong to a new source, 
and finally combined by the canonical 
Luke. Hilgenfeld may well ask how it is 
possible to break up in this manner the 
narrative part of the speech relating to 
Moses, so as to regard w. 22-28 as a 
section alien from what precedes and 
what follows ! (see especially Hilgenfeld's 
criticism on Feine, Zeitschriftfur wissen- 
schaft. Theol., p. 396 (1895) and Knaben- 
bauer, p. 120) ; on the truthful record 
of the speech see Lightfoot's striking 
remarks " Acts," B.D. 2 , i., p. 33. What- 
ever may be said as to the various diffi- 
culties which the speech contains, two 
things are apparent : (1) that these diffi- 
culties do not touch the main drift of the 
argument; (2) that the fact of their 
presence, where their removal was easy, 
bears witness to the accuracy of the 

Chapter VIII. — Ver. 1. lavXos Se 
•k.tA., R.V. joins these words to the 
conclusion of the previous chapter, and 
thus brings them into a close and fitting 
connection with vii. 58. So too Wendt, 
Blass, Nosgen, Zockler. — fjv o-vvevSokwv : 
for this characteristic Lucan use of the 
imperfect of the substantive verb with a 
participle, see chap. i. 10. The formula 
here indicates the lasting and enduring 
nature of Saul's "consent". The verb 
eruvfvSoKEu is peculiar to St. Luke and 
St. Paul, and is used by the former in 
his Gospel as well as in Acts, cf. Luke 
xi. 48, Acts xxii. 20 (by St. Paul him- 
self with reference to his share in the 
murder of St. Stephen), Rom. i. 32, 1 
Cor. vii. 12, 13. The word is also found 
in 1 Mace. i. 57 (iv. 28), 2 Mace. xi. 24, 
35. signifying entire approval ; it is also 
twice used by St. Clement, Cor., xxxv., 
6; xliv., 3: "consent" does not express 
the force of the word — " was approving 
of his death " (Rendall). — avaip€<rci : used 
only here in N.T. (on St. Luke's favourite 

word dvaipc'cd, see Friedrich, Das Lucas- 
evangelium, p. 22) ; both verb and noun 
were frequent in medical language 
(Hobart, Zahn), see below on ix. 29, but 
the noun in LXX, Num. xi. 15, Judith 
xv. 4, 2 Mace. v. 13, and in classical 
Greek, e.g., Xen., Hell., vi., 3, 5. — 
ey€V€To S« : another characteristic for- 
mula in St. Luke, Friedrich, «. 5., p. 13 ; 
here introduces a new section of the 
history. — iv Ikcivtj tj} -qpepq.: R.V. "on 
that day" (A.V. "at that time"), cf. ii. 
41 ; the persecution broke out at once, 
"on that very day" (so Wendt, Rendall, 
Hort, Hackett, Felten, Zockler, Holtz- 
mann), the signal for it being given by 
the tumultuous stoning of the first mar- 
tyr (but see on the other hand Alford, 
in loco). Weiss draws attention to the 
emphatic position of eiceivT) before rfj 
■qp,e'pq..— eiri ttjv iicicXTjcriav ttjv ev "I, : 
hitherto as, e.g., v. 11, the Church has 
been thought of as one, because limited 
in fact to the one city Jerusalem, but 
here we have a hint that soon there 
would be new Ecclesiae in the one 
Ecclesia, as it spread throughout the 
Holy Land (Hort, Ecclesia, pp. 53-56, 
227, and Ramsay, St. Paul, etc., pp. 
41, 127, 377). — irovrts tc: "ridiculum 
est hoc mathematica ratione accipere " 
(Blass) — it is evident from ver. 3 that 
there were some left for Saul to perse- 
cute. In ix. 26 we have mention of a 
company of disciples in Jerusalem, but 
there is no reason to suppose (Schnecken- 
burger, Zeller, Overbeck) that Luke has 
made a mistake in the passage before us, 
for there is nothing in the text against 
the supposition that some at least of 
those who had fled returned again later. 
— SiEcrirdpTjo-av : only in St. Luke in 
N.T., here and in ver. 4, and in xi. 19. 
This use of the word is quite classical, 
and frequent in LXX, e.g., Gen. ix. ig, 
Lev. xxvi. 33, 1 Mace. xi. 47. Feine 
remarks that even Holtzmann allows 
that the spread of Christianity through- 
out Judaea and Samaria may be regarded 
as historical. — x"P a s : here rendered 
"regions": Blass takes the word as 
almost =, and see also Plummer 
on Luke xxi. 21, Iv rais x<^p ai s " in 
the country," R.V. The word is charac- 
teristic of St. Luke, being used in his 
Gospel nine times, and in Acts eight ; 
it is used thrice by St. Matthew and by 
St. John, four times by St. Mark, but 
elsewhere in N.T. only once, James v. 4. 




X<ipas Trjs 'louoouas Kai Zau-apcias, ttXt)^ tow dTroaroXuf. 1 2. 
o-uccKO/xiaai' 8c to^ 2r4$a.vov aVSpcs euXa0€i5, Kal e-rroirjo-ai'To 

1 Iap.ap€La? ABCHP, so W.H. alt. App., p. 160, Blass, Weiss, Hilg. ; Zafiapias 
fc$DE, so Tisch., W.H., see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 45. After Sia>Yp.o? D, Flor., Sah. 
kou 9Xu|/is, assim. to Matt. xiii. 21, 2 Thess. i. 4, so Hilg. The same addition 
occurs in Western text in xiii. 50. After airoo-ToXcov D 1 , Flor., Gig., Prov., Sah., Aug. 
add 01 tp.ei.vav ev Up., retained by Blass in p, so Belser, Beitrdge, p. 49, and Hilg. 

It is found frequently in LXX and in 
1, 2, 3 Mace. — ttjs 'lovocuas Kal 1a- 
uapeias : thus the historian makes another 
step in the fulfilment of the Lord's com- 
mand, i. 8, and see also Ramsay, St. Paul, 
etc., p. 41. St. Cluysostom remarks on 
oiKovofiCas 6 Sico-ypos 'fjv, since the per- 
secution became the means of spreading 
the Gospel, and thus early the blood of 
the martyrs became the seed of the 
Church. — itXtjv to>v a,iro<rr6Xci>v — irXijv: 
characteristic of St. Luke, sometimes as 
an adverb, sometimes as a preposition 
with genitive as here and in xv. 28, 
xxvii. 22 ; elsewhere it is only found once 
as a preposition with genitive, in Mark 
xii. 32, although very frequent in LXX. 
The word occurs at least thirteen times 
in the Gospel, four times in Acts, in St. 
Matthew five times, in St. Mark once, 
and in John viii. 10 ; see Friedrich, Das 
Lucasevangeliutn,pp. 16, gi. This men- 
tion of the Apostles seems unlikely to 
Schneckenburger. Schleiermacher, and 
others, but, as Wendt points out, it is 
quite consistent with the greater stead- 
fastness of men who felt themselves to 
be irpwTOYCDvicrTai, as GZcumenius calls 
them, in that which concerned their 
Lord. Their position too may well have 
been more secure than that of the Hel- 
lenists, who were identified with Stephen, 
as they were held in favour by the people, 
v. 13, and as regular attendants at the 
temple services would not have been 
exposed to the same charges as those 
directed against the proto-martyr. There 
was, too, a tradition (very old and well 
attested according to Harnack, Chron- 
ologic, i., 243) to the effect that the 
Apostles were commanded by Christ not 
to depart from Jerusalem for twelve 
years, so f that none should say that he 
had not heard the message, Euseb., 
H. £., v., 18, 14; nor is there anything 
inconsistent with this tradition in the 
visit of St. Peter and St. John to Samaria, 
since this and other journeys are simply 
missionary excursions, from which the 
Apostles always returned to Jerusalem 
(Harnack). The passage in Clem. Alex., 
Strom., ri., 5, 43, limited the Apostles' 

preaching for the time specified not to 
Jerusalem, but to Israel. — Zap.apc(as : our 
Lord had recognised the barrier between 
the Samaritan and the Jew, Matt. x. 5 : 
but now in obedience to His command 
(i. 8) both Samaritan and Jew were ad- 
mitted to the Church, for although the 
Apostles had not originated this preach- 
ing they very plainly endorsed it, ver. 
14 ff. (cf. Hort, Judaistic Christianity, 
p. 54). Possibly the very fact that Philip 
and others were flying from the perse- 
cution of the Jewish hierarchy would have 
secured their welcome in the Samaritan 

Ver. 2. Spitta connects ver. 2 with 
xi. 19-21, and all the intermediate sec- 
tion, viii. 5-xi. 19 ; forms part of his source 
B (so also Sorof, Clemen, who joins his 
H.H., viii. 1 to xi. 19 ; but on the other 
hand see Hiigenfeld, Zeitschrift fur 
wissenschaft. Theol., p. 501 (1895), and 
Jiingst, Apostelgeschichte, p. 79). Ac- 
cording to Spitta the whole narrative of 
Philip's ministry in viii. ought not to be 
connected so closely with the death ot 
Stephen, but should fall after ix. 31. 
The only reason for its earlier insertion 
is the desire to connect the second deacon 
with the first (but Hiigenfeld, u. s., pp. 
413, 414 (1895), as against both Spitta 
and Clemen, regards the account of 
Philip and that of Stephen as insepar- 
able). Spitta strongly maintains that 
Philip the Apostle, and not the deacon, 
is meant ; and if this be so, he would 
no doubt help us to answer the objection 
that in viii. 14-17, and indeed in the 
whole section 9-24 we have an addition 
of the sub- Apostolic age inserted to show 
that the Apostles alone could bestow 
the Holy Spirit. But it cannot be said 
that Spitta's attempt at the identification 
of Philip in viii. with the Apostle is in any 
way convincing, see, £.g\,Z6ckler, Apostel- 
geschichte, p. 212 ; Hiigenfeld, u. s., p. 416 
(note), and Jiingst, u. s., p. 81. Feine's 
objection to viii. 14-17 leads him, whilst 
he admits that the meeting with Simon 
Magus is historical, to regard the con- 
version of the sorcerer as doubtful, be- 
cause the whole passage presupposes 



KOTre-roy fieyav iir' auTw. 3. ZaOXos §6 eXup-cuyero r'qv eKKX-nrnav', 
Kara tous oucous elo-rropeuou.ei'os, crupui' T€ avSpas kcu yucalicas 

(w. 18-24) that the laying on of the 
Apostles' hands bestowed the Spirit ; 
so Clemen refers the whole representation 
in its present form of the communication 
of the Spirit, not through Baptism, but 
through the laying on of the Apostles' 
hands, to his Redactor Antijudaicus (cf. 
xix. 6), and to the same hand he attri- 
butes the irXt)v tuv diro<n*6X<i>v, ver. 1, 
and cf. ver. 25, introduced for the pur- 
pose of showing that the Apostles Peter 
and John sanctioned the Samaritan 
mission from the central home of the 
Christian Church. — <rvvcK<£p.i<rav : in its 
primary sense the verb means to carry 
or bring together, of harvest ; to gather 
in, to house it ; so also in LXX, Job v. 
26 ; in a secondary sense, to help in 
burying ; so Soph., Ajax, 1048 ; Plut., 
Sull., 38. The meaning is not " carried 
to his burial," as in A.V., but rather as 
R.V., " buried," for, although the Greek is 
properly "joined in carrying," the word 
includes the whole ceremony of burial — 
it is used only here in the N.T., and in 
LXX only in /. c. — cvXa^eis : only found 
in St. Luke in N.T., and used by him 
four times, once in Luke ii. 25, and in 
Acts ii. 5, xxii. 12 (evaepvjs, T.R.). The 
primary thought underlying the word is 
that of one who handles carefully and 
cautiously, and so it bears the meaning of 
cautious, circumspect. Although cvXd- 
P«ia and €vXafi$€t<r0cu are both used in 
the sense of caution and reverence to- 
wards the gods in classical Greek, the 
adjective is never expressly so used. 
But Plato connects it closely with Sbccuos 
(cf. Luke ii. 25), Polit. 311 A and 311 B 
(so evcre(3ws and cvXajius are used to- 
gether by Demosthenes). In the LXX 
all three words are found to express re- 
verent fear of, or piety towards, God ; 
EvXa^€io-0ai, frequently, cvXdfScia in 
Prov. xxviii. 14, where <tkXt)pos ttjv 
KapSCav in the second part of the verse 
seems to point to the religious character 
of the cvXap*., whilst cvXa^s is found in 

Micah vii. 2 as a rendering of T^Dn ( C A 
Psalms of Solomon, p. 36, Ryle and 
James' edition) ; cf. also Ecclus. xi. 
17 (but see for both passages, Hatch 
and Redpath) ; in Lev. xv. 31 we find 
the word evXafJcis iroiijaeTe tovs ulcus 

'I. diri twv aicaOapcriuy avrwv, *^^ 

— T 

hi. The adverb evXapis is found once, 
■/. i'iacc. vi. 11. St. Luke uses the word 
VOL. II. 14 

chiefly at all events of O.T. piety. In 
Luke ii. 45 it is used of Simeon, in Acts 
ii. 5 of the Jews who came up to worship 
at the feasts in Jerusalem, and in xxii. 
12, although Ananias was a Christian, 
yet the qualifying words eiX. tcc/rd 
tov vop.ov point again to a devout observ- 
ance of the Jewish law. Trench, N. T. 
Synonyms, i., pp. 38, 198 ff. ; Westcott, 
Hebrews, on v. 7 ; Grimm-Thayer, sub 
v., and sub v. SeiXCa. — avSpes «vX. : 
much discussion has arisen as to whether 
they were Jews or Christians. They 
may have been Christians who like 
the Apostles themselves were still Jews, 
attending the temple services and 
hours of prayer, some of whom were 
doubtless left in the city. But these 
would have been described more pro- 
bably as dSeX<f>o£ or p,a0T)Ta( (so Felten, 
Page, Hackett). Or they may have been 
devout Jews like Nicodemus, or Joseph 
of Arimathea, who would show their 
respect for Stephen, as Nicodemus and 
Joseph for Jesus (so Holtzmann, Zockler). 
Wetstein (so too Renan and Blass) 
explains of Gentile proselytes, men like 
Cornelius, who rendered the last offices 
to Stephen out of natural respect for the 
dead, and who stood outside the juris- 
diction of the Sanhedrim, so that the 
funeral rites need not have been per- 
formed in secret. But St. Luke as a 
rule uses other words to denote Gentile 
proselytes, and the Sanhedrim would 
probably not have interfered with the 
burial, not only on account of the known 
Jewish care for the dead, but also because 
devout Jews would not have been obnox- 
ious in their eyes to the charges brought 
against Stephen, vi. 14 (so Nosgen). 
The word might therefore include both 
devout Jews and Jewish Christians who 
joined together in burying Stephen. — 
koitctov peyav, from koittw, kotttojacli., 
cf. planctus from plango, to beat the 
breast or head in lamentation. Not used 
elsewhere in N.T., but frequent in LXX ; 
cf., e.g., Gen. 1. 10, 1 Mace. ii. 70, iv. 
39, ix. 20, xiii. 26, for the same allocation 
as here, and for TroiTJaat tcoircnSv, Jer". 
vi. 26, Mic. i. 8, and cf. also Zech. xii. 
10. In classical Greek icou.p.6s is found, 
but see Plut., Fab., 17, and Kennedy, 
Sources of N. T. Greek, p. 74, for refer- 
ence to the comic poet Eupolis (cf. also 
Blass), and Grimm-Thayer, sub v. For 
the Jewish customs of mourning cf. 
Matt. ix. 23, Hamburger, Real-Encyclo- 




irapeSiSou els <puXaKvji'. 4. 
eoaYYeXi^ojiefot tov \6yov. 1 

01 ficv ouv SiaairapefTes oitj\6c 

1 8iT)X0ov ; for this word Gig., Par., Wern. seem to have read ciropcvov-ro, ibant. 
After Xoyov Par., Wern. and other Latin authorities add " circa (per) civitates et 
castella Judaeae," Kara Tas iroXeis Kat Kcouas ttjs '•> Blass in {$, evidently for the sake 
of clearness, as also in previous cirop., cf. Wendt. After Xo-yov E, Vulg., Par 2 , Wern. 
add tov 8«ov, again addition apparently for clearness (if not omission). Blass rejects 
in p ; where 6 X<J-yos is used in Acts in this sense we almost always have this addition 
or tou Kvpiov. 

pddie des jfudentums, i., 7, 996, " Trauer " ; 
Edersheim, jfesus the Messiah, i., p. 616, 
and Sketches of Jewish Social Life, p. 
172 ff. If the mourners included Jews as 
well as Jewish Christians, it may well 
have been that the lamentation was not 
only a token of sorrow and respect, but 
also in the nature of a protest on the 
part of the more moderate section of the 
Pharisees (see also Trench's remarks, 
u. s., p. 198). According to the tradition 
accepted by St. Augustine, it is said that 
both Gamaliel and Nicodemus took part 
in the burial of Stephen, and were after- 
wards laid in the same grave (Felten, 
Apostelgeschichte, p. 167, and Plumptre 
in loco). 

