The Second Missionary Journey (Acts 16)
The Second Missionary Journey (Acts 16)
Acts 16:1-10: Textual Issues
Vs. 1 Lachmann reads καὶ εἰς Δέρβην καὶ εἰς Λύστραν with A, B.
Vs. 4 See a long addition of D.
Vs. 6 Omit τήν before ‘Galatian.’
Vs. 7 ἐλθόντες Lachmann adds δέ with A, B, C, D, E and others, and this must be the right reading.
τὸ Πνεῦμα Ἰησοῦ The Byzantine Majority text omits Ἰησοῦ, which Lachmann and Tischendorf rightly retain with A, B, C**, D, E, various Syrian witnesses.
Vs. 10 Another curious addition of D.
Tischendorf has ὁ κύριος with D, G, H and large majority of Syrian witnesses. Lachmann has ὁ θεός with A, B, C, E.
Vs. 1 Κατήντησεν reached, arrived. Peculiar to Paul and the Acts in the New Testament. Nine times in Acts, four times in St. Paul. In St. Luke it is always used of approaching or reaching a place (except Acts 26:6 where it is in one of St. Paul’s speeches) and in this passage where it is used of approach from the sea. In St. Paul it is used of ‘attaining’ or ‘pertaining to.’
ἐκεῖ i.e. Lystra as the order naturally suggests, especially with the accusative, which is the correct reading. Lystra is separated from Derbe by a repetition of εἰς. That Timothy was a native of Lystra and not Derbe appears also from: 1) vs. 2 Λύστροις καὶ Ἰκονίῳ; 2) Acts 20:4. Not a native of Derbe but associated with a native of Derbe. The inference from this verse that Timothy too was a native of Derbe is not only not supported by that passage, but by implication negated. 3) the Peshitta on Acts l.c. makes him a native of Lystra, though this may be a critical correction. Derbe is mentioned first, then Lystra the order one would reach them traveling East to West from Cilicia. Timothy was probably converted by St. Paul on the occasion of his former visit (Acts 14:8, 20). See also 2 Tim 3:11. At least he is called by St. Paul his son in the faith (see 1 Tim 1:2).
γυναῖκος Ἰουδαίας πιστῆς Eunice, 2 Tim 1:5. Hence the references in 2 Tim 3:10 to these parts.
Vs. 2 καὶ Ἰκονίῳ Note at Iconium rather than at Derbe, an account of the similarities of Lystra relative to the former place. Bin M. Kallisseh probably the site of Lystra. Cony. and H I p. 228 (2nd edition 1856). Derbe was an especially unimportant place (cf. Acts 14:19).
Vs. 3 διὰ τοὺς Ἰουδαίους Compare the expression in Gal 2:4. The Jews in these quarters cf. Acts 14:19. An external source of information here?
ὅτι Ἕλλην Different procedure in the case of Timothy and Titus and the circumstances were different: 1) in the case of Timothy, it was his duty to become a Jew to the Jew; 2) the duty of Titus was to maintain the liberty of the Gospel. See Gal 2:3.
Vs. 4 παρεδίδοσαν Whether orally or in writing is uncertain. Probably the latter with the strength of the expression.
αὐτοῖς the Gentile Christians in these cities.
Vs. 6 The first mention of, and first recorded visit to Galatia. On what is meant by Galatia see Lightfoot, Galatians, the Introductory remarks. It is important to observe that Phrygia at this time had no political significance. It was an inland district bounded by Pisidia (with which it was separated by the Taurus range) on the South, by Cara, Lydia, Bithynia on the Northwest, and by Galatia, Cappadocia, and Lycaonia on the East. The phrase ‘Phyrgia Major’ signified roughly a part of Asia Minor where the Phrygian race dwelt (see Cony. + H I p. 291, note 1 for references), but the Phrygian race spread widely. Phrygia Minor was on the Hellespont and the northern part of Mysia. The greater part of Phrygia was in proconsular Asia, but some was in the adjacent Roman provinces. Hence, sometimes it is specified over and above Asia, sometimes not (scarcely ‘distinguished from’ or ‘excluded’). It is so specified here and Acts 2:9. It is not in 1 Pet 1:1.
