Excursus: St. Paul’s Apostolic Journeys
The First Missionary Journey (Acts 13–14)
Acts 13–14 contain the account of the setting apart of Paul and Barnabas for the apostleship and their first missionary journey. The events extend over a period of six years A.D. 44–50, or rather they are all that are recorded during that period. The missionary journey itself comprises Cyprus (the native place of Barnabas), and the southeastern district of the province of Asia Minor, Pamphylia, Pisidia, and Lycaonia. The three towns in which a somewhat detached account of their preaching is given are Antioch (Pisidian), Lystra and Iconium. This first missionary venture is marked not only by great successes but by great perils. St. Paul refers to the difficulties with marked emphasis at the end of his life (2 Tim 3:11). There is a possibility that the account of this journey was once a separate document. The opening presentation of the account reads like the commencement of a long narrative. Here it will be good to give an overview of the three missionary journeys.
Excursus: St. Paul’s Apostolic Journeys
(N.B.—Antioch the Starting Point of all the Journeys)
First Missionary Journey—Acts 13–14 (accompanied by Barnabas). (Seleucia), Cyprus (Salamis and Paphos), Pamphylia (Perga), Pisidia (Antioch), ὁ λόγος τοῦ Κυρίου δι’ ὅλης τῆς χώρας (Iconium), Lycaonia (Lystra, Derbe) (and again visiting the same places in reverse order) (Lystra, Iconium, Antioch, Perga), (Attalia), Antioch. 15.1 Controversy at Antioch, visit to Jerusalem, (Apostolic Conclave) return to Antioch.
Second Missionary Journey—Acts 15:35–18:22 (accompanied by Silas). Passes through Syria and Cilicia confirming the churches Derbe, Lystra (Timothy joins them Acts 16:3). Διῆλθον δὲ τὴν Φρυγίαν καὶ Γαλατικὴν χώραν, κωλυθέντες ὑπὸ τοῦ Ἁγίου Πνεύματος λαλῆσαι τὸν λόγον ἐν τῇ Ἀσίᾳ· ἐλθόντες δὲ κατὰ τὴν Μυσίαν . . . παρελθόντες δὲ τὴν Μυσίαν κατέβησαν εἰς Τρῳάδα (Acts 16:6-8). Macedonia (Philippi, Amphipolis, Apollonis, Thessalonike, Berea). Silas and Timothy remain there. By sea to Athens (sends the summons to Silas and Timothy to get to Athens with all speed, but nothing said of their arrival). Corinth (Silas and Timothy arrive), sails with Aquila and Priscilla (nothing said of Silas and Timothy) to Syria by way of Ephesus, Caesarea, Jerusalem (ἀναβὰς Acts 18:22), κατέβη εἰς Ἀντιόχειαν.
Third Missionary Journey (Acts 18:23–27:44). Galatia, Phrygia (Apollos in Ephesus, commended to the church at Corinth), διελθόντα τὰ ἀνωτερικὰ μέρη (Acts 19:1), Ephesus (ἔθετο ὁ Παῦλος ἐν τῷ πνεύματι διελθὼν τὴν Μακεδονίαν καὶ Ἀχαΐαν πορεύεσθαι εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα εἰπὼν ὅτι μετὰ τὸ γενέσθαι με ἐκεῖ δεῖ με καὶ Ρώμην ἰδεῖν [Acts 19:21], and sends off the others and Erastus to Macedonia himself staying in Asia for some time—Acts 19:21-22), Ephesus (uproar of Demetrius), Macedonia, Hellas. Stays three months (γενομένης ἐπιβουλῆς αὐτῷ ὑπὸ τῶν Ἰουδαίων μέλλοντι ἀνάγεσθαι εἰς τὴν Συρίαν, ἐγένετο γνώμης τοῦ ὑποστρέφειν διὰ Μακεδονίας—Acts 20:3). Sopater, Aristarchus, Secundus accompany him. Troas, Assos, Mitylene, Cos, Rhodes, Patara, Tyre, Ptolemais, Caesarea, Rome.
Antioch Takes Centre Stage
13.1 ἐν Ἀντιοχείᾳ Notice that coincidentally with the beginning of Paul’s apostleship, Antioch displaces Jerusalem as the missionary centre of Christianity. From Antioch they receive their commission, from Antioch they set out, and to Antioch they return and report their experiences (Acts 14:26-27).
τὴν οὖσαν ἐκκλησίαν Not the church that was there, but rather the church that was then. Comp. Rom 13:1 on the construction οὖσαι ὑπὸ θεοῦ τεταγμέναι εἰσίν. The passages cited by Alford for the other meaning do not bear it out (e.g. Mark 8:1).
προφῆται καὶ διδάσκαλοι These were the second and third orders in the church, the first being the apostles. 1 Cor 12:28—ἔθετο ὁ θεὸς ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους, δεύτερον προφήτας, τρίτον διδασκάλους. . . . Which were prophets and which teachers in the list probably we cannot say. There is no point in the list at which a line can be drawn. On the charism of teaching see Schaff, ii. p. 154.
ὁ τε Βαρναβᾶς The definite article on account of his preeminence, in vs. 2 as well.
καὶ Συμεὼν ὁ καλούμενος Νίγερ Comp. Josephus Bell. Jud. ii.20.4, ii.19.2, iii.2.2 etc. on Niger. See Q. Coeclus Niger, a questor of Jewish extraction Renan III. p. 512. See also, Plutarch, Cicero, 7. The name was common among the Romans.
Λούκιος ὁ Κυρηναῖος Perhaps one of those mentioned in Acts 2:10. The name is far too common to suggest an identity with the Lucius of Rom 16:21 though the one commonality is he is a Jew (Acts 2:18). The identification with St. Luke is improbable. As the names are different it goes for nothing that the Cyrenians were famous physicians (Herod. iii.31). This Lucius is one of the 70 in the Apostolic Constitutions vii.46. Lucius is made bishop of Cenchreae.
Μαναήν A Hebrew name (Menahem) meaning ‘to console.’ On Menahem the usurper of the throne—2 Kings 15:14. In the LXX Μαναήμ (B) but A has it as here. In Josephus, Ant. xv.10.5 a certain Manaen is said to have procured his future by hailing as King of the Jews, Herod when he was young. There is an allusion to this same man in the J.T. Haggigah 16.2 (see Lightfoot II. p. 685) where his defection is severely censured. (See Tholuck’s Glaubwürdigkeit, p. 167). This cannot be the same Manaen for one is the contemporary of Herod the Great, the other of Herod’s son, but the repetition of the name in the courts of the Herods is a significant fact, but our Manaen may well be a relative of these persons. While the elder Manaen was brought up with Herod the Great, the younger Manaen, whether son or nephew, would not unnaturally be brought up with the younger Herod. A little later there is yet another Manaen, a son of Judas the Galilean, who took a prominent part in the war with the Romans (Bell. Jud. ii.17.8, 9; Vit. 5). There is also a second-century heretic mentioned by Hippolytus (viii. 12; ix.17).
Table 1. The Herods
Herod the Great
Aristobolus Archelaeus
A.D.
Herod Philip
Herod Agrippa I
A.D.
Herod Antipas
Herod King of Chalcis
a.d
Herodias
Agrippa II
Berenice
Druscilla
Herod the Great
Herod Antipas
Herod Agrippa I
Herod Agrippa II
σύντροφος ‘foster-brother,’ or more generally ‘companion’ in later life, and more literally ‘being in the same land with.’ The passages in Polybius (e.g. v.9.4) are exactly parallel and point to the former meaning, cf. 2 Macc 9:29. In the court of kings, some are seen as ‘companions’ or even ‘playmates’ of the children of the king. Here, as Wordsworth says, we have a striking example of ‘the one taken, and the other left.’ Archalaeus and Antipas were brought up in Rome (Ant. xii.1.3). Whether it was before or after their return to Israel that Manaen was the playmate of Antipas we cannot say.
Ἡρῴδου τοῦ τετραάρχου Herod Antipas, tetrarch of Galilee and Peraea, Luke 3:1; Josephus Ant. xvii.8.1. They were strictly speaking, tetrarchies of the whole, and Archelaeus held two (Ant. xvii.2.4). Hence Herod Antipas is strictly designated ‘the tetrarch’ as he had one (Luke 3:19; 9:7; Mt 14:1; Josephus Ant. xviii.5.1). Mark 6:14, with less precision, calls him ὁ βασιλεὺς Ἡρῴδης, not ‘Herod THE king’ which would have been misleading as it would have made the term ‘king’ a distinctive appellation of this particular Herod. There was a special reason why the title ‘the tetrarch’ should be added, for when he dies it makes clear what territory specifically he had occupied. In Mt 14:1 he is introduced as Ἡρῴδης ὁ τετραάρχης, but after this he is simply called ‘king,’ which illustrates Mark 6:14. Herod Antipas was still living when we arrive at this point in our narrative, but he had been banished to Lyons in A.D. 39 by the machinations of his nephew Herod Agrippa I (Josephus Ant. xviii.7.2), and his dominion added to those of Agrippa I. This Manaen may not have been around at the time of Antipas’ banishing.
For some reason or other, St. Luke evinces a particular knowledge of Herod’s household (e.g. Luke 8:3: καὶ Ἰωάννα γυνὴ Χουζᾶ ἐπιτρόπου Ἡρῴδου). And he alone records the audience of our Lord before Antipas (Lk 23:7sq.; Acts 4:27). And here the mention of Manaen, and the mention of the death of Herod Agrippa I (Acts 12, see Prof. Plumptre’s Biblical Studies, p. 377 on Manaen). The mention of Joanna, the wife of Herod’s estate manager, and Manaen here illustrate each other. It is clear that a hearing of John’s teaching had been authorized in the royal household. The hearings began when it says that Herod himself heard John gladly (καὶ ἡδέως αὐτοῦ ἤκουεν—Mark 6:20). His hearing continued when he examined our Lord. There is obviously much talk in Herod’s household about the new movement of John and then Jesus, e.g Mt 14:2—καὶ εἶπεν τοῖς παισὶν αὐτοῦ . . . which includes the servants, and also this might have included his steward and Manaen his foster-brother (see especially Luke 9:7, 9—διηπόρει διὰ τὸ λέγεσθαι ὑπὸ τινων . . . and ἐζήτει ἰδεῖν αὐτόν). Indeed, his own kingdom was the headquarters of the movement! It was natural that the royal household would not escape the news of this. See especially Luke 23:8—Ὁ δὲ Ἡρῴδης ιδὼν τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐχάρη λίαν, ἦν γὰρ ἐξ ἱκανῶν χρόνων θέλων ἰδεῖν αὐτὸν διὰ τὸ ἀκούειν περὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἤλπιζεν τι σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ὑπ’ αὐτοῦ γινόμενον.
Σαῦλος mentioned last, perhaps because he was the least prominent in rank of the persons mentioned. If so, it is remarkable that the first and last on the list are chosen, and also that they speedily change places.
The τίνες is inserted in The Textus Receptus to make the sentence more smooth.
Vs. 2 εἰς τὸ ἔργον. τὸ ἔργον used absolutely of the Gospel. See Acts 15:38; Phil 2:30, So Ignatius Ephes. 14, γὰρ επαγγελίας τὸ ἔργον and in his Rom. 3 τὸ ἔργον. Probably the reference is to the work here, since they have been called together for this.
ἀφορίσατε comp. Rom 1:1 (not quite the same as Gal 1:15).
δή ‘verily’ Acts 15:36 and Luke 2:15.
The call of the Spirit and the outward and visible action.
Vs. 4 εἰς Σελεύκειαν The port of Antioch. It is reckoned to be forty-one miles from there by water, sixteen and a half by land. It is called Seleucia Plena, and Seleucia ad Mare (C+H i. p. 167). A very common name (cf. Antiochia, Apamea, Laodicea) see Strabo, xvi. p. 751.
κατῆλθον It has a double use. To come down from the higher land to the coast as here, or to put into port from the high seas (see Acts 27:5).
Κύπρον about one hundred miles from Seleucia, but by sea the journey is about one hundred fifty miles to Salamis and once there one hundred miles from Salamis to Paphos being at opposite ends of the island. Both figure in the Sybilline Oracles iv. 125 on Salamis, v.449 on Paphos. The home place of Barnabas and other early disciples. A Jewish colony.
Vs. 5 ἐν Σαλαμῖνι Salamis, afterwards Constantia. Large Jewish population. I cannot verify the statements of e.g. Milman II. p. 421 but Salamis was made a desert by the insurrection of the Jews under Hadrian. See Dio lxviii.32 cited in Eusebius iv.6. He says a word about it.
ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς As at Damascus Acts 9:20.
καὶ Ἰωάννην ὑπηρέτην comp. Acts 19:22, especially on the baptizing see 1 Cor 1:14-17.
Vs. 6 ὅλην τὴν νῆσον ἄχρι Πάφου A distance of about one hundred miles. Comp. Tacitus Hist. ii.iii (see Lewin I. p. 122). In the inscriptions Paphos is called Sebaste Claudia Flavia or more simply called Sebaste (A.U.C. 739 see Dion liv.23). In Greek the abbreviation was σλ. Κλ. Φλ. Paphos was the metropolitan residence of the proconsul C.I.L. iii.218 (which contains a good deal of information about Cyprus). See Cesnola, Cyprus 29, p. 425 where he says that ‘the proconsul Paulus may be the Sergius Paulus of Acts xiii. Instances of the suppression of one of the names is not rare’ (see Sergius Secundus Paulus in Lightfoot, Colossians, p. 63).
