1 It has been much disputed whether the charge: "Thou teachest apostacy from Moses," etc., was true or not. There certainly was truth in the charge. Paul maintained that the Mosaic law, as such, was not binding upon Christians. But it was against those who made it a yoke of bondage upon believers, that he waged a polemic. Where there was no imposition of the law as necessary to salvation, Paul in no way antagonized it, but rather trusted to the free working of the principles of the gospel to gradually accomplish the abolition of its rites and forms. The truth seems to be that Paul was tolerant of Judaism where it did not impose burdens upon believers or threaten the completeness and sufficiency of the gospel; he even accommodated himself to Jewish requirements. as in shaving his head at Cenchrea and circumcising Timothy. He never unnecessarily opposed the law of Moses, but taught that it had been fulfilled in Christ. So far as he accommodated himself to its ceremonies, it was only that he might remove prejudice and so win the Jews to Christ.-G. B. S.
2 Old text: malista gar ekeinoij sugxronisei, as the comment on oi apo thj 'Asiaj 'Ioudaioi, meaning apparently that his arrival at Jerusalem would naturally fall at the same time with that of the Jews who, like himself, came from the same parts. Mod. text transfers the comment to the first clause of the verse, "And as the days were about to be fulfilled: ora pwj malista dh autoij egxronisei," it is not easy to see with what meaning.
4 en toij signoij auton embale. Ammonius in the Catena, "It was a custom of the Jews to utter this cry against the just as they did against the Lord, Aire auton! i. e. away with Him from among the living." Hence Oecumen. combining this with the explanation in the text, "It was the custom of the Jews, etc. But some say, That is, what they say with us," etc. And so mod. text, "It was a custom of the Jews to say this against those whom they would condemn, as also in the case of Christ they appear doing this, and saying, 'Aron auton! that is, Make him to disappear from among the living. "But some," what among us they say according to the Roman custom, En toij signoij auton embale, the same is the Aire auton.
6 This vow appears to have been the Nazarite vow described in Num. vi. 1-21, taken by the apostle as an accommodation to Jewish prejudices and to allay the suspicions of the legal party in Jerusalem. This was done upon the recommendation of James, the "Bishop" of the church, and his associates. The significance of Paul's paying the expenses, is, perhaps, that the period during which the others vow had run was on this condition reckoned to his account also. It is noticeable that the party of James distinctly admits that adherence to the legal ceremonies is not required of the Gentile Christians; it is equally important to notice that Paul yielded to the advice to take this view, as a concession in a matter of indifference, since he was living for the time as a Jew among Jews, that he might give no needless offence and might win the more. It was not a compromise, but an expedient concession to convictions and prejudices which it was not wise or necessary to oppose or increase.-G. B. S.
7 Mod. text, "Using this economy then, he himself at a later time (?) accuses Peter, and he does not do this aplw." St. Chrysostom's view of St. Peter's dissimulation at Antioch as an "economy," is most fully given in his exposition of the passage, Xomment. in Gal. xap. ii. <\=a7_4, 5.
8 Mod. text adds, "But as for the sicarii, some say they were a kind of robbers, so called from the swords they bore, which by the Romans are called sicoe: others, that they were of the first sect among the Hebrews. For there are among them three sects, generally considered (aireseij ai genikai): Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes who are also called osioi, for that is the meaning of the name `Essenes,0' on account of their reverend manner of life: but the same (?) are also called sicarii, because of their being zealots." For a further illustration of the way in which the modern text was formed, especially in respect of its use of the Catena (see p. 279, note 3), compare the latter with Oecumenius on this passage. The Catena, namely, cites from Origen: "Among the Jews are treij aireseij genikai Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes: these (last) exercise a more reverend manner of life, being lovers one of another and temperate: whence also they are called Essenes, i. e. osioi: but others called them (?) sicarii, i. e. zealots." (Oecumen. using the Catena, makes a continuous exposition from Chrys., Origen, and Josephus. Mod. text from the same materials, interpolates the text of Chrys, as above.
10 The cupbearer may be Narcissus (Rom. xvi. 11): the name of the concubine is not mentioned. In one of his earliest works, Adv. Oppugn. Vitoe Monast. i. §3. t. i. p. 59. D. St. Chrys. relates that Nero cast St. Paul into prison, and in the end beheaded him, in his rage at the loss of a favorite concubine, converted by him to the faith.
13 kai mh meta thj hmeteraj blabhj. Mod. text and Edd. kai ei mh, which is ambiguous. "The thing to be considered is, whether they are offended dikaiwj kai mh meta t. h. b. justly, and not with concomitant hurt to ourselves should we give way." As in the case afterwards mentioned, the sitting at meat in an idol's temple; the "weak brothers" were offended dikaiwj, and to abstain from such conduct was not attended with any moral hurt or loss to the men of "knowledge."
14 otan toinun adiaforon h to kwluma, ginesqw. Ben, quando igitur indifferens est, abstineatur. But the kwluma (which is overlooked in this rendering) seems to mean, the hindrance to the apotacasqai, which latter will be the subject to ginesqw. For instance, if the impediment urged by others against a person's taking the monastic vows be a thing indifferent, let him take them. Else, if we were to look to this only-viz. that this or that man is offended-pollwn exomen aposthnai-many are the right undertakings we should have to forego or desist from: as on the other hand were we to make it a rule to despise all considerations of offence, we should have to be the ruin of many a brother.
15 Namely, in a matter where the duty of persisting in our course is plain-viz. where the other is offended ou dikaiwj, and to give way would be meta thj hmeteraj blabhj-then, even though great evils to him or others result from our not giving way, we must take no notice of the offence, must allow it no weight.
1 Eita ina mh nomisqh to eqnoj 'Ioudaioj, legei thn qrhskeian: kai gar kai allaxou ennomon eauton Xristou kalei. Ti (A. b.c. add oun, Cat. dh) touto estin; (Mod. text adds, Pauloj yeudetai\ #Apage) Ti oun\ ouk hrnhsato\ k. t. l. The sense is confused by omission and transposition. It seems to be this: He gives the tribune to understand that he is a Roman: but because he would not have the Jews to suppose that he was not a Jew, therefore he declares his religion, that he is a Jew. And herein was no denial of his Christianity, etc. See below on v. 3. ina mh palin nomiswsi to eqnoj allo, thn qrhskeian ephgagen. Hence we restore the sense as in the text.-Oecumen. gives it. "He immediately drew him off from this surmise, kai to eqnoj kai thn qrhskeian eipwn, as in fact he elsewhere calls himself, Under the law to Christ."
2 Mod. text omits the article. 9O tw Xristw pistenwn, as we take it, is the answer to the question, ti dh touto estin; In the next sentence (which Edd. separate from this only by a comma) he says: in the same sense he calls himself and Peter, fusei 'Ioudaioi, "born Jews (not proselytes,) and Jews still." But Ammonius in the Catena: "I am a man which am a Jew: for we Christians are fusei 'Ioudaioi, as confessing the true faith: which is what the name Judah signifies."
3 The whole purpose of Paul's defence here is to appease the prejudice against him as an apostate from Moses. He addresses the people of Jerusalem in their own tongue and as "brethren." He shows them that although born in a Greek city, he had received his education in Jerusalem, under one of their most famous Rabbis. He sketches his history as a zealous adherent of Judaism. After his conversion he did not desert the religion of his fathers. It was while praying in the temple that the call of God came to him which summoned him to go as an apostle to the Gentiles. From this apology, it would be seen how far Paul was from despising the Mosaic law and also, how manifestly providential had been the call by which he had been set apart to a distinct work among the Gentiles. It is a guarded defence which neither antagonizes the law, nor admits its binding force over the apostle or his converts.
5 Krinetai par anqrwpoij (tisin o Qeoj add. mod. text) oti ouk esti Qeoj. The subject, not expressed, is Christ. He is brought before the bar of men's judgment for trial whether He be God: so below touj dikazontaj.
7 Kan fanerwj ou kataginwskh (b.c. -ei) dia to dogma, all' apodexetai k. t. l. Ben, retains this, in the sense, saltem aperte non damnabit propter doma: taking kan in different senses in this and the former clause. Ed. Par. Ben. 2, Legendum videtur fanerwj oun katag. Licet sit quispiam valde efferus, licet aperte ob dogma condemnet, at clam etc. Erasm. Etiam si per dogma non condemnetur. The emendation is sure and easy: kan fanerwj SOU kataginwskh. So below. Polloi de kai kataginwskontej autwn dia to dogma, aidountai dia ton bion.
