Bibelkommentare

Acts 28:1. διασωθέντες, see on Acts 27:43. Used by Josephus of his own shipwreck and escape, Vita, 3, and in Xen. and Thuc. of coming safely to a place.—τότε ἐπέγ.: not imperfect as in Acts 27:39; here denoting the immediate recognition of the place after they had once gained safety (Weiss, Rendall, C.H.). St. Paul’s Bay is several miles distant from Valetta, the harbour which the sailors doubtless knew previously, see also Breusing, p. 190, Vars, p. 243, and J. Smith, pp. 140 and 148, 4th edition.—Μελίτη, see critical note; Malta, cf. Diod. Sic., v., 12, Strabo, vi., 2, Ovid, Fasti, iii., 567, Sicula Melita as distinct from Melita Illyrica (Meleda). There is no need here to refute the view that the latter, in the Adriatic Sea on the coast of Dalmatia, is meant. This view depends chiefly upon the narrow view of the meaning of the Adria Acts 27:27, see also below on Acts 28:2-3. It was first put forward in the tenth century by Constantine the Porphyrogenite, and was advocated in the last century by a Dalmatian monk, Padre Georgi, himself a native of Meleda, no doubt jealous for the honour of his birthplace and his monastery. Its chief champion may be said to be W. Falconer, in his Dissertation on St. Paul’s Voyage, 1817, republished in 1870 by his nephew, Judge Falconer. This last was an unsuccessful attempt to controvert the arguments of J. Smith in favour of Malta, who may be said to have established his case to demonstration (see for a candid description of Falconers view “Adria” (Dickson), Hastings’ B.D.). More recent nautical authorities have most decisively confirmed the view of J. Smith, cf. Breusing, p. 190, and Vars, p. 242. Quite apart from the strong local tradition in favour of Malta, and the testimony of the Apocryphal Acta Petri et Pauli in favour of Γαυδομελέτη (Gosso-Malta) (for references to Lipsius’ edition, Wendt and Zöckler, in loco), it is not too much to say that Meleda could not have been reached without a miracle under the circumstances of weather described in the narrative, cf. Dean Howson’s “Melita,” B.D.1, ii., pp. 315–317, and Zahn (in answer to Mommsen), Einleitung, ii., p. 422.

Acts 28:2. βάρβαροι, i.e., they were not a Greek-speaking population, cf. Romans 1:14 (not barbarians in the modern sense of rude and uncivilised); they were of Phœnician descent, and came under the Roman dominion in the second Punic War, Livy, xxi., 51. Ramsay, St. Paul, p. 343, sees in the title an indication that the writer was himself of Greek nationality. For the use of the term in classical Greek, and by Philo and Josephus, see “Barbarian” (F. C. Conybeare), Hastings’ B.D., Grimm-Thayer, sub v., and Mr. Page’s note. (In 2Ma 2:21 the writer describes Judas Maccabæus as chasing “barbarous multitudes,” τὰ βάρβαρα πλήθη, retorting on the Greeks the epithet habitually applied by them to all nations not their own, Speaker’s Commentary.) See further the evidence of coins and inscriptions in Zahn, Einleitung, ii., 422, proving as against Mommsen that the Phœnician tongue had not died out in the island, and cf. above, Introd., p. 8.—οὐ τὴν τυχ., cf. Acts 19:11, “nocommon kindness,” R.V. (and so A.V. in Acts 19:11).—φιλαν.: see note on Acts 27:3. The word is found in LXX, Esther 8:13, 2Ma 6:22; 2Ma 14:9, 3Ma 3:15; 3Ma 3:18, and in classical Greek, but it was a word which a physician would be very likely to employ, for Hippocrates speaks of “philanthropy” in a physician as ever accompanying a real love of his profession. Galen distinguishes between those who healed through “philanthropy” and those who healed merely for gain, and even a more generous diet for the sick was called φιλανθρωποτέρα τροφή, Hobart, p. 296. The word is used here only and in Titus 3:4 in N.T.—ἀνάψ. γὰρ πυράν, Luke 12:49, Jam 3:5; if we read the simple verb (see critical note) we have it three times with λύχνον in Luke 8:16; Luke 11:33; Luke 15:8, and nowhere else in N.T. (except with meaning “to touch”). πυράν: only here and in Acts 28:3 in N.T., cf. Jdt 7:5, 1Ma 12:28, 2Ma 1:22; 2Ma 10:36 (see H. and R.), and similar phrases in classical Greek.—προσελάβοντο, cf. Acts 17:5, Acts 18:26 for similar use, and five times by St. Paul; cf. 2Ma 10:15, see critical note.—ἐφεστῶτα, cf. Polyb., xviii. 3, 7; in N.T. 2 Timothy 4:6, only in Luke and Paul, præsentem, Wetstein, “present,” A. and R.V. Weiss and De Wette take it as meaning that the rain suddenly came upon them.—ψῦχος: this and the mention of the rain prove that St. Paul’s ship could not have encountered a sirocco wind, i.e., from the south-east, for this only blows for two or three days, and even in November is hot and sultry (Hackett). W.H[424] read ψύχος, but Weiss, Wendt, Blass as above, see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 68.