Observe the correct reading here—τὴν Φρυγίαν καὶ Γαλατικὴν χώραν with τήν omitted before Γαλατικήν. This relieves us from any geographical difficulty. If τήν were to remain, and we were to suppose (as is natural and as might be expected from St. Luke’s strict accuracy) that the districts were mentioned in the order in which they were visited, we should have to send St. Paul from West to East, from Phrygia to Galatia, and back again from East to West (from Galatia to Mysia). But the right reading—‘the region of Phrygia and Galatia’ (Φρυγίαν is an adjective) shows that the country meant was the border country and St. Paul kept, roughly speaking, along this frontier, as we might expect from his subsequent movements. The frontier runs in Struner’s map about northwest, right for the heart of Bithynia. St. Paul appears to have been detained in Galatia by sickness (Gal 4:13). The suggestion that St. Luke, ‘the beloved physician’ first joined Paul in a professional capacity is not to be hastily rejected. He was however probably not with St. Paul at this time.
It is important in relationship to St. Paul’s epistles to both the Galatians and the Colossians. We must consider: 1) the reading; 2) the grammar (comp. Mark 1:5; Luke 3:1); 3) the meaning.
The questions Galatians raises for our discussion are: 1) is the mention of Galatia here a reference to the Roman province, or the region ruled by the Gauls? (cf. Lightfoot, Gal. p. 19; Col. p. 24). If the former, then it would include Derbe and Lystra, Antioch and Iconium and thus the evangelization of Galatia has already been described. But this is contrary to: 1) St. Luke’s use of geographical terms in this passage. This explains a) the use of the phrase ‘the Phrygian and Galatian region,’ and b) the others terms used in the context i.e. Lycaonia and Pisidia; 2) the course of the itinerary; 3) the notices in the Epistle to the Galatians.
But what exactly does the phrase ‘the Phrygian and Galatian region’ in 16:6 mean? We should compare Acts 18:23 which has ‘the Galatian region and Phrygia.’ This difference is easily explained. St. Paul then preaches in Galatia (Gal 4:13-15). Why then did St. Luke not relate these incidents after preaching in Galatia? 1) His ignorance of the facts? 2) The subsequent defection of the Galatian churches? It is useless to speculate.
The questions Colossians raises for our discussion are: 1) in view of Col 2:1 apparently St. Paul had never been there. 2) His itinerary here in Acts would not take him in that direction. Renan said that he had been there, but had not preached.
Vs. 6 Another v.l. here, and this one is rather important—διῆλθον or διελθόντες? Important because it separates Galatia from the previous places. Nothing is said of the preaching but it is implied by Acts 18:23, and there is implied opposition in διῆλθον, between Phrygia and Galatia. The κωλυθέντες signifies as much. The verb in any case denotes thoroughness [as in going completely through something] and is generally used in relationship to the preaching (Acts 8:4, 40; 9:32; 11:19; 18:23; 19:21, 22, 25).
ἐν τῇ Ἀσίᾳ 1) naming of Asia, 2) evangelization Acts 18:22; 19:1sq. Asia in the Bible is either: 1) the Syrian Kingdom though the King of Asia’s name had been transferred to the King of Pergamon (see 1 Macc 8:6-8). Cf. e.g. 1 Macc 11:13. This is the sense in which we find ‘Asia’ in the Apocrypha. From the Pergamene Kingdom, Asia Minor passed into the hands of the Romans whence 2) Asia = proconsular Asia. The West portion of Asia included Mysia, Lydia, Caria, and the greater part of Phrygia. Τhis is the New Testament sense.
Vs. 7 τὸ πνεῦμα Ἰησοῦ The mission of the Spirit from Jesus. Comp. Acts 2:33; Phil 1:19.
κατά in the borders of, in the neighborhood of (in this case Mysia). Mysia is a part of Asia (Howson being wrong that it is excluded from Asia, p. 209). The apostle seems to have had a series of revelations that drove him westward to Troas, and from Troas to Macedonia. He kept on the borders of proconsular Asia until he arrived at Mysia, hoping that sooner or later the hindrance might be withdrawn, and he might preach in Asia. Finding that he was prevented there also, he attempted to penetrate into Bithynia. Here too he was prevented and his only course was to pass through Mysia to the coast.
εἰς τὴν Βιθυνίαν Bithynia did however, before long, come to the Gospel. Cf. 1 Pet 1:1 and Pliny’s letter 10.97.
Vs. 8 παρελθόντες ‘having passed by’ i.e. not preached in, for they must have passed through it.