8 Old text echxoteron: a word unknown to the Lexicons, and of doubtful meaning. If we could suppose a comparative of the perfect participle in kwj (analogous to the comparison of errwmenoj and asmenoj), ecesthkotero/ would suit the sense very well: but such a form seems to be quite unexampled.-Mod. text anohtoteron. Then: "Even as madmen have no self-possession, so this has no self-possession. When therefore is this to come to consciousness of itself, having such a dizziness' which it were well," etc.
1 The sense is confused in old text by misplacing the portions of sacred text. Mod. text "witnesses of the truth of Christ speaking boldly. But the Jews," etc. v. 21-24, which verses are followed in old text by fhsin: aire auton ou gar kaqhkei auton zhn. Below, mod. text "or the Jews themselves also," and omits "or if it Were not so, to have ordered him to be scourged."
2 The words, "I will send thee to the Gentiles," were those at which the Jews took offence. That a word should come from heaven to Paul in the Temple, commanding him to leave the chosen people and the Holy City and go to the uncircumcised heathen, was a statement verging upon blasphemy. This admission they would regard as proof of Paul's apostasy from Moses. It implied that he regarded the heathen as standing upon the same plane as themselves. The thought roused all their native bigotry. Beyond "this word" they would not hear him, nor did they think that one who should so estimate the privileges and character of the Jews as compared with the Gentiles was fit to live.-G. B. S.
3 Proeteinan auton toij imasin is commonly rendered, as here, "When they stretched him out, or bound him with thongs." But this rendering seems to overlook the force of pro in the verb and the force of the article toij. The preferable interpretation seems to be, (Thayer's Lex.): "When they had stretched him out for the thongs, i. e. to receive the blows of the thongs, by tying him up to a beam or pillar." (So Meyer, DeWette, Lechler, Gloag).-G. B. S.
4 Mod. text entirely mistaking the sense, interpolates, "On which account also the tribune fears on hearing it. And why, you will say, did he fear?" as if it meant, The tribune would have been afraid to be condemned for this, etc.
5 Meaning that all provincial subjects of the Roman Empire came to be called Romans, only in the time of this Emperor: therefore in St. Paul's time it was a great thing to be able to call one's self a Roman. If it means, "All the citizens of Tarsus," the remark is not apposite. Certain it is that Tarsus. an urbs libera by favor of M. Anthony, enjoyed neither jus coloniarum nor jus civitatis until long afterwards, and the Apostle was not a Roman because a citizen of Tarsus. This however is not the point of St. Chrysostom's remark. In the Catena and Oecumen. it will be seen, that in later times the extended use of the name "Roman" as applied to all subjects of the Roman Empire made a difficulty in the understanding of this passage. Thus Ammonius takes it that St. Paul was a "Roman," because a native of Tarsus which was subject to the Romans (so Oec.): and that the Jews themselves for the like reason were Romans; but these scorned the appellation as a badge of servitude; Paul on the contrary avouched it, setting an example of submission to the powers that be.-After this sentence mod. text interpolates, "Or also he called himself a Roman to escape punishment: for," etc.
7 profasin einai to pragma kai to eipein auton 9Rwmaion ton Paulon: kai iswj. ...We read tw eipein and kai yeudesqai ton P. iswj. Mod. text "But the tribune by answering, `with a great sum,0' etc., shows that he suspected it to be a pretext, Paul's saying that he wasa Roman: and perhaps he surmised this from Paul's apparent insignificance."
8 Mod. text interpolates: "So far was it from being a falsehood, his saying, etc., that he also gained by it, being loosed from his chains. And in what way, hear." And below, altering the sense: "He no longer speaks to the tribune, but to the multitude and the whole people."
9 Mod. text "When he ought to have been pricked to the heart, because (Paul) had been unjustly bound to gratify them, he even adds a further wrong, and commands him to be beaten : which is plain from the words subjoined."
10 Mod. text "Now some say, that he knowing it speaks ironically (or feigns ignorance, eirwneuetai); but it seems to me, that he did not at all know that it was the high priest: otherwise he would even have honored him: wherefore," etc. In old text tinej fasi, placed before oti ouk hdein, k. t. l. requires to be transposed.