Μάγον A neutral word, or at least not necessarily pejorative (see Mt 2:1). Hence the addition of the prefix ψευδο, comp. Acts 19:19. See the article on Magi in Smith’s Dictionary. Magic, the outcome of a yearning after the supernatural when not satisfied in a legitimate way. Religion is a necessity of the human heart. The producing of systems of abstract philosophy, hence the phenomenon of the civilized world at this time—Chaldee, holy men, worship of Isis, etc. The struggle of the church against magic, and its adoption by the Neo-Platonists. What is characteristic of magic, sorcery etc. is it is religion divorced from morality.
Βαριησοῦς A patronymic like Bar-Timaeus, Bar-tholomew, Bar-Sabas, Bar-abbas etc. He must have had some other name as well. The variation in the mss. here reflects the shrinking from allowing the sacred name of Jesus to be used in such cases. See on Mt 27:23—Meyer, III. p. 918.
Ἰουδαῖον of Jews involved in the magical arts see Acts 19:19.
Vs. 7 σὺν τῷ ἀνθυπάτῳ the proconsul. Distinctive of the senatorial provinces. In A.D. 27, after the battle of Actium, Cyprus had been made an imperial province (see Dio liii.11). A few years later (A.D. 32) it was handed over to the Senate. See Dion Cass. liv.4. See also Strabo xvii p. 840 for the mention of the senatorial province. There was an inscription record about this time of the proconsuls of Cyprus (e.g. L. Annius Bassus A.D. 52 and his predecessor Q. Julius Cardus mentioned in the inscription—see Boeckh. nos. 2631, 2632). The name of at least four proconsuls during the reign of Claudius occur. These two plus Cominius Proculus and Quadratus on the coins. See Ackeman’s Numismatic Illustrations, p. 39sq. See references in Becker and Marquardt, iii. p. 173. Hence the objections of some earlier commentators that St. Luke is inaccurate here fall to the ground. They had observed the earlier passage in Dio, and overlooked the latter. We find the same accuracy by St. Luke when it comes to Gallio the proconsul of Achaia. Provinces constantly changed [from imperial to senatorial or vice versa]. On a procurator of Cyprus see C.I.L. iii.6072, for a proconsul iii.218 (about A.D. 190) and also ix.433.
On the temple of Paphian Aphrodite see Eckhel, III, p. 84.
Σεργίῳ Παύλῳ A person of the same name is mentioned by Pliny (Elenchos ab. Lab. ii, xviii) and perhaps a descendant of our man is mentioned by Galen (Anat. i.2 Kühner, Vol. II. p. 218), more than a century later. He too was a man of rank (about A.D. 160).
ἀνδρὶ συνετῷ here called a prudent man. Curiously enough, he is introduced in one passage as Σεργίoς τε ὁ καὶ Παύλoς, for so it must be read, but in the vast majority of the papyri he is simply called Παύλoς. The alliance of such a man with a sorcerer and imposter like Elymas is a significant fact. The same dissatisfaction with the religion of his world and the philosophies of his day that had brought him into contact with Elymas led him also to communicate with Barnabas and Saul.
Vs. 8 Ἐλύμας—alama, alim. On the name Freytas, III, p. 213. Hence the name Eulema with which we are familiar. I cannot find that the root occurs in this sense in the cognate languages Hebrew and Aramaic, hence this man’s name points to the same extra-Judaic source as his magical practices. Indeed, his circumstances themselves would suggest as much. We would naturally have looked to Phoenica and Syria, but the evidence does not encourage us to seek the affinities here.
Ἐλύμας ὁ μάγος οὕτως γὰρ μεθερμηνεύεται τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ The word μάγος seems not to be Semitic but rather Aryan, that is, Persian in its origin. See Gesenius s.v. μάγος. Connected with the Persian ‘malat,’ Greek μεγας, Latin magus, but it was adopted into the Chaldean (Babylonian), see Jer 39:3, 13, the ‘rabmag,’ a title of Nergalshalrezer. See the article by Prof. Rawhnson on ‘rabmag’ in Smith’s Dictionary (cf. rabsani, rabslakeh).
Vs. 9 ὁ καὶ Παῦλος The first mention of his name, Paul. It is impossible not to connect this with the mention of Sergius Paulus. The coincidence forces us to this conclusion. So Jerome, Epist. To Philem. See Chapter 5 and the reference in Coneybeare and H. As for other suggestions: 1) a reference to his stature, being short—cf. 2 Cor 10:10, Acts of Paul and Thecla 3—the reference to Paul being μικρόν (see C+H I, p. 70 and the references in Stanley, the traditional account of Paul); 2) a reference to his humility, 1 Cor 15:9 (cf. 1 Cor 3:8). So Augustine (ref. to in C+H I p. 186). 3) the resemblance in sound, i.e. Saul, Paul, like Jose, Jason, Silas, Silvanus (see C+H I, p. 185). 1), 2), 3) may have assisted to recommend the name, but the coincidence in time with the conversion of Sergius Paulus was the occasion and motive.
ἀτενίσας So too Acts 14:9; 23:1. Also of St. Paul. No ground [here] for the theory of weak eyes, for used e.g. of Peter Acts 3:4; 10:4. See Lightfoot, Galatians, p. 189.
Vs. 10 ῥᾳδιουργίας The older sense of the word seems to have been indolence, carelessness, or an easy-going disposition e.g. Xenephon Mem. ii.1.20. But later, in Polybius and onwards it is ‘want of principle,’ unscrupulousness, guile, imposture, e.g. Lucian, Calum. 20. Comp. Acts 18:14 ῥαδιούργημα.
ὑιὲ διαβόλου In striking contrast to his name, as Meyer says, ‘son of Jesus,’ ‘son of the Savior.’
διαστρέφων τὰς ὁδοὺς τοῦ κυρίου τὰς εὐθείας Comp. Micah 3:9 LXX on διαστρέφων.
Vs. 11 ἀχλὺς καὶ σκότος Luke the Physician. In Galen (in Wettstein) ἀχλύς, ὀφθαλμός πάθος, multiple references.
χειραγωγούς Plutarch, de Stoicorum 1063B.
Vs. 13 οἱ περὶ Παῦλον Paul is now the prominent person. When they started, it would have been Barnabas’ company?
Πέργην See Lewin, I, p. 234. About 60 stadia = seven miles up from the coast to the city. See Strabo xiv.4, p. 667. St. Paul would probably land at Attalia (see his return Acts 14:25) and go by road the few miles to Perga. On the temple of Artemis (Strabo l.c. and see Lewin, p. 135). St. Paul does not appear to have stayed and preached here on this occasion. This is different from his return, see Acts 14:25. It is not ἐπιστηρίζοντες τὰς ψυχὰς (as in Acts 14:22) but καὶ λαλήσαντες . . . τὸν λόγον as if it were for the first time.
Παμφυλίας (Πασα φυλη) Strabo, xiv, p. 668.
Ἰωάννης δὲ Probably from timidity or lack of zeal. This was after having arrived in Pamphylia and having been deterred by the people. See Acts 15:37 where Paul regards it as a sort of apostasy. The κινδύνοις ποταμῶν, κινδύνοις λῃστῶν, κινδύνοις ἐκ γένους, κινδύνοις ἐξ ἐθνῶν (2 Cor 11:26) may have occurred here at this time (see C+H, I p. 197). Strabo xii, p. 571 describes the country as rugged, with raging rivers and he has a few choice words about the Pamphlians (p. 570).
Vs. 14 Αὐτοὶ δὲ διελθόντες But they themselves passing through the country.
τὴν Πισιδίαν, the correct reading (A, B, Aleph, C). On the use of the term see Strabo, xii. p. 577. I have not found another instance of ‘Pisdian’ used as an adjective. Comp. however Acts 16:6; Mark 1:5; John 3:22. All these names of places are properly adjectives.
Ἀντιόχεια On inscriptions chiefly Latin, C.I.L. iii.209sq. This was a Roman colony city—a Caesarea and was the capital of Pisidia (see Pliny N.H. v.24), hence Antiocheia Caesarea or Caesarea Antiochus almost due north of Perga.
τῇ ἡμέρα τῶν σαββάτων See Col 2:16. On the reading of the Law see Acts 15:21; 2 Cor 3:14. On the reading of the prophets Luke 4:17. The expositor was sometimes the reader himself, see Philo, Fragm. II.580sq. but sometimes it was a different person (Quod Omni 12, i.e. II b 458). After the reading from the prophets came the sermon, or exposition, or exhortation. See, again, Luke 4:17. Now it so happens that in the then extant arrangement of lessons, the beginning of Deut 1:1–3:21 and the beginning of Is 1:1-27, are read on the same day. See Justin Martyr Apol. i.67 (p. 98C), and Second Epistle of Clement Appendix p. 303sq. Bengel has pointed out parallels to both lessons in vss. 17-19. See especially Deut 1:31, 38, and from Isaiah 1:2, 26. I do not think that the idea is to be lightly rejected. If the reference to Isaiah were not here distinct, it would still deserve great consideration. And indeed this reference would explain what otherwise would need explanation, especially in light of what is mentioned in vs. 20. On the later date for the lectionary see Hup. Studien und Krit. 1837, p. 843. This does not seem to be a formidable argument. It is plain that some lectionary or other existed at the time, and the later one based along the lines of the earlier one.
Vs. 15 ἀρχισυνάγωγοι normally plural cf. Mark 5:22; Luke 8:41; Acts 18:8, 17. Luke 13:17 presents us with an example. This apparent zealous leader who was present is the ‘ruler of the synagogue’ and can make pronouncement at the time.
παρακλήσεως See Acts 4:36.
κατασείσας See Acts 12:17—it procures silence.
The Speech of St. Paul. Representative of this sort of preaching to the Jews as at Lystra to the barbarians, and as at Athens to the cultivated Greeks, and at Miletus to the disciples. His rule—‘to the Jew first’ (Rom 1:16; 15:8). Probably not a full report of the sort of preaching to the Jews here. It can be discussed under two headings: its resemblances and its peculiarities.
1) Its long historical preface is like the Stephen speech that serves as a) an explanation, and b) an introduction of the Gospel.
2) A similar audience under similar circumstances. There are no such resemblances to the speech at Areopagus or the speech at Miletus. In both there is an implicit argument with both Jew and Judaizing Christian. Notice as well the double argument concerning the resurrection with: a) an appeal to the eyewitnesses, as well as b) the testimony of Scripture. As with the Stephen speech we have the combination of quotations in vs. 21 comp. Rom 3:10 (Ps, Prov, Is) or 1 Cor 15:54 (Is 25:8; Hos 13:4). Like the Stephen speech, this is not a speech that any later Christian fiction writer would have invented.
3) Introduction of the Pauline doctrine (Acts 13:38, 39, 41 and cf. Acts 13:23 to Gal 3:29). He does here at Psidian Antioch exactly what he himself would later say and do at Corinth (see 1 Cor 15:3).
Vs. 16 οἱ φοβούμενοι τὸν θεὸν So again at vs. 26. Cf. Acts 10:2, 22. Elsewhere σεβομένοι Acts 13:43, 50; 17:17. Proselytes and other worshippers. As to their number and importance, Josephus, Ant. xx.8.11 tells of a prominent Jewish woman who interceded on behalf of the Jewish in Jerusalem.
Vs. 17 ὕψωσεν 1) by the marvelous increase in numbers, and 2) by the miracles wrought on their behalf. However ὕψωσεν in Is 1:2 means brought up, reared, and so it should probably be taken here.
Vs. 18 ἐτροποφόρησεν This was arguably from the LXX of Deut 1:31 cf. 2 Macc 7:27 of a mother rearing a child. There is therefore an a priori probability that St. Paul meant this here. Origen however (Hom. on Jerm. xviii, III, p. 248) explains the term in Deut 1:31 at great length, explaining that the term τροποφόρησεν was appropriate to express the Hebrew and so also contra Cels. iv.71 (I, p. 556). Hence the reading also occurred in the LXX earlier on, and it is so read now in the Apostolic Constitutions vii.36, but there is nothing in the immediate context to determine the issue. ἐτροποφόρησεν is read in Aleph, B, C2, D, Harclean and is not an unsuitable reading. See Cicero ad Att. xiii.29, Ar. Ran 1481. In any case, St. Paul might well have had a copy of the LXX with τροποφόρησει in it and have adopted that reading as suitably expressive.
Vs. 19 κατεκληρονόμησεν The right reading. Sometimes to distribute as a lot or an inheritance see Deut 1:38; 1 Sam 2:8; Jer 3:18.
Vs. 20 ὡς ἔτεσιν τετρακοσίοις καὶ πεντήκοντα. καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα ἔδωκεν κριτὰς ἕως Σαμουὴλ προφήτου. Unquestionably the correct reading. For the dative, John 2:20 and Rom 16:25. See Winer, no. xxxi p. 271 (Moulton). Here it denotes the period, indicating the period of fulfillment. In other words it was close on 450 years before the Israelites settled in Canaan. Alford’s note here must be altogether set aside. The reading of the uncial text makes no difference. 1 Kings 6:1 however gives the time span from the Exodus to the building of the Temple in the fourth year of Solomon as only 480 years. Our text would agree almost precisely with the chronology of Josephus in Ant. viii.3.1 which reckons it as 592 years after the Exodus (reckoned as follows—592 minus 40 years of wandering, minus 25 years Joshua, 40 years Saul, 40 years David = 443, allowing for seven years of coming or going [or rounding up to 450]). And the reckoning of years agrees with the notices in the book of Judges.
Σαμουὴλ The first of the continuous succession of prophets as in Acts 3:24. Especially known as ‘Samuel the prophet.’ Stanley I, p. 403, 419. With him, nabi first comes into usage 1 Sam 9:9. ‘It is at the close of the period of the judges that prophets first become not merely an occasional occurrence but a fixed institution in the Jewish [community]’ (Stanley p. 419). And on the end of one dispensation (the judges) and the commencement of the next (the kings), see Stanley, Vol. I, p. 398. The prophetic dispensation was parallel with the monarchy. On the institution of the ‘school of the prophets,’ 1 Sam 10:5, 10; 19:20. See Stanley’s Lectures I, p. 395sq. Samuel is not ὁ προφήτης but rather just προφήτης here, the right reading i.e. not ‘until Samuel the prophet’ but rather ‘until Samuel was prophet.’ Comp. Mark 2:26 where there is a similar v.l. referring to Abiathar where the issue is whether there is a definite article before ‘high priest’ or not.
Vs. 21 ἐκ φυλῆς Βενιαμίν Comp. Rom 9:1; Phil 3:5.
ἔτη τεσσεράκοντα The Biblical account says nothing about this, though the notices are consistent with it. E.G. 2 Sam 2:10 Ishbosheth, Saul’s son, is forty years old at his death and Saul was a young man when he was anointed king (1 Sam 9:2). Josephus, Ant. vi.14.9 suggests exactly 40 years in all, but this is not reconcilable with what the narrative itself says (1 Sam 19:18; 2 Sam 5:4).
Vs. 22 μεταστήσας αὐτὸν Did a typological application to himself go through Paul’s mind, the second Saul? The removal of Saul the persecutor, and the substitution of a servant of God?
εὗρον This echoes the language of the Psalms. See Ps 88:21 (89:21); cf. 1 Sam 13:14; Is 44:28.
Vs. 23 ἤγαγεν
Vs. 24 πρὸ προσώπου A Hebraism.
Vs. 25 Τί ἐμὲ ὑπονοεῖτε εἶναι; οὐκ εἰμὶ ἐγώ. Comp. John 3:28 and John 1:20. On the rest of the passage Luke 3:15sq. John 1:20, 26, 27. But the motive? Comp. Acts 1:5; 11:16; 19:4. Directed against the so-called disciples of John and the heno-baptists? Consider the interplay only a few years later (Acts 18:25; 19:4). Again in the Gospel of John, it seems clear he has this sect in view. Comp. John 1:15sq; 3:23sq.; 5:33sq.; 10:40sq. (see Lightfoot, Col. p. 402sq.).
Vs. 26 ὑμῖν The you is the Jews of the Diaspora and the proselytes as well as οἱ . . . κατοικοῦντες ἐν Ἰερουσαλὴμ (vs. 27) and so . . . ἐξαπεστάλη. Having travelled with Barnabas, the Gospel is preached to the Dispersion, and when it fails with the Dispersion it is offered to the Gentiles (Acts 13:46).
Vs. 27 κρίναντες (‘judging’ not condemning, this is a system problem) ἐπλήρωσαν. αὐτον goes with ‘judging,’ ‘fulfilling’ with αὐτας.
Vs. 29 St. Paul had no object in separating those who crucified Jesus and took him down, from those who buried him. In fact the main point is that he was buried.
Vs. 30 ὃς ὤφθη ἐπὶ ἡμέρας πλείους See Acts 1:3. ὤφθη is also the Pauline word for the appearances, 1 Cor 15:5sq. This is a very unsure inference, but St. Paul was acquainted with the appearances in Galilee related by St. Matthew and St. John. Indeed the appearance to more than 500 brethren (1 Cor 15:6) is most naturally placed in Galilee. St. Paul is thinking of the apostles and immediate disciples who just happened to be Galileans. These were least likely to be deceived, and those who were his chief disciples.
Vs. 33 τοῖς τέκνοις ἡμῶν Not intended to exclude themselves. Comp. Acts 2:39. But this is more expressive that the Textus Receptus. One solution is to take one half of the Textus Receptus reading, ἡμῖν for ἡμῶν, but external authority will not allow it. To all of them—see Acts 13:36.
External Evidence:
For δευτέρῳ A, B, Aleph, C, E, L, P, H, 1361. And also the versions—Memph., Theb., Vulg., Syr., Peshit., Syr. Harcl., Ethiop., Ambrosiaster de fed. v.1 (I. p. 555).
For πρῶτῳ D, Hilar. Tractate on the Ps. II, p. 31, Origen, II, p. 537sq. So too same variable mss. in Bede. Then there are a number of mss. that omit the reference to the Psalms—46 Latin mss.
Conclusion: While there is overwhelming support for the ‘second Psalm’ reading, rarely is the consenus so great for a controverted reading. The authority for πρῶτῳ is all of one kind. It is just that some authorities deny or reject this fact. But the alteration is exactly the same as the sort of corrections we find in D, and it allowed some authorities excuses. Moreover, a comparison of the case for the two readings is in favor of ‘Second’ rather than ‘First.’ The testimonies for the reading ‘Second’ requires a different ordering of the Greek words (ἐν τῷ πρώτῳ ψαλμῷ), and we find that it has been altered, for the reference to ‘second’ comes after the mention of the Psalm.
Importantly, it is difficult to imagine, if the ‘first’ reading were original that one could arrive by correction at the word order we find in the ‘second’ reading. All this not withstanding, the chief editors, Tischendorf (8th ed.), Tregelles, Lachmann, Griesbach etc. have the reading ἐν τῷ πρώτῳ ψαλμῷ. Lachmann apparently feels so strongly about this that he takes the A.V. word order and the πρώτῳ reading from D and creates a reading that is not found in any authority! The sole argument on the other side is the probability that πρώτῳ would be altered to ‘second.’ If the manuscript authorities were fairly evenly balanced, the argument could have weight, but with this preponderance of authorities, it doesn’t.
In our time the tendency to want to argue for the ‘first’ reading is in part because this is the numbering system with which we are familiar. But in the early centuries might there not be a tendency in the other direction? What are the facts?
Talmud Berachot Folio 9—(quote at length in Scholt. p. 455). The context is a discussion of why Ps 18 (19) should be repeated after the Eighteen Benedictions. R. Jehuda the son of R. Simon . . . said ‘because David put it after the Eighteen Psalms.’ But he ought to have said 19. Answer: the two pericopae make one psalm. In support of this, appeal is made to a teaching of R. Samuel . . . who relates that R. Johana that David began each favorite Psalm with ‘Blessed’ and so he commences the first psalm with ‘Blessed is the man’ and ends it with ‘Blessed are all they. . . .’
Similarly an obscure passage from J.T. Taan. Fol. 65 (quoted in Lightfoot II, p. 690), ‘R. Joshua ben Levi says It was according to the Eighteen Psalms from the beginning of the Psalms, the Lord hears these in the day of trouble (xx.1), but if any were to say unto there are nineteen, they say unto him that “why do the heathen rage” (Ps.ii) is not reckoned among them.’ Niper II, p. 337sq. l.c. says that of two Hebrew copies that were followed in his land, the two psalms were attached together. . . .
Justin Martyr, Apol. 140 quotes Ps 1; 2 continuously as though they form one unit, prefacing them with a summary of contents in the prophets and writings. Again, Tertullian, adv. Marc. iv.22 refers to the discussion of ‘the Son’ in Ps 2:7 as in the ‘primo psalmo.’ Cyprian i.13 speaking of the same matter refers to the ‘primo psalmo’ as well, in some mss. though the best supported reading is ‘secundo.’
There are other church fathers as well whose conception of the relationship of Psalm 1 and Psalm 2 is the same as Justin’s, namely that they are one psalm. See again Apollonianus in Tischendorf.
Thus it is plain that for the Christian church in the early centuries, this arrangement was by no means uncommon. In fact, it is defended by both rabbinical and early Christian authority. Some saw in this arrangement a special meaning and adopted the text accordingly. Thus in fact, the character of the alteration in D, which are frequently made to suit a certain tradition, and generally some problematic tradition.
υἱὸς μου εἶ σύ Heb 1:5; 5:5, and a v.l. in Luke 3:22 in D and Latin authorities (the same class of authorities as in the ‘first,’ ‘second’ variants). See Clement of Rome 36. On the double reference of the Psalm, the primary and secondary reference. Secondary is the messianic reference, but it is already seen among the rabbis see B.T. Sukkah Folio 52 (see Lightfoot, II, p. 690).
Γεγέννηκα does not refer to eternal sonship, but rather to the manifestation of the sonship in time, as the adverb σήμερον shows. The secondary reference is to be compared to the primary one. Here it is manifested by the resurrection comp. Rom 1:4—ἐξ ἀναστάσεως νεκρῶν, not that his nature was changed by the resurrection but that his permanent form was defined.
What parts of the Psalm were treated as messianic? Ps 2:1-2 see Acts 4:25-26, and Ps 2:10 (‘kings’) a general consensus (such as one rarely finds) among the rabbis about this, and they made challenging critiques. How the prophetic spirit exhorts us here. How the psalm predicts the demise of Pilate and Herod, rulers of Jews and Gentiles. How Christ was to be believed on by persons of every race. How God calls him Son and promises to subject every race to him. How the foolish attempt to escape from his power. How God calls all unto repentance before the day of judgment. (At the same time he has the LXX reading of vs. 10).
Vs. 34 ἀνέστησεν αὐτὸν ἐκ νεκρῶν
Δώσω See Is 55:3 where the LXX agrees with the Hebrew. The mercies he promised to David. But all the promises made to David are only partially fulfilled in David himself, their true fulfillment was in David’s greater son, the messiah, of which David was a type. Thus, the promise of universal dominion, thus again the promise of freedom from corruption which we hear of here in the next verse. See Is 55:3-5 and the whole context, especially illustrated by Ps 89:20, 24, 27, 29, 34-35, 37 and 2 Sam 7:8, 13, 15-16. David lives still, as present in his descendants and the covenant with David as a continuous application. See Delitzsch Is. l.c.
ὅσια A pious man. See 2 Chron 6:42 Comp. Clement of Rome, I p. 187.
τὰ πιστά trustworthy, sure, assured.
Vs. 35 διότι The right reading. Not διό. The resurrection is a fulfillment of a promise, but God could not completely fulfill his merciful plan to David himself, because it had been promised to David ‘thou wilt not leave my soul in hell.’
λέγει Best taken impersonally—the place ‘it is said’ as e.g. in Eph 5:14.
How he proposes here to understand ὁ θεός, supposing that God speaks here what David speaks to God, but this is not necessary and therefore to be avoided. Notice the Pauline character of all this.
Ps 16:10 comp. Acts 2:27. Resemblance to St. Peter, and why not? The application of the passage is most natural in itself. Consider the communication with Peter in Gal 1:18.
Vs. 40 τὸ εἰρημένον ἐν τοῖς προφήταις Comp. Mt 2:23 διὰ τῶν προφητῶν ὅτι Ναζωραῖος (Mark 1:2—a false reading), John 6:45; Is 54:13, but comp. Jer 31:34; Micah 4:2; Acts 7:42 citing Amos, Acts 15:15 citing Amos as well. The ‘book of the prophets’ = the Twelve as most commonly where there is a special quotation see Acts 7:42; 15:15.
Vs. 41 ἴδετε, οἱ καταφρονηταί Hab 1:5 the Chaldean invasion, so Hab 2:5 applies in Gal 3:11. There is probably also an allusion to this latter passage in Gal 3:29 (see Lightfoot, Gal. p. 138, notes). Yes, we see the Pauline character of what is said in this speech in Acts 13. The LXX must have read בַכּוֹדִם for בַגּוֹיִם here see Hab 1:13; 2:5 and is so translated καταφρονηταί and so also the Peshitta. Note the LXX also has ἀφανίσθητε.
Vs. 42 Ἐξιόντων δὲ αὐτῶν i.e. Paul and Barnabas.
παρεκάλουν i.e. the worshippers in the synagogue. The grouping in the Authorized Text is unwarranted. The separation of Jews and Gentiles came later.
μεταξὺ on which see Clement of Rome 64, Epist. Barnab. 13.
Vs. 43 σεβομένων προσηλύτων The former term refers to the devout, A.V. has ‘religious,’ see Acts 13:50; 17:4, 17. Comp. Josephus, Ant. xvii.7.2. προσηλύτος means a newcomer, even a stranger, an alien. See Ex 12:48-49 LXX, and so frequently in the LXX e.g. Is 54:15. It is an LXX word not appearing in classical sources. It = גֵּר, a sojourner, so that it signifies one who comes and takes up his abode temporarily or permanently with the Israelites. In the other Hexaplanic (?) sources but not in the LXX προσηλύτος and cognates is the equivalent of ἐπηλύς and its cognates (e.g. in Barnabas, Soph. Leg.).
τῇ χάριτι τοῦ θεοῦ Pauline doctrine = τῷ εὐαγγελλίῳ see 2 Cor 6:1; 8:9 cf. Rom 3:29; 5:15; 6:15sq. Eph 2:5-7, 8. See Lightfoot notes on Col 1:6 (p. 136). On this comp. John 1:17 ὁ νόμος διὰ Μωϋσέως ἐδόθη, ἡ χάρις καὶ ἡ ἀλήθεια διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐγένετο. Cf. Gal 5:4; Acts 15:11; 20:24.
Vs. 44 σχεδόν comp. Acts 19:26. A natural hyperbole.
τὸν λόγον τοῦ κυρίου i.e. Jesus Christ, see vss. 48, 49 and frequently in Acts. But the question is—is the genitive subjective or objective?
Vs. 46 ὁ Παῦλος First, the chief speaker.
ἀπωθεῖσθε thrust away from yourselves.
ἀξίους κρίνετε ἑαυτοὺς as evinced by their acts.
τῆς αἰωνίου ζωῆς the knowledge of the Gospel is this.
πρῶτον Rom 1:16; 2:9-10. The first in privilege or the first in responsibility. So e.g. the end of Acts in Rome see Acts 28.
Vs. 47 τέθεικά Is 49:6 from the LXX word for word and substantially agreeing with the Hebrew with minor differences. Comp. Luke 2:32.
