37-30.
38. Πέτρος δὲ ἔφη πρὸς αὐτοὺς, Μετανοήσατε, καὶ βαπτισθήτω
ἕκαστος ὑμῶν 1 ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν "
καὶ λήψεσθε τὴν δωρεὰν τοῦ Αγίου Πνεύματος.
30. ὑμῖν yap ἐστιν
i) ἐπαγγελία καὶ τοῖς τέκνοις ὑμῶν, καὶ πᾶσι τοῖς εἰς µακράν, ὅσους
1επι SAEP, Bas., Chrys., so Tisch. and Weiss ; but εν in BCD, Cyr.-Jer., Epiph., Cyr., Theodrt., so W.H., R.V.; both expressions seem to be equally common in
by its construction with ἀπό, ἔκ, cf. also Acts xx. 31, ἡ εἰς θεὸν peravora (Syno- nyms in Grimm-Thayer, sub petapé- Aopat). Christian Baptism was not admission to some new club or society of virtue, it was not primarily a token of mutual love and brotherhood, although it purified and strengthened both, cf. ver. ff.
44 ff.
Ver. 38. βαπτισθήτω: “ Non satis est Christocredere,sed oportet et Christianum profiteri, Rom. x. 10, quod Christus per baptismum fieri voluit,” Grotius. John’s baptism had been a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins, but the work of St. Peter and of his fellow-Apostles was no mere continuation of that of the Baptist, cf. xix. 4,5. Their baptism was to be ἐπὶ (ἐν) τῷ ὀνόματι Ἰ. Χ. St. Peter’s address had been directed to the proof that Jesus was the Christ, and it was only natural that the acknowledgment of the cogency of that proof should form the ground of admission to the Christian Church: the ground of the admission to baptism was the recognition of Jesus as the Christ. The reading ἐπί (see especially Weiss, Apostelgeschichte, pp. 35, 36) brings this out more clearly than év. It is much better to explain thus than to say that baptism in the name of one of the Persons of the Trinity involves the names of the other Persons also, or to suppose with Bengel (so Plumptre) that the formula in Matt. xxviii. 19 was used for Gentiles, whilst for Jews or Proselytes who already acknowledged a Father and a Holy Spirit baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus sufficed; or to conjecture with Neander that Matt. xxviii. 19 was not at first considered as a formula to be adhered to rigidly in baptism, but that the rite was performed with reference to Christ’s name alone. This difficulty, of which so much has been made, does not appear to have pressed upon the early Church, for it is remarkable that the passage in the Didache, vii., 3, which is rightly cited to prove the early existence of the Invocation of the Holy Trinity in baptism, is closely followed by another
in which we read (ix. 5) μηδεὶς δὲ Φαγέτω μηδὲ πιέτω ἀπὸ τῆς εὐχαριστίας ὑμῶν, GAN’ οἱ βαπτισθέντες εἰς ὄνομα Κυρίου, i.e., Christ, as the immediate context shows.—eis ἄφεσιν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ὑμῶν: eis, ‘‘unto”’ R.V., signifying the aim. It has been objected that St. Peter lays no stress upon the death of Christ in this connection, but rather upon His Resurrection. But we cannot doubt that St. Peter who had emphasised the fact of the crucifixion would have remembered his Master’s solemn declaration a few hours before His death, Matt. xxvi. 28. Even if the words in this Gospel eis ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν are rejected, the fact remains that St. Peter would have connected the thought of the forgiveness of sins, a prerogative which, as every Jew was eager to maintain, belonged to God and to God alone, with the (new) covenant which Christ had ratified by His death. Harnack admits that however difficult it may be to explain precisely the words of Jesus to the disciples at the Last Supper, yet one thing is certain, that He connected the forgiveness of sins with His death, Dogmengeschichte, Ἱ., pp: 55 and 59, see also ‘‘Covenant,”’ Hastings, B.D., p. 512.—tpov: the R.V. has this addition, so too the Vulgate (Wycl. and Rheims). As each individual ἕκαστος was to be baptised, so each, if truly penitent, would receive the forgiveness of his sins.—thv δωρεὰν, not χάρισμα as in 1 Cor. xii. 4, 9, 28, for the Holy Ghost, the gift, was a personal and abiding possession, but the xaptopara were for a time answering to special needs, and enjoyed by those to whom God distributed them. The word is used specially of the gift of the Holy Ghost by St. Luke four times in Acts, Vili. 20, x. 45, xi. 17, but by no other, Evangelist (cf., however, Luke xi. 13), cf. Heb. vi. 4 (John iv. το).