Ver. 3. IXvp.a(vETo: deponent verb, 
used in classical Greek of personal out- 
rage (XtiuT|), of scourging and torturing, 
of outraging the dead, of the ruin and 
devastation caused by an army (Wet- 
stein). In the LXX it is found several 
times, cf. especially Ps. lxxix. (lxxx.) 13, 
of a wild boar ravaging a vineyard, and 
cf. also Ecclus. xxviii. 23. As the word 
is used only by St. Luke it is possible 
that it may have been suggested by its 
frequent employment in medical lan- 
guage, where it is employed not only of 
injury by wrong treatment, but also of the 
ravages of disease, Hobart, Medical Lan- 
guage, pp. 111, 212. R.V. renders "laid 
waste," A.V. (so Tyndale) " made havoc 
of," but the revisers have rendered iropdew 
by the latter, cf. Acts ix. 21, Gal. i. 3. 
St. Paul's description of himself as v^pur- 
ttjs, 1 Tim. i. 13, may well refer to the 
infliction of personal insults and injuries, 
as expressed here by {cf. 
Paley, Hora Paulina, xi., 5). — tt|v «k- 
icXTjo-iav, i.e., the Church just mentioned 
at Jerusalem — Saul's further persecution, 
even to Damascus, probably came later 
(Hort, Ecclesia, p. 53). — icai-a toiis oitcovs 
clairop. : the expression may denote " en- 
tering into every house," R. and A.V., 
or perhaps, more specifically, the houses 
known as places of Christian assembly, 
the ttcicATjcriai xclt' oIkov, see on ii. 46. 

In any case the words, as also those 
which follow, show the thoroughness and 
relentlessness of Saul's persecuting zeal. 
— <n5p«v : haling, i.e., hauling, dragging 
(schlappend), cf. James ii. 6. The word 
is used by St. Luke three times in Acts 
(only twice elsewhere in N.T.), and he 
alone uses tcaTao-upw, Luke xii. 58, in the 
same sense as the single verb (where St. 
Matthew has irapaSu). For its employ- 
ment in the Comic Poets see Kennedy, 
Sources of N. T. Greek, p. 76, and also 
Arrian, Epict., i. 29, 22, and other in- 
stances in Wetstein ; cf. LXX, 2 Sam. 
xvii. 13, 4 Mace. vi. 1, ecriipav eiri to 
fJao-avioTTJpia tov 'EX. — yuvaiicas : re- 
peated also in ix. 2, and xxii. 4, as 
indicating the relentless nature of the 
persecution. Some of the devout and 
ministering women may well have been 
included, Luke viii. 2, 3, Acts i. 14. 

Ver. 4. ol p.6v ovv : marking a general 
statement, Se in following verse, intro- 
ducing a particulai instance (so Rendall, 
Appendix on u.ev oxiv, Acts, p. 162, and 
see also p. 64). — SifjXflov : the word is 
constantly used of missionary journeys 
in Acts, cf. v. 40, xi. 19, ix. 32 (Luke 
ix. 6), cf. xiii. 6, note. — eviayyeXif <5u.evoi : 
it is a suggestive fact that this word is 
only used once in the other Gospels 
(Matt. xi. 5 by our Lord), but no less 
than ten times in .St. Luke's Gospel, 
fifteen in Acts, and chiefly elsewhere 
by St. Paul ; truly " a missionary 
word," see ver. 12. Simcox, Language 
of the N. T., p. 79, speaks of its intro- 
duction into the N.T. with " such a 
novel force as to be felt like a new 
word ". It is used several times in LXX, 
and is also found in Psalms of Solomon, 
xi., 2 (cf. Isa. xl. 9, Hi. 7, and Nah. i. 15). 
On its construction see Simcox, u. s., 
p. 79, and Vogel, p. 24. 

Ver. 5. ♦CXiiriros Se : the Evangelist, 
cf. xxi. 8, and note on vi. 5.— els ir<SXiv: 
if we insert the article (see above 
on critical notes), the expression means 
" the city of Samaria," i.e., the capital 
of the district (so Weiss, Wer/it, 




5. <WAinnOI Se KOTeXdwj' els ttoXi^ ttjs lapapeias, 1 iKr\pu<ra*¥ 
aurois toi' X^.cttoi'. 6. irpoo-eixoV te f 01 5)(Xoi tois Xeyop-eVois otto 
tou 4uXnnrou 6u,o0uua8oV, eV tw dicoueie aoToils Kal pXe'iren' toL 
<rr](j.ela a eitoiei. "J. 3 iroXXif yap tu>v exorrwe irvEuuaTa aKadapTa 
j3o<Lrra pEydXt] 4>wefj E^rjpxcTO ■ iroXXol 8e Tvapa\EXup,eVot Kal x^Xol 

1 ets Z. tt]v iroXiv Par. (" Samaria in civitate," again for clearness (Wendt)), so 
Blass in ; lajxapeias ABHP, so Blass ; -ta$ N 3 DE, so Tisch., W.H., see on ver. 1. 
(See on the reading Winer-Schmiedel, p. 266.) 

2 irpo<rei X ov re EHP, Chrys. ; but 8c ^ABCD 2 61, e, Vulg., Sah., Boh., Syr. Hard., 
so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Blass, Wendt, Weiss. In D this verse begins us S« tjkovov 
irav(T«s) 01 oxXoi irpoaeixov tois Xey. wav (omnis turbce, d), but Blass rejects ' 
Hilg. retains. Weiss, Codex D, p. 68, expresses surprise at this rejection by Blass! 
as the reading is not more superfluous than countless additions in D ; the words 
already lay in the following ev tw aicoveiv av-rovs. Chase refers to Syriac with 
considerable probability. 

3 iroXXwv HP, Boh., Arm., Chrys. (D 1 irapa iroXXois, D 2 airo iroXXoi, a tnultis, d) ■ 
iroXXoi fc$ABCD 2 E 18, 36, 40, 61, Vulg., Sah. Syr., Aeth., so Tisch., W.H., R.V.,' 
Blass, Wendt, Weiss, Hilg. Blass inserts a after aicaOapra, so Hilg., " bene " Blass 
(see below and Wendt, note, p. 172, eighth edition). 

Zockler, see Blass, in loco), or Sebaste, 
so called by Herod the Great in honour 
of Augustus, XePeurrtj (Jos., Ant., xv., 7, 
3 ; 8, 5 ; Strabo, xvi., p. 860), see Schurer, 
jewish People, div. ii., vol. 1, p. 123 ff., 
E.T., and O. Holtzmann, Neutest. Zeit- 
geschichte, p. 93. — licijpvcr<rcv : the re- 
visers distinguish between this verb 
and evavyeX. in ver. 4, the latter being 
rendered " preaching," or more fully, 
preaching the glad tidings, and the 
former "proclaimed" (see also Page's 
note on the word, p. 131), but it is 
doubtful if we can retain this full force 
of the word always, e.g., Luke iv. 44, 
where R.V. translates KTjpvaorwv, "preach- 
ing ". — airois, i.e., the people in the 
city mentioned, see Blass, Grammatik, 
p. 162, and cf. xvi. 10, xx. 2. 

Ver. 6. irpoceixov . . . Tots Xe-y., 
cf. xvi. 14, 1 Tim. i. 4, Tit. i. 14, 2 Pet. 
i. g, see note on v. 35, used in classical 
Greek sometimes with vovv, and some- 
times without as here ; frequent in LXX, 
cf. with this passage, Wisdom viii. 12, 
1 Mace. vii. 12. — 6p.o0vp.a8ov, see above 
on i. 14. 

Ver. 7. iroXXuv yap k.t.X. : if we 
accept reading in R.V. (see critical notes 
above), we must suppose that St. Luke 
passes in thought from the possessed to 
the unclean spirits by which they were 
possessed, and so introduces the verb 
*£ 1 1PX OVTO ( as if the unclean spirits were 
themselves the subject), whereas we 
should have expected that 49cpaircv6ir|o-av 
would have followed after the first iroX- 
Xol. as after the second, in the second 

clause of the verse. Blass conjectures 
that £ should be read before J3ouvTa, 
which thus enables him, while retaining 
I|ijpxovto, to make iroXXoC in each 
clause of the verse the subject of iOcpair. 
One of the most striking phenomena in 
the demonised was that they lost at least 
temporarily their own self-consciousness, 
and became identified with the demon or 
demons, and this may account for St. 
Luke's way of writing, as if he also 
identified the two in thought, Eder- 
sheim, Jesus the Messiah, i., 479, 647, ff. 
As a physician St. Luke must have often 
come into contact with those who had 
unclean spirits, and he would naturally 
have studied closely the nature of their 
disease. It is also to be noted that 
iroXXoC with the genitive, tuv €xovt<ov 
(not iroXXol €x 0VT ««)i shows that not all 
the possessed were healed, and if so, 
it is an indication of the truthfulness of 
the narrative. Moreover, St. Luke not 
only shows himself acquainted with the 
characteristics of demoniacal possession, 
cf. his description in Luke viii. 27, ix. 
38, 39, but he constantly, as in the 
passage before us, distinguishes it from 
disease itself, and that more frequently 
than the other Evangelists. Hobart 
draws special attention to Luke vi. 17, 
viii. 4, xiii. 32, which have no parallels 
in the other Gospels, and Acts xix. 12. 
To which we may add Luke iv. 40, Acts 
v. 16 (Wendt) ; see further on xix. 12. — 
|3owvTa, cf. Mark i. 26, Luke iv. 33. — 
irapaXcXvucvoi : St. Luke alone of the 
Evangelists uses the participle of irapa- 




^8€paTT€u0t]O'a»'. 1 8. ral ly^CTo x a P«- fAcydXir] 2 ^ tt) TroXei €K£iVt]. 
9. 'Ak^ip hi tis ovofjiaTi IifiWK Trpoinnjpxcy "* iv rrj ttoXci |iayeu<i>i/ Kal 

1 €8£poTT€v9T]o-av ; D reads cOepaircvov-ro, so Hilg., perhaps assim. to c^p^ovto, 
Blass in (3 rejects. 

2 xapa p.€7a\if| DEHP, Vulgclem., Syr. Hard., Arm., Chrys. ; ttoXXt) X apa J^ABC 
47, 61, so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt; x a P a T€ p-evaX^ ryevsro, so Gig., 
Par., Syr. Pesh., Blass in p, and Hilg. x a P a often joined with pty. elsewhere in 
N.T. ; cf. Luke ii. 10, xxiv. 52, Acts xv. 3. 

3 irpovirrjpxev . • • e^itrruv, D reads irpovirapxov . . . e|i<TTavev ; Par., Vulg., 
Iren. also read irpovrrapxwv, so Hilg. lajxapcias, see on ver. 1. p.cyav, "delevi," 
so Blass on the authority of some codices of Iren. see comment, below. 

Xveiv, instead of irapaXvuicis, the more 
popular word ; and here again his usage 
is exactly what we should expect from a 
medical man acquainted with technical 
terms (Hobart, Zahn, Salmon), cf. ix. 33 
and Luke v. 18, 24 (irapaXvTiic$, W.H. 
margin). Dr. Plummer, St. Luke, Introd., 
lxv., points out that Aristotle, a physician's 
son, has also this use of irapaXcXvplvos 
(Eth. Nic, i., 13, 15), but he adds that its 
use in St. Luke may have come from the 
LXX, as in Heb. xii. 12, where we have 
the word in a quotation from Isa. xxxv. 3 
(cf. also Ecclesiast. xxv. 23). It may be 
added that the participle is also found in 
3 Mace. ii. 22, ical tois p.^Xc<ri irapaXeXv- 
fie'vov, and cf. i Mace. ix. 15, where it is 
said of Alcimus, Kal irapcXvftr). But the 
most remarkable feature in St. Luke's em- 
ployment of the word is surely this, that 
in parallel passages in which St. Matthew 
and St. Mark have -nrapaXvTiK^s he has 
TrapaXeXvplvos, cf. Luke v. 18, Matt. ix. 
2, Mark ii. 3 ; in Luke v. 24 this same 
distinction is also found in the Revisers' 
text (but see W.H. above), when this 
verse is compared with Matt. ix. 6 and 
Mark ii. 10. 

Ver. 8. This detail, and indeed the 
whole narrative, may have been derived 
by St. Luke from the information of St. 
Philip himself, cf. xxi. 8, xxiv. 27, or 
from St. Paul as he travelled through 
Samaria, xv. 3. 

Ver. 9. Ztpwv : very few of the most 
advanced critics now dismiss Simon as 
an unhistorical character, or deny that 
the account before us contains at least 
some historical data ; see McGiffert's 
note, Apostolic Age, p. 100. Hilgenfeld 
and Lipsius may be reckoned amongst 
those who once refused to admit that 
Simon Magus was an historical person- 
age, but who afterwards retracted their 
opinion. But it still remains almost un- 
accountable that so many critics should 
have more or less endorsed, or developed, 
the theory first advocated by Baur that the 

Simon Magus of the Clementine Homilies 
is none other than the Apostle Paul. It 
is sufficient to refer for an exposition of 
the absurdity of this identification to Dr. 
Salmon " Clementine Literature " (Diet, 
of Christ. Biog., iii., pp. 575, 576 ; 
see also Ritschl's note, Die Entstehung 
der altkatholischen Kirche, p. 228 (second 
edition)). This ingenuity outdid itself 
in asking us to see in Simon's request to 
buy the power of conferring the Holy 
Ghost a travesty of the rejection of Paul's 
apostolic claims by the older Apostles, 
in spite of the gift of money which he 
had collected for the poor Saints in Jeru- 
salem (Overbeck). No wonder that 
Spitta should describe such an explana- 
tion as " a perfect absurdity " (Apostel- 
geschichte, p. 149). Before we can be- 
lieve that the author of the Acts would 
make any use of the pseudo-Clementine 
literature in his account of Simon, we 
must account for the extraordinary fact 
that an author who so prominently repre- 
sents his hero as triumphing over the 
powers of magic, xiii. 6-12, xix. 11-19, 
should have recourse to a tradition in 
which this same hero is identified with a 
magician (see Spitta, u. s., p. 151 ; 
Salmon, " The Simon of Modern Criti- 
cism," Diet, of Christian Biog., iv., p. 
687 ; Zockler, Apostelgeschichte, p. 212, 
and Wendt's note, p. 201). In Acts 
xxi. 8 we read that St. Luke spent several 
days in the house of Philip the Evangel- 
ist, and if we bear in mind that this same 
Philip is so prominent in chap, viii., there 
is nothing impossible in the belief that St. 
Luke should have received his narrative 
from St. Philip's lips, and included it in 
his history as an early and remarkable 
instance of the triumph of the Gospel — we 
need not search for any more occult reason 
on the part of the historian (see Salmon, 
m. s., p. 688). Simon then is an his- 
torical personage, and it is not too much 
to say that to all the stories which have 
gathered round his name the narrative of 

8 — io. 



e|icnw to Zdvos Tt]S Zafiapetas, \iyw tlvai Tifa eauToc fiiyav • 
10. w irpoacixof irdrres x dir6 p.i»cpou eus p.€yd\ou, XeyorreSs Outos 

1 iravTes fc^ABCDE 61, Vulg., many other verss., Chrys., so all edd. ; om. HP, 
Aethpp, Iren. ; Blass brackets : "nee opus". 

