Commentari biblici

Acts 15:1-2. The Jewish-Christian opinion, that the Gentiles could only in the way of circumcision and observance of the law—that is, in the way of Jewish Christianity—obtain the salvation of the Messianic kingdom, was by no means set aside by the diffusion of Christianity among the Gentiles, which had so successfully taken place since the conversion of Cornelius. On the contrary, it was too closely bound up with the whole training and habit of mind of the Jews, especially of those who were adherents of the Pharisees (comp. Ewald, p. 464 f.), not to have presented, as the conversions of the Gentiles increased, an open resistance to the freedom of the Gentile brethren from the law,—a freedom which exhibited itself in their whole demeanour to the scandal of the strict legalists,—and to have made the question on which it hinged the most burning question of the time. This opposition—the most fundamental and most dangerous in the apostolic church, for the overcoming of which the whole further labour of a Paul was requisite—emerged in the very central seat of Gentile Christianity itself at Antioch; whither some[23] from Judaea (τῶν πεπιστευκότων ἀπὸ τῆς αἱρέσεως τῶν Φαρισαίων, as Syr. p. has on the margin, and codd. 8. 137 in the text, as a certainly correct gloss, see Acts 15:5) came down with this doctrine: If ye shall not have been circumcised (περιτμηθ., see the critical remarks) according to the custom, ordered by Moses (and so have taken upon you the obligation of obedience to the whole law, comp. Galatians 5:3), ye cannot obtain the salvation in Christ!

στάσεως (Acts 23:7; Acts 23:10; Soph. O. R. 634) κ. ζητήσεως (Acts 25:20; John 3:25); division and disputation.

ἔταξαν] namely, the ἀδελφοί, Acts 15:1, the Christians of Antioch, comp. Acts 15:3.

Jerusalem was the mother-church of all Christianity; here the apostles had their abode, who, along with the presbyters of the church, occupied for the Christian theocracy a position similar to that of the Sanhedrim. Comp. Grotius. The recognition of this on the part of Paul is implied in Galatians 2:1-2.

καί τινας ἄλλους ἐξ αὐτῶν] among whom, according to Galatians 2:1, was Titus, not named at all in the Acts, unless Paul voluntarily took him as companion, which is more suitable to the expression in Galatians 2:1.

We may add that the commission of the church, under which Paul made the journey, is by no means excluded by the statement: κατὰ ἀποκάλυψιν, Galatians 2:2; see on Gal. l.c. Subtleties directed against our narrative may be seen in Zeller, p. 224 f.

ζήτημα, quaestio, i.e. question in dispute, in the N.T. only in the Book of Acts; often in Greek writers.

[23] According to Epiphan. Haer. 26, Cerinthus is supposed to have been among them.

Acts 15:3. Προπεμφθέντες] after they were sent forth, deducti, i.e. escorted for a part of the way. Comp. 3 John 1:6; Herod. i. 111, viii. 124, 126; Plat. Menex. p. 236 D; Soph. O. C. 1663. Morus and Heinrichs: “rebus ad iter suscipiendum necessariis instructi.” That, however, must have been suggested by the context, as in Titus 3:13. The provision with necessaries for the journey is understood of itself,[24] but is not contained in the words.

τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς] They caused joy by their visit and by their narratives, not only to the Jewish-Christians (Heinrichs), but to all.

[24] Although the travellers, on account of the hospitality of the churches, which they visited by the way, certainly needed but little.

Acts 15:4-5. Παρεδέχθησαν (see the critical remarks) denotes, in keeping with the delegation in Acts 15:2 f., the reception, i.e. the formal receiving of the delegates as such. Comp. 2Ma 4:22. Observe the prefixing of ἐκκλησία; comp. Php 1:1.

μετʼ αὐτῶν] see on Acts 14:27; comp. διʼ αὐτῶν, Acts 15:12.

Acts 15:5 belongs to the narrative of Luke, who here records as worthy of remark, that at the very first meeting of the delegates with the church receiving them, the very same thing was maintained by some who rose up in the assembly (ἐξανέστησ.), and was opposed (δέ) to the narration of Paul and Barnabas ὅσα ὁ Θεὸς ἐποίησε μετʼ αὐτῶν, as had been brought forward by Jews at Antioch and had occasioned this mission. Those mentioned in Acts 15:1, and those who here came forward, belonged to one and the same party (the Pharisee-Christians), and therefore Acts 15:5 is unjustly objected to by Schwanbeck. Beza, Piscator, Wakefield, and Heinrichs put Acts 15:5 into the mouth of the delegates; holding that there is a rapid transition from the oblique to the direct form, and that ἔλεγον is to be supplied after ἐξανέστ. δέ. A harsh and arbitrary view, as the change in form of the discourse must naturally and necessarily have been suggested by the words, as in Acts 1:4 and Acts 17:3. That the deputation had already stated the object of their mission, was indeed self-evident from ἀπεδέχθησαν, and hence it was not requisite that Luke should particularly mention it.