Vs. 48 ὅσοι ἦσαν τεταγμένοι appointed.
εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον See John 5:24; 17:23. This belief in eternal life involves he who partakes of it has eternal life just as he who partakes of food and sacrament etc. has temporal life. Comp. σωτηρία and its cognates.
Vs. 50 τὰς σεβομένας γυναῖκας The women especially affected, as e.g. at Damascus. See Josephus, Bell. Jud. ii.20.2 on devout women. The A.V. is strange here ‘decent and honorable women’ but these are moral epithets prompting moral approval whereas the Greek terms treat in one case religion and in the other case social position.
εὐσχήμονας gentle folk. Acts 17:12; comp. Mark 15:43.
Vs. 51 ἐκτιναξάμενοι A direct reference to one of our Lord’s sayings. Luke 9:5 cf. Luke 10:2; Mt 10:14. This perhaps explains vs. 47 οὕτως γὰρ ἐντέταλται ἡμῖν ὁ κύριος and see Luke 9:5 ἐπ’ αὐτούς (‘against them’).
Acts 14—Barnabas and Saul = Zeus and Hermes?
Vs. 1 Ἰκονίῳ about sixty miles east, or a little south of east, of Pisidian Antioch. Noted by different contours to Phyrgia and Lycaonia and Pisidia. It was apt to get high snow, if traveling to Asia Minor from Syrian Antioch through Tarsus and Sardis to Ephesus (the road through Pisidian Antioch). An important place in medieval times, and home to the Seljuk sultans. Mentioned by Xenephon in the Anabasis, no houses so doubtless not yet what it afterwards became. See Strabo xii.6, p. 568.
κατὰ τὸ αὐτὸ Only here in the New Testament (but comp. ἐπι τὸ αὐτὸ) but it occurs several times in the LXX 1 Sam 11:11; 30:24; 31:6 etc. It means not in the same way, but together as the LXX shows.
Ἰουδαίοι As always throughout Apostolic history and afterwards e.g. Martyrdom of Polycarp.
Vs. 3 διδόντι with the following καί. Thus it explains μαρτυροῦντι [how the Lord bore witness by giving . . . ].
Vs. 5 ὁρμὴ a mad impulse, here mental rather than physical as the context shows. Comp. James 3:4.
τῶν ἐθνῶν τε καὶ Ἰουδαίων here as forming one body.
Hence σὺν τοῖς ἄρχουσιν αὐτῶν should refer to both Gentile and Jewish leaders, the magistrates of the former and the synagogue rulers of the latter. Comp. Acts 4:26-27.
ὑβρίσαι καὶ λιθοβολῆσαι αὐτούς comp. 1 Thess 2:2. προπαθόντες καὶ ὑβρισθέντες.
Comp. Acts 14:19; 2 Cor 11:5, the discussion in Paley’s Horae Paulinae; cf. The Legend of Paul and Thecla, the story about Demos, Hermogenes and the stoning.
Vs. 6 τὰς πόλεις τῆς Λυκαονίας thus implying that Iconium was not Lycaonian but 1) geographically and ethnographically doubtful. See Xenophon, Anab. i.2.19; 2) politically, Pliny N.H. v.27. Pliny distinguishes where the tetrarchy is, and ‘ipsa Lycaonia,’ i.e. Lycaonia proper. Strabo xii.6 (p. 568) also speaks of the separate government.
This explains two things: 1) Lycaonia is limited to Lystra and Derbe; and 2) κατέφυγον they would be under a different government. This leads to an important point—this part of Lycaonia had passed through different hands. It had belonged to Amnytas, king of Galatia. On his death in 25 B.C. it was bestowed on Archelaeus king of Capadoccia. In A.D. 17 it was attached to the Roman province of Galatia and in A.D. 37 it was assigned to Antiochus king of Comagene. The historians only say that part of Cilicia was given to him. Dion lix.6-8 i.e. Cilicia Asperca as appears from other notices (see Lewin, Fast. Sac. p. 250), BUT, the coins show that Lycaonia was also assigned to him. See Eckhel, III, p. 255 sq. He was deposed by Caligula, restored by Claudius in A.D. 41, and reigned until A.D. 71. Josephus Bell. Jud. vii.7.1. Therefore, at this time, this portion of Lycaonia was under him.
Λύστραν comp. vs. 8 ἐν Λύστροις. Comp. Acts 16:1-2 where there is the same variation (Λύστροις in 16:2). About 30-40 miles south and somewhat east of Iconium. Later said to be 1,001 churches in the vicinity (see Hamilton, II, p. 319 on Kara Dagh, and see Lewin, I, p. 148).
Λύστραν καὶ Δέρβην The geographical order. On a later trip he approaches from the east (16:2) and takes them in a different order.
Vs. 9 ἤκουεν Probably the right reading here. B, C, Harclean Syr. More expressive. ‘Was listening to’ when the occurrence happens.
Vs. 10 μεγάλῃ φωνῇ so we must read (not μεγάλῃ τῇ φωνῇ raising his voice, contrast Acts 26:24 where it is the undisputed reading).
ἥλατο The right reading, not ἥλλετο. The initial account. Means ‘leapt up.’ See Acts 3:8 ἐξαλλόμενος ἔστη καὶ περιεπάτει, whereas ἥλλετο would comport with that passage.
Vs. 11 Λυκαονιστὶ: 1) the language meant. Steph. Byz. says in Derbe they spoke this language. See Strabo xiv.4 (p. 631); 2) Relation to the narrative here; 3) bearing on the gift of tongues.
Vs. 12 Δία . . . Ἑρμῆν Appearance 1) to Lycan, the mythical founder of Lycaonia, see Ovid, Meta. i.237, and 2) to Baucis and Philemon, Ovid, Meta. viiii.626. See Lightfoot, Colossians, p. 304.
Δία More imposing in physical appearance.
Ἑρμῆν The constant attendant of Zeus (see Euripides, Ion on Hermes) and the one gifted with words.
ἐπειδὴ αὐτὸς ἦν ὁ ἡγούμενος τοῦ λόγου See Macrobius, Saturnalia i.8. See Wettstein.
Vs. 13 πρὸ τῆς πόλεως (αὐτῶν to be struck out). A position assigned to a titular deity. S.C. Teb. 152 comp. 482, 496.
For example, Artemis at Ephesus, Boeckh C.I.G. 2963C (and see Boeckh’s note on ‘the great deity Artemis’ followed by πρὸ πόλεως. . . .). Cf. Hecate at Aphrodisias 2796, Demeter at Smyrna 3194, 3211 again πρὸ πόλεως. Comp. Wood, Ephesus, viii.2 p. 23 (and his note on πρὸ πόλεως).
ταύρους καὶ στέμματα
πυλῶνας porch, gatehouse, portals, A.V. ‘unto the gates’ in connection with ‘which was before the city’ is misleading. πυλῶνας here is the outer gate leading into the court where the temple stood. Highly developed in Egyptian temples. Of an outer gate to a private house see Acts 12:13 τὴν θύραν τοῦ πυλῶνος. πυλῶνος here is the outer gate. Comp. Mt 26:71.