Acts always stands in a relation of pri- 
ority — the two facts mentioned in Acts, 
that Simon was a magician, and that he 
came into personal antagonism with St. 
Peter, always recur elsewhere — but Acts 
tells us nothing of the details of Simon's 
heretical preaching, and it draws the 
veil entirely over his subsequent history. 
But " the hero of the romance of heresy " 
comes into prominence under the name 
of Simon in Justin Martyr, Apol., i., 26, 
Irena^us, i., 23 (who speaks of Simon the 
Samaritan, from whom all heresies had 
I their being), and in the Clementine litera- 
ture. But there is good reason for 
thinking that St. Irenaeus, whilst he 
gives us a fuller account, is still giving 
us an account dependent on Justin, and 
there is every reason to believe that the 
Clementine writers also followed the 
same authority ; see further, Salmon, 
" Simon Magus," u. s., iv., p. 681 ff., and 
for a summary of the legends which 
gathered round the name of the Samari- 
tan magician Plumptre's note, in loco, 
may be consulted. To the vexed ques- 
tion as to the identification of the Simon 
of Justin with the Simon of the Acts 
Dr. Salmon returns a decided negative 
answer, u. s., p. 683, and certainly the 
Simon described by Justin seems to 
note rather the inheritor and teacher of a 
Gnostic system already developed than 
to have been in his own person the 
father of Gnosticism. Simon, how- 
ever, was no uncommon name, e.g., 
Josephus, Ant., xx., 7, 2, speaks of 
a Simon of Cyprus, whom there is 
no valid reason to identify with the 
Simon of the Acts (although famous 
critical authorities may be quoted in 
favour of such an identification). On the 
mistake made by Justin with reference 
to the statue on the Tiberine island with 
the words Setnoni Sanco Deo Fidio 
inscribed (cf. the account of the 
marble fragment, apparently the base of 
a statue, dug up in 1574, marked with a 
similar inscription, in Lanciani's Pagan 
and Christian Rome) in referring it to 
Simon Magus, Apol., i., 26, 56, Tertullian, 
Apol., c. xiii., and Irenaeus, i., 23, whilst 
in reality it referred to a Sabine god, 
Semo Sancus, the Sabine Hercules, see 
further, Salmon, u. s., p. 682, Rendall, 

Acts, p. 220. (Van Manen, followed by 
Feine, claims to discover two represen- 
tations of Simon in Acts — one as an 
ordinary magician, viii. 9, n, the other 
as a supposed incarnation of the deity, 
ver. 10— so too Jiingst, who refers the 
words from p,ay«vuv to ZapapCa? to his 
Redactor ; but on the other hand Hilgen- 
feld and Spitta see no contradiction, and 
regard the narrative as a complete whole.) 
— (xaycvuv : only here in N.T., not found 
in LXX (but cf. fjiayos in Dan. i. 20, ii. 
2), though used in classical Greek. The 
word (xdyos was used frequently by 
Herodotus of the priests and wise men 
in Persia who interpreted dreams, and 
hence the word came to denote any 
enchanter or wizard, and in a bad sense, 
a juggler, a quack like y6i)$ (see instances 
in Wetstein). Here (cf. xiii. 6) it is used 
of the evil exercise of magic and sorcery 
by Simon, who practised the charms and 
incantations so extensively employed at 
the time in the East by quacks claiming 
supernatural powers (Baur, Paulus, i., 
p. 107 ; Neander, Geschichte der Pflan- 
zung, cf. i., 84, 85 (fifth edit.) ; Wendt, 
Apostelgeschichte, p. 202 ; Blass, in loco ; 
Deissmann, Bibelstudien, p. ig, and see 
below on xiii. 6. — 2gi<rruv, from l|ierTda> 
(I|C<ttt)|*i) ; so l|urrdva>v, W. H. from 
€$i<rrdv<i> (hellenistic), see Blass, Gram- 
matik, pp. 48, 49, transitive in present, 
future, first aorist active, cf. Luke xxiv. 22 
— so ^(EoraKtvai, ver. n, perfect active, 
hellenistic form, also transitive ; see 
Blass, w. s. (also Winer-Schmiedel, p. 
118, and Grimm-Thayer, sub v.) (in 3 
Mace. i. 25 igun-dvciv also occurs). — 
l<rrap,ai, intransitive, ver. 13, Blass, u. s., 
p. 49 — the revisers have consistently 
rendered the verb by the same English 
word in the three verses 9, n, 13, thus 
giving point and force to the narrative, 
see on ver. 13. — \4yuv k.t.X., cf. v. 36 
Blass, Grammatik, p. 174, regards piyav 
as an interpolation, and it is not found 
in the similar phrase in v. 36 (so too 
Winer-Schmiedel, p. 243), cf. Gal. ii. 6, 
and vi. 3, and the use of the Latin 
aliquis, Cicero, Att., iii., 15, so too vii. 
3, etc. It may be that Simon set himselt 
up for a Messiah (see Ritschl's note, p. 
228, Die Entstehung der altkatholischen 
Kirche, second edition), or a Prophet, Jos., 

2I 4 



itrriv r\ oucaius tou ©eou r\ ficydXt]. 1 II. Trpoo-eixov Se auTw, Sia 
to licarw xp6 v( ? Tals ixayeLais 2 e^coTaiteVai cujtous. 12. °Ot€ 8c 

1 i\ iieyaXi) HLP, Sah., Syr. Pesh., AethPP-, Chrys. ; yj KaXoviievrj jieyaXij J^ABCDE, 
Vulg., Boh., Syr. Hard., Arm., Aethr., Irint., Orig., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Blass, 
Weiss, Hilg. 

^ayeiais BLP, so Blass, Weiss, Hilg.; fiayiats ^ACDEH, so Tisch., W.H. 
(see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 44). 

Ant., xviii., 4, 1, but ver. 14 points to a 
definite title, and it is likely enough that 
the people would repeat what Simon had 
told them of himself. His later followers 
went further and made him say, " Ego 
sum sermo Dei, ego sum speciosus, ego 
paraclitus, ego omnipotens, ego omnia 
Dei " Jerome, Commentar. in Matt., c. 
xx., 24 (Neander, Geschichte der Pflan- 
zung, cf. 1., 85, note). — lavrov : contrast 
Philip's attitude; he preached Christ, not 
himself (cf. Rev. ii. 20). 

Ver. 10. T) Svvafiis rov ©eov r\ lAcydXi] : 
in R.V. the power of God which is called 
(■caXoviMVij) Great, see above, critical 
notes. T.R. may have omitted the word 
because it appeared unsuitable to the 
context ; but it could not have been used 
in a depreciatory sense by the Samaritans, 
as if to intimate that the person claimed 
was the so-called " Great," since they 
also gave heed to Simon. On the other 
hand it has been argued that the title 
" Great" is meaningless in this relation, 
for every divine power might be described 
by the same epithet (so Wendt, in loco, 
and Blass : " mirum maxime t| ko.X. quasi 
Swains ©. fAtKpd quoque esse possit ". 
This difficulty leads Blass in his notes to 
introduce the solution proposed by Klos- 
termann, Probleme im Aposteltexte, pp. 
15-20 (1883), and approved by Wendt, 
Zockler, Spitta, and recently by Zahn, 
Einleitung in das N. T., ii. 420 ; see also 
Salmon's remarks in Hermathena, tad., 
p. 232), viz., that p.eyaX.ri is not a trans- 
lation of the attribute " great " ^"V but 
rather a transcription of the Samaritan 
word v^yQ or ^7J72 meaning qui 
revelat (cf. Hebrew PHil, Chaldean 

H7il N*?3, to reveal). The explana- 
tion would then be that in contrast to 
the hidden essence of the Godhead, 
Simon was known as its revealing power. 
Nestle however (see Knabenbauer in loco) 
objects on the ground that icaXov|AcvT) is 
not read at all in many MSS. But 
apart from Klostermann's explanation 

the revised text might fairly mean that 
amongst the " powers " of God (cf. the 
N.T. use of the word Swdfieis in Rom. 
viii. 38, 1 Peter iii. 22, and cf. Book of 
Enoch lxi. 10) Simon was emphatically 
the one which is called gTeat, i.e., the 
one prominently great or divine. The 
same title was assigned to him in later 
accounts, cf. Irenseus, i., 23 (Clem. Horn., 
ii., 22 ; Clem. Recog., i., 72 ; ii., 7 ; Tertul- 
lian, DePrascr., xlvi. ; Origen, c. Celsum, 
v.). But whatever the claims made by 
Simon himself, or attributed to him by his 
followers, we need not read them into 
the words before us. The expression 
might mean nothing more than that 
Simon called himself a great (or reveal- 
ing) angel of God, since by the Samaritans 
the angels were regarded as Svvdueis, 
powers of God (cf. Edersheim, jfesus the 
Messiah, i., 402, note 4, and De Wette, 
Apostelgeschichte, p. 122, fourth edition). 
Such an explanation is far more probable 
than the attribution to the Samaritans of 
later Gnostic and philosophical beliefs, 
while it is a complete answer to Overbeck, 
who argues that as the patristic literature 
about Simon presupposes the emanation 
theories of the Gnostics so the expression 
in the verse before us must be explained 
in the same way, and that thus we have 
a direct proof that the narrative is in- 
fluenced by the Simon legend. We may 
however readily admit that Simon's 
teaching may have been a starting-point 
for the later Gnostic developments, and 
so far from ver. 10 demanding a Gnostic 
system as a background, we may rather 
see in it a glimpse of the genesis of the 
beliefs which afterwards figure so pro- 
minently in the Gnostic schools (Nosgen, 
Apostelgeschichte, in loco, and p. 186, and 
see McGiffert, Apostolic Age, p. 99, and 
" Gnosticism," Diet, of Christ. Biog., ii., 
680). On the close connection between 
the Samaritans and Egypt and the wide- 
spread study of sorcery amongst the 
Egyptian Samaritans see Deissmann, 
Bibelstudien, pp. 18, 19. In Hadrian's 
letter to Servianus we find the Samaritans 
in Egypt described, like the Jews and 
Christians there, as all astrologers, sooth- 

II — 14. 



ETTioreuCToc tw ♦iXiinrw €uaYY c Xi£opeV<i> Ta 1 irepl rr\s paoaXeias tou 
©€ou Kal tou oVopaTOS tou 'Itjo-ou Xpiorou, ePairri^orro aVopeg tc 
Kal yufaiKes. 13- 6 8e Kal auTC-s eirurreuo-e, Kal PairTio-flcls 
r\v irpoaKapTcpaic tw <J>iXiinra> ■ Oewpue tc o-rjpcla Kal ouedpeis 
peydXas yivopivas, e^ioraTo. 14. 'AKouaa»res 8e 01 iv 'lepoaoXupotg 
dTTOoroXoi, oti Se'ScKTai f\ lapdpeia toc Xoyoi' tou ©cou, dirconreiXai' 

1 Ta omit W.H., R.V., Blass, Weiss. 

sayers and quacks (Schiirer, Jewish 
People, div. ii., vol. ii., p. 230 E.T.). : no 
doubt an exaggeration, as Deissmann 
says, but still a proof that amongst these 
Egyptian Samaritans magic and its 
kindred arts were widely known. In a 
note on p. 19 Deissmann gives an in- 
teresting parallel to Acts viii. 10, l-iri- 
KaXovpai are ttjv \ktyio-rr\v 8vvap.1v ttjv 
ev T&> oipavai (aXXoi • ttjv ev Tfj dpKT<i>) 
vtto KvpLov Oeov TeTayaevTiv (Pop. Par. 
Bibl. not., 1275 ff . ; Wessely, i., 76) (and 
he also compares Gospel of Peter, ver. 
19, t| Swauis pov (2)). The expression 
according to him will thus have passed 
from its use amongst the Samaritans 
into the Zauber -litter atur of Egypt. 

Ver. 11. LKavw ypdvu : dative for 
accusative, cf. xiii. 20, and perhaps Luke 
viii. 29, Rom. xvi. 25 — the usage is not 
classical, Blass, Grammatik, p. 118, but 
see also Winer-Moulton, xxxi. 9 a. St. 
Luke alone uses licavos with xp° v °s> 
both in his Gospel and in Acts (Vogel, 
Klostermann). — payetais : only here in 
N.T., not found in LXX or Apocryphal 
books, but used in Theophrastus and 
Plutarch, also in Josephus. It is found 
in a striking passage in St. Ignatius 
(Ephes., xix., 3) in reference to the shin- 
ing forth of the star at the Incarnation, 
o0cv IAveto iracra fxayeCa. Kat iras Setrpo's, 
and it is also mentioned, Didache, v., 1, 
amongst the things comprised under 
" the way of death," and so in ii. 1 we 
read ov fA-aycvcreis ov tfxxppaKcvccis. — e£- 
«o-TaK€vai, see above on ver. g. 

Ver. 12. evayyeX. irepl : only here 
with ircpt, cf. Rom. i. 3 (Jos., Ant., xv., 
7, 2). Amongst the Samaritans Philip 
would have found a soil already prepared 
for his teaching, cf. John iv. 25, and a 
doctrine of the Messiah, in whom the 
Samaritans saw not only a political but 
a religious renewer, and one in whom 
the promise of Deut. xviii. 15 would be 
fulfilled (Edersheim, Jesus the Messiah, 
i., 402, 403 ; Westcott, Introduction to the 
Study of the Gospels, pp. 162, 163). — 
ovSpes TC Kal -yvvaiKes, cf. v. 14: 

" etiam mulieres quae a superstitionibus 
difficilius abstrahuntur," Wetstein, cf. 
John iv. 35 ff. 

Ver. 13. Kal aviTos: characteristic of 
St. Luke, see Friedrich, Das Lucas- 
evangelium, p. 37. — Pairrurdcls — ipair- 
rl<r6r\ dXX' ovk e<{><»TUr0T) (St. Cyril). — t|v 
irpoo-KapTEpwv : on rjv with a participle as 
characteristic of St. Luke see on i. 10, 
and Friedrich, u. s., p. 12 ; on irpoo-KapT. 
see on i. 14. Here with dative of the 
person (cf. x. 7) ; the whole expression 
shows how assiduously Simon attached 
himself to Philip. — ficcopwv : the faith of 
Simon rested on the outward miracles 
and signs, a faith which ended in 
amazement, e^to-raro — but it was no per- 
manent abiding faith, just as the amaze- 
ment which he had himself inspired in 
others gave way before a higher and 
more convincing belief. The expression 
Svvdpcis urydXas may have been pur- 
posely chosen ; hitherto men had seen 
in Simon, and he himself had claimed to 
be, v) 8w. i\ prydXi) (Weiss). — 4|icrTaTo: 
" Simon qui alios obstupefaciebat, jam 
ipse obstupescit," Wetstein. e£urTapai., 
intransitive, Blass, Grammatik, p. 49. 
Irenasus speaks of him as one who pre- 
tended faith, i. 23 (so too St. Cyril, St. 
Chrysostom, St. Jerome, St. Ambrose) : 
he may have believed in the Messianic 
dignity of Christ, and in His Death and 
Resurrection, constrained by the miracles 
which Philip wrought in attestation of 
his preaching, but it was a belief about 
the facts, and not a belief in Him whom 
the facts made known, a belief in the 
power of the new faith, but not an 
acceptance of its holiness, ver. 18 (see 
further, Rendall's note in loco, and on 
the Baptism of Simon, " Baptism," In 
Hastings' B.D.). 

Ver. 14. i\ lap. : here the district ; 
Weiss traces the revising hand of St. 
Luke (but see on the other hand Wendt, 
in loco). There is nothing surprising in 
the fact that the p r eaching of the Gospel 
in the town should be regarded by the 
Apostles at Jerusalem as a proof that the 




irpos auTOus Tor n^Tpoy kcu '\(i>dvvr\v ■ 15. oith'Cs Karapdi'Tes 
irpo<rnu|ai'TO irepl ainwv, oira>9 \dj3uai nveup-a Ayioc (16. outtui 
yap v\v cxr' ouoeyl auTaiK emireirnuKos, p.oi'oi' Se fBePaimap-eVoi 

good news had penetrated throughout 
the district, or that the people of the 
town should themselves have spread the 
Gospel amongst their countrymen (cf. 
John iv. 28). — SeSeKToi tov Xifyov tov ©. : 
the phrase is characteristic of St. Luke, 
as it is used by him, Luke viii. 13, Acts 
xi. 1, xvii. n, but not by the other Evan- 
gelists — it is found once in St. Paul, 
1 Thess. i. 6 (cf. ii. 13 and James i. 21). 
In the mention of John here, as in iii. 4, 
Weiss can only see the hand of a reviser, 
since the beloved disciple is mentioned 
with Peter in a way for which, as Weiss 
alleges, no reason can be assigned, iii. 
4, 11, iv. 13; but nothing was more 
likely than that Peter and John should 
be associated together here as previously 
in the Gospels, see Plumptre's note on 
Acts iii. 1. 

Ver. 15. oirives : on this form of the 
relative see Rendall, in loco ; Blass how- 
ever regards it as simply = 01, Grammatik, 
p. i6g, cf. xii. 10. — KaTa{3dvTes> cf. xxiv. 
1 (Luke ii. 42), xi. 2, xxi. 12, 15. Wendt 
defends the historical character of this 
journey to Samaria as against Zeller and 
Overbeck. — irpocr»}v|avTo irepi : here only 
with irepl; the verb is characteristic of St. 
Luke, and he alone has the construction 
used in this verse, cf. Luke vi. 28, W.H. 
The exact phrase is found in St. Paul's 
Epistles four or five times (and once in 
Hebrews), but often in LXX, and cf. 
Baruchi., 11, 13; 2 Mace. i. 6, xv. 14. The 
laying on of hands, as in vi. 7 and xiii. 3, 
is here preceded by prayer, see Hooker, 
Eccles. Pol., v., chap, lxvi., 1-4. — oirws 
\a$o)crL riv-'AYiov : the words express the 
chief and highest object of the Apostles' 
visit : it was not only to ascertain 
the genuineness of the conversions, or 
to form a connecting link between the 
Church of Samaria and that of Jerusa- 
lem, although such objects might not 
have been excluded in dealing with an 
entirely new and strange state of things 
— the recognition of the Samaritans in a 
common faith. It has been argued with 
great force that the expression Holy Spirit 
is not meant here in its dogmatic Pauline 
sense ; Luke only means to include in 
it the ecstatic gifts of speaking with 
tongues and prophecy. This view is 
held to be supported by ISwv in ver. 18, 
intimating that outward manifestations 
which meet the eye must have shown 

themselves, and by the fact that the 
same verb, ^ireireae, is used in cases 
where the results which follow plainly 
show that the reception of the Holy 
Ghost meant a manifestation of the out- 
ward marvellous signs such as marked 
the day of Pentecost, x. 44, 46, xi. 15 
(cf. xix. 6). In the case of these Samari- 
tans no such signs from heaven had 
followed their baptism, and the Apostles 
prayed for a conspicuous divine sanction 
on the reception of the new converts 
(Wendt, Zockler, Holtzmann, and see 
also Hort, Ecclesia, pp. 54, 55). But 
even supposing that the reception of the 
Holy Ghost could be thus limited, the 
gift of tongues was no mere magical 
power, but the direct result of a super 
natural Presence and of a special grace — 
of that Presence speaking with tongues, 
prophesyings, and various gifts, 1 Cor. 
xiv. 1, 14, 37, were no doubt the outward 
manifestations, but they could not have 
been manifested apart from that Presence, 
and they were outward visible signs 01 
an inward spiritual grace. In a book 
so marked by the working of the Holy 
Spirit that it has received the name of 
the " Gospel of the Spirit" it is difficult 
to believe that St. Luke can mean to 
limit the expression Xap.8avttv here and 
in the following verse to anything less 
than a bestowal of that divine indwelling 
of the spirit which makes the Christian 
the temple of God, and which St. Paul 
speaks of in the very same terms as a 
permanent possession, Gal. iii. 2, Rom. 
viii. 15 (Gore, Church and the Ministry, 
p. 258). St. Paul's language, 1 Cor. xii. 
30, makes it plain that the advent of the 
Holy Spirit was not of necessity attested 
by any peculiar manifestations, nor were 
these manifestations essential accom- 
paniments of it : " Do all speak with 
tongues ? " he asks, " Are all prophets ? " 
See further on ver. 17. 

Ver. 16. IwiireirrwKtJs : the verb is 
characteristic of St. Luke, and used by 
him both in his Gospel and in Acts of the 
occurrence of extraordinary conditions, 
e.g., the sudden influence of the Spirit, 
cf. Luke i. 12, Acts x. 44, xi. 15, xix. 17, 
cf. Rev. xi. 11 (Acts x. 10 cannot be sup- 
ported, and in xiii. 1 1 read jfireo-ev). Simi- 
lar usage in LXX, Exod. xv. 16, 1 Sam. 
xxvi. 12, Ps.liv. 4, Judith ii. 28, xi. 11, etc. 
Friedrich, Das Lucasevangelium, p. 41 

15— *8. 



uirfjpxoy ets to SVofia too Kupiou Mtjaou.) 17. totc eireTiOoof l toIs 
Xetpas €ir' auTous, koi i\d\L^a.vov n^eou-a "AytOK. 18. 0eao-d|i,€yos 2 
8c 6 2up.u>v, oti Sid ttjs cmOeVews twc x^P^^ tu^ dxrocrroXwi' SiSotou 

1 eireTi9ovv, see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 121 ; Blass, Gram., p. 48. 

2 8£a<ra|A€vos HLP, Chrys. ; iScuv ^ABCDE, so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Blass, Weiss, 
Wendt, Hilg. 

For the word as used by St. Luke in 
another sense also characteristic of him, 
see below on xx. 37, and Plummer on 
xv. 20. On the formula of baptism see 
above p. 91, and " Baptism," B.D. 2 , 
p. 352, and Hastings' B.D. — (iirfjpxov 
here perhaps = " made a beginning," 
took the first step (Lumby). 

Ver. 17. There cannot be any reason 
to doubt the validity of St. Philip's bap- 
tism, and it is therefore evident that the 
laying on of hands (cf. xix. 6) is here 
distinct from baptism, and also from the 
appointment to any Church office (as in 
vi. 6, xiii. 3), or the bestowal of any 
special power of healing as in the person 
of Ananias, ix. 12, 17, although gifts of 
healing might no doubt accompany it. 
But both here and in xix. 6 (cf. Heb. vi. 
2) it follows closely upon baptism, and 
is performed by Apostles, to whom alone 
the function belongs, although it is 
reasonable to suppose that the prophets 
and teacher's who were associated with 
them in their Apostolic office, and who 
could lay on hands in Acts xiii. 1-3, 
could do so in other cases also for the 
reception of the Holy Ghost (Gore, 
Church and the Ministry, p. 258). The 
question why St. Philip did not himself 
" lay hands " upon his converts has been 
variously discussed, but the narrative of 
Acts supplies the answer, inasmuch as 
in the only two parallel cases, viz., the 
verse before us and xix. 6, the higher 
officers alone exercise this power, and 
also justifies the usual custom of the 
Church in so limiting its exercise (" Con- 
firmation," Diet, of Christian Antiq. 
(Smith & Cheetham), i., p. 425 ; B.D. 1 , 
\ii.,App.; and Hooker, Eccles. Pol., v., 
ch. lxvi. 5, and passage cited; Jerome, 
Advers. Lucif., c. 4, and St. Cyprian, 
Epis. 73, ad Jubaianum (reference to the 
passage before us)). Undoubtedly there 
are cases of baptism, Acts hi. 41, xvi. 15, 
33, where no reference is made to the 
subsequent performance of this rite, but 
in these cases it must be remembered that 
the baptiser was an Apostle, and that 
when this was the case its observance 
anight fairly be assumed. For the special 

case of Cornelius see below on x. 
44, see further " Confirmation," B.D. 2 , 
i., 640. Weizsacker contrasts this ac- 
count in viii., v. 16, which he describes as 
this crude conception of the communica- 
tion of the Spirit solely by the imposition 
of the Apostles' hands (Apostolic Age, 
ii., 254 and 299, E.T.), and which repre- 
sents baptism as being thus completed, 
with the account of baptism given us by 
St. Paul in 1 Cor. i. 14-17. But in the 
first place we should remember that 
Acts does not describe baptism as being 
completed by the laying on of hands ; 
the baptism was not invalid, the Sama- 
ritan converts became by its administra- 
tion members of the Church ; and the 
laying on of hands was not so much a 
completion of baptism as an addition to 
it. And, in the next place, Heb. vi. 2 
certainly indicates that this addition 
must have been known at a very early 
period (see Westcott, in loco). It may 
also be borne in mind that 2 Cor. i. 21 
is interpreted of confirmation by many 
of the Fathers (cf. too Westcott's inter- 
pretation of 1 John ii. 20, 27), and that 
St. Paul is writing a letter and not 
describing a ritual. — c\dp(3avov: Dr. 
Hort, who holds that the reception of 
the Holy Spirit is here explained as in 
x. 44 by reference to the manifestation 
of the gift of tongues, etc., points out 
that the verb is not eXa|3ov, but imperfect 
e\du.(3avov, and he therefore renders it 
" showed a succession of signs of the 
Spirit " (see also above). But this inter- 
pretation need not conflict with the belief 
in the gift of the Spirit as a permanent 
possession, and it is well to remember 
that circTtdeo-av (iiterl%ow) is also im- 
perfect. Both verbs may therefore simply 
indicate the continuous administration 
of the laying on of hands by the Apostles,' 
and the continuous supernatural result 
(not necessarily external manifestation) 
which followed upon this action ; cf. 
IfiairrltovTo in ver. 12, imperfect, and so 
in xviii. 8. % 

Ver. 18. 0ca<rdu.cvo$ : the word would 
seem to point on (so ISwv, see critical 
notes) to some outward manifestation of 



■'6 riKcG|xa to "Ayioc, Trpocrr) veyKCK aoTOis XP^f 1011 " 01 ^ Xc'yttH', 1 9- AoTe 
icnfxol TT)f c^oucrtai' TaJnrjv, tea w cac emOto Tas xeipas, \ap.|3dfr} 
ricEUfia "Ayiof. 20. rierpos oe elite irpos auTeV, To dpyupioV ctou 
ow aoi €ir| els diroSXeiac, on TTjf Supcdf tou 0€ou Bid 

1 D, Gig. Par. read irapaxaXuv kcu Xeycov (cf. ver. 24 where irapaicaXcd is also 
found in D), so Hilg. ; combination not infrequent, Matt. viii. 5, Acts ii. 40, xvi. 9, to 
strengthen the request. After iva D, Par. Const, apost. insert Kayo, eav fc^ABCELP, 
so Tisch., W.H., Weiss; av DH 36, Const, apost., Bas., Chrys., Cyr.-Jer. (so Blass 
in ^, and Hilg.). 

the inward grace of the Spirit, so Weiss, 
Wendt, Zockler ; so Felten, although 
he does not of course limit the recep- 
tion of the Holy Spirit to such outward 
evidences of His Presence. The word 
may further give us an insight into 
Simon's character and belief — the gift 
of the Spirit was valuable to him in its 
external manifestation, in so far, that is, 
as it presented itself to ocular demonstra- 
tion as a higher power than his own 
magic— Sid ttjs liriO. twv \. r£>v diroor., 
see above on ver. 17, cf. Sid, " the laying 
on of hands" was the instrument by 
which the Holy Ghost was given in this 
instance: "Church," Hastings' B.D., 
i., 426. — irpoo-T|veyKev axiTOis xP'*it iloTa • 
Simon was right in so far as he regarded 
the gift of the Spirit as an c£ov<ria to be 
bestowed, but entirely wrong in suppos- 
ing that such a power could be obtained 
without an inward disposition of the 
heart, as anything might be bought for 
gold in external commerce. So De Wette, 
Apostelgeschichte, p. 124 (fourth edition), 
and he adds : " This is the fundamental 
error in ' Simony,' which is closely con- 
nected with unbelief in the power 
and meaning of the Spirit, and with 
materialism " (see also Afford in loco). 
(See further on "Simony," Luckock, 
Footprints of the Apostles as traced by St. 
Luke, i., 208.) Probably Simon, after the 
manner of the time, cf. xix. 19, may 
already have purchased secrets from other 
masters of the magical arts, and thought 
that a similar purchase could now be 

Ver. 19. tvo cJ eov eiri6<j>: "that on 
whomsoever I lay my hands," i.e., quite 
apart from any profession of faith or test 
of character ; no words could more plainly 
show how completely Simon mistook the 
essential source and meaning of the 
power which he coveted. 

\fcr. 20. to dp-yvpidv arov k.t.X. : the 
words are no curse or imprecation, as 
is evident from ver. 22, but rather a 
vehement expression of horror on the 

part of St. Peter, an expression which 
would warn Simon that he was on the 
way to destruction. Rendall considers 
that the real form of the prayer is not 
that Simon may perish, but that as he 
is already on the way to destruction, so 
the silver may perish which is dragging 
him down, to the intent that Simon him- 
self may repent and be forgiven : so Page, 
" thy money perish, even as thou art 
now perishing," cf. CEcumenius, in loco 
(and to the same effect St. Chrys.) : ovic 
«rri TctiTa dpwpe'vov dXXd iraiSevovTos, 
<I>s dv tls ciiroi * to dpyvpiov o*ov o~vv- 
a-ndXoiTO aoi pe-ra ttjs irpoaipeVews. 
But see also on the optative of wishing, 
Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 79, 
where he speaks of Mark xi. 14 and Acts 
viii. 20 as peculiar, being imprecations of 
evil, and cf. also Blass, Grammatik, p. 
215. — eiTj els dtrwXciav : a frequent con- 
struction, " go to destruction and remain 
there," see Felten, Wendt, Page, and 
cf. ver. 23, els x°^ T l v • • • Sira. The 
noun occurs no less than five times 
in St. Peter's Second Epistle, cf. also 
1 Peter i. 7. els dirwX. occurs five times 
elsewhere, Rom. ix. 22, 1 Tim. vi. 9, 
Heb. x. 39, Rev. xvii. 8, ri, and it is 
frequent in LXX; cf. 1 Chron. xxi. 17, 
Isa. xiv. 23, liv. 16, Dan. iii. 29, and ii. 
5, Theod.,etc; 1 Mace, iii.42, Belandthe 
Dragon, ver. 29, and several times in 
Ecclus. — ttjv Scopcdv : and so, not to 
be bought, cf. Matt. x. 8, and our Lord's 
own words in Samaria, John iv. 10, el 
fjSeis ttjv Scopedv tov ©eov k.t.X. — oti, 
. . . cvopuras 810 X' KTaaSai : " because 
thou hast thought to obtain," to acquire, 
gain possession of, KTao-801, deponent 
verb, so in classical Greek, not passive 
as in A. V., see Matt. x. 9, and elsewhere 
twice in St. Luke's Gospel, xviii. 12, 
xxi. 19, and three times in Acts, i. 18, viii. 
20, xxii. 28, and once in St. Paul, 1 Thess. 
iv. 4, frequent in LXX, and in same 
sense as here of acquiring by money. — 
ev6p. : it was not a mere error of judg- 
ment, but a sinful intention, which 




Xpr\\i.dTQ>v KTaoOai. 21. ouk coti ctoi p-epis ouot tcX^pos iv tu Xoyw 
toutu) • •»] yap Kapoia <rou ouk lo-rtf eoGcta cVwiuoi' * tou ©eou. 22. 
u.CTaKOTjo-oi' 06V dir6 ttjs xaxias crou Tau-rns, Kal oerjfirjTi tou ©eou, 2 €i 
apa d^cO^o-CTai 001 Tj Eiripoia Trjs KapBias aou • 23. ci$ 3 yap xoXV 

1 evwiriov EHLP; evavn fc^ABD 15, 36, so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Blass, Hilg. (cf. 
Luke i. 8, a rarer word). 

