Trouble in Zion—Peter Explains (Acts 11)
Trouble in Zion—Peter Explains (Acts 11)
Vs. 17 ἐγὼ δὲ τίς ἤμην Why take the τίς as interrogative at all?
Vs. 19 The earliest preaching in the Gentile Churches, though we have no reason to believe that there was any formal admission of the Gentiles before Cornelius.
Acts 11:20ff: The Widening of the Mission
[Acts 11:19, with its reference back to the effect of the persecution of Stephen, indicates that those who fled travelled as far as Phoenica, Cyprus, and Antioch, and note that they confined themselves to speaking only to Jews.]
Vs. 20 Κύπριοι καὶ Κυρηναῖοι Of Cyrenians cf. Acts 6:9; Mark 15:21; Acts 2:10. One of these is mentioned below, Acts 13:1. Cyprus = Kittim = Citium. Of the Jews there see 1 Macc 15:21 and especially Josephus, Ant. xv.10.1 where he quotes Strabo xvii.12.2. Jews were sent to Cyprus by Cleopatra. Mentioned also as an important Jewish colony by Philo, Leg. Ad Gaius sec. 36. See also J. T. Sukkah v.1—‘and they . . . went on the sea as far as Cyprus of the Messiah of Jews under Trajan.’ Cf. Dion. L. xviii.32. There was an insurrection under Trajan. They are numbered at 240,000.
Cyprian Christians mentioned: 1) Barnabas Acts 4:36; 2) Mnason 21:16—ἀρχαίῳ μαθητῇ, perhaps one of these included here.
καὶ πρὸς τοὺς Ἑλληνιστὰς The right reading here? See B, D*, E. καὶ πρὸς τοὺς Ἑλληνάς A, Aleph, D. The verses preceding here are of no account as they make no difference of the two readings. The external evidence therefore, very dubious. This is not however the case with the Peshitto in Acts 9:29 where Ἑλληνιστάς refers to Jews who know Greek and in Acts 6:1 where the Greek disciples are simply ‘the Greeks.’ The reasons for preferring Ἑλληνάς: 1) the καί seems to be part of the text and yet it has no meaning unless an extension is spoken of; 2) the opposition in 6:1 is τῶν Ἑλληνιστῶν πρὸς τοὺς Ἑβραίους, not Ἓλλην vs. Ἰουδαῖος; 3) the sequence and context of the narrative requires it. Otherwise there would be no eventuality which would lead to the mission of Barnabas and the subsequent events. But if so, can this be before or after the conversion of Cornelius?
It is impossible to say. On the one hand there are the distinct headings in St. Luke’s narrative. But he is said to drop them and resume them alternately so as to keep them parallel. See Acts 11:30; 12:1-23; 12:24. There is reference to the internal unity of the apostles and the Jerusalem church [earlier], but here we are focusing on the external movement that I have been following. These events may have followed a little after, or come a little before, the conversion of Cornelius. Roughly speaking we may say that it synchronizes. But at all events it should be seen not as a consequence of the conversion of Cornelius, but rather an independent movement in the same direction. We are told nothing of the success of those who preached among the Jews, only of those who carry the Gospel to the Greeks.
Vs. 22 περὶ αὐτῶν Barnabas, ‘the son of consolation/exhortation,’ is sent by Jerusalem Church to check on things at Antioch. διελθεῖν [see Acts 11:19] seems to imply they went by land. Whether this came before or after the conversion of Cornelius is not clear. The mission of Barnabas must have been after.
Vs. 23 παρεκάλει True to his name Acts 4:36. παράκλησις = προφητεία. For προφητεία is not ‘prediction’ but rather inspired preaching and παράκλησις is not ‘consolation’ but rather ‘exhortation’ so that the two meet. Philo, iv, p. 116, προφήτης γὰρ ἴδιον. . . . Comp. 1 Cor 14:3 ὁ δὲ προφητεύων ἀνθρώποις λαλεὶ οἰκοδομὴν καὶ παράκλησιν καὶ παραμυθίαν and 1 Cor 14:31 δύνασθε γὰρ καθ’ ἕνα πάντες προφητεύειν, ἵνα πάντες μανθάνωσιν καὶ πάντες παρακαλῶνται. So also Acts 15:32 προφῆται ὄντες διὰ λόγου πόλλου παρεκάλεσαν. . . . Cf. Ps 119:171—‘my lips speak with paeans . . . ’ (nabi for naba . . . in the Syriac). Barnabas appears as a προφήτης later at Acts 13:1.
Προθέσει purpose, determination, 2 Tim 3:10.
Vs. 24 ἀνὴρ ἀγαθὸς καὶ πλήρης Πνεύματος Ἁγίου—See Baumg.
Vs. 25 See the strange reading of D—καὶ εὑρὼν αὐτὸν ἤγαγεν αὐτὸν εἰς Ἀντιόχειαν, similarly Tischendorf (8th ed.).
Vs. 26 αὐτοῖς
χρηματίσαι 1) in a special sense ‘to determine an oracle’ but comp. Heb 12:25; ‘directed’ Acts 10:22; 2) to play a part; 3) ‘to be considered,’ ‘taken for,’ ‘called’ in later classical Greek. In the New Testament Rom 7:3.
