1 The accusations against Stephen were probably true in part and false in part. He had doubtless spoken against Jewish legalism and narrowness and had perhaps shown the bearing of O. T. prophecy and of Jesus' doctrine of fulfilment upon the fate of the Jewish system. The charge that he had spoken "against Moses" had, then, a certain verbal truth which made its moral falseness all the more subtle. The perversion of his words was due in part to their utter incapacity to apprehend Christianity as the fulfilment of their own religion which necessarily involved the passing away of the latter, and partly from their bitter jealousy and hatred of the Christian "sect" and the determination to find some excuse to bring against it all the legal and social forces of the whole Jewish people. In his preaching Stephen had doubtless sought to set forth the distinctive character of Christianity as a religion historically founded in Judaism. but not to be limited and bound by its forms. He but developed germs of truth found in the teaching of Jesus concerning the Sabbath, ceremonial purifications, etc. He was the forerunner of Paul, who brought upon himself the same accusations (Acts xviii. 13; xxi. 21).-G. B. S.
2 E. "And observe how the charge is twofold. `Shall destroy,0' say they, `the place,0' and, 'shall change the customs. And not only twofold, but bitter," etc. So Edd. but Savil. adds, "and shall introduce others instead."
3 A. b.c. N. Ouxi shmeiwn edehqh, kai (A. B. ou) pollhn epedeicato thn parrhsian. Cat. has pollwn for shmeiwn, and reads it affirmatively. Edd. oux shmeia eirgasato; ou (D.F. kai) pollhn k. t. l. Perhaps the passage may he restored thus: "Did he not work miracles-though he needed not many-and show great boldness?"
5 Edd. from E. "And how, it may be asked, doth the Scripture say this concerning Abraham's father? Because it does not trouble itself about matters that are not very essential. What was useful for us to learn, this only it has taught us, that in consequence of his son's vision, he went out with him: the rest it leaves untold, by reason that he died soon after settling in Charran. `Get thee out of thy kindred.0' Here he shows that these men," etc.
7 A. C. N. Ei gar eipen, dwsei, dwsei, dhlon oti, kai ouden par autwn Cat. Ou gar k. t. l. B. Ou gar eipen, dwsei, all, Ouk edwke, dhlon oti ta par ekeinou, kai ouden par autwn. So E. D. F. Edd. except that for dhlon oti ta these have dhlwn oti panta. The meaning seems to be: "They boasted of their possession of the land, as the token of God's favor to themselves. See how Stephen will not allow them to rest in this conceit. Abraham was `the friend of God,0' yet to him `He gave none inheritance,0' etc. True `He promised to give it0': but if God said (that) He will give it (spoke of giving it at some future time); this very circumstance shows that the Jews had it from Abraham, in consequence of God's favor to him; not as deserved by themselves."
8 touj swzomenouj. Edd. from E. touj qaumazomenouj, "they that are admired."-Below. all our mss. and the Catena have 'Epi men twn apostolwn elegon, "In the case of the Apostles, they said." We read, conjecturally, hlgoun.
9 C. N. have ouxi idiwtwn ontwn alla kai elaunomenwn pantoqen: B. F. D. E. Edd. oude ej dikasthrion agomenwn, alla kai el. p. In the translation we assume the full reading to be, ouxi, idiwtwn ontwn, ej d. agomenwn, alla kai e. p. In the next sentence E. alone (followed by Edd.) has the unnecessary alteration, 'Entenqen kai yeudomartuntwn autwn, ou monon ouk ekratoun, all k. t. d. A. ouxi id. ontwn alla kai rhtorwn, ou monon [oux ?] htwnto, alla kai [kata ?] kratoj enikwn, kaitoi k. t. l. i. e. ["their adversaries"] being not private individuals, but public speakers too, they not only were [not] worsted, but mightily conquered: [so that `they were not able to resist0'] though," etc.-Below, for plattontaj: A. E. prattontaj C. we read prattontaj kai plattontaj: after which, Edd. have (from E. alone): "As also in the case of Christ: who did everything to compass His death: insomuch that it became manifest to all men that the battle," etc. And, instead of the next sentence; "And mark what say the false-witnesses, who were got up by those who murderously dragged Him before the council: `We have heard,0'" etc.