2 ©eov HLP, Vulg., Syr. Pesh., Irint., Blass in (prob. after ver. 21); Kvpiov 
^ABCDE, Sah., Boh., Syr. Hard., Arm., Const, apost., Bas., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., 
Weiss, Wendt, so Hilg. 

3 D 1 has tjv ( = ev (?)) Yap irncpias x°^Tl Kai <rvv8ecru.<{> aSiK., so Blass and Hilg., 
prob. caused by the difficult eis. opw — DE read Oeupu, so Const, apost., Chrys. ; 
"recte" Blass, so in a and {$, and Hilg. ; but there seems no real reason why opu 
should not occur here. 

had come from a heart not right before 
God, ver. 21 ; cf. Matt. xv. 19. 

Ver. ax. ucpls ovSe kXtjpos, cf. Deut. 
xii. 2, xiv. 27, 29, xviii. 1, Isa. lvii. 6, and 
instances in Wetstein, see on i. 17. — 
\6yia tovt([) : both A. and R.V. "in this 
matter," i.e., in the power of communi- 
cating the Holy Spirit, but Grotius, 
Neander, Hackett, Blass, Rendall and 
others refer it to the Gospel, i.e., the 
word of God which the Apostles preached, 
and in the blessings of which the Apostles 
had a share. Xoyos is frequently used 
in classical Greek of that de quo agitur 
(see instances in Wendt). Grimm, sub 
v., compares the use of the noun in 
classical Greek, like p'qua, the thing 
spoken of, the subject or matter of the 
X670S, Herod., i., 21, etc. — t| yap icapSta 
. . . €v0«ia, cf. LXX, Ps. vii. 10, x. 3, 
xxxv. io, lxxii. 1, lxxvii. 37, etc., where 
the adjective is used, as often in classical 
Greek, of moral uprightness (cf. evdvTtjs 
in LXX, and Psalms of Solomon, ii., 15, 
cv £ti6vTr|Ti KQpSias), so also in Acts 
xiii. 10, where the word is used by St. 
Paul on a similar occasion in rebuking 
Elymas ; only found once in the Epistles, 
where it is again used by St. Peter, 2 
Pet. ii. 15. 

Ver. 22. Kaiclas : not used elsewhere 
by St. Luke, but it significantly meets us 
twice in St. Peter, cf. 1 Pet. ii. 1, 16. — 
a<j>e9. : if we read above, Kvptov, the 
meaning will be the Lord Jesus, in 
whose name the Apostles had been 
baptising, ver. 16, and d<t>c0. may also 
point to the word of the Lord Jesus in 
Matt. xii. 31 (so Alford, Plumptre). — 
tl apa, Mark xi. 13 (Acts xvii. 27). R. 
and A.V. both render " if perhaps," but 
R.V. " if perhaps . . . shall be forgiven 
thee " ; A.V. " if perhaps . . . may be 
forgiven thee ". St. Peter does not throw 

doubt on forgiveness after sincere repent- 
ance, but the doubt is expressed, because 
Simon so long as he was what he was 
(see the probable reading of the next 
verse and the connecting y**p) could not 
repent, and therefore could not be for- 
given, cf. Gen. xviii. 3. " If now I have 
found favour in thine eyes," «t apa 

(fc^'DN), which I hope rather than 
venture to assume ; see also Simcox, 
Language of N. T. Greek, pp. 180, 181, 
and compare Winer-Moulton, xii., 4 c, 
and liii. , 8 a; and Viteau, Le Grec du 
N. T., p. 62 (1893). — cirivoia: only here 
in N.T. ; cf Jer. xx. 10, Wisdom vi. 16, 
etc., 2 Mace. xii. 45, 4 Mace. xvii. 2, and 
often in classical Greek. 

Ver. 23. els yap x°^ v : The pas- 
sages in LXX generally referred to as 
containing somewhat similar phraseology 
are Deut. xxix. 18, xxxii. 32, Lam. iii. 
15. But the word \o\^ is found in 
LXX several times, and not always as 
the equivalent of the same Hebrew. In 
Deut. xxix. 18, xxxii. 32, Ps. lxix. 21, 
Jer. viii. 14, ix. 15, Lam. iii. 19, it is used 

to translate {T^l (tZJi^' Deut. xxxii. 
32), a poisonous plant of intense bitter- 
ness and of quick growth (coupled with 
wormwood, cf Deut. xxix. 18, Lam. iii 
19, Jer. ix. 15). In Job xvi. 14 (where, 
however, AS 2 read £on]v for x°M v ) '* ' s 

used to translate H^^t2 bile, gall 

in xx. 14 of the same book it is the' 

equivalent of JT^tt in the sense of 

the gall of vipers, i.e., the poison of 
vipers, which the ancients supposed to 
lie in the gall. In Prov. v. 4 and Lam. 

iii. 15 it is the rendering of ("TD^A 




iriKpias Kal auVSeo-u-ow dSiKias opw ere oWa. 24. diTOKpi9els oe 6 
Iiu.a>v ctire, Aei]6Y]T€ uu-ei? uirep ep.ou irpos rot' Kupioy, oirws p-rjoeV 
eireXOt] iir' epe «k elpTJfcaTC. 1 25. Ol pif ouV Siap.apTupdp.ekOi Kal 
XaXrjaatres tok Xoyoi' tou Kupiou, imicrrpetyav 2 els 'lepooaaXf^p., 
iToXXds tc riav lapapenw euTjYyeXiaai'TO. 

1 Before 8«T)0T)Te D, Gig., Syr. Hard, mg., Const, apost. prefix irapaicaXu ; cf. 
ver. 19, so Hilg. For wv D has tovtoiv twv kukuv, and adds p.01 after eipipcaTe, so 
Hilg. At end of verse D adds os iroXXo. kXqiujv ov SieXipiravev, so Syr. H. mg. 
without os — so Blass in 0, but icou for 09 ; Hilg. follows D ; see Belser, Beitrdge, 
p. 4, who refers to xx. 27, xvii. 13, for SiaXipiravciv, SiaXeiireiv, constr. with parti- 
ciple as here, instances which he regards as beyond doubt Lucan ; cf. Luke vii. 45, 
where SioAeiiru, used only by Luke, is found with a similar constr., SiaXipiravu only 
found elsewhere in Tobit x. 7 (but S al.), but also in Galen, cf. Grimm, sub v., and L. 
and S. But in spite of the Lucan phraseology it seems difficult to suppose that Luke 
would himself have struck out the words, unless, indeed, he had gained further in- 
formation about Simon which led him to conclude that the repentance was not 
sincere. Such an omission could scarcely be made for the sake of brevity. Weiss, 
Codex D, p. 68, evidently regards the words as added by a later hand, not as omitted 
by Luke himself ; see also Wendt, edit. 1899, p. 177, note. 

- -uTreo-TptiJ/av CEHLP, several verss., Chrys. ; vire<rrpe<frov fr$ABD 15, 61, Vulg., 
so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Blass, Weiss, Wendt, Hilg. lapaptiTwv ABCDHLP, so 
W.H. (and see App., p. 161), Hilg.; lapapiTuv fc$E, so Tisch., Blass. evTjyyeXi- 
o-clvto HLP, Boh., Syr. Pesh., Aeth., Chrys. ; ruTjYveXiSovTo fc$ABCD, Vulg., Sah., 
Syr. Hard., Arm., Aug., so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Blass, Weiss, Wendt, Hilg. 

wormwood ; and in the former passage 
we have iriKp^Tepov xoXrjs. If we take 
the most usual signification of x°X'n in 
the LXX, viz., that of the gall plant (see 
R.V., margin, in loco, gall, or a gall 
root), the thought of bitterness would 
naturally be associated with it (in the 
passage which presents the closest paral- 
lel to the verse before us, Deut. xxix. 18, 
iv x°X'n lca «' wiicpia, iriKpta is a transla- 
tion of the Hebrew word for wormwood) ; 
ev xoXfi iriicpias might therefore denote 
the intefnse malignity which filled the 
heart o Simon. (On the word x ^ m 
its sense here, and in Matt, xxvii. 34, see 
Meyer- Weiss, Matth., p. 546.) The pre- 
position els is generally taken as = Iv 
in this passage ; but Rendall suggests 
that here, as is sometimes elsewhere, it 
= «£»s, and he therefore renders : " I see 
that thou art as gall of bitterness," de- 
noting the evil function which Simon 
would fulfil in the Church if he continued 
what he was. Westcott's note on Heb. 
xii. 15 should also be consulted. — <n5v- 
Seo-(iov aSiKias : R.V. translates " thou 
art ... in the bond of iniquity ". But 
if the passage means that Simon " will 
become ... a bond of iniquity," R.V. , 
margin, or that he is now as a bond of 
iniquity (Rendall), the expression denotes, 
not that Simon is bound, but that he 
binds others in iniquity. Blass refers to 

Isa. lviii. 6, where a similar phrase occurs, 
otjvS. a8uc., and explains : " improbitate 
quasi vinctus es " ; so Grimm, while 
pointing out that the phrase in Isa. lviii. 
6 is used in a different sense from here, 
explains " vinculum improbitatis, i.e., 
quod ab improbitate nectitur ad con- 
stringendos animos ". Others again 
take the expression to denote a bundle, 
fasciculus (Wetstein) (cf. Hdian., iv., 12, 
n), Simon being regarded " quasi ex 
improbitate concretum," cf. especially 
Cicero, in Pison., ix., 21 ; but such a ren- 
dering is rejected by Grimm, as no ex- 
amples can be adduced of this tropical 
use of the noun, and by Wendt, on the 
ground that aSiKia is not in the plural, 
but in the singular. Combinations with 
dSiKia are characteristic of St. Luke ; 
cf. Luke xiii. 27, xvi. 8, 9, xviii. 6; cf. 
Act i. 18 ; the word only occurs once 
elsewhere in the Gospels, John vii. 18 ; 
Friedrich, Das Lucasevangelium, p. 23. 
Ver. 24. Aoi8i|T€ : the verse is often 
taken (as by Meyer and others) as a 
further proof of the hollowness of Simon's 
belief, and his ignorance of the way of 
true repentance — he will not pray for 
himself, and he only asks for deliverance 
from fear of the penalty and not from 
hatred of the sin (so Bengel). But on 
the other hand Wendt, in criticising 
Meyer, objects to this further condemna- 

24 — 26. 



26. "Ayy 6 ^°S 8e Kupi'ou eXdXno-e irpos •KXnnroe, Xcyui', 'AvdoTr|9i 
k<u iropeuou Kara (xeo-rjixPpiar, eirl ttjv 6S6v ttjv KaTa(3aicoucrai' diro 

tion of Simon as not expressed in the 
text. So far as the petition for the 
Apostles' prayers is concerned, it is of 
course possible that it may have been 
prompted by the belief that such prayers 
would be more efficacious than his own 
(so Blass, Wendt, see also conclusion of 
the story in D) ; he does not ask them 
to pray instead of himself but vir^p, on 
his behalf.— eire'X0fl : not used by the 
other Evangelists, but three times in St. 
Luke's Gospel and four times in Acts, 
with lirt and accusative both in Gospel 
(i. 35, cf. xxi. 35) and Acts. 

Ver. 25. oi uev ovv : the \kkv ovv and 
8e in ver. 26 may connect the return of 
the party to Jerusalem and the following 
instructions to Philip for his journey, and 
so enable us to gather for a certainty 
that Philip returned to Jerusalem with 
the Apostles, and received there his 
further directions from the Lord ; see 
Kendall's Appendix on p.«v ovv, Acts, p. 
164, but cf. on the other hand, Belser, 
Beitrdge, pp. 51, 52. On the frequent 
and characteristic use of |*ev ovv in Luke, 
see above on i. 6, etc. — vir&rTp€\|»av : if we 
read the imperfect, we have the two verbs 
in the verse in the same tense, and the 
sense would be that the Apostles did not 
return at once to Jerusalem, but started 
on their return (imperfect), and preached 
to the Samaritan villages on the way (as 
Belser also allows) — the T€ closely unites 
the two verbs (Weiss). The verb is 
characteristic of St. Luke : in his Gospel 
twenty-one or twenty-two times ; in 
Acts, eleven or twelve times; in the 
other Evangelists, only once, Mark xv. 
40, and this doubtful ; only three times in 
rest of N.T. (Lekebusch, Friedrich). 

Ver. ?6. ayveXos : on the frequency 
of angelic appearances, another char- 
acteristic of St. Luke, see Friedrich, Das 
Lucasevangelium, pp. 45 and 52 (so 
Zeller, Acts, ii., 224, E.T.), cf. Luke ii. 
9 and Acts xii. 7, Luke i. 38 and Acts x. 7, 
Luke xxiv. 4 and Acts i. 10, x. 30. There 
can be no doubt, as Wendt points out, 
that St. Luke means that the communi- 
cation was made to Philip by an angel, 
and that therefore all attempts to explain 
his words as meaning that Philip felt a 
sudden inward impulse, or that he had a 
vision in a dream, are unsatisfactory. — 
dvdo-rqfli, as Wendt remarks, does not 
support the latter supposition, cf. v. 17, 
and its frequent use in Acts and in O.T. 
see below. — Se may be taken as above, 

see ver. 25, or as simply marking the 
return of the narrative from the chief 
Apostles to the history of Philip. As in 
vv. 29, 39, irvevua and not ay-yeXos 
occurs ; the alteration has been attributed 
to a reviser, but evan Spitta, Apostel- 
geschichte, p. 153, can find no reason for 
this, and sees in the use of irvevp,a and 
ayyeXos here nothing more strange than 
their close collocation Matt. iv. 1, n. — 
dvdo-TT)0i koA iropevov, words often 
similarly joined together in LXX. — 
|X€cnr](j.ppiav : towards the south, i.e., he 
was to proceed "with his face to the 
south," cf. xxvii. 12 (Page). — lirl rfjv 
6S6v (not "irpds), on, i.e., along the road 
(not " unto, " A. V.). R.V. margin renders 
KaTa u«o-. "at noon"; so Rendall, cf. 
xxii. 6, as we have KaTa not irpos ; 
so Nestle, Studien und Kritiken, p. 
335 (^92) (see Felten's note, Apostel- 
geschichte, p. 177 ; but as he points out, 
the heat of the day at twelve o'clock 
would not be a likely time for travelling, 
see also Belser, Beitrdge, p. 52, as against 
Nestle)c Wendt, edition 1899, p. 177, 
gives in his adhesion to Nestle's view on 
the ground that in LXX, cf. Gen. xviii. 
1, etc., the word uco"r]uPp. is always so 
used, and because the time of the day for 
the meeting was an important factor, 
whilst there would be no need to mention 
the direction, when the town was defi- 
nitely named (see also O. Holtzmann, 
Neutest. Zeitgeschichte, p. 88). — avTi] 
Io-tIv epTjpos : opinion is still divided as 
to whether the adjective is to be referred 
to the town or the road. Amongst recent 
writers, Wendt, edition 1899, p. 178 ; Zahn, 
Einleitung in das N. T., ii., 438 (1899) ; 
Belser, Rendall, O. Holtzmann, u. s., 
p. 88, Knabenbauer (so too Edersheim,, 
Jewish Social Life, p. 79 ; Conder in 
B.D. 2 " Gaza," and Grimm-Thayer) may 
be added to the large number who see a 
reference to the route (in Schiirer, Jewish 
People, div. ii., vol. i., p. 71, E.T., it is 
stated that this view is the more pro- 
bable). But, on the other hand, some oJ 
the older commentators (Calvin, Grotius, 
etc.) take the former view, and they have 
recently received a strong supporter in 
Prof. G. A. Smith, Historical Geog. oj 
the Holy Land, pp. 186-188. O. Holtz- 
mann, although referring avrtj to 6809, 
points out that both Strabo, xvi., 2, 30, 
and the Anonymous Geographical Frag- 
ment (Geogr. Grac. Minores, Hudson, iv., 
p. 39) designate Gaza as <fp-r)uo$. Dr. 