13 Other interpretations are given in the Catena and Oecum. "Anonym.: The high priest being a hypocrite deserved to be called a `whited wall.0' Whence also Paul says he did not even know him as high priest, since it is the work of a high priest to save the flock put under his charge: but this man made havoc upon it, etc. Severus : Paul justly reproached him, but then, as if repenting, said: `I knew not,0' etc. Not know that he was high priest? Then how saidst thou, `And sittest thou to judge me?0'-But he pretends ignorance: an ignorance which does no harm, but is an `economy0' (oikonomousan): for reserve (metaxeirismoj) may be more forcible than speaking out (parrhsia): an unseasonable parrhsia often hinders the truth: a seasonable metax. as often advances it."
14 Other methods of dealing with Paul's much debated statement: "I did not know that he was the high priest," besides the view given in the text (with which agree Beza, Wolff, Lechler, et al.) are: (1) Paul did not perceive who it was that addressed him and thus did not know that it was the high priest whom he rebuked (Alford). (2) Paul did not acknowledge Ananias to be high priest; he would not recognize so unjust a man as a real high priest (Calvin, Meyer, Stier). (3) Ananias was not high priest at this time (Lightfoot, Whiston, Lewin). (4) Paul did not recollect or consider that it was the high priest whom he was addressing (Bengel, Olshausen, Neander, Schaff, Hackett, Conybeare and Howson, Gloag). In this view Paul apologizes for his rash words, spoken inadvertently and without reflection, by adding: "for it is written, Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people." Baur and Zeller suppose that the apostle never said what he is reposed as saying. The choice appears to lie between views (2) and (4).-G. B. S.
15 Mod. text omits the whole of the portion marked (a). The sense is: St. Paul is concerned to explain how it was that having been bred and taught in Jerusalem, he did not remain there. It was by command of Christ in a vision that he departed. In fact he could not stay there unless, etc. Accordingly we find him everywhere fleeing about from place to place, like one exiled from his own land. The words which are corrupt, are: ouk ekei emenen\ oude ekei dietriben (oude gar echn ekei diatribeinj) ei mh muria kat' autwn (autou A) kataj-keuasai (sic) hqele pantaxou: kaqaper tij fugaj perifugwn.
16 to outw paradocon, viz. that the Jews would not receive the testimony of one, who from his known history had, of all men, the greatest claim to be heard by them: "`Lord, they know,0' etc., therefore surely they will listen to me." (So St. Chrysostom constantly interprets these words: see Cat. in loco.) But Christ did not gratify his wish for information on this point: He only bade him depart.-The innovator, who has greatly disfigured this Homily by numerous interpolations, has here: "did not teach him what he must do."
17 Better: "they cast off their clothes" as a signal of their anger and readiness to stone Paul. Others understand it to mean: waving their garments as a signal of their assent to the exclamations against Paul of those who were near.-G. B. S.
18 touto malista hporhsan an oi 'Ioudaioi: i. e. perhaps "they would be at a loss to know the reason of his being brought before them loosed, not knowing what had passed between him and the tribune." Mod. text amplifies: "This he ought to have done at the outset, and neither to have bound him, nor have wished to scourge him, but to have left him, as having done nothing such as that he should be put in bonds. `And he loosed him,0' it says, etc. This above all the Jews knew not what to make of."
19 eidon anqrwpon qanatwnta: ei gar touto hn, kan esighsen: kai labwn auton aphlqen: kan ecedwken auton autoij o xiliarxoj. The meaning (see above p. 289.) may be: "The wrong was not to be put up with, for to hold his peace under such treatment would have been to embolden the tribune to sacrifice him to his enemies, as a person who might be insulted with impunity." But the passage is corrupt: perhaps it should be ouk (mod. text has outwj) eidon anqr. qan. "They did not see before them one who was willing to die, i.e. to let them take away his life. For if this were the case, he had but to hold his peace, and the tribune would," etc. Mod. text "In such wise saw they a man ready to die; and they would not endure it. `I knew not that he was the high priest.0' Why then: the rebuke was of ignorance. For if this were not the case, kan labwn auton aphlqe kai ouk esighse, kan ecedwken, k. t. l."
20 Mod. text quite perverting the sense: "Obeying the law, not from a wish to show (endeicasqai) to them: for those he had even strongly condemned. For the law's sake, therefore, he defends himself, not for the sake of the people, with reason," etc.