10 to euripiston tou oxlou. Edd. add anerqizontej, "irritating the fickle-minded multitude." Below, for 'All' o oxloj o ataktoj k. t. l., A. has 'All' oux o oxloj tauta all oi grammateij. 'Hmeij ak. k. t. l. "But not the multitude (said) this, but the scribes: We have heard," etc. Edd. from E., "But such is envy: it makes them demented whom it possesses, so that they do not so much as consider the meaning of the words they utter."
11 ou para ton nomon. For this, E. alone has kai suggenelan, and instead of the text, "Then came he out," etc. kai to klhronomian entauqa mh labein: so Morel. Ben. Savile retains the reading of E., but adds ou para ton nomon after suggeneian.
15 alla ton agroikon. Edd. from E., alla ton oikethn: which is idle, for it appears below that the paij here is a servant. We supply ekalese or eipen: and indeed an palin eiph below shows that the insult spoken of was some contumelious speech.-Also before Mh nomishj, something needs to be supplied, e.g. Mh su mimhsh touton, "Do not thou imitate him." And perhaps indeed ton agr. may belong to this: "He insulted my boy." But do not thou imitate the rude, uncivil man: deem it not, etc.
16 wj zhtoumen skepasai. A.B.C. The other mss. omit the clause, and Edd. except Savile who reads from N. ou zhtoumen authn spasai, "we do not seek to draw it." We adopt spasai.-Below, E. F. D. Edd. tou Despotou, "thy Master's sufferings," for sautou, which the context shows to be the true reading.
19 Memphibaal, Chrys. here and Synops. Sacr. Script. t. vi. 349. and Theodoret Quaest. 31, in lib. 2. Reg. Memfibosqe, LXX. Elsewhere he is called Meribbaal, 1 Chron. viii. 34. So Jerubbaal, Judg. vi. 32. Jerubbesheth, 2 Sam. xi. 21. Memphibaal is compounded of the two forms. Ben.
2 Ina gar mh toutw (Cat. toutwn, A. C. N. touto B. om.) nomiswsiu euqebeij (N. euebein) einai, dia to legein k. t. l. The wording of the passage is not strictly grammatical, but the sense seems to be as expressed above.-E. D. F. omit this sentence, and substitute, "Seest thou?" So Edd.
3 The relation of v. 6 and 7 to v. 5 is, as Chrys. intimates, to show that the apparent incongruity between the promise of God to give the land to Abraham and his seed, and the fact that Abraham never personally possessed the land, was not accidental nor did it involve the failure of the divine promise. Accompanying the promise were divine assurances (Gen. xv. 13, Gen. xv. 14) that a period of bondage and oppression was to precede the occupation of the land which was to be the inheritance of the nation.-G. B. S.
4 E. Edd. omit this sentence: and below for "Here again," etc. the same substitute: "This happened also in the case of Christ: for indeed Joseph is a type of Him: wherefore also he narrates the history at large, hinting (at this meaning)."
5 If it be too strong language to say, with Chrys., that Joseph is set forth here as a "type of Christ," it is clear that the narrative of his ill-treatment by his brethren, subsequent exaltation and his return of good for evil to those who had sold him into bondage, is meant to suggest that their treatment of Jesus had been similar.-G. B. S.
6 h de anastasij kaq eauthn. This clause is found in the Catena alone. Something seems to be required as the antithesis to the preceding clause, tauta men gar meta proair. anqr. hn-for which E. Edd. have tauta goun ouk apo proair. hn. "These things however did not come of man's purpose."-At the end of the next sentence, Edd. (with E. alone) omit the clause, o ofeilwn apoqanein: and for Eita palin, have, "This he says, by way of showing both him (Moses) as savior, and these ungrateful to their benefactor."
7 Ti gar ei mh aneilon auton tw pragmati; tw logw aneilon wsper kakeinoi. N. and Catena read aneilen, both times, as if the Compiler understood the passage in the sense of a preceding comment extracted from S. Clem. Alex. Strom. "fasi de oi mustai logw monw anelein ton Aiguption: the initiated say that Moses struck the Egyptian dead by a word, as in the Acts Peter is related to have done in the case of Ananias," etc. But Chrys. nowhere thus interprets the fact, and the context, wsper kakeinoi, is against this view.-Below, di on ezh meta Qeon: i. e. the Hebrew whom Moses saved, v. 24, who is here supposed to be one of the parties in the strife mentioned in v. 26. This however not being clear, A., as usual omits: and the innovator assuming the passage to be corrupt, substitutes, di wn esontai meta Qeou, giving them counsel by means of which they shall be with God." So Edd.: only Sav. notes in the margin the genuine reading of the other mss. and Cat.