[424] Westcott and Hort’s The New Testament in Greek: Critical Text and Notes.

Acts 28:3. συστρέψαντος: here only in Acts, but cf. Acts 11:27, Acts 16:39, in [425] text; = exemplum αὐτουργίας, Bengel. Cf. Matthew 17:22, W.H[426], R.V. margin; of collecting men, 2Ma 14:30.—φρυγάνων: brushwood, copse; the furze still growing near St. Paul’s Bay would well afford material for a fire (Lewin), and it may be quite true that wood is found nowhere else but in a place at a distance from the Bay; in classical Greek used in plural for dry sticks, especially firewood; here only in N.T., but several times in LXX, for straw, stubble, and bramble.—τι before πλῆθος, see critical note: implying as much as he could carry, Weiss; πλ. used elsewhere of persons.—ἔχιδνα: the objection that no poisonous serpents are found to-day in Malta, like that based on the absence of wood in Acts 28:2, may well be dismissed as “too trivial to deserve notice; such changes are natural and probable in a small island, populous and long civilised,” Ramsay, St. Paul, p. 343, Breusing, p. 191, Vars, p. 243; so too J. Smith, p. 151, 4th edition, refers to the gradual disappearance of the viper in Arran as the island became more frequented, and cf. Hackett’s note for similar proof. Mr. Lewin, as late as 1853, believed that he saw a viper near St. Paul’s Bay, St. Paul, ii. 200.—ἐκ: “out of,” but if ἀπό “by reason of,” R.V. margin, “from the heat,” the viper numbed by the cold felt the sudden heat, and was restored to activity, cf. on its habits (Hackett), ἀπό “in causæ significatu sæpe apud Græcos,” Grotius, Bengel. cf. Acts 20:9, and Luke 21:26.—ἐξελθοῦσα, see critical note. διεξ. supported by Meyer and Alford, as if the serpent glided out through the sticks.—θέρμης: only in Luke in N.T., but in classics and in LXX, Job 6:17, Psalms 18(19):6, Ecclesiastes 4:11, Sir 38:28; often used in medical writers instead of θερμότης (Hobart), but the latter is also used in Hipp.—καθῆψε: only here in N.T., but frequent in classical Greek, and usually in middle, although not found in LXX, cf. however Symm., καθάπτεσθαι, Cant. i. 6, cf. Epict., Diss., iii., 20, 10, i.e., τοῦ τραχήλου: (Grimm): Blass, Page, Felten render “bit,” momordit. So Nösgen and Zöckler, who think that this is evidently meant from the context, although not necessarily contained in the verb itself; Dioscorides used it of poisonous matter introduced into the body (Hobart, p. 288). Blass thus expresses the force of the aorist, “momento temporis hoc factum est, priusquam . manum retraxisset”.