Vs. 9 Τρῳάδα Obviously, St. Paul does not preach on this occasion. This accords with 2 Cor 2:12. ‘Alexandria Troas was a recollection of the city of Priam, and a prophecy of the city of Constantine’ C+H I p. 330. TRANSIENS ADIUVA NOS—the motto of S.P.G.
τῷ Παύλῳ noting the emphatic position of these words. This prepares for the first person narrative which follows.
Vs. 10 ἐζητήσαμεν first person plural. Note: 1) the naturalness of its sudden appearance; 2) the relation of its appearance and disappearance, Acts 17:1sq., and it reappears at Acts 20:5. Was St. Luke a native of Philippi? See Renan, St. Paul, p. 131.
ὅτι . . . εὐαγγελίσασθαι construction confined to St. Luke and St. Paul in the New Testament except 1 Pet 1:12. Alford’s note is worth reading however he has passed over one important consideration. The question is between the third plural (e.g. vs. 7) and the first plural. St. Luke would scarcely have been in St. Paul’s company at vs. 7 where he was αὐτούς. There is, I think, no instance of the third plural being used by St. Luke where we are sure that he was with St. Paul [investigate]. St. Luke indeed drops the ‘we,’ but does he use ‘they’? In other words, the use of the third person singular ‘he (Paul) does so and so’ does certainly not exclude e.g. the presence of St. Luke a bit. The use of the third person plural ‘They did so and so’ certainly does seem to show that he was not present at the time.
16:11-13: Textual Issues
vs. 11 δέ Tischendorf, D adds it as usual.
Vs. 12 τῆς before Macedonia. Lachmann thinks original, included in Byzantine Majority text, omitted by A, C, E, et al.
Vs. 12 αὐτῇ before ‘the city’—Tischendorf. Lachmann, A, B, C, D*, E have ταύτῃ.
Vs. 11 εὐθυδρομήσαμεν On St. Luke’s nautical terms see Smith, Voyage and Shipwreck, pp. 36sq. (new edition). The word also occurs in Acts 21:1. Contrast Acts 20:5 ‘for days.’ The reverse voyage took five days, here only two days, hence εὐθυδρομήσαμεν.
Νέαν Πόλιν See Lightfoot, Phil. p. 48. Port of Philippi, probably the ancient Datum, see Smith’s Dictionary s.v.
Σαμοθρᾴκην See C+H, p. 331. citing Il. xiii.12sq.
Vs. 12 κἀκεῖθεν i.e. ἐπορευσάμεθα or some such word. Ignatius follows the same route.
On ἥτις see Lightfoot, Phil. p. 51 and on κολωνία p. 50.
It seems to be unnatural to make πρώτη ‘furthest eastward.’ Would it not in this case be ἡ πρώτη? Yet we find the article frequently omitted with numerals in the New Testament where we should expect to find it. No principle however is violated. The numerals are in themselves definite and therefore do not require the article, though I believe it is generally found in classical authors. Cf. Acts 12:10; 17:4; 20:18, perhaps however this will not justify πρώτη τῆς μερίδος. The conjunction πρώτης is worth considering if any conjunction were allowable in the New Testament. It would perhaps be easier if we omitted τῆς with Lachmann in which case we might take Μακεδονίας πόλις together, ‘a city of Macedonia, first of the district.’ μερίδος is peculiar to St. Luke and St. Paul in the New Testament. In short, the words will not bear Alford’s translation. They must mean of the district of Macedonia. May not the words πρώτη . . . πόλις mean ‘a principal city’ or even ‘the chief city.’ Even if Amphipolis was at the time the capital, still, if Philippi were a more important place it might be called this without reference to its political status, just as Liverpool might be called the chief town in Lancasterhire.
κολωνία is emphatic. The incident turns on this fact.
Vs. 13 παρὰ ποταμὸν see Lightfoot, Phil. p. 53sq. The absence of the definite article would perhaps alone be fatal to the the Stryman, and the Stryman was so far off that the distance of the προσευχή would be more than a Sabbath day’s journey.
ἐνομίζομεν προσευχὴν εἶναι The reading ἐνομίζομεν—A, B, C, 13, 61, Memph. Eth. This seems also to be the reading of the Harclean Syr. The reading of ἐνομίζεν must be considered a corruption of this. ἐνομίζετο E, 31, Syr. Peshitta.
προσευχήν A2, Aleph, C, 13.61; προσευχὴ A*, B, D ,E, H, L.