πρώτως Aleph, B, D* is not ‘first,’ but rather ‘primarily,’ ‘especially.’ πρώτως is the right reading because 1) superior authorities Aleph, B, D* vs. A, Dx and the rest; 2) a rare word was unlikely to be substituted for a common word, whereas the reverse was frequently the case. On the usage in Greek comp. Sophocles, Thucydides, Plato, Aristotle, Galen etc.
ἐν Ἀντιοχείᾳ Philostratus, Vita Ap. iii.58; Hadrian Vita 14; Marcus Aurelius Vita 25.
Χριστιανούς a Gentile appellation for Christians used here by the Antiochenes, in Acts 26:28 by Agrippa. Ιn 1 Pet 4:16 it is a term appropriated, having come from without. They called themselves οἱ ἁγίοι, οἱ ἀδελφοί, οἱ πιστοὶ, μαθηταί. They were called by Jews Ναζωραίοι Acts 24:5. They would have preferred to be designated ‘followers of the Christ.’
Therefore, varied. Not necessarily following the account of the name by Renan, II. p. 234. He mentions by name Ἡρῳδιανοί, Σιμῳνιανοί as analogous though on no good grounds, for why should Latin names be given to all the sects when the church was emphatically Greek? Winer no. 16, p. 119, speaks in the same way, though more cautiously calling it a Latinizing formation. Renan also considers Ασιανοί a Latinism, but Σαρδιανοί etc. are quite beyond the reach of objection. See Kühner, para. 334.7 (Vol. I, p. 720sq.). The New Testament confirms our view, namely that it was a heathen appellation (cf. Acts 26:28; 1 Pet 4:16). In Ignatius we find Χριστιανισμούς (Magn. 10, Rom. 3). As early as Ignatius it had lost all its heathen tinge, which it still exhibits in the New Testament. On Tacitus’ later confusion of Chrestus with Christos see Lightfoot, Phil. p. 16.
Vss. 27-30 Here we have evidence of friendly feeling between the Jewish and Gentile Christians, as represented by Jerusalem and Antioch, which was renewed in the circular letter issued at the apostolic conclave. Cf. 1 Cor 9:11 ‘If we have shared with you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we reap your carnal things’?
Vs. 27 προφῆται See Alford.
Vs. 28 Ἅγαβος He is mentioned again at Acts 21:10, there as though introduced for the first time, probably because taken from a different document. On prophetic sign acts comp. e.g. 1 Kings 22:11; Isaiah 20:3, Ezek 5.
διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος so Acts 21:11.
λιμὸν μεγάλην On famine see Luke 15:14 but not Luke 4:25. See Winer no. 9, p. 73 (Moulton). Famine at Sparta was represented in a picture, Altem. x.75. On the date, the first famine in Judaea mentioned by Josephus, Ant. xx.2.6 and xx.5.2, occurred during the proconsulships of Fadus (A.D. 44–46) and Tiberius Alexander (A.D. 46–48). It seems it was spread over a considerable time—two or three years. Josephus relates the providential visit of Queen Helena of Adiabene who visited Jerusalem during the famine and ordered grain and figs from Egypt when she saw the conditions there. This was not the one that transpired under Claudius for that took place earlier. The accession of Claudius was in Jan. 24th A.D. 41. Agabus’ prophecy may have been uttered about A.D. 43–44 but hardly earlier (i.e. just before the famine broke out). The death of Herod Agrippa was nearly synchronous, but whether before or after we cannot say.
ἐφ’ ὅλην τὴν οἰκουμένην During the reign of Claudius there were several famines in various parts of the Empire, but no synchronous universal famine. Cf. Dion lx.11 referring to something going on about A.D. 51; cf. Tacitus Annal. xii.43; Suetonius, Claudius, 18. On one in Greece see Schone, p. 152 and see Baumg. vol I, p. 303.
The term οἰκουμένην in Greek times meant Greece and its surroundings (see Shep. Hermas s.v. p. 1777). In Roman times it refers to the Roman Empire (cf. Luke 2:1; Herodian. v.2.5), ‘under the Roman oikemene.’
Vs. 29 διακονίαν See below on Acts 12:25. The ministry of service cf. 1 Cor 16:15; 2 Cor 8:4; 9:1, 12, 13 but in Rom 15:31 the reading may be δωροφορία. This famine explains the request (in A.D. 51) in Gal 2:10. On a later occasion (A.D. 58) we find Paul again the bearer (Acts 24:17). It is the latter occasion to which the mentions in Cor and Rom refer. The Christians at Antioch are able to collect money and send it before the famine begins.
Vs. 30 πρὸς τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους the first mention of the elders. On the other hand, the apostles are not mentioned. Are the two connected? The next chapter describes a persecution—James beheaded, Peter imprisoned and escaped, apparently leaves Jerusalem (vs. 17). This would, not improbably, be the signal for the dispersion of the apostles on this wider mission. Here therefore (comp. Acts 12:17) the local authorities in Jerusalem were the elders, James and the elders. It seems not improbable then that while the first persecution was connected with the establishment of the diaconate; the second one is connected with the establishment of the presbytery. The πρεσβύτεροι formed on the model of the synagogue (thus differing from the diaconate). See Lightfoot, Phil. pp. 199sq. On the order of the names ‘Barnabas and Saul’ in various places in the Acts, see below.