'UpouaaXTjp. cis rdt,av auTT) £<n\v epr|u.os. 27. teat dyaords 
ciropeodT] • kcu loou dfr^p Ai9io<l» eufouxos ou^dor-ris Kai'SdKiqs rqs l 
PaaiXio-arjs AlQiotThiv, os Tjt' em irdo-r|s rfjs yd^-qs auTTJs, o§ €\T]\u6eu 

1 ttjs HLP, Chrys.; om. NABC(D)E 61, so Tisch., W.H., R.V., Blass, Weiss, 
Wendt, Hilg. ; D adds Tiros, but Blass rejects in p, Hilg. retains. os (2) 
S$ 3 BC 2 D 2 EHLP, Syr. Hard., Arm., Chrys., so Weiss (see comment, below), 
[W.H.]: om. fc^AC'D 1 , Vulg., Sah., so Tisch., Blass, Hilg. Blass suggests orig. 
reading was ovtos, which might easily fall out after avTrjs — ovros in Gig., Boh. 
For avTtjs D reads cmjtov, but Blass rejects, so Hilg. — suggested as due from retrans. 
of Latin, or unpointed Syriac. eis om. in D' w in D 2 . 

Smith strengthens these references, not 
only by Jos., Ant., xiv., 4, 4, and 
Diodorus Siculus, xix., 80, but by main- 
taining that the New Gaza mentioned 
in the Anonymous Fragment was on 
the coast, and that if so, it lay off the 
road to Egypt, which still passed by the 
desert Gaza; the latter place need not 
have been absolutely deserted in Philip's 
time ; its site and the vicinity of the great 
road would soon attract people back, but 
it was not unlikely that the name v Ept]p.os 
might still stick to it (see also ver. 36 
below). If we take the adjective as re- 
ferring to the road, its exact force is still 
doubtful ; does it refer to one route, 
specially lonely, as distinguished from 
others, or to the ordinary aspect of a 
route leading through waste places, or to 
the fact that at the hour mentioned, 
noon-day (see above), it would be de- 
serted ? Wendt confesses himself un- 
able to decide, and perhaps he goes as 
far as one can expect to go in adding 
that at least this characterisation of the 
route so far prepares us for the sequel, in 
that it explains the fact that the eunuch 
would read aloud, and that Philip could 
converse with him uninterruptedly. 
Hackett and others regard the words 
before us as a parenthetical remark by 
St. Luke himself to acquaint the reader 
with the region of this memorable occur- 
rence, and avTt| is used in a somewhat 
similar explanatory way in 2 Chron. v. 2, 
LXX, but this does not enable us to 
decide as to whether the explanation is 
St. Luke's or the angel's. Hilgenfeld 
and Schmiedel dismiss the words as an 
explanatory gloss. The argument some- 
times drawn for the late date of Acts by 
referring epr^xos to the supposed demoli- 
tion of Gaza in a.d. 66 cannot be main- 
tained, since this destruction so called 
was evidently very partial, see G. A. 
Smith, u. s., and so Schiirer, u. s. 

Ver. 27. koA dvao~rds eirop€v8T| : im- 
mediate and implicit obedience. — ica! 
ISov, see on i. n ; cf. Hort, Ecclesia, 

p. 179, on the force of the phrase ; used 
characteristically by St. Luke of sudden 
and as it were providential interposi- 
tions, i. 10, x. 17, xii. 7, and see note 
on xvi. 1. — €vvovx°5 ; the word can be 
taken literally, for there is no contra- 
diction involved in Deut. xxiii. 1, as he 
would be simply " a proselyte of the 
gate" (Hort, Judaistic Christianity, p. 
54). The instances sometimes referred 
to as showing that the exclusion of 
eunuchs from the congregation ot the 
Lord was relaxed in the later period of 
Jewish history can scarcely hold good, 
since Isa. lvi. 3 refers to the Messianic 
future in which even the heathen and 
the eunuchs should share, and in Jer. 
xxxviii. 7, xxxix. 15 nothing is said which 
could lead us to describe Ebed Melech, 
another Ethiopian eunuch, as a Jew in 
the full sense. On the position and in- 
fluence of eunuchs in the East, both in 
ancient and modern times, see " Eunuch," 
B.D. 2 , and Hastings' B.D. St. Luke's 
mention that he was a eunuch is quite 
in accordance with the " universalism " 
of the Acts ; gradually the barriers of a 
narrow Judaism were broken down, first 
in the case of the Samaritans, and now 
in the case of the eunuch. Eusebius. 
H. E., ii., 1, speaks of him as irpcoTos «| 
eOviv, who was converted to Christ, and 
even as a "proselyte of the gate" he 
might be so described, for the gulf which 
lay between a born Gentile and a genuine 
descendant of Abraham could never be 
bridged over (Schiirer, Jewish People, 
div. ii., vol. ii., p. 326, E.T.). Moreover, 
in the case of the Ethiopian eunuch, de- 
scended from the accursed race of Ham, 
this separation from Israel must have 
been intensified to the utmost (cf. Amos 
ix. 7). No doubt St. Luke may also 
have desired to instance the way in 
which thus early the Gospel spread to 
a land far distant from the place of its 
birth (McGiffert, Apostolic Age, p. 100). 
— Svvdo-rrjs: noun in apposition to dvr]p 
Ale., only used by St. Luke here and in 

2-;— 2g. 



-TTpOCTKUfijo-wk' cis 'UpoucraXrju,, 28. ?]v re u-n-ocrTpe<J>(i)e icai KO.Qrn3.evos 
eiri tou appcnros auTou, ical aveyivftto-Ke toc irpo<j>-rjrr)i' 'Haatav. 1 29. 
ctire 8e to riceupa tw ♦iXi-irrra*, flpocreXue Kai koXXtjGtjti tw appcm 

; tov -n-po4>. Ho-. EHLP 61, Boh., Syr. Hard.; Ho-, tov irpo<}>. ^ABC 13, 69 
Vulg., Syr. Pesh., Sah., Arm., Aeth., so Tisch., W.H., R.V. See for this note v. 30 

his Gospel, i. 52, and once again by St. 
Paul, 1 Tim. vi. 15. In LXX frequent 
(used of God, Ecclus. xlvi. 5, 2 Mace. 
xv. 3, 23, etc. ; so too of Zeus by Soph.), 
for its meaning here cf. Gen. 1. 4, 
Latin, aulicus. — KovSaKtjs: not a per- 
sonal name, but said to be a name often 
given to queens of Ethiopia {cf Pha- 
raoh, and later Ptolemy, in Egypt), Pliny, 
N. H., vi., 35, 7. In the time of Euse- 
bius, H. E., ii., 1, Ethiopia is said to 
be still ruled by queens, Strabo, xvii., I., 
54 ; Bion of Soli, Ethiopica (Miiller, 
Fragm. Hist. Grac, iv., p. 351). Ac- 
cording to Brugsch the spelling would 
be Kanta-ki : cf. " Candace," B.D. 2 , and 
"Ethiopia,'' Hastings' B.D. — -va£if)s: a 
Persian word found both in Greek and 
Latin (cf. Cicero, De Off., ii., 22; Virg., 
JEn., i., 119 ; and see Wetstein, in loco). 
In LXX, Ezra vi. 1 (Esth. iv. 7), treasures; 
v. 17, vii. 20, treasury ; vii. 21, treasurers ; 
cf. also Isa. xxxix. 2, and Ya£o<j>v\diciov 
in LXX, and in N.T., Luke xxi. 1, Mark 
xii. 41 (2), 43, John viii. 20. " Observat 
Lucas, et locum, ubi praefectus Gaza? 
Philippo factus est obviam, Gazam fuisse 
vocatum " Wetstein ; see also on the 
nomen et omen Felten and Plumptre, 
and compare on the word Jerome, 
Epist., cviii. , 11. If the second 8s is 
retained (R.V.) it emphasises the fact 
that the eunuch was already a proselyte 
Weiss). — irpoo-Kwiio- wv: proves not that 
(he was a Jew, but that he was not a 
heathen (Hackett). The proselytes, as 
well as foreign Jews, came to Jerusalem 
to worship. We cannot say whether he 
had gone up to one of the feasts; St. 
Chrysostom places it to his credit that 
he had gone up at an unusual time. 

Ver. 28. appo/ros: the chariot was 
regarded as a mark of high rank : very 
frequent word in LXX, but in N.T. only 
here, and in Rev. ix. g, cf. xviii. 13. 
" Chariot," Hastings' B.D., properly in 
classics a war-chariot, but here for appd- 
p.a|a, a covered chariot (Blass), Herod., 
vii., 41. — avE-yivuo-KEV : evidently aloud, 
according to Eastern usage ; there is no 
need to suppose that some slave was read- 
ing to him (Olshausen, Nosgen, Blass). 
As the following citation proves, he was 

reading from the LXX, and the wide- 
spread knowledge of this translation 
in Egypt would make it probable a 
priori (Wendt), cf. Professor Margoliouth, 
" Ethiopian Eunuch," Hastings' B.D. 
It may be that the eunuch had bought 
the roll in Jerusalem " a pearl of great 
price," and that he was reading it for the 
first time ; ver. 34 is not quite consistent 
with the supposition that he had heard 
in Jerusalem rumours of the Apostles' 
preaching, and of their reference of the 
prophecies to Jesus of Nazareth : Philip 
is represented as preaching to him Jesus, 
and that too as good news. " The 
eunuch came to worship — great was also 
his studiousness — observe again his piety, 
but though he did not understand he read, 
and after reading, examines," Chrys., 
Horn., xix., and Jerome, Epist., liii., 5. 
See also Corn, a Lapide, in loco, on the 
diligence and devotion of the eunuch. 

Ver. 29. to irvevpa elirev : nothing 
inconsistent with the previous statement 
that an angel had spoken to him, as 
Weiss supposes by referring the angel 
visit to a reviser. There was no reason 
why the angel should accompany Philip, 
or reappear to him, whilst the inward 
guidance of the Spirit would be always 
present, as our Lord had promised. — 
Ko\Xt]6T]Ti, cf. v. 13, in Acts five times, 
and in each case of joining or attaching 
oneself closely to a person, of social or 
religious communion with a person, twice 
in Luke's Gospel, cf. xv. 15 for its sense 
here, and elsewhere only once in the 
Evangelists, Matt. xix. 5, and that in a 
quotation, Gen. ii. 24, cf. its use three 
times in St. Paul, Rom. xii. 9, 1 Cor. vi. 
16, 17. In classical Greek similar usage, 
and cf. LXX, Ruth ii. 8, Ecclus. ii. 3, 
xix. 2, 1 Mace. iii. 2, vi. 21, etc. Hebrew 

p^T see Wetstein on x. 28. 

Ver. 30. irpoo-Spapwv h\: rightly 
taken to indicate the eagerness with 
which Philip obeyed. — 'Apd ye — the ye 
strengthens the apo, dost thou really 
understand ? num igitur ? dpa without 
ye is only found elsewhere in Luke xviii. 
S, and in Gal. ii. 17 (W.H., and also 
Lightfoot, Galatians, I.e.), see Blass, in 


nPAHEii: AnorroAQN 


toutco. 30. irpocrSpafAwf 8e 6 ♦iXnnros ^Koucref auToG dyayifwericoi'Tos 
tok ■npo<\>r)Tt]\> 'Ho-ataf, ical elirec, *Apd ye yiycoo-Keis d dkayieojcrKeis ; 
31. 6 8e elirc, riws yap de Soi'aifiTjv, iav p,Y) ns oStjytJot] * p.e ; 
irape«d\e(re T€ toi' <}>£\nr7iw avafiavra KaGiaai aw auTto. 32. •p 8e 
irepioxT| tt)s ypa<|>r]S V dyeyivcoaxef, tjk auTT}, " c Qs TrpojSaToe eirc 
axpayrjy tjx^I 1 Kai ^ dp.vos ivavrlov toG Keipoy-ros 2 auToy d<J>cokos, 
outws ouk deoiyei to ot6u,o, auToG. 33. iv rrj Taireu'wcrei auToG r\ 
Kpicris auToG T|p9rj, 3 Trjf 8e yet'cav auToG tis S«]YY)o-6tcu ; on aiperai. 

1 o§i\yr\o"Q AB'HLP, Chrys., so Blass, Weiss; oStjytjo-ci ^B x CE 13, so Tisch., 
W.H., R.V., Wendt, Hilg. 

2 KCipovTos BP, Orig., so Lach., W.H. text, Blass, Weiss; Kcipavros NACEHL, 
Chrys., so Tisch., W.H. marg., Hilg. But as Wendt points out, readings vary as 
in LXX. 

3 tv tt) Tairei. . . . t)p0T] D, Par., Iren. omit. Blass brackets in p ; may have 
been a " Western non-interpolation," or the omission may have been for shortness, 
avrov CEHLP, Syrr. (P. and H.), several verss., Chrys.; om. NAB, Vulg., Irint., so 
Tisch., W.H., R.V., Blass, so LXX. 

loco, and Grammatik, p. 254. In LXX 
very rare, see Hatch and Redpath, sub 
v., and Viteau, he Grec du N. T., p. 22 
(1893). — 71V. d dv<ry. : for paronomasia, 
see Blass, Gram., p. 292, where other 
instances in N.T. are given, and also 
Wetstein, in loco. Julian's well-known 
saying with reference to the Christian 
writings, and the famous retort, are 
quoted by Alford, Plumptre, Page, Meyer- 
Wendt, in loco. 

Ver. 31. -yap ; " elegans particula hoc 
sensu quid quaeris?" implies, Why do 
you ask ? for how should I be able ? {cf. 
Matt, xxvii. 23, Mark xv. 14, Luke xxiii. 
22) ; see Simcox, Language of N. T. 
Greek, p. 172 ; Grimm-Thayer, sub v., I. 
— dv Sweup/qv : optative with av ; occurs 
only in Luke, both in his Gospel and 
Acts, expressing what would happen on 
the fulfilment of some supposed condi- 
tion : see, for a full list of passages, Bur- 
ton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 80 ; 
Simcox, u. s., p. 112: twice in direct 
questions, here and in xvii. 18, but only 
in this passage is the condition expressed, 
cf. also Viteau, Le Grec du N. T., pp. 33 
and 66 (1893).— 68t]yt)o-t), see critical 
notes, and Blass, Grammatik, p. 210 ; if 
we read future indicative it will be an 
instance of a future supposition thus ex- 
pressed with more probability, Burton, 
m. s., pp. 104, 105, 109, and see also 
Simcox, note on the passage, tt. s., p. 
112. Burton compares Luke xix. 40 
(W.H.), see also Viteau, u. s., pp. 4, in, 
226, whilst Blass maintains that there is 
no one certain example of this usage of 

edv with future indicative. The word 
used here (" insignis modestia eunuchi," 
Calvin) is used also by our Lord Himself 
for the Holy Spirit's leading and guid- 
ance, John xvi. 13, and also in the LXX, 
as in the Psalms, of divine guidance. 
— irapcKaXco-ev : "he besought,'" R.V* 
("desired" A.V.), the word is rightly 
taken to denote both the humility and 
the earnestness of the eunuch (Bengel) : 
a verb frequent both in St. Luke and 
St. Paul, six or seven times in Gospel, 
twenty-two or twenty-three times in Acts. 
— T€: note the closing connecting par- 
ticle, showing the necessary result of the 
question (Weiss). 

Ver. 32. irepiox'Jl ttjs YpatjSrjs " the 
contents of the passage of Scripture " i.e., 
the one particular passage, Isa. liii. 7, 8 
(so Meyer- Wendt, Holtzmann, Hackett), 
cf. i. 16, and 1 Pet. ii. 6 : irepicxei ev 
ttj Ypacf>fl and toujttjs in ver. 35 below ; 
7repiox»] has been taken to mean a 
section, as in Cicero, Epist. ad Att., xiii., 
25 (so in Codex A, before the Gospel 
of St. Mark, its irepiox<»-t> i.e., sectiones, 
are prefixed), but in CicerO also Meyer- 
Wendt take the word to mean the contents 
of a passage, cf. notes, edit. 1888 and 1899; 
see also Felten and Plumptre, in loco. 
St. Chrysostom apparently takes ypa<j>TJ 
here as = at ypa^ai, " totum corpus 
scripturae sacrae," see Blass, in loco, 
but if so, the plural would be used as 
always ; see above references and Light- 
foot on Gal., hi., 22. The fact that the 
eunuch was reading Isaiah is mentioned 
by St. Chrysostom as another indication 

3°— 35- 



cLtto rf]s Y^ "H £ w *l a "Tou. 34- &"iroi<pip€is Se 6 £u>'ou)(09 t« 
♦tXi'irrrw clue, <rou, irepl ti^os 6 Trpo<(>TiTtjs X£yei touto ; irepi 
pauroo, fj irepi eTcpou th'OS ; 35- a^ot^as 8e 6 3>iXiTnro$ to aTop.a 
auTou, Kai dp^'os Atto ttjs yP a< l>TS Taurus, euTiyycXicaTO aurw 

of character, since he had in hand the 
prophet who is more sublime than all 
others, Horn., xix. 

Ver. 33. Iv ffl Taireivworei k.t.X., cf. 
Isa. liii. 7, 8, " in his humiliation his 
judgment was taken away" (LXX), 
so A. and R.V., generally taken to 
mean by his humbling himself his 
judgment was cancelled, cf. Phil. ii. 6, 7, 
so Wendt in seventh and eighth editions : 
cf. Grimm-Thayer, sub v., Kpi'tris, the 
punishment appointed for him was taken 
away, i.e., ended, and so sub v., aipw = 
to cause to cease, Col. ii. 14. But the 
words "in his humiliation" etc., may 
also fairly mean that in the violence and 
injustice done to him his judgment, i.e., 
the fair trial due to him, was withheld, 
and thus they conform more closely 
to the Hebrew " by oppression and 
by (unjust) judgment he was taken 
away," sc Hitzig, Ewald, Cheyne and 
R.V. So to the same effect Delitzsch 
takes the words to mean that hostile 
oppression and judicial persecution befel 
him, and out of them he was removed 
by death (cf. R.V. margin). (The words 
have been taken to mean that by 
oppression and judgment he was hurried 
off and punished, raptus est ad suppli- 
cium.) — tt|v (8k) yevedv ovtov tis SiTjyi]- 
trcTai ; (LXX), " his generation who 
shall declare ? " R.V., the words may 
mean " who shall declare the wicked- 
ness of the generation in which he 
lived ? " (see Grimm-Thayer, sub v., 
yeved) — their wickedness, i.e., in their 
treatment of him ; so De Wette (and 
Meyer in early editions), and to the same 
effect, Lumby, Rendall, cf. our Lord's 
own words, Matt. xii. 39-42, etc. In 
Meyer- Wendt (seventh and eighth edi- 
tion) the words are taken to mean " who 
can fitly declare the number of those who 
share his life ? " i.e., his posterity, his 
dfsciples, so Felten (but see on the other 
hand, Delitzsch, in loco). The Hebrew 
seems to mean, as in R.V. text, " and 
as for his generation who among them 
considered that he was cut off out of the 
land of the living ? for the transgression 
of my people " etc. , see Cheyne, in 
loco ; Briggs, Messianic Prophecy, p. 358, 
and Delitzsch, Jesaia, pp. 523, 524, fourth 
edition (see also Page's note, and Wendt, 
edition i8gg). The references by the 

Fathers (cf. Bede and Wordsworth) to 
the eternal generation of the Son, and 
the mystery of His Incarnation, do not 
seem to find support in the Hebrew or 
in the Greek rendering. On the oldest 
Jewish interpretations of Isaiah liii., see 
Dalman's Der leidende und der sterbende 
Messias, pp. 21-23, 2 7"35i 89, 91 ; and 
see also in connection with the passage 
before us, Athanasius, Four Discourses 
against the Arians, i., 13, 54, and Dr. 
Robertson's note; see also above on 
St. Peter's Discourses in chap, hi., and 
below on xxvi. 23. — aipcTat. diro ttjs yijs : 
" is taken," i.e., with violence (here = 

Hebrew ^jj , cf. use of aipu, LXX, Acts 

xxii. 22, xxi. 36, Matt. xxiv. 39, Luke 
xxiii. 18, John xix. 15. 

Ver. 34. airoK., see above iii. 12, v. 8. 

It has been sometimes supposed that the 
eunuch was acquainted with the tradition 
that Isaiah had been sawn asunder by 
Manasseh — Felten, see Wetstein on 
Heb. xi. 37. 

Ver. 35. dvoi|as t& «tt. cuitov : the 
phrase is used to introduce some weighty 
and important utterance, cf. x. 34, xviii. 
14, and Luke i. 64, so too Matt. v. 2, 
2 Cor. vi. 11, also frequent in LXX; 
" aperire os in Scriptura est ordiri Ion- 
gum sermonem de re gravi et seria. 
Significat ergo Lucas coepisse Philippum 
pleno ore disserere de Christo," Calvin, 

cf. Hebrew phrase VQ-.TIN nil 3 

in various senses. — dp|dp,evos, see on i. 
22, cf. Luke xxiv. 27. — Tavrqs, see above 
on ver. 3 — — evti7Y*Xi<roTo : used with 
an accusative both of the person ad- 
dressed, as in w. 25. 40, and of the 
message delivered, cf. Luke viii. 1, Acts 
v. 42, viii. 4, 12, etc., but when the two 
are combined the person is always ex- 
pressed by the dative, cf. Luke i. 19, ii. 
10 (Acts xvii. 18), Simcox, Language of 
the N. T., p. 79. From the sequel it i^ 
evident that Philip not only preached 
the glad tidings of the fulfilment of 
the prophecies in Jesus as the ideal 
and divine Sufferer, but that he also 
pointed out to the eunuch the door 
of admission into the Church of Jesus ; cf. 
Jerome, Epist., liii., 5. 

Ver. 36. tSov v8o>p : " mlus fides, foris 
aqua praesto erat" Bengel. According 





toc Mtjo-ouV. 36. <*>s Se eTropeuorro Kcrrd tt|»' 6S0V, r\\Qov em ti 
uowp • Kai 4)T]<rn' 6 euroG)(os» loot) uSa>p • ti KOjXuei p.e PaTTTio-fl-qfai • 
37. 1 ctire Be 6 4>iXnnros, Ei moreucis e| oXtjs ttjs KapSias, IlecrTif. 
diroKpiOels Se eiirc, flioreuw tw vlov tou 0eou el^ai t6c > lirjaou»' 
XpiaTOf . 38. Kal cKeXeoae crrTJi'ai to dpp.a • ica! Kar4fii)(Ta,v dp4>6- 
Tepoi eis to uowp, o tc ♦iXnnros kcu 6 euyo&xos * Kal e|3dTrn.o , €»' 

1 The whole verse as it stands in T.R. is read in one form or another, with varying 
variations, also in Patristic quotations, by E (D is wanting from viii. 29b — x. 14), 
15, and other good cursives, Gig., Par., Wern., Vulg. (clem. + am." demid. 
tol.), Arm., Syr. Hard, mg., Iren., Cypr., R.V. marg., and by Hilg. ; om. by 
^ABCHLP 13, 61, Vulg. (am.* fu.), Syr. Pesh. Hard, text, Sah., Boh., Aeth., 
Chrys., so Tisch., W.H., Weiss, Wendt, R.V. text. The verse is strongly defended 
by Belser, Beitrdge, p. 50, as originally Lucan, but omitted by Luke for brevity as 
in many other cases — but on the other hand Wendt, edit. 1899, p. 180, note, justly 
points out that it is difficult to see any reason for its omission, whilst it is easily con- 
ceivable that the words would have been inserted perhaps originally as a marginal 
note, since otherwise the belief of the eunuch is nowhere expressly stated in the text ; 
cf. Rom. x. 9 (but cf. ii. 41, xvi. 33). But they were evidently known as early as 
Irenaeus, Adv. Har., iii., 12, as also to Oecumenius and Theophylact, and they may 
well have expressed what actually happened, as the question in ver. 36 evidently 
required an answer. Augustine did not question its genuineness, although he refused 
to shorten the profession at Baptism on account of it, De Fide et Operibus, ix. (see 
W.H., App., p. 93; Felten, crit. notes, p. 177; Speaker's Comtn., in loco). 

to Jerome (Epist., ciii.) and Eusebius 
(wepi xoTTttv), the site of the baptism was 
placed at Bethsura (Bethzur, Josh. xv. 
28, 2 Chron. xi. 17, Neh. iii. 16, etc.), 
about twenty miles from Jerusalem, and 
two from Hebron. Robinson (Biblical 
Researches, ii., 749) thinks that the place 
is more probably to be found on the road 
between Eleutheropolis (Beit-Jibrin) and 
Gaza, whilst Professor G. A. Smith (see 
above on ver. 26) considers that the fact 
that Philip was found immediately after 
at Azotus suggests that the meeting and 
baptism took place, not where tradition 
has placed them, among the hills of 
Judaea, but on the Philistine plain (Hist. 
Geog. of the Holy Land, pp. 186, 240). 
But as he finds it impossible to apply the 
epithet " desert " to any route from Jeru- 
salem to Gaza, whether that by Beit- 
Jibrin, or the longer one by Hebron, he 
does not hesitate to apply the epithet to 
Gaza itself, and as the meeting (accord- 
ing to his view) took place in its neigh- 
bourhood, the town would naturally be 
mentioned. Gaza and Azotus, ver. 40, 
are the only two Philistine towns 
named in the N. T. — ri kwXvci p.* poir- 
Tio-0rjvai ; " mark the eager desire, mark 
the exact knowledge . . . see again his 
modesty, he does not say Baptise me, 
neither does he hold his peace, but he 
utters somewhat betwixt strong desire 
and reverent fear" Chrys., Horn., xix. 

Ver. 38. els to v8o>p : even if the 
words are rendered "unto the water" 
(Plumptre), the context dvefSijo-av 4k in- 
dicates that the baptism was by immer- 
sion, and there can be no doubt that this 
was the custom in the early Church. St. 
Paul's symbolic language in Rom. vi. 4, 
Col. ii. 12, certainly seems to presuppose 
that such was the case, as also such 
types as the Flood, the passage of the 
Red Sea, the dipping of Naaman in Jor- 
dan. But the Didache is fairly quoted 
to show that at an early period immer- 
sion could not have been regarded as 
essential, cf. vii. 3. See also " Teaching 
of the Apostles," iv., 807, in Diet, of 
Christ. Biog. (Smith & Wace), "Apos- 
tellehre" in Real-Encyclopddie fur pro- 
testant. Theol. und Kirche (Hauck), 
p. 712 ; " Baptism " in B.D. 2 . " Mutavit 
jEthiops pellem suam" is the comment 
of Bede, " id est sorde peccatorum 
abluta, de lavacro Jesu dealbatus as- 

Ver. 39. rivcvpa K. Tjpirao-t : although 
the expression is simply flvcvpa K. the 
reference is evidently to the same divine 
power as in ver. 29, and cannot be ex- 
plained as meaning an inward impulse 
of the Evangelist, or as denoting a 
hurricane or storm of wind (as even 
Nosgen and Stier supposed). The article 
is omitted before rivcvpa K. in Luke iv. 
18, so also in LXX, Isa. lxi. 1, and we 




auTor.v 39. ot€ 8c a.vif&i)<Tav ek tou uScito?, rifeufia Kupi'ou rjp-rrao-e 
tow ♦iXiinroi' 1 • Kal ouk elSev auToy oukcti cuvouxos, eiropcucTo yap 

1 (Ivevua K. i)pira<rc tov ♦. ; instead of this A 2 , Par., Wern., Syr. H. mg., Jer., Aug. 
read irvevpa ayiov eireircaev €irt tov ewovxov, ayycXos 8e K. T)pirao*ev tov <t>. Wendt 
regards as interpolation partly according to ver. 26 and partly according to ver. 44. 
Hilg. retains and Belser, p. 51, defends as Lucan. It is fitting that in Scripture the 
Hoi)' Ghost is not represented as given after Philip's Baptism, because his work was 
to be completed by the advent of Peter and John ; but in the case before us no Apostle 
was present, and so the Holy Spirit came down miraculously after Philip had baptised 
the eunuch. So, too, Hilgenfeld leans towards the reading /. c, and regards it as 
just possible that the ordinary text is a set-off against the contradiction involved with 
viii. 15-18, in accordance with which the Holy Spirit was only bestowed through the 
laying on of the hands of the Apostles. Blass rejects, and follows T.R. (see below). 
After ♦iXiirirov Par., Syr. H. mg. (no other authorities) add " ab eo" ; so Hilg., and 
so Blass in p, air* avTov, which seems somewhat strange in the case of the latter 

cannot therefore conclude anything from 
its omission here, tjpirao-e, abripuit, the 
disappearance, as the context shows, was 
regarded as supernatural, cf. LXX, 1 
Kings xviii. 12, 2 Kings ii. 16 (Ezek. iii. 

14, Hebrew only JTV^)- Thus Hilgen. 
feld recognises not only a likeness here 
to the O.T. passages quoted, but that 
a miraculous transference of Philip to 
another place is implied. No doubt, as 
Hilgenfeld points out, irvcvua may mean 
wind, John iii. 8, but this by no means 
justifies exclusion of all reference here to 
the Holy Spirit. No doubt we may see 
with Blass alikeness in the language of the 
narrative to the O.T. passages just cited, 
and St. Luke's informants may have been 
the daughters of Philip, who were them- 
selves -rrpocf^TiSes (see Blass, in loco) ; 
but there is no reason why he should not 
have heard the narrative from St. Philip 
himself, and the rendering irvcvua by 
ventus is not satisfactory, although Blass 
fully recognises that Philip departed by 
the same divine impulse as that by which 
he had come. Holtzmann endorses the 
reference to the O.T. passages above, but 
specially draws attention to the parallel 
which he supposes in Bel and the 
Dragon, ver. 34 ff. But this passage 
should be contrasted rather than com- 
pared with the simple narrative of the 
text, so free from any fantastic embellish- 
ment, while plainly implying a super- 
natural element : cf. for the verb apiragu, 
1 Thess. iv. 17, 2 Cor. xii. 2, 4 (a reference 
to which as explaining Philip's with- 
drawal is not to the point, since the narra- 
tive cannot imply that Philip was cktos 
tov crup.aT09), Rev. xii. 5, used of a 
snatching or taking up due to divine 
agency, cf. Wisdom iv. 11, where it is 

said of Enoch -qpira-yY). Both in classical 
Greek and in the LXX the word implies 
forcible or sudden seizure (John vi. 15). 
— Kal ovk eXSev . . . ciropcuETo -yap k.t.X. 
If these two clauses are closely connected 
as by R.V., they do not simply state 
that the eunuch went on his own way 
(Rendall), (in contrast with Philip who 
went his way), rejoicing in the good 
news which he had heard, and in the 
baptism which he had received ; and 
R.V. punctuation surely need not prevent 
the disappearance of Philip from being 
viewed as mysterious, even if the words 
Kal ovk clSov avTov ovk€ti do not 
imply this. Moreover avTov may rather 
emphasise the fact that the eunuch went 
his way, which he would not have done 
had he seen Philip, but would perhaps 
have followed him who had thus en- 
lightened his path (so Weiss, in loco, 
readingat>TovTT]v 686V — avTov emphatic : 
see also St. Chrysostom's comment in 
loco). — x ai P 0>v: "the fruit of the Spirit 
is . . . joy," Gal. v. 22 (the word at the 
end of a clause is characteristic of Luke ; 
Luke xv. 5, xix. 6, see Vogel, p. 45). 
Eusebius describes the eunuch, to whom 
he gives the name of Indich, as the first 
preacher to his countrymen of the tidings 
of great joy, and on the possible reception 
in the earliest Christian times of the 
Gospel message in the island of Meroe at 
least, see "Ethiopian Church," Diet, of 
Christ. Biog., ii., 234 (Smith & Wace). 
In the conversion of the Ethiopian eunuch 
men have seen the first fulfilment of the 
ancient prophecy, Ps. lxviii. 31 (Luckock, 
Footprints of the Apostles as traced 
by St Luke, i., 219, and C. and H., 
p. 66). 