Vs. 14 οἱ ἀπόστολοι 1) on the range of the term see Lightfoot, Gal. p. 92sq. On Barnabas as an apostle see Gal 2:9; Acts 9:5-6. Personal witness to Christ. This probably is the case with Barnabas, see Acts 4:36. But 2) When did he become an apostle? Acts 13:1-2. There they are prophets, the two highest orders of the exceptional ministry (Eph 4:11 cf. Eph 2:20; 3:5; 1 Cor 12:28-29).
ἐξεπήδησαν ‘rushed in’
Vs. 15 ὁμοιοπαθεῖς comp. James 1:17 whereas God is ἀπαθή. For the incident, see the case of St. Peter in Acts 10:26, of St. John in Rev 19:10.
εὐαγγελιζόμενοι ὑμᾶς
ζῶντα Pointing to the statues about them (see Raphael’s cartoon of Hermes).
τῶν ματαίων An equivalent of the Hebrew הֶבֶל meaning 1) breath; 2) a vain, fleeting, empty something; 3) used especially of idols. Sometimes translated εἴδωλα see Deut 32:21, sometimes ματαία 1 Kings 16:13, so too 2 Kings 17:15; Jer 2:5. Sometimes ματαία seems to refer to a lie, see Amos 2:4. Sometimes the term seems to be used of a shaggy demon of the wood (see Lev 17:7). So 2 Chron 11:15, a fiend. The basic idea of ματαία is ‘blind,’ ‘purposeless’ so εἴδωλον, a Jewish application of the word, probably not found in classical sources. The subsidiary idea of a ‘phantom’ becomes prominent—1 Cor 8:4.
θεὸν ζῶντα a living God. The correct reading here. Much more expressive than the variants, for the stress is laid on the attributes not on the person. So too 1 Thess 1:9 showing how Pauline the language is here. Comp. 2 Cor 6:16 where the contrast is made with εἰδώλα, and doubtless elsewhere, where the force is not so obvious e.g. 2 Cor 3:3 where the contrast is between a dead letter and a living God.
Vs. 17 αὑτὸν, the focus, see my note on Col 1:20.
ὑετοὺς The drought in the country. Strabo xii.6 ‘the distance is eighteen [miles] but it [the road] is said to be now almost impossible because of the scarcity of water and provisions.’
ὑμῖν, ὑμῶν the correct readings, i.e. you Gentiles, you barbarians, but to the Jews was vouchsafed a more direct revelation of Himself.
Vs. 18 The conversion of Timothy, see the note on 16:1.
Vs. 19 λιθάσαντες, a Jewish mode of punishment, though here it was done with the aid of heathen and in a tumultuous way. The incident mentioned in 2 Cor 11:25. Doubtless this transpires on account of Paul’s ‘blasphemy’ see Acts 9:58, 59. Comp. Iliad iv. 88 (and Fragm. p. 1503, Becker).
Vs. 20 The site not necessarily ascertained. See Lewin I, p. 151sq. Ruins seen by Hamilton, I p. 313sq. an acropolis not far from the lake Ak Ghieul. This is possibly Derbe because Steph. Byz. says φρέριον καὶ λιμήν (for which read λίμνη). Hamilton however places it at Dule, somewhat to the south, because Dule resembles Δελβετα = Δέρβη. But there is no lake there, and as there can be no λιμήν at Derbe (wherever it was) the substitution of λίμνη seems certain. See the letter of Hamilton to Horsa and C+H, I p. 228, the later version in which he seems prepared to abandon his view about Derbe.
Vs. 21 ἱκανοὺς
εἰς τὴν Λύστραν Note the definite article with this word and not with the others. The return to Lystra, where his life had so recently been in jeopardy, is emphasized. The original conception of the sentence in the author’s mind seems to have ended with the mention of Lystra and καὶ εἰς Ἰκόνιον καὶ [εἰς] Ἀντιόχειαν is an after-thought or rather two after-thoughts, hence the repetition of the preposition.
Vs. 22 ἐπιστηρίζοντες Acts 15:32, 41; 18:23 (where στηρίζων is the right reading). For στηρίζειν as used by St. Paul see e.g. Rom 1:11 εἰς τὸ στηριχθῆναι ὑμᾶς.
καὶ ὅτι . . . ‘and saying, we must through many afflictions enter . . .’
The tradition that St. Luke was a native of Antioch. Alford supposes, based on this passage, that his birthplace was Pisidian Antioch. This now has been refuted in Journal of Philology III (1856), p. 95. ‘Alford . . . wrongly takes the language here as indication of the writer’s presence in Antioch of Pisidia on this occasion.’ And I added ‘he rightly rejects the “common” explanation that ἡμᾶς is used by the writer as a Christian and of all Christians.’ I pointed out that this is what is called the recitative ὅτι, i.e. it introduces the exact words of another as e.g. Acts 13:38; 15:1 and is most commonly used to indicate a quotation or indeed for the word ‘saying’ according to the circumstances. I went on to note that ‘this abrupt shift from the oblique to the direct narrative is especially characteristic of St. Luke’s style and are subsidiary proof of the unity of authorship of different parts of Acts, and between the Acts and the Third Gospel.’ Comp. for instance Acts 1:4; 17:3; 23:22 and in vs. 23 there is the change from the direct [discourse] to the dialogue.
Alford’s reply (Pro. p. 7 and here ad loc p. 160) . . . He says we should expect ὑμᾶς, but why? He asks, ‘to what then would he have it referred’? My answer is, it is not used here by the writer, but rather by the speaker not as a Christian and [speaking] for all Christians, but rather as a Christian to the Christians he is addressing. There is an exact parallel in 1 Thess 3:2sq. where St. Paul does this same thing and uses the first person—προελέγομεν ὑμῖν ὅτι μέλλομεν . . . Observe the thoroughly Pauline character of this passage.
Vs. 23 κατ’ ἐκκλησίαν Is it 1) ‘in every church’ as κατὰ πόλιν. Acts 15:21; 20:23; Tit 1:5; 2) ‘in the public assembly,’ ‘in church’ as κατ’ οἶκον Acts 5:42? Though Acts 13:1 might suggest the latter, but the former is more probable in light of Tit 1:5, καταστήσῃς κατὰ πόλιν πρεσβυτέρους.
Vs. 25 λαλήσαντες ἐν Πέργῃ . . . It is not ἐπιστηρίζειν here. For though they had passed through Perga before (Acts 13:3), nothing is said of them preaching on that occasion.
Αττάλειαν A good harbor. The name comes from Attalus II (Philadelphus) of Pergamon, on ‘Adalia’ see Lewin, I. p. 154; also ‘Satalia’; see C+H, I p. 242sq.
Vs. 26 ἐπλήρωσαν—‘fulfilled’ i.e. completed, discharged.