Commentaires bibliques

In this chapter we have, I. The sin and punishment of Ananias and Sapphira, who, for lying to the Holy Ghost, were struck dead at the word of Peter, Ac 5:1-11. II. The flourishing state of the church, in the power that went along with the preaching of the gospel, Ac 5:12-16. III. The imprisonment of the apostles, and their miraculous discharge out of prison, with fresh orders to go on to preach the gospel, which they did, to the great vexation of their persecutors, Ac 5:17-26. IV. Their arraignment before the great sanhedrim, and their justification of themselves in what they did, Ac 5:27-33. V. Gamaliel's counsel concerning them, that they should not persecute them, but let them alone, and see what would come of it, and their concurrence, for the present, with this advice, in the dismission of the apostles with no more than a scourging, Ac 5:34-40. VI. The apostles' cheerful progress in their work notwithstanding the prohibition laid upon them and the indignity done them, Ac 5:41,42.

The hypocrisy of Ananias and his wife Sapphira, and their awful death, Acts 5:1-11. The apostles work many miracles, and the Church of God is increased, Acts 5:12-16. The high priest and the Sadducees, being incensed against the apostles, seize and put them in prison, Acts 5:17, Acts 5:18. The angel of God delivers them, and commands them to go to the temple, and proclaim the Gospel, Acts 5:19, Acts 5:20. The high priest, having gathered the council together in the morning, sends to the prison to have the apostles brought before him, Acts 5:21. The offers return, and report that they found the prison shut, and the watch set, but that the men had got out, Acts 5:22, Acts 5:23. A messenger arrives in the meanwhile, and says that the apostles are preaching in the temple, Acts 5:24, Acts 5:25. The captain and officers go and bring than before the council, who expostulate with them, Acts 5:26-28. The apostles defend themselves, and charge the council with the murder of Christ; and assert his resurrection from the dead and ascension to the right hand of God, Acts 5:29-32. The council are confounded, and purpose to slay the apostles, Acts 5:33. Gamaliel gives them seasonable and prudent advice, Acts 5:34-39. The council agree to it, but, before they discharge the apostles, beat them, and command them not to teach in the name of Jesus, Acts 5:40. They depart rejoicing in their persecution, and continue to preach Jesus Christ, Acts 5:41, Acts 5:42.

CHAPTER 5

Acts 5:2. After γυναικός, Elz. Scholz have αὐτοῦ, which Lachm. Tisch. Born, have rightly deleted, as it is wanting in A B D* א, min., and has evidently slipped in from Acts 5:1.

Acts 5:5. After ἀκούοντας, Lachm. Tisch. Born. have deleted the usual reading ταῦτα; it is wanting in A B D א*, min. Or. Lucif. and several VSS., and is an addition from Acts 5:11.

Acts 5:9. εἶπε] is very suspicious, as it is wanting in B D א, min. Vulg.; in other witnesses it varies in position, and Or. has φησίν. Deleted by Lachm. Born. and Tisch.

Acts 5:10. παρὰ τ. π.] Lachm. and Tisch. read πρὸς τ. π. according to A B D א, Or.; other witnesses have ἐπὶ τ. π.; others, ὑπὸ τ. π.; others, ἐνώπιον. Born. also has πρὸς τ. π. But as Luke elsewhere writes παρὰ τ. π. (Luke 8:41; Luke 17:16), and not πρὸς τ. π. (Mark 5:22; Mark 7:25; Revelation 1:17), the Recepta is to be retained.

Acts 5:15. παρὰ τὰς πλ.] Lachm. reads καὶ εἰς τὰς πλ after A B D** א, min. D* has only κατὰ πλ.; and how easily might this become, by an error of a transcriber, καί τὰς πλ., which was completed partly by the original κατά and partly by εἰς! Another correction was, καὶ ἐν ταῖς πλατείαις (E). No version has καί. Accordingly the simple κατὰ πλατ., following D*, is to be preferred.

Instead of κλινῶν, Lachm. Tisch. Born, have rightly κλινορίων (so A B D א); κλινῶν was inserted as the wonted form.

Acts 5:16. εἰς Ἱερουσ.] εἰς is wanting in A B א, 103, and some VSS. Deleted by Lachm. But the retention of εἰς has predominant attestation; and it was natural to write in the margin by the side of τῶν πέριξ πόλεων the locally defining addition Ἱερουσαλήμ, which became the occasion of omitting the εἰς Ἱερουσ. that follows.

Acts 5:18. τ. χειρ. αὐτῶν] αὐτῶν is wanting in A B D א, min. Syr. Erp. Arm. Vulg. Cant. Theophyl. Lucif., and omitted by Lachm, Tisch. Born. But see Acts 4:3.

Acts 5:23. ἑστώτας] Elz. has ἔξω ἑστ. But ἔξω has decisive evidence against it, and is a more precisely defining addition occasioned by the following ἔσω.

πρό] Lachm. Tisch. Born. read ἐπί, according to A B D א, 109; πρό is an interpretation.

Acts 5:24. ὅ τε ἱερεὺς καὶ ὁ στρατ. τ. ἱεροῦ κ. οἱ ἀρχιερ.] A B D א, min. Copt. Sahid. Arm. Vulg. Cant. Lucif. have merely ὅ τε στρατ. τ. ἱεροῦ κ. οἱ ἀρχιερ. So Lachm. Rinck, and Born. But ἱερεύς being not understood, and being regarded as unnecessary seeing that οἱ ἄρχιερ. followed, might very easily be omitted; whereas there is no reason for its having been inserted. For the genuineness of ἱερεύς also the several other variations testify, which are to be considered as attempts to remove the offence without exactly erasing the word, namely, οἱ ἱερεῖς κ. ὁ στρ. τ. ἱερ. κ. οἱ ἀρχ. and ὅ τε ἀρχιερεὺς κ. ὁ στρ. τ. ἱερ. κ. οἱ ἀρχ.

Acts 5:25. After αὐτοῖς Elz. has λέγων, against decisive evidence. An addition, in accordance with Acts 5:22 f.

Acts 5:26. ἵνα μή] Lachm. Born. have μή, according to B D E א, min. But the omission easily appeared as necessary on account of ἐφοβ. Comp. Galatians 4:11.

Acts 5:28. οὐ is wanting in A B א*, Copt. Vulg. Cant. Ath. Cyr. Lucif. Rightly deleted by Lachm. and Tisch., as the transforming of the sentence into a question was evidently occasioned by ἐπηρώτησεν.

Acts 5:32. After ἐσμεν, Elz. Scholz, Tisch. have αὐτοῦ, which A D* א, min., and several VSS. omit. It is to be defended. As μάρτυρες is still denned by another genitive, αὐτοῦ became cumbrous, appeared inappropriate, and was omitted. B has καὶ ἡμεῖς ἐν αὐτῷ μάρτυρες (without ἐσμεν), etc. But in this case EN is to be regarded as a remnant of the ἐσμεν, the half of which was easily omitted after ἡμεῖς; and thereupon αὐτοῦ was transformed into αὐτῷ. The less is any importance to be assigned to the reading of Lachm.: καὶ ἡμεῖς ἐν αὐτῷ μάρτυρές ἐσμεν κ.τ.λ.

Acts 5:33. ἐβουλεύοντο] Lachm. reads ἐβούλοντο, according to A B E, min. An interpretation, or a mechanical interchange, frequent also in MSS. of the classics; see Born, ad xv. 37.

Acts 5:34. βραχύ τι] τι, according to decisive evidence, is to be deleted, with Lachm. Tisch. Born.

ἀποστόλους] A B א, 80, Vulg. Copt. Arm. Chrys. have ἀνθρώπους. So Lachm. Tisch.; and rightly, as the words belong to the narrative of Luke, and therefore the designation of the apostles by ἀνθρώπους appeared to the scribes unworthy. It is otherwise in Acts 5:35; Acts 5:38.

Acts 5:36. προσεκλίθη] Elz. Griesb. Scholz read προσεκολλήθη, in opposition to A B C** א, min., which have προσεκλίθη; and in opposition to C* D* E H, min. Cyr., which have προσεκλήθη (so Born.). Other witnesses have προσετέθη, also προσεκληρώθη. Differing interpretations of the προσεκλίθη, which does not elsewhere occur in the N. T., but which Griesb. rightly recommended, and Matth. Lachm. Tisch. have adopted.

Acts 5:37. ἰκανόν to be deleted with Lachm. and Tisch., as it is wanting in A* B א, 81, Vulg. Cant. Cyr., in some others stands before λαόν, and in C D, Eus. is interchanged with πολύν (so Born.).

Acts 5:38. Instead of ἐάσατε, Lachm. has ἄφετε, following A B C א. A gloss.

Acts 5:39. δύνασθε] Lachm. Tisch. Born. have δυνήσεσθε, according to B C D E א, min., and some VSS. and Fathers. Mistaking the purposely chosen definite expression, men altered it to agree with the foregoing future.

Instead of αὐτούς, which Lachm. Tisch. Born, have, Elz. and Scholz read αὐτό, against decisive testimony. An alteration to suit τὸ ἔργον.