23 oti parufestasin autaij ai kakiai, th men parrhsia qrasuthj. th de epieikeia anandria. It is seldom possible to match the ethical terms of one language with exact equivalents in another. Here qrasuthj, as opposed to parrhsia "courage in speaking one's mind," is not merely "audacity," or "hardihood," or "pugnacity," or "the spirit of the bully," though it may be applied to all these. On the whole, "forwardness" seems to be most suitable for the antithesis: the one character comes forward boldly and speaks up in the cause of truth and justice; the other thrusts itself forward, in its own cause, for resentment of wrongs done to one's self. Below, in connection with anandria it means what we call "bullying."
24 All our mss. o gar uper eautou mh algwn, duskolwj uper eterwn alghsei, but Sav. marg. ouk alghsei; which we adopt as indispensable to the sense. In the next sentence, C. omits the mh before amunwn, and A. the ouk before amuneitai.
25 'Ekeinoj men gar oude anagkaiaj apaitoushj xreiaj, thj ousiaj aptetai twn xrhmatwn, outoj de ekeinou genoito an adelfoj. We leave this as it stands, evidently corrupt. Something is wanting after outoj de. "The former, the oikonomikoj, is careful not to touch his principal or capital, but will confine his outlay within his income: the latter," etc. But oude anagk. ap. xreiaj is hardly suitable in the former case, and should rather come after outoj de "the latter, the niggard, though the need be ever so urgent, has not the heart to touch either principal or income"-or something to that effect. Then perhaps, pwj oun outoj ekeinou genoito an adelfoj; Mod. text "For the former spends all upon proper objects; the latter, not even when urgent need requires, touches the principal of his money. The oikon. therefore will to brother to the megaloy."
2 kai en toutw, viz. in saying "I am a Pharisee," kai en tw meta tauta, i. e. "Of the hope of resurrection," etc. Mod. text "but is also permitted to contribute somewhat of himself, which also he does and kai en t., kai en tw m. t. both on this occasion and on that which followed (?) he pleads for himself, wishing," etc.
3 Mod text "Either because spirit and angel is one or because the term amfotera is taken not only of two but of three." (This is taken from Ammonius in the Catena. The innovator adds): "the writer therefore uses it kataxrhstikwj, and not according to strict propriety."
4 The last clause in the Vulgate text, mh qeomaxwmen, is unknown to St. Chrys., being in fact quite a modern addition. Chrys. interprets it as an aposiopesis-viz. poion egklhma; St. Isidore of Pelusium in the Cat. to gar ei h esti: tout' estin, h pn. elalhsen autw h aggeloj. Ammonius ibid. "Either the sentence is left incomplete, viz. but whether a spirit or an angel has spoken to him ...is not certain: or, it is to be spoken as on the part of the Pharisees, Eide (5) pn. k. t. l. that is, Behold, he is manifestly asserting the resurrection, taught (kathxhqeij) either by the Holy Ghost or by an angel the doctrine of the resurrection." Mod. text using the latter: "Where is the crime, if an angel has spoken to him, if a spirit, and taught (kathxhqeij) by him, he thus teaches the doctrine of the resurrection?" (and then, adopting the modern addition mh qeom.), "then let us not stand off from him, lest warring with him, we be found also fighting against God."
5 The Pharisees were uniformly more favorably inclined to Christianity than the rival sect of the Sadducees. The latter, as disbelieving in the resurrection and the spirit-world, would be especially prejudiced against a system which made these tenets so central. The Pharisees, on the other hand, agreed on these points with Christianity. It is evident that in his defence here before the Sanhedrin Paul wishes to conciliate the Pharasaic party so far as can be done by emphasizing his own agreement with them respecting the resurrection. They, as believers in this doctrine, would have less prejudice against Paul's teaching concerning Christ's resurrection. In asserting his Pharasaic ancestry, Paul wishes to establish a point of connection with them and thus gain a foothold for the defence of his central truth of Christ's resurrection, which justifies him in being His disciple and servant.-G. B. S.
6 To this question mod. text interpolates for answer from Ammonius in the Catena, "that is, they declared themselves to be out of the pale of the faith to Godward, if they should not do that which was determined against Paul."
8 Mod. text "And with reason the tribune does this (i. e. sends Paul away): for of course he did not wish either to gratify (xarisasqai) or to assent." But the meaning is: "If he had not been informed of their plot, he would have been embarrassed by the request, not liking to refuse, nor yet to grant it."