The original reading in this verse was altered for several reasons: 1) the proper meaning of προσευχή was not understood; 2) the general purport of the sentence did not seem quite satisfying; 3) προσευχήν got corrupted into προσευχή and some further change seemed to be required. This must be taken in connection with the v.l. in vs. 16 τὴν προσευχήν nearly the same authorities as read προσευχή here omit the definite article there. Obviously, they did not understand the meaning of the word προσευχή which refers to a ‘place of prayer.’ Hence it cannot imply any building, nor is this necessary. It may simply be a place in the open air where prayer was held. But the words οὗ ἐνομίζομεν seem to decide the issue in favor of the other interpretation. See my notes in Phil. p. 52. Comp. Josephus, Ant. xiv.10.22 with his Bell Jud. iii.296 and his Vit. 56; Note, too, Philo, in Flacc. 14 and Leg. Ad Gaius 21, 43. In Philo it can refer either to a building = synagogue, or to an open-air place. See also le Moyse on Polyc. p. 72sq. and the reference to the Shep. of Herm. s.v. The phrase likely means ‘where prayer was wont to be held’ but in vs. 16 where we have the definite article before προσευχή it seems to be ‘place of prayer.’
τῇ τε ἡμέρᾳ τῶν σαββάτων or τὰ σαββάτα is a phrase unique to St. Luke in the New Testament. John 19:31 is an apparent exception and the phrase is found in a v.l. in Mark 6:2 but is wrong.
ταῖς συνελθούσαις γυναιξίν No doubt there were many proselytes like Lydia. On the women in Philippi and Macedonia see Phil 4:2. She is here a noble example of the better spirit of the church to which she belonged and of which she was probably the firstfruits. Cf. Rev 2:19. See Lightfoot, Phil. p. 56sq.
Λυδία 1) the name. Probably, she had some other name at home. The form Lydia rather than Lyde suggests part of the Roman population of Philippi. The name occurs in Horace. But note, slave women were called by the name of their country—e.g. the Syrian, the Lydian. Here it is clearly a proper name though perhaps determined by her country of origin cf. Achaius, a native of Corinth. 2) relationship to St. Paul. For Renan’s very strange speculations see his St. Paul, p. 148 sq. A much more probable hypothesis is to identify her with Euodia or Syntyche. See Claud. Rescript. Pres. i.270—‘Lydia Sidonis’; Valerius Flacc. iv. 369—‘Lyda mursus sparso telas macilaverit ortho.’ Proselytes would be more likely to be women than men (cf. Acts 13:50).
Vs. 14 πορφυρόπωλις See Boeckh, for Thyatira 3496, 3497, 3498 and see the note at 3480. For the term πορφυρόπωλις itself see Boeckh, 2519 (a coin inscription). The whole district was famous for its skill in purple-dying. Cf. Ar. Ach. 112. There was a special guild, a company of dyers at Thyatira (the trades seem to have formed themselves into guilds there) οἱ βάφεις. See Boeckh, Corpus Inscrp. ii Part. xiv. Sect. vii. nos. 3496, 3497, 3498 and 3480.
σεβομένη a believing Gentile, a proselyte, see Acts 17:4, especially Acts 17:17; 13:43, 50, and probably Acts 18:7. Perhaps an allusion to this in Acts 18:13. In Acts 19:27 it is used of the worshippers of Artemis at Ephesus. It only occurs in these passages in St. Luke. Outside St. Luke only Mt 15:9; Mark 7:7 (both the LXX of Is.).
διήνοιξεν an ‘opened circle.’
Vs. 15 ὁ οἶκος αὐτῆς The argument for infant baptism is not strong from an isolated case, but the referencing of the household strengthens it (see Gloag).
πιστὴν τῷ κυρίῳ This phrase cannot mean, as some would have it, ‘believing in the Lord,’ but rather ‘faithful to the Lord.’
The Church of Thyatira in Revelation. Thyatira was a Macedonian colony (see Trench, Chandler), but when and how evangelized?
Lydia is presented as a type of the church, see Rev 2:19: 1) πιστἰς εἰ κεκρίκατε με πιστὴν; 2) διακονία. Perhaps, as Renan suggests, it was through her (Phil 4:15) that the Philippians ministered to Paul’s work.
16:16-40: Textual Issues
Vs. 16 τὴν omitted before προσευχήν in Byzantine Majority text with D, G, H, etc.