Acts 5:41. After ὀνόματος Elz. has αὐτοῦ, which is wanting in decisive witnesses, and is an addition for the sake of completeness. Other interpolations are: Ἰησοῦ,

τοῦ Χριστοῦ,

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ,

τοῦ κυρίου,

τοῦ Θεοῦ.

Ac 5:1-11.

ANANIAS AND SAPPHIRA.

"The first trace of a shade upon the bright form of the young Church. Probably among the new Christians a kind of holy rivalry had sprung up, every one eager to place his means at the disposal of the apostles" [OLSHAUSEN]. Thus might the new-born zeal of some outrun their abiding principle, while others might be tempted to seek credit for a liberality which was not in their character.

But a certain man - In the previous chapter the historian had given an account of the eminent liberality and sincerity of the mass of early Christians, in being willing to give up their property to provide for the poor, and had mentioned the case of Barnabas as worthy of special attention. In this chapter he proceeds to mention a case, quite as striking, of insincerity, and hypocrisy, and of the just judgment of God on those who were guilty of it. The case is a remarkable instance of the nature of "hypocrisy," and goes to illustrate the art and cunning of the enemy of souls in attempting to corrupt the church, and to pervert the religion of the gospel. Hypocrisy consists in an attempt to "imitate" the people of God, or to assume the "appearance" of religion, in whatever form it may be manifested. In this case religion had been manifested by great self-denial and benevolence. The hypocrisy of Ananias consisted in "attempting" to imitate this in appearance, and to impose in this way on the early Christians and on God.

With Sapphira his wife - With her concurrence or consent. It was a matter of "agreement" between them, Acts 5:2, Acts 5:9.

Sold a possession - The word used here κτῆμα ktēma does not indicate whether this was "land" or some other property. In Acts 5:3, however, we learn that it was "land" that was sold; and the word here translated "possession" is translated in the Syriac, Arabic, and the Latin Vulgate as "land." The pretence for which this was sold was doubtless to have the appearance of religion. That it was "sold" could be easily known by the Christian society, but it might not be so easily known for "how much" it was sold. Hence, the attempt to impose on the apostles. It is clear that they were not under obligation to sell their property. But, "having" sold it for the purposes of religion, it became their duty, if they professed to devote the avails of it to God, to do it entirely, and without any reservation.

But a certain man named Ananias - Of these unhappy people we have no farther account than what is recorded here. In reference to birth, connections, etc., their names are written in the dust. The import of his name, חנניה chananiyah, the grace or mercy of the Lord, agrees very ill with his conduct.

But a certain man named Ananias,.... A name common among the Jews, the same with Hananiah, Jeremiah 28:1 it signifies not the humility of the Lord, or the affliction of the Lord, or the answer of the Lord, as say some, as if it was derived from but the grace of the Lord, or the Lord's gracious one, coming from there is no dependence on names; though this man's name signified one that was in the grace and favour of God; he was not so, but a graceless person, as appears by what follows. It is very likely he was a minister of the word, since the account of him follows upon that of Barnabas, and is opposed to it; it may be he was one of the hundred and twenty, on whom the Holy Ghost fell on the day of Pentecost; and yet, though he had great gifts, had no grace. This shows there are hypocrites among men of the greatest names and characters, and in the purest churches; this first and pure church, which, in the preceding chapter, has such large encomiums, was not free from them:

with Sapphira his wife; whether this is the same name with "Shiphrah", Exodus 1:15 or "Zipporah", Exodus 2:21 both which are by the Septuagint called "Sephora", or whether another, and may signify "beautiful", is not very material. Jerom (c) says, in the Syriac language this name signifies "beautiful"; though he first gives other explanations of it, as "narrantem, literatam, sive librariam", as though it was derived from the Hebrew word The precious stone called sapphire seems to come from the same root as this, and to be so called because of its beautiful azure colour. The name "Sappho", which was the name of a famous poetess, the inventress of a kind of verse called "Sapphic" verse, is said to be the diminutive of this name "Sapphira". Drusius observes, it may be read "Tzephira"; which comes near to "Zipporah", and among other things signifies a "she goat"; and it was usual to give women names taken from such creatures. So "Rachel", a "sheep", and "Tabitha", or "Dorcas", a "doe". But whatever her name or person were, her actions were disagreeable:

sold a possession; which was their own. So the Arabic and Syriac versions read, "their own field", or "farm"; find the Ethiopic version, "their own vineyard": it might be his wife's dowry or jointure, and so her consent was necessary; or they might be jointly concerned in this sale, to show not only their concord and harmony among themselves; but that they agreed in their devotion and religious actions, and that being both filled with zeal for God, and love to the brethren, sold their estate to support the common cause.

(c) De Nominibus Hebraicis, fol. 106. C.