[425] R(omana), in Blass, a first rough copy of St. Luke.

[426] Westcott and Hort’s The New Testament in Greek: Critical Text and Notes.

Acts 28:4. τὸ θηρίον: “the beast,” R.V. Although this is the meaning of the Greek word, it is to be noted that St. Luke uses it here exactly as the medical writers, who applied it to venomous serpents—in particular, to the viper, ἔχιδνα (so Aristotle), and an antidote made chiefly from the flesh of vipers went by the name ἡ θηριακή (Hobart, Zahn, Knabenbauer), and those bitten by a viper were called θηριόδηκτοι.—κρεμ. ἐκ: “hanging from,” R.V., it clung by its mouth to the hand of Paul, construction as in classical Greek, cf. 2Ma 6:10.—πάντως: only in Luke and Paul, expressing strong affirmation, cf. Acts 21:22, and Luke 4:23; cf. Tob 14:8, 2Ma 3:13.—φονεύς, a murderer, and therefore justice demands his life, death for death; they saw that he was a prisoner perhaps from his chains (Bengel); at all events the solders would have guarded him, as we may infer from Acts 27:42.—ἡ Δίκη: “justice,” R.V., cf. Hesiod, Theog., 902; so in Soph., Ant., 544; Œd. Col., 1384; for the personification cf. Wis 1:8; Wis 11:20, and several instances in 4 Macc., see Grimm-Thayer, sub v. The Maltese may have heard the name from the Greeks or Romans, or they may have honoured a goddess of their own, whose name Luke here represents by ἡ Δ., “debile lumen naturæ … nec quis sit ὁ Δίκαιος Justus Ultor norunt”, Bengel.—διασωθέντα, see on Acts 27:43.—οὐκ εἴασεν: “hath not suffered,” they thought of him as already dead, as if the deadly bite had already done its work; not sinit, as Vulgate, but sivit.

Acts 28:5. ἀποτ.: only in Luke, Luke 9:5, in parallel in Matt. and Mark, ἐκτ., cf. Lamentations 2:7, and in classical Greek, Eur., Bacch., 253.—ἔπαθεν οὐδὲν κακόν, cf. Mark 16:18, Luke 10:19.