Ver. 40. evpe'flTj tl% "A.: constructio 
pragnans «= was borne to and found at, 



VIII. 40. 

TTjk 68oy auTOo \aipmv. 40. ♦iXiinros 8e eupe'Oiq eis "A^wtov kcu 
oiepx°p-efos cui1YY c ^i €TO T ^ s wtSXeis irdaos, Iws tou eX0£.i' atirrov 
els Kcucrripeiav. 1 

1 Koio-apeiav BCHLP, so Blass, Weiss, Hilg. ; Kaurapiav fr>$AE 6i, so T sch., 
W.H. (see W.H., App., p. 160, and Winer-Schmiedel, p. 45). 

cf. xxi. 13 ; or, as cU means more than 
ev, implying that he had come into the 
city and was staying there, cf. Esth. i. 5 ; 
marg. Hebrew "found," A.V., ctiptancu, 

N2?2 is very often found in the LXX 

in similar phrases, e.g., 1 Chron. xxix. 
17, 2 Chron. xxxi. 1, 1 Sam. xiii. 15, etc. 
The word may imply, however, much 
more than the fact that Philip was present 
at Azotus, and Alford sees in it a pro- 
bable reference to 2 Kings ii. 17 (cf. 
passages in O.T. above), where the same 
word is used, cvpcOi). Blass takes it to 
mean "vento quasi ibi dejectus," but see 

above on ver. 39 .— * AfwroVj TiltpN ; 

only mentioned here in N.T., but in 
LXX Ashdod, Josh. xi. 22, xiii. 3, xv. 46, 
1 Sam. v. 5, 2 Chron. xxvi. 6, Neh. iv. 7, 
xiii. 20, Jer. xx. 20, xlvii. 5, Amos i. 8, 
Zeph. ii. 4, Zech. ix. 6 ; Azotus in 1 Mace, 
v. 18, x. 84; Herod., ii., 157: Herod, speaks 
of the siege of the twenty-nine years under 
Psammetichus as the longest in history 
(£ = <r8, as in 'npop.d£i]s, Ahuramazda, 
Blass, in loco). An old Philisvme town, 
and one of the five chief cities — it might 
be regarded as the half-way station on the 
great road between Gaza and Joppa. 
Schurer holds that the population was 
Jewish to a considerable extent, as we 
find that Vespasian was obliged to place 
a garrison there (Jos., B. J., iv., 3, 2) ; 
it is now a mere village of no impor- 
tance, and still bearing the name Esdud. 
Schurer, Jewish People, div. ii., vol. i., 
pp. 62, 67 ff., E.T. ; G. A. Smith, Hist. 
Geog. of the Holy Land, pp. 192, 193; Ham- 
burger, Real-Encyclopadie desjudentums, 
i., 1, 124, "Ashdod," B.D. 2 , "Azotus," 
and also Col. Conder sub v., Hastings' 
B.D. — 8i6pxop.evos evT|YY«X., see above 
on ver. 4 and also xiii. 6, and cf. 
Luke ix. 6 for a similar combination 
of the two verbs. — ras irdXeis irdcras : 
from their position between Azotus and 
Caesarea, Lydda and Joppa may well 
have been included, cf. ix. 32, 36, in 
which we may see something of the 
effects of St. Philip's preaching, " hie 
quoque, uti in urbe Samariae, Apostolis 
auditores praeparavit," Bengel. — Kai- 
aapciav (mentioned no less than fifteen 

times in Acts) : its full name was Kai- 
crapeia Zcf3a<m], so named by Herod 
the Great in honour of Augustus (Jos., 
Ant., xvi., 5, 1) ; sometimes also -rrapd- 
Xios or r[ lirl OaXaTTfl (Jos., B. J., iii., 
g, 1; vii., 1, 3); it was also called 
" Straton's Tower " (cf. K. r\ iTpdrtovos, 
Apost. Const., vi., 12), although it was 
virtually a fresh site. Schurer derives this 
latter name from Straton, the name of 
one or more of the last kings of Sidon, 
who towards the end of the Persian 
period were probably in possession of 
the strip of coast upon which the tower 
was built (Schurer, u. s., div. ii., vol. i., 
p. 84 ff.). Herod's lavish expenditure 
and enlargement gave it such impor- 
tance that it came to be called Caput 
Judaea, Tacitus, Hist., ii., 79, i.e., 
of the Roman Province, for it never 
could be called truly Judaean. For its 
magnificence, see Jos., Ant., xv., 9 ; 
B. J., i., 21, cf. Ant., xvi., 5. It 
was a seaport suited to his taste, 
which Herod wanted, and in Caesarea 
he found it — " Joppa, Jerusalem's port, 
was Jewish, national, patriotic ; Caesarea, 
Herodian, Roman in obedience, Greek 
in culture". The buildings were 
magnificent — a temple with its two 
statues of Augustus and of Rome, a 
theatre, an amphitheatre ; but above all, 
the haven was the chief work of art, 
Sebastos Limen, so large and important 
that the name of the city was even 
dwarfed beside it (see especially Dr. G. 
A. Smith, u. s., p. 140). Here the Roman 
procurators had their abode, both before 
and after Agrippa's reign ; here, too, was 
the chief garrison of the troops of the 
province. The population was chiefly 
heathen, but with a considerable mixture 
of Jews, and so both Gentile and Jew 
had equal rights, while each claimed ex- 
clusive powers. In the time of Felix 
things came to such a pass that blood- 
shed ensued, and Felix exasperated the 
Jews by leaving the sole direction of the 
town in the hands of the heathen party. 
It was this which in the first place pro- 
voked the great rising of the Jews, a.d. 
66 (Jos., Ant., xx., 8, 7, 9; B. J., ii., 13, 
7 ; 14, 4, 5). The war broke out, and, 
according to Josephus, all the Jewish in- 

IX. i- 



IX. 1. 'O AE lauXos €Ti eprnreW diretXTJs Kal fyovou €19 tous 
fjia0T]Tas tou Kupiou, ■npoaeKQun' tw dp^icpei, 2. irJTrjcra.TO Trap' auTou 
emoroXas ciS AafxaorKOf irpos tcis owaywyds, oirws edi' n^as euprj 
tt]s 6800 SVTas aVSpas re kcu yumiKas, ScScjxeVous dydyn eis 

habitants, twenty thousand in number, 
were massacred in an hour. Here the 
famous Rabbi Akiba met a martyr's death, 
here Eusebius of Caesarea and Procopius 
were born, and hither Origen fled. See 
Schiirer, u. s.; Hamburger, Real-Encyclo- 
pddie des Judentums, ii., 1, 123 ; G. A. 
Smith, w. s., pp. 138, 143 ff., B. D. 2 ; Eder- 
sheim, History of the Jewish Nation, pp. 
21, 23, 156, 199, 251, 265, etc. Among the 
Jews Caesarea was called by the same 
name by which we know it, but some- 
times from its fortifications, Migdal Shur, 
or after its harbour, Migdal Shina, or after 
both, and once by its ancient name, 
•' Straton's Tower" (cf. also Strabo, xvi., 
p. 758), but as the seat of the Roman 
power, and for its preponderating heathen 
population, it was specially hated ; and 
so it was designated " the daughter of 
Edom," although the district, so rich 
and fertile, was still called ' ' the land of 
life ". Edersheim, Jewish Social Life, 
pp. 24, 72, 202, and Hamburger, u.s. 
Caesarea is mentioned in the verse before 
us not because of its political and com- 
mercial importance, but because it be- 
came the after home of Philip, xxi. 8. 
But it also might be named here as 
marking a further and interesting stage 
in the progress of the Gospel (see also 
below on chap. x.). We cannot say 
whether at the time of the narrative in 
chap. x. Philip had already settled and 
worked in Caesarea. 

Chapter IX.— Ver. 1. 'O 8i lavXos : 
takes up and continues the narrative 
from viii. 3 ; the resumptive use of 8e. — 
!ti : " Sic in summo fervore peccandi 
ereptus et conversus est " Bengel. — 
€(jnrv€<i)v : only here in N.T., not " breath- 
ing out," A. V., but rather "breathing 
of," lit., " in " (R.V. simply " breathing "), 
cf. LXX, Josh. x. 40 ; irov tp/irve'ov £wfjs 
{cf. Ps. xvii. 15) — threatening and 
murdering were as it were the atmo- 
sphere which he breathed, and in and 
by which he lived, cf. Stobaeus, Flor., 85, 
19, 68p.TJs !|*irveovTa, L. and S. and 
Blass, in loco (cf. also Aristoph., Eq., 
437, ovtos tJ8t) Kaxias kcu crvicoc^avTias 
irvet, and Winer-Moulton, xxx., 9). — tw 
apxicpci: probably Joseph Caiaphas, who 
continues thus to persecute the Church, 
see on iv. 6 (v. 17) ; he held office until 
36 a.d., see Zockler's note, in loco, and 

"Caiaphas," B.D. 2 , artd Hastings' B.D. 
" Saul as a Pharisee makes request of 
a Sadducee 1 " says Felten. 

Ver. 2. •QTr\tra.To, see on iii. 2, with 
irapd, in iii. 3, we have the imperfect, 
but " inest in aoristo quod etiam accepit," 
Blass ; on the use of the verb in N.T., see 
also Blass, Gram., p. 182, and Grimm- 
Thayer, sub v. — «iuoTo\as, cf. xxii. 5, 
xxvi. 12 ; on the jurisdiction of the San- 
hedrim, see above on iv. 5 ; Weber, 
Judische Theol., p. 141 (1897) ; O. 
Holtzmann, Neutest. Zeitgeschichte, pp. 
174, 175 ; and Schiirer, Jewish People, 
div. ii., vol. i., p. 185, E.T. : only within 
the limits of Judaea had the Sanhedrim 
any direct authority, although its orders 
were regarded as binding over every 
Jewish community. But the extent to 
which this obligation prevailed depended 
on the disposition of the Jewish com- 
munities towards the Sanhedrim. — Aa- 
paancov : " In the history of religion," 
writes Dr. G. A. Smith, " Damascus was 
the stage of two great crises. She was 
the scene of the conversion of the first 
Apostle of Christianity to the Gentiles ; 
she was the first Christian city to be 
taken by Islam. It was fit that Paul's 
conversion, with his first sense of a 
mission to the Gentiles, should not take 
place till his journey had brought him to 
Jewish soil." If Damascus was not the 
oldest, it may at all events be called the 
most enduring city in the world. Ac- 
cording to Josephus, Ant., i., 6, 4, it was 
founded by Uz, the grandson of Shem, 
whilst a Moslem tradition makes Eliezer 
its founder, and Abraham its king (see 
also Jos., Ant., i., 7, 2). Here, too, was 
the traditional scene of the murder of 
Abel (Shakespeare, 1 King Henry VI., i., 
3). Damascus was situated some seventy 
miles from the seaboard (about six or 
eight days' journey from Jerusalem), to 
the east of Anti- Lebanon in a great 
plain, watered by the river Abana with 
her seven streams, to which the city owes 
her beauty and her charm. Travellers 
of every age and of every nationality 
have celebrated the gardens and orchards, 
the running waters and the fountains of 
Damascus, and as the Arab passes from 
the burning desert to its cooling streams 
and rich verdure, it is not surprising that 
he hails it as an earthly paradise. From 




'lepouaaXfjp.. 3. iv 8e tw iropcueaOai, iyivero auToe eyyi££i»' ttj 
Aau-aoritw, Kal e^au^mis 1 Trepir)(rrpa T 'ei' auToy <|>a>s &tt6 tou oupavou * 

1 e|ai4>vrjs — in fc^B^E 13 e|e<}>VTjs, so W.H., but see xxii. 6. 

Schmiedel, p. 47. 

see Winer- 

a commercial point of view Damascus 
has been called the meeting-place and 
mart of the nations, and whilst the 
armies of the ancient world passed 
through her streets, she was also the 
great avenue of communication for the 
wealth of north and south, east and 
west [cf. the significant passage, Ezek. 
xxvii. 16, 18, and Amos iii. 12, R.V., 
from which it seems that the city was 
known at an early date for her own 
manufactures, although the passing trade 
of the caravans would be its chief source 
of income). For its political position at 
the period of Acts, see below on ver. 
24, and for its history in the O.T., its 
after struggles, and its present position as 
still the chief city of Syria, see G. A. 
Smith, Hist. Geog., p. 641 ff. ; Ham- 
burger, Real-Encyclopddiedes Judentums, 
i., 2, p. 220, B.D. 2 ; and Hastings' 
B.D., Conybeare and Howson (smaller 
edition, p. 67 ff.) ; Schiirer, Jewish 
People, div. ii., vol. i., p. 96, E.T. — 
Trpos -ras a-uvaYwY*** cf. v >- 9> as at 
Jerusalem — the number of Jews dwelling 
in Damascus was so numerous that in a 
tumult under Nero ten thousand were 
put to death, Jos., B. J., vii., 8, 7 ; ii., 20, 
2 ; as at Jerusalem, the Christians of 
Damascus may not as yet have formally 
separated from their Jewish brethren ; 
cf. the description of Ananias in xxii. 
12 ; but as communication between 
Damascus and the capital was very fre- 
quent, refugees from Jerusalem would 
no doubt have fled to Damascus, and it 
is difficult to believe that the views advo- 
cated by Stephen had in him their sole 
representative. There is no reason to 
question with Overbeck the existence in 
Damascus of a community of believers in 
the claims of Jesus at this early date ; 
but whilst those Christians who de- 
voutly observed the law would not have 
aroused hostility hitherto, Saul came 
armed with a commission against all 
who called on the name of Christ, and 
so probably his object was not only to 
bring back the refugees to Jerusalem, 
but also to stir up the synagogue at 
Damascus against their own fellow- 
worshippers who acknowledged that 
Jesus was the Christ. — eav tivos evpr) : 
the phrase does not mean that the exist- 

ence of Christians was doubtful, but 
whether Saul would succeed in finding 
them out (Weiss). — ovtcs ttjs 68ov : the 
genitive with clvai or -yryvco-dai, very com- 
mon in N.T. (as in classical Greek) ; may 
be explained as the genitive of the class to 
which a man belongs, or as the genitive 
of the property in which any one partici- 
pates, expessed by the genitive singular 
of an abstract noun, and also, as here, of 
a concrete noun, Winer-Moulton, xxx., 
5, c. (and Winer-Schmiedel, pp. 269, 
270). "The Way," R.V., all E.V., 
" this way," except Wycliff, who has " of 
this life," apparently reading vita instead 
of vice in the Vulgate ; see Humphry on 
the R.V., in loco. (In xviii. 25 we have 
tt|v 68ov tov K. of the instruction given 
to Apollos, cf. the common metaphorical 
use of the word in LXX.) In the text 
(as in xix. 9, xxii. 4, xxiv. 14, 22) the 
noun is used absolutely, and this use is 
peculiar to St. Luke {cf 6 \<Jyos, sc, tov 
8., x. 44, xiv. 25, etc., and to ovop.a, v. 
41). The term may have originated 
amongst the Jews who saw in the 
Christians those who adopted a special 
way or mode of life, or a special form of 
their own national belief, but if so, the 
Christians would see in it nomen et 
omen — in Christ they had found the 
Way, the Truth, the Life, John xiv. 6 
(so Holtzmann points out the parallel in 
St. John, and thus accounts for the 
article ttjs 68ov — there is only one way 
of salvation, viz., Christ). Chrysostom' 
(so Theophylact) thinks that the be- 
lievers were probably so called because 
of their taking the direct way that leads 
to heaven (Horn., xix.) : see also Dean 
Plumptre's interesting note. The ex- 
pression seems to point to the early date 
of Acts. As it is used thus, absolutely, 
and with no explanation in the con- 
text, Hilgenfeld sees in chap. ix. the 
commencement of a third source C 
(see Introd., p. 29). — ywaiKas, see 
above on viii. 3. Although no doubt 
the women referred to were Jewesses, 
yet it is of interest to note the remark of 
Josephus, B. J., ii., 20, 2, viz., th