πύθωνα, probably the right reading, Byzantine Majority text -νος with D, E, G, H, etc.
ὑπαντῆσαι Lachmann, ἀπαντῆσαι A, D, G, H, etc. The two verbs are constantly confused in Greek mss.
Vs. 17 ὑμῖν So B, D, E, vg. The Textus Receptus has ἡμῖν on inferior but fair authority.
Vs. 19 One of the many interpolations of D.
Vs. 24 εἰληφώς, Lachmann. λαβών Tisch. on better authority.
Vs. 30 D adds τούς λοιπης ἀσφαλισάμενος καί.
Vs. 31 Byzantine Majority Text adds Χριστόν after ‘Jesus.’
Vs. 35 Another curious addition in D, syr. Marg.—συνελθόν οἱ στρατηγοί etc.
Vs. 39 another long gloss in D.
Vs. 40 πρός A, B, D, G, H, L et al. There is scarce any authority for εἰς which the Textus Receptus has.
Vs. 16 παιδίσκην 13 times in the New Testament comp. Gal 4:31 [and apparently from the LXX here]. Here the sense of the term is determined by τοῖς κυρίοις αὐτῆς. She was a slave.
πορευομένων ἡμῶν Probably on a subsequent occasion.
εἰς τὴν προσευχὴν ‘to the place of prayer.’ Of these places see Howson, I p. 346.
Πύθωνα See Lightfoot, Phil. p. 54; Plutarch, Moralia p. 414; Clemen. Hom. ix. 16. The term ventriloquist would however convey a wrong idea. Not art, but rather demonical possession is the main idea, a divining spirit that was considered to come from Apollo (Plutarch de Def. Oracl. 419E, other passages in Wettstein). The divining spirit seems to be the essential thing and ventriloquism an accidental element in a Πύθων. Ιs Πύθων ever a name of Apollo? Meyer says, ‘Πύθων ist Name des Apollo also das (der?) orakelgottes.’ Antholog. Jacobs I p. 55. She was in the popular language Πύθωληπζος. On the nature of this spirit see Baumgar. ii. p.121. In using the word Πύθωνα St. Luke is no doubt accommodating his language to popular belief but this cannot be the case with πνεῦμα; the whole point of the narrative turns on the fact of the girl being possessed by a spirit.
μαντευομένη The only place in the New Testament where this word or its cognates occurs. Contrast προφητεία to μάντις, μανία. See Plotius, and consider the Montanist controversy.
ὑπαντῆσαι ‘Came to meet,’ whether with friendly or hostile purposes, can also mean ‘came up to,’ ‘confronted.’ Not ἀπαντῆσαι (the Textus Receptus) which would simply be ‘met’ without any idea of direct confrontation. Comp. κατακολουθοῦσα (vs. 17) which is the right reading. The absolute distinction between ὑπαντῆσαι (by design) and ἀπαντῆσαι (by chance) however cannot be maintained (see R+P). But still the former is more appropriate here and is more likely to be used where there is design, the other where it seems more a matter of mere chance (comp. Mark 14:13). All the words for ὑπαντῆσαι suggest persistency and importuning.
μαντευομένη, not elsewhere in the New Testament. As for its use in the LXX Deut 18:10, 14; so 2 Kings 17:17; Eccles (31) 34:5. This Greek word almost always represents the Hebrew קסם divination, which always has a bad sense, except Prov 16:10 where it is a sort of figure. Sometimes it is associated with other similar Hebrew words (see Jer 60:36; Ezek 21:23) that can have a good sense but in Ezek 13:8 חֹזֶה has a negative sense and the root HZH is regularly contrasted with προφήτης. See Micah 3:11 ‘her prophets divine for money.’ The main differences between μαντεία and προφητεία: 1) the former has no moral element in it; 2) it is respective of the will or the consciousness of the speaker. The orthodox writers urged this against Montanism. See especially Auctor., Ab Catapha. In Eusebius H.E. v.16-17, critiquing that they spoke ‘in an ecstasy.’ Even with Balaam the case is not so, yet Balaam is the extreme limit of προφητεία and he is called μάντις as a reproach (Josh 13:22).
ἐργασίαν business, trade, hence the proceeds of the trade.
Vs. 17 ἔκραζεν means ‘kept crying.’
κατακολουθοῦσα ‘following close behind’ only here and in Luke 23:5 in the New Testament, ‘dogging their steps.’