Acts 28:6. οἱ δέ …: Paul shook off the viper—the natives looked for a fatal result. They knew the deadly nature of the bite, and their subsequent conduct shows that they regarded it as nothing short of miraculous that Paul escaped. So St. Luke evidently wishes to describe the action, see on μέν οὖν, Acts 28:5, and δέ, Rendall, Acts, p. 161, Appendix.—προσεδόκων, see below.—πίμπρασθαι, from the form πίμπρημι, present infinitive passive, see critical note, and Winer-Schmiedel, p. 122; cf. in LXX, Numbers 5:21-22; Numbers 5:27, πρήθειν, H. and R., of parts of the body becoming swollen. In classical Greek πίμπρασθαι means “to take fire,” and πρήθειν “to cause to swell,” and those two ideas are combined, as in the word πρηστήρ; “a venomous snake, the bite of which caused both inflammation and swelling” (Page, in loco), cf. Lucan, ix. 790. In the N.T. the verb is peculiar to St. Luke, and it is the usual medical word for inflammation (Hobart, Zahn) in Hipp., Aret., Galen.—καταπίπτειν: only in Luke in N.T., cf. Luke 8:6, Acts 26:14, it was used by medical writers of persons falling down suddenly from wounds, or in epileptic fits; Hipp., Galen (Hobart, Zahn), cf. the asp-bitten Charmian in Ant. and Cleo. (Shakespeare), Acts 5, Scene 2.—ἄφνω: only in Acts 2:2; Acts 16:26.—προσδ.… ἄτοπον: the two words are described by Hobart as exactly those which a medical man would use (so too Zahn), and he gives two instances of the latter word from Galen, in speaking of the bite of a rabid dog, or of poison, p. 289. The word is used elsewhere in N.T. of something morally amiss; cf. Luke 23:41, Acts 25:5, 2 Thessalonians 3:2, but here evidently of something amiss physically. In R.V. it is rendered in each passage “amiss”. The word in N.T. is confined to Luke and Paul, but it is found several times in LXX in an ethical sense (as in N.T., except in loco), cf. Job 4:8; Job 11:11; Job 27:6; Job 34:12; Job 35:13, Prov. 24:55 (Proverbs 30:20), cf. 2Ma 14:23; so too in Thucydides, Josephus, Plutarch, etc.; but it is used of any harm happening to a person as here, cf. Jos., Ant., viii., 14, 4; xi., 5, 2; Herodian, iv., 11. προσδοκία, peculiar to St. Luke in N.T.; cf. Luke 21:26, Acts 12:11, and προσδοκάω, in Luke six times, in Acts five, was, no doubt, frequently used in medical language (Hobart, Zahn) for the expectation of the result of a disease or paroxysm “when they were long in expectation,” R.V.), but in Jos., Ant., viii., 14, 4, we have καὶ μηδὲν τῶν ἀτόπων προσδοκᾷν, and in Herodian, iv., 11, μηδὲν ἄτοπον προσδοκοῦντες· εἰς αὐτὸν γιν., cf. Luke 4:23 (Klostermann, Weiss).—μεταβαλλόμενοι, so frequently in classics without τὴν γνώμην, cf. Jos., B. J., v., 9, 3.—θεὸν αὐτὸν εἶναι: it is perhaps fanciful to suppose with Grotius and Wetstein that they compared him to the infant Hercules, or to Æsculapius represented with the serpent, but the latter is undoubtedly right in adding, “eleganter autem hic describitur vulgi inconstantia”; we naturally compare with Chrysostom the startling change in the people of Lystra, Acts 14:11; Acts 14:19, “Aut latro inquiunt aut deus … datur tertium: homo Dei” (Bengel).

Acts 28:7. χωρία: “lands,” R.V. Vulgate, prædia. In this passage τόπος and χωρίον occur together, but whilst the former is used of place indefinitely, the latter is used of a definite portion of space enclosed or complete in itself; cf. John 4:5; Grimm-Thayer’s Syn[427], sub v., τόπος.—τῷ πρώτῳ: an official title technically correct in Malta, Ramsay, St. Paul, p. 343, honoraria appellatio, so too Schmiedel, Encycl. Bibl., i., 47, 1899; as his father was alive, he would not have been called from his estates (see, however, O. Holtzmann, Neutest. Zeitge-schichte, p. 106), but the inscriptional authorities confirm the first view, a Greek inscription giving πρῶτος Μελιταίων καὶ Πάτρων, applied to a Roman Knight, Prudens by name, ἱππεὺς Ῥ., so that Publius may well have been of the same rank, and in a Latin inscription we have municipii Melitensium primus omnium, see Zahn, Einleitung, ii., p. 422; Blass, in loco; Zöckler, Holtzmann, Knabenbauer, also Alford, Lewin, Hackett, Renan; possibly the conjecture may be correct that the Greek and Latin inscriptions give a translation of a title which the Romans already found in vogue in the island. Publius would be naturally the chief authority in the island under the Roman prœtor of Sicily, Cic., Verr., iv., 18.—Ποπλίῳ: Greek form for the prænomen Publius, “nomen a populus derivatum,” Blass; Ramsay, p. 343, thinks that Poplius may = the Greek rendering of the nomen Popilius, but that the peasantry may have spoken of him familiarly by his prætnomen Publius. Tradition makes him bishop of Malta (Felten, Knabenbauer).—ἀναδεξ.: only here of hospitable reception = ὑποδέχεσθαι, Acts 17:7; φιλοφ., 2Ma 3:9, 4Ma 8:5; in the former passage φιλοφ. ἀποδεχθείς, so in Jos., Ant., xiv., 8, 5, φιλοφ. ὑποδέχεσθαι, and instances in Wetstein, see above on Acts 28:2.—ἡμᾶς: some take the word as referring to Paul and his companions, Luke and Aristarchus (as it seems to lead on to what follows), perhaps including Julius, whilst others point out that he may have entertained the whole crew for the short space of time mentioned, as the ἡμέρας τρεῖς indicates that the entertainment was only provisional; probably he had a large number of slaves (Nösgen, Weiss). Publius may well have been officially responsible for the needs of the Roman soldiers and their prisoners, but φιλοφ. indicates that the duty was performed with generous courtesy.—ἐξένισεν: entertained (as his guests), cf. Acts 10:6; Acts 10:23, etc., Hebrews 13:2. The traditional site was at Civita Vecchia, the old capital of the island, where St. Paul spent the three months, and another tradition places it on the way from St. Paul’s Bay to the capital.

[427] synonym, synonymous.

Acts 28:8. πυρετοῖς: the use of the plural for a fever is peculiar to St. Luke in N.T., and quite medical, Hobart, J. Smith, Zahn (cf. Luke 4:38-39); although the plural is found in Dem., Lucian in the sense of “intermittent attacks of fever,” but Hobart shows that the term was very common in Hipp., and he also quotes from Aretæus and Galen. Each of the other Evangelists uses πυρετός, but in the singular, never in the plural. The disease was common in Malta (J. Smith and C. and H.).—δυσεντερίᾳ, see critical note, “dysentery,” R.V.; “Lucas medicus morbos accuratius describere solet,” Wetstein; another medical term, peculiar to St. Luke in N.T., often joined with πυρετός by Hippocrates (Hobart, Zahn).—συνεχ., cf. Luke 4:38, συνεχομένη πυρετῷ μεγάλῳ, where St. Luke not only speaks of πυρ. μέγας, where Matthew and Mark (Matthew 8:14 and Mark 1:30) have simply πυρετός, but also introduces the term συνεχ. where they have πυρέσσουσα; ἔχεσθαι and συνέχ. are both used by the medical writers as in these passages, although no doubt συνέχεσθαι is sometimes found with a word like νοσήματι in classical Greek (cf. Grotius. in loco, Hobart, Zahn, Weiss), so in Hippocrates, ὑπὸ δυσεντερίης ἐχομένῳ, and τοῖσιν ὑπὸ τῆς ἡρακλείης νόσου συνεχομένοισιν; nine times in St. Luke, elsewhere only three times in N.T., and once in St.Matthew 4:24, in a way similar to St. Luke, but joined there not only with νόσοις, but with a word (βασάνοις) which the medical writers (so St. Luke) never employ of bodily disease.—Ιάσατο αὐτόν, cf. Mark 16:18, the word is more frequently used by the medical writers for “healing” than any other (Hobart), and it occurs in St. Luke’s writings fourteen times and once figuratively, in St. Matthew four times and once figuratively, once in St. Mark, three times in St. John, once figuratively, and in the rest of the N.T. three times, but in each case figuratively. In answer to the attempts to regard the miraculous element as an addition to the narrative here, as in the previous chapter, it may be sufficient to quote the remarks of Weizsäcker: “The stormy voyage and shipwreck form the central point of the narrative: to this is appended the residence at Malta. In the former, Paul reveals himself as a prophet; in the latter, as the possessor of miraculous power. We should make a vast mistake, however, if we were to infer from this that the simple travel-record had here been revised by a writer intent upon artificially glorifying the Apostle as a worker of miracles. The narrative is an indivisible whole; it is impossible to disentangle the mere history of travel from it, or to strip away the miraculous additions,” Apostolic Age, ii., p. 126, E.T.