9 Touto kai entauqa armottei eipein. Edd. from E. only, touto kai autouj hrmotte tote eipein: "This was also suitable for them to say at that time." It was not perceived that the recapitulation begins here. See note 5 p. 102.
12 E. D. F. insert for explanation, patriarxaj de fhsi touj progonouj: "he calls their ancestors, patriarchs." This is the "humoring" spoken of above: in C.'s time, "patriarch" had become a title of honor.
14 Morel. Ben. with E. D. F. omit this clause: Savile transposes it. "But as this (Joseph) reigns there as king where they sold him, so does Christ in His death," etc.-In the next sentence, touto seems to refer to the description in Gen. xli. 42, Gen. xli. 43, of the distinctions conferred upon Joseph, which perhaps Chrys. cited.-After this sentence, Edd. have (from E. only) the formula of recapitulation, 'All' idwmen k. t. l., which is quite misplaced.-Below, A. and the mod. t. insert #Ora, before dia limon oia kataskeuazei.
.B.C.) with en Suxem, making Suxem the name of the place just mentioned-not of the person referred to in the O. T. The Vulgate renders filii Sichem thus coming into collision with the O. T. l. c.-G. B. S.
16 kai paideia kai grammasin, as the comment on epaideuqh v. 22, which must be supplied. Cat. has, kai paideia kai grammata. E. omits the clause, and substitutes, as the beginning of the next sentence, 'Emoi qaumazein eperxetai pwj. "To me it occurs to wonder how he could be forty years," etc. So Edd.
17 ef eautou, b.c. F. D. N. but A. E. Edd. epi toutou "in the case of this man." So perhaps Oecumen. epieikwj nun tw adikounti prosferetai.-Below, E. Edd. "With the same spirit they appear to say the same with reference to Christ, `We have no king but Caesar.0' Thus was it ever habitual to the Jews to act, even when receiving benefits. Do you mark their madness? Him who was to save them, they accuse, by saying, `As thou,0' "etc.
18 So A. B. N. Cat. (in C. the sentence !Idou-'Iakwb is omitted by an oversight caused by the homoeoteleuton 'Iakwb.) Edd. "Not only does he here show that the Angel which appeared unto him was the Angel of the Great Counsel, but he shows also what loving-kindness God exhibits by this manifestation."
19 i. e. "I have heard their groaning:" not simply ("I have come down) because of their calamities." The expression, "I have heard" denotes His ready sympathy.-But the modern text: "He does not simply say, `I have heard;0' but because of their calamities."
22 malista de oudeij auton atimazei. Savile justly retains this sentence from the old text. Montf. rejects it, as superfluous, and disturbing the sense. Downe ap. Sav. proposes oti ouk htimasqn: "non ambit honorem, sed bene secum actum putat si nulla affectus sit ignominia." But in the old text there is no alla before agapa: and the meaning is not, "he thinks himself well off," etc., nor as Ben., "he rejoices that," etc., but, "he is content not to be honored; knowing this at any rate, that nobody can dishonor him."
23 E. Edd. "Thence also the gormandizers (gastrizomenoi) themselves complain of one another, are in ill humor, haste to be rid of the filth within. Still, even after it is cast out," etc. And below:-"fever and diseases. `Yes,0' say you, `they are sick and are disgusting; it is waste of words to tell us all this, and make a catalogue of diseases: for it is I that am diseased. etc, ...while these luxurious livers one may see in good plight, sleek, merry, riding on horseback.0'"
1 Here the innovator, not perceiving that the renewed exposition began above, inserts the formula 'All' idwmen anwqen ta eirhmena, and then has: "This, it says, is Moses, which said, A Prophet, etc. To this, I suppose, Christ refers, when He says, `Salvation is of the Jews,0' hinting at Himself. This is he that was in the wilderness, with the Angel that spake unto him. Lo, again he shows, that it was He," etc. So Edd.
2 The meaning of v. 38 is that Moses became (genomenoj) a mediator between God (represented by the Angel) and the people. Cf. Gal. iii. 19 where the law is said to have been "ordained through angels, by the hand of a mediator" (Moses). No mention is made of angels as revealers of the law in Exodus xix. the first mention of angels in connection with the giving of the law being in a highly poetic passage in Moses' benediction, Deut. xxxiii. 2. (Even here the Heb. text is uncertain. Cf. the lxx. in loco). The function of angels in the giving of the law has a prominent place in later Jewish theology as opposed to the action of mere human ministers. The New Testament notices on the subject reflect this later phase of thought (Cf. Acts vii. 53; Heb. ii. 2). See Lightfoot on Gal. ii. 19.-G. B. S.
3 By logia zwnta are meant living oracles in the sense of operative, effectual, as Jesus affirmed his words to be "spirit and life" (John vi. 63). They contain vital truth. The law was indeed "weak" (Rom. viii. 3) but it was so "through the flesh," i.e. human sinfulness. It was not inherently weak but was so relatively to the great power of sin in man which needed to be overcome.-G. B. S.
4 It is not probable that this passage (v. 39, 40) means that the people proposed to return to Egypt (as Chrys.). In the O. T. the constant representation is that the golden calf (or bull) was worshipped as the image of the divinity who had led them out of Egypt (Ex. xxxii. 4; 1 Kings xii. 28). It seems clearly implied in Ezek. xx. 7, Ezek. xx. 8, Ezek. xx. 24, that the Israelites while in Egypt had been much addicted to the idolatry of the country. The meaning here is that, being discouraged and disappointed on account of Moses' continued absence in the mount, they were ready to transfer their allegiance from Jehovah to some of the divinities to whose worship they had previously been accustomed. The worship of cattle was especially common, as of Apis at Memphis and Mnevis at Heliopolis.-G. B. S.
6 This clause, omitted by A. b.c., is preserved by N. and the Catena. The calf was one, yet they called it Gods: on which St. Chrys. remarks elsewhere, that they added polytheism to idolatry.-The next sentence may perhaps be completed thus: "that they did not even know that there is One God."-Edd. from E.F.D. "So frantic are they, that they know not what they say."
7 dia gar touto epishmainetai. The meaning is: Stephen was accused of speaking against "the customs,"-sacrifices, temple, feasts, etc. Therefore he significantly points to that critical conjuncture. from which these "customs" date their introduction: namely, the Provocation at Horeb. Prior to that, he tells of "living oracles," life-giving precepts: after it, and as its consequence, sacrifices, etc., those statutes which were not good, and ordinances by which a man shall not live, as God says by Ezekiel. Not a word of sacrifice till then: and the first mention is, of the sacrifices offered to the calf. In like manner, "they rejoiced," "the people ate and drank, and rose up to play:" and in consequence of this, the feasts were prescribed: kai eufrainonto, fhsin: dia touto kai eortai.-'Epishmainetai might be rendered, "he marks," "puts a mark upon it" (so the innovator, who substitutes, touto kai Dauid epishmainomenoj legei): we take it passively, "there is a mark set over it-it is emphatically denoted." In the active, the verb taken intransitively means "to betoken or announce itself," "make its first appearance."-In the Treatise adv. Judaeos, iv. §6. tom. i. 624. C. St. Chrysostom gives this account of the legal sacrifices: "To what purpose unto Me is the multitude of your sacrifices? etc. (Isaiah i., 11, ff.) Do ye hear how it is most plainly declared, that God did not from the first require these at your hands? Had He required them, He would have obliged those famous saints who were before the Law to observe this practice. `Then wherefore has He permitted it now?0' In condescension to your infirmity. As a physician in his treatment of a delirious patient, etc.: thus did God likewise. For seeing them so frantic in their lust for sacrifices, that they were ready, unless they got them, to desert to idols: nay not only ready, but that they had already deserted, thereupon He permitted sacrifices. And that this is the reason, is clear from the order of events. After the feast which they made to the demons, then it was that He permitted sacrifices: all but saying: `Ye are mad, and will needs sacrifice: well then, at any rate sacrifice to Me.0'"-(What follows may serve to illustrate the brief remark a little further on, Kai h aixmalwsia kathgoria thj kakiaj.) "But even this, He did not permit to continue to the end, but by a most wise method, withdrew them from it ...For He did not permit it to be done in any place of the whole world, but in Jerusalem only. Anon, when for a short time they had sacrificed, he destroyed the city. Had He openly said, Desist, they, such was their insane passion for sacrificing, would not readily have complied. But now perforce, the place being taken away, He secretly withdrew them from their frenzy." So here: "Even the captivity impeaches the wickedness (which was the cause of the permission of sacrifice.")
8 Our passage here follows the lxx. which speaks of Moloch and Remphan. The terms in the original (vid. R. V.: Amos v. 25-27) are "Siccuth" and "Chiun." It is a disputed point whether these are in the prophecy names of divinities or whether they mean respectively "tabernacle" and "shrine" (or image). The difficulty lies in the ambiguity of the Hebrew text. The name Moloch being akin to the Hebrew word for king (rlm
), confusion might easily arise. The N. T. text varies from the lxx. only in adding the word proskunein (43) to lay emphasis upon the charge of idolatry, and in replacing Damascus by Babylon (43), an interpretation from the standpoint of subsequent history. The statement of our text that the Israelites fell into the worship of these divinities in the wilderness rests upon extra-Pentateuchal tradition, derived, perhaps, from such prohibitions of Moloch-worship and similar idolatries as are found in Lev. xviii. 21, and Deut. xviii. 10. The charge in the prophecy of Amos is a general one referring to the frequent lapses of the people into image-worship down to his own time.-G. B. S.
"tent of meeting"-i. e. the tent where God met the people. From a misunderstanding of the etymology of dcwm
(it being taken from dwc
to witness, instead of from dcy
to assemble) it was translated by marturion-a rendering which has occasioned frequent misunderstanding. Marturion is rightly used in the lxx. to render hzdc
) in Exod. xxv. 22; Num. ix. 15.-G. B. S.
11 E. F. D. Edd. add, "that they knew (Him) not, and that they murdered (Him):" but the meaning is, that they betrayed, and that they murdered: or, as below, Their fathers slew the Prophets, and they, Him Whom they preached.
12 ton ekeina poihsanta, A. b.c. N. Cat. i.e. that Christ, Who, as the Angel, did those works, etc. The modern text touj ek. poihsantaj: that those who did those wickednesses, etc.: and so Oec. seems to have taken it: "If ye killed them who preached Him to come, no wonder that ye kill Me," etc.-Below, for Oi toinun antipoiountai tou nomou, kai elegon, A. B. N. (N. corrected outoi nun) have ou toinun k. t. l. and A. legontej: "Therefore they claim not the Law (on their side), saying," etc.
13 'Aggelwn (53) cannot refer (as Chrys.) to the Jehovah-angel of the bush. It refers to angels as the mediators in the giving of the law, an idea which appears in the lxx., the N. T. elsewhere (Gal. iii. 19; Heb. ii. 2) and is prominent in later Jewish theology (Cf. Josephus, Ant. XV. v. 3) Vid. note *, p. 107.-G. B. S.
15 Edd. from E. Sainei o diaboloj pollakij wj o kuwn, alla gnwtw paj oti. "The devil fawns full oft as the dog, but let every man know that," etc. A. b.c. N. wj o kuwn eidetw (idetw X.) oti. We restore the true reading by omitting wj. "The dog" is anger: the devil sainei, not as the dog, but upon the dog, as the allotrioj in the preceding sentence. "Let our faithful watch-dog see at once that he is an intruder." In the following sentence the image is so far incongruous, as sainwmen here has a different reference: viz. "as the dog fawns upon the friend though beaten, so let us," etc.
16 an de autouj kai trefh o allotrioj kai outw blaptousin (A. blayousin). The antithesis seems to require the sense to be, "While, if the stranger even feed them, for all that, they do him a mischief." But the words trefh and blaptousin are scarcely suitable in the sense, trofhn didw and lumainontai. Edd. have from E. alone, pwj ou mallon blayousin; in the sense, "If however the stranger (not merely caresses but) also (regularly) feeds them, how shall they not do more hurt (than good)?" i. e. "If the devil be suffered to pamper our anger, that which should have been our safeguard will prove a bane to us."-Perhaps this is the sense intended in the old reading; but if so, kai outw is unsuitable.