οἵτινες ‘for they’
ὑμῖν more probable than ἡμῖν. ‘Arrests this attractions.’
Vs. 18 διαπονηθείς only here and Acts 4:2.
Vs. 19 ἐξῆλθεν ἡ ἐλπὶς Repetition of the same word. Dumb. Not a rational and literate [phenomenon], but the evil spirit had gone out of her. The connection is destroyed in the A.V. where the first ἐξῆλθεν (in vs. 18) is translated ‘came out,’ the second ‘was gone.’
ἐπιλαβόμενοι See the notes on Acts 9:27.
εἰς τὴν ἀγορὰν the marketplace (the Greeks and Romans shut the gate to the Hebrews).
τοὺς ἄρχοντας The special term, defined in vs. 9. This is quasi-oblique. The plaintiffs in expressing their intentions would naturally say ‘before the magistrates or authorities.’ The historian speaks directly here in his own person and is more precise in vs. 20, τοῖς στρατηγοῖς, ‘the mayors.’
Vs. 20 στρατηγοῖ See the article in Smith’s Dictionary s.v. Philippi. So Paul and Silas come into the town to the ‘agora,’ the marketplace, where the magistrates (ἄρχοντας) sat, who turned the matter over to the military authorities (στρατηγοῖ). On these military officials see Lightfoot, Phil. p. 51. Observe the Roman characteristics of Philippi throughout the narrative. See Baumgar. ii. p. 123. On στρατηγοῖ see Aust. Polit. vi.8 (p. 178 with Bekk.).
ὑπάρχοντες being Ἰουδαῖοι to begin with, there is an a priori assumption of offense. It is obvious that the higher members of the hierarchy here at Philippi are not Jews, as elsewhere, and ‘we do not let the Jews take part in it.’
Vs. 21 ἔθη, ‘customs.’ On the ‘Jewish superstition,’ see Arrian xiii.32 (‘extrema superstitio’). Remembering the political character of ancient religion, especially at Rome, the Jews were viewed as both unpatriotic and inhuman and not surprisingly there was persecution, for example under Domitian (Dur. Cap. lxvii.14). The edict of Claudius must have been issued shortly before this incident in Philippi. See Acts 18:2 (Suetonius, Claud. xv), if identified with the Senatus Consultum Mandate (see Tacitus, Annal. xii.52) it would be in A.D. 52. It would give the clue to the feeling expressed at Philippi here, a Roman colony. Here again the sentiments are thoroughly Roman. Contrast the instigation of the persecution and consequently the form of the accusation at Thessalonike (17:7). A political imprisonment here, note the parallelism and yet contrast with the account of St. Peter’s in Acts 12. See Baumgar. ii, p. 122: ‘Among the Jews this . . . assumes a religious form; among the Gentiles of the Roman Empire it takes a political shape.’
Vs. 22 συνεπέστη But to whom does the συν refer? Rose up with whom? To the instigators of the persecution? More than likely to translate ‘rose up as one man.’
περιήξαντες αὐτῶν τὰ ἱμάτια . . . αὐτῶν i.e. of Paul and Silas. This deduction comes 1) from the Greek, for while αὐτῶν might refer to the thing in itself, but coming before the reference to the ἱμάτια, this is hardly probable; 2) from the requirements of the sense of the sentence. They were not Jews, who would not listen to blasphemy. This was done by means of the lictors. Notice how thoroughly true, thoroughly Roman all this is, though no parade by the author of his knowledge. He does not mention the lictors by name until later, he does not give the fatal word ‘summons,’ ‘despolie verbera.’ He is content with giving the narrative in his own style, and it bespeaks a Roman colony because it is faithful.
περιρρήσειν here, the περι conveying the notion of stripping (cf. Mt 26:65; Joel 2:13; Acts 14:14). For the process see Dionysius of Halicarnassus iii.30 (p. 502) and ix.39 (p. 1849). Also Plutarch, Vita Popl. 6. The other Greek references in Wettstein need not be consulted. Here the magistrates are said to do what they ordered the military to do. There is no talk of a judge hanging or imprisoning a convict. See Seneca, de ora. i.19 and C+H I. p. 357.
ῥαβδίζειν See 2 Cor 11:25 where Paul says he was beaten with Roman rods three times.