αὐτούς] namely, the Gentile-Christians, as those to whom the narrative ὅσα ὁ Θεὸς ἐπ. μ. αὐτ. had chiefly reference; not the τινας ἄλλους, Acts 15:2 (Lekebusch), which is erroneously inferred from Galatians 2

They must be circumcised, etc., has a dictatorial and hierarchical tone.

Acts 15:6. The consultation of the apostles and presbyters concerning this assertion (περὶ τοῦ λόγου τούτου, see Acts 15:5) thus put forward here afresh, was not confined to themselves (Schwanbeck, who here assumes a confusion of sources), but took place in presence, and with the assistance, of the whole church assembled together, as is evident from Acts 15:12, comp. with Acts 15:22, and most clearly from Acts 15:25, where the ἀπόστολοι καὶ οἱ πρεσβύτεροι καὶ οἱ ἀδελφοί (Acts 15:23) write of themselves: ἔδοξεν ἡμῖν γενομένοις ὁμοθυμαδόν. Against this it has been objected that no place would have sufficed to hold them, and therefore it is maintained that only deputies of the church took part (Mosheim, de reb. Christ. ante Const. M. p. 117, Kuinoel, Neander); but this is entirely arbitrary, as the text indicates nothing of such a limitation, and the locality is entirely unknown to us.

This assembly and its transactions are not at variance with Galatians 2:1 ff. (in opposition to Baur, Zeller, Hilgenfeld, Hausrath), where, indeed, they are presupposed as known to the readers by αὐτοῖς in Acts 15:2, as well as by Acts 15:3 and Acts 15:5. Hofmann, N.T. I. p. 126, judges otherwise, but by a misinterpretation of Galatians 2:4 ff. The words κατʼ ἰδίαν δὲ τοῖς δοκοῦσι, Galatians 2:2, betoken a separate discussion, different from these public discussions. See on Gal. l.c.; comp. also Lekebusch, p. 294 ff.; Lechler, p. 398 ff.; Ritschl, altkath. K. p. 150; Trip, Paulus nach d. Apostelgesch. p. 86 ff.; Oertel, p. 232 ff.

Acts 15:7. Πολλῆς δὲ συζητήσεως γενομένης] These were the preliminary debates in the assembly, before Peter (to whom the first word belonged, partly by reason of his apostolic precedence, partly and especially because he was the first to convert the Gentiles) rose up and delivered a connected address.[25] In this previous πολλὴ συζήτησις may have occurred the demand for the circumcision of Titus, indirectly mentioned in Galatians 2:3. See on Gal. l.c.

ἀφʼ ἡμερῶν ἀρχαίων] does not point to the conversion of Cornelius as to something long since antiquated and forgotten (Baur, I. p. 91, ed. 2). But certainly that selection of Peter as the first converter of the Gentiles, viewed in relation to the entire period, during which Christianity had now existed, dated from ancient days, Acts 10:11.

ἐν ἡμῖν ἐξελέξατο κ.τ.λ.] He made choice for Himself among us, that by my mouth, etc. Hence ἐμέ is not to be supplied, as Olshausen, following older commentators, holds. Others (Grotius, Wolf, Bengel, Heinrichs, Rosenmüller, Kuinoel, and many others) unnecessarily take ἐν ἡμῖν for ἡμᾶς as a Hebraism in accordance with בָּחַר בְ (1 Samuel 16:9-10; 1 Kings 8:16; 1 Chronicles 28:4-5; Nehemiah 9:7, and the LXX. at those places). So also Ewald. Beza aptly says: “habito inter nos delectu voluisse.”

Luke has the word εὐαγγέλιον only here and in Acts 20:24, not at all in the Gospel. John also has it not.

[25] There is no further mention of Peter in the Book of Acts.—The reference to the conversion of Cornelius is introduced, according to Baur, simply in pursuance of the consistent plan of the author, who makes Peter thus speak after the manner of Paul.

Acts 15:8-10. God who knows the heart, who thus could not be deceived in the matter (comp. Acts 1:24), has, in reference to this their admission effected by my instrumentality into the fellowship of the gospel and of faith (Acts 15:7), done two things. He has (a) positively borne matter-of-fact witness for them (to their qualification for admission) by His giving to them the Holy Spirit, as to us (comp. Acts 10:44, Acts 11:15 ff.); and (b) negatively, He made in no way distinction between us and them, after He by faith, of which He made them partakers through the gospel, had purified their hearts. God would have made such a distinction, if, after this ethical[26] purification of the heart effected by faith, He had now required of them, for their Christian standing, something else, namely, circumcision and other works of the law; but faith, by which He had morally purified their inner life, was to Him the sole requisite for their Christian standing without distinction, as also with us. Observe on (a), that δοὺς αὐτοῖς κ.τ.λ. is contemporaneous with ἐμαρτύρησεν, expressing, namely, the mode of it; and on (b), that τ. π. καθαρίσας is previous to the οὐδὲν διέκρινε. This is evident from the course of the speech, as the faith must have been already present before the communication of the Spirit (comp. Acts 11:17).

Acts 15:10. Accordingly as the matter now stands (νῦν οὖν).

ΤΊ ΠΕΙΡΆΖΕΤΕ ΤῸΝ ΘΕΌΝ;] i.e. why do ye put it to the test, whether God will abandon His attestation of non-observance already given to the Gentiles, or assert His punitive power against human resistance? “Apostrophe ad Pharisäos et severus elenchus,” Bengel.

ἐπιθεῖναι] with the design to impose, etc.

ζυγόν] comp. Galatians 5:1, and Chrysostom in loc.: τῷ τοῦ ζυγοῦ ὀνόματι τὸ βαρὺ τοῦ πράγματος (of the complete observance of the law) ΑὐΤΟῖς ἘΝΔΕΊΚΝΥΤΑΙ. Contrast to this yoke: Matthew 11:29-30.

οἱ πατέρες ἡμ.] since the time of Moses.

[26] Weiss, Petr. Lehrbegr. p. 321, thinks that it is in the ceremonial sense, so that the idea only allusively passes over into that of ethical cleansing. But τὰς καρδίας points only to the moral sphere. Comp. Weiss himself, p. 274 f. This moral cleansing presupposes, moreover, the reconciliation appropriated by faith; see 1 Peter 1:18.

Acts 15:11. ʼΑλλά] A triumphant contrast to the immediately preceding ὃν οὔτε οἱ πατέρες ἡμῶν οὔτε ἡμεῖς ἰσχύσ. βαστ.

διὰ τῆς χάρ. τ. κυρ. Ἰ.] Comp. Romans 5:15; Romans 1:7; 1 Corinthians 1:3; 2 Corinthians 1:2; 2 Corinthians 13:13; Ephesians 1:2; Php 1:2; 2 Thessalonians 1:2. Not elsewhere used by Peter. In triumphant contrast to the yoke of the law, it is here placed first.

καθʼ ὃν τρόπον κἀκεῖνοι] sc. πιστεύουσι σωθῆναι διὰ τῆς χάριτος τοῦ κυρ. Ἰησοῦ. The ἐκεῖνοι are the Gentile-Christians, to whom the whole debate relates. Others (Calvin, Calovius, Wolf, and many older commentators, following Augustine, against Pelagius) make it apply to πατέρες ἡμῶν. Incorrectly, as the salvation of the Jewish fathers (servati fuerunt is supplied) is quite alien from the question concerning the σωτηρία of the Gentile-Christians here. But the complete equalization of both parties is most fitly brought out at the close; after its having been previously said, they as well as we, it is now said, we as well as they. Thus the equalizing is formally complete.

That Peter in the doctrine of the righteousness of faith was actually as accordant with Paul as he here expresses himself, is (in opposition to Baur, Schwegler, Hilgenfeld, and Zeller) to be inferred even from Galatians 2:15 ff., where Paul acknowledges his and Peter’s common conviction, after he had upbraided the latter (Acts 15:14) for the inconsistency of his conduct at Antioch. Comp. on Gal. l.c.; also Baumgarten, p. 430 f.; Lekebusch, p. 300 ff.

Acts 15:12. The result of this speech was that the whole assembled multitude (πᾶν τὸ πλῆθος) was silent, so that thus a new συζήτησις did not begin, and the agitation of the opponents was set at rest. A happy beginning for the happy issue. Now Barnabas and Paul could without contradiction confirm the view of Peter by the communication of their own apostolic experiences among the Gentiles,

Barnabas first, on account of his older and closer relation to the church. Comp. on Acts 15:25.

σημεῖα κ. τέρατα] Comp. generally also Romans 15:19; 2 Corinthians 12:12, hence so much the less improbable (Zeller).