1 In our mss. the Homily opens abruptly with the question, Pwj ouk elabon ek twn eirhmenwn aformhn eij to [mh Cat.] anelein auton; which is left unanswered, till some way further on. See note 2.-Montf. notes, "Unus, eisto mh anelein." But this reading does not appear in any of our mss. though the Catena has it. Edd. from E, have; "How it was that they did not take occasion from what he had said to kill him, but are still mad, and seek an accusation, one may well wonder. So ever in trouble are the wrong-doers. Just then as the chief priests, in their perplexity, said," etc. F. D. adopting part of this addition, "but are still mad, and seek an accusation. See once more," etc.
2 ouden padxomen. Kai eboulonto, fhsin (om. D. F.) anelein auton. (as if these words were part of the sacred text. Then) Profasin ('Alla prof. D. F.) hqelon eulogon k. t. l. A. b.c. D. F. The modern text substitutes, 'Eboulonto men oun anelein: all' ou poiousi touto, aitian qelontej eulogon k. t. l.-Oecumenius, however, begins his comment thus: Ei eboulonto anelein, pwj ouk aneilon e/qewj tote; #Oti profasin eulogon k. t. l. Hence we restore the true reading, and the proper order. Namely, for Kai we read Ei, and transpose to this place, as part of the interlocution, the question pwj ouk elabon-; So, the fhsin is explained, the question is followed by its answer, and there is no abruptness.
3 touto de eusebeiaj hn to rhma. i. e. all that Stephen had spoken in accusation of their wickedness, especially v. 51-53, was the language of piety, of a devout man zealous for the honor of God: they could not say, "This is impious;" and they were waiting to catch at something which might enable them to cry out, "He blasphemeth:" and, disappointed of this, they were cut to the heart.-Below Ben. retains (from E. alone) mh palin kainon ti peri auton allo genhtai, though Savile had restored the genuine reading mh palin aidesimwteroj genhtai. They had desired to injure his reputation for sanctity, and now feared that his speech would have the opposite result.
4 Edd. from E. outw de autw legei fanhnai, wj pou dieceisin, ina kan outw decwntai ton logon. "And Stephen describes Christ as appearing to Him in this manner, as one somewhere relates at large. in order that," etc.: meaning, that he might have said "sitting at the right hand," but forbears to do this, because it was offensive to the Jews, and accordingly tewj peri thj anastaewj kinei logon, kai fhsin auton istasqai. The clause wj pou dieceisin seems to have been intended by the innovator, not as part of the text, but as a gloss, "as is somewhere shown at large." But what Chrys. says is, that Christ was pleased to appear in this attitude to Stephen for the sake of the Jews, in order, etc.-Hom. vi. in Ascens. (Cat. in 1,) he says, "Why standing, and not sitting? To show that He is in act to succor His martyr. For thus it is said also of the Father, `Stand up, O God, and, Now will I stand up, saith the Lord, I will set him in safety.0'"-Below, Dia touto k. t. l. Comp. de Mundi Crest. Hom. ii. t. vi. 447. C. "Why did He cause the face of Stephen to shine? Because he was to be stoned as a blasphemer for saying `Behold,0' etc., therefore God, forestalling this, crowned his face with angelic beauty, to show those thankless ones, that if he were a blasphemer, he would not have been thus glorified." But E. (Edd.) apo toutou stoxazomai dedoc. "I conjecture that it was from this vision (Erasm.,from this time: Ben. hence) that his face was glorified." In the next sentence, Edd. from E. di wn epebouleuonto ekeinoi, di autwn ebouleto autouj ekkalesasqai, ei kai mhden pleon egeneto. Kai ekbalontej k. t. l. "by means of the very machinations wherewith those were assailed He desired to call (the doers) themselves to Himself, even if nothing more had been done."
8 Chrys, seems to assume that andrej eulabeij refers to Christian men, a view that has been taken by some modern expositors (as Ewald and DeWette). It is better to understand by the term. pious Jews who were favorably disposed to Christianity (So Meyer, Olshausen, Lechler, Lange, Gloag, Hackett). The usage of eulabhj in the N. T. favors this view as it is applied to devout persons who were not Christians (vid. ii. 5; Luke ii. 25) in every case, except in xxii. 12 when it refers to Ananias, a Christian, but is used in describing him in a legal point of view: eulabhj kata ton nomon. Moreover, if Christians had been meant, they would not probably have been designated by so vague a term, but, as uniformly, would have been called disciples or brethren. The burial of Stephen by devout Jews recalls the burial of Jesus by Joseph of Arimathaea and Nicodemus (John xix. 38, John xix. 39).-G. B. S.