Vs. 24 ἠσφαλίσατο a middle. See Mt 27:65-66. This is the first persecution originating with Gentiles. See Baumgar. ii. p. 122.
εἰς . . . φυλακὴν C+H I p. 357sq.
On ξύλον, ‘stocks,’ see Eusebius H.E. vi.39 (also V.I. Ep. Ner. no. 27).
Vs. 25 singing—‘to boast in tribulations’ as St. Paul himself says, see Baumgar. ii. p. 127.
Vs. 27 μάχαιραν, v.l. τὴν μάχαιραν (Lachmann).
Vs. 28 The strangeness of the incident. The Apostles singing Psalms at midnight in a dungeon and the miraculous earthquake, had so affected the prisoners that their minds were too much occupied with what had happened to attempt to make the escape. See the gloss of D on vs. 30 τοὺς λοιποὺς ἀσφαλισάμενος.
Vs. 29 φῶτα, ‘lights,’ not as in the A.V. ‘light.’
Vs. 30 ἵνα σωθῶ Powerfully affected by what had happened, he naturally asked the question—he had heard before of his prisoners professing to show ‘the way of salvation.’ If he did not know the full import of this word ‘salvation,’ he at least knew enough to make him eager to secure it.
Vs. 31 καὶ ὁ οἶκός σου Not meaning of course that the belief of the jailor would secure the salvation of his family also, but ‘believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved,’ these terms are offered to him, and to all members of his household no less.
Vs. 33 ἔλουσεν (i.e. ‘lavit’), ἐβαπτίσθη (‘baptizatus est’). With regard to this incident it may be remarked (Bengel): 1) the arguments drawn from the narrative in favor of infant baptism are very precarious; 2) but it does seem to imply a sanction of baptism by aspersion without immersion, though any such sanction is scarcely needed and the practice as in this case is justified rather by the spirit of the Apostle’s teaching.
Vs. 34 ἀναγαγών ‘having brought.’ A.V. ‘And when he had brought them into his house, he set meat before them.’ It is perhaps sufficient to remember that they were in a prison that would probably be underground. Cf. e.g. the chamber of the Mamertine in Rome.
παρέθηκεν τράπεζαν the opposite is ἀπαίρειν.
See Pollinx, Laert. vi.84, x.81.
πανοικεὶ ‘all + house’
Vs. 35 ῥαβδούχους (i.e. the lictors of duumvirs) the first mention of lictors by name, but as for their actions see vs. 22. Plutarch, Moralia P. 280A, Cicero Leg. Cyr. ii 34 no. 93. But by word ῥαβδούχους seems to be the common translation of ‘lictor,’ no less of those that carried the ‘fisces’ than of those who carried the ‘bacilla,’ οἱ ῥαβδοι being the Greek translation for either the fisces or the bacilla. Cf. Plutarch, Vit. Rom. 26.
The earthquake must have been reported to, and perhaps felt by the duumvirs and the accompanying incidents had reached their ears. This with their recollections of the previous day decided their conduct.
ἀπέστειλαν here, ἀπέσταλκαν in vs. 36.
Vss. 36-37 ἀπήγγειλεν ‘reported.’ Note the threefold approach: 1) δημοσίᾳ (publicly); 2) Ῥωμαίους; 3) ἀκατακρίτους (uncondemned).
Cicero, Pro Rabri. 4 (12). An earlier law the Valerian (254 A.U.C.) and the Porcian (506 A.U.C.), had forbidden scourging of Roman citizens, except in certain circumstances. See Cicero, Verr. ii.5 nos. 57, 62, 66. See the passages in Alford.
How did St. Paul possess the Roman franchise? It was not as a native of Tarsus, for Tarsus was neither a ‘colonia’ nor a ‘municipium.’ Some ancestor must have procured the freedom of the city, either by purchase, or as a reward for services, for St. Paul was himself born free (Acts 22:28). Silas also, from this account, seems to have been a Roman citizen.
οὐ γὰρ ‘certainly not.’ An expression of indignation. Paul shows a sense of his political rights. Comp. Acts 22:28, 1 Thess 2:2—ὑβρισθέντες (having been insulted). Paul’s political sensibilities influences his diction e.g. Phil 3:20—πολίτευμα. The Romans are proud of their citizenship but our true ‘familia’ is in heaven.
Vs. 38 ἐφοβήθησαν Plutarch, Pomp. 24.
Vs. 40 πρὸς τὴν Λυδίαν