ΠΡΑΞΗΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ ος
23—45>
‘ a “πόλων ἐγίνετο.ὶ 44. πάντες δὲ of πιστεύοντες ἦσαν ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτό, καὶ εεἶχον 2 ἅπαντα κοινὰ, 45.9 καὶ τὰ κτήµατα καὶ τὰς ὑπάρξεις ἐπίπρασ-
1 Τη νετ. 43 NACE 13, many cursives, Vulg., Syr. Pesh, Boh. add εν ἱερουσαλημ (which is added by D to των αποστ. in ver. 42); so Tisch., Κ.Υ. marg. But the addition is not found in BD 1, 31, 61, Sah., Syr. Harcl., Arm., Aeth., Chrys.; so W.H., Κ.Υ. text, Weiss, Wendt. SgAC 4o, Vulg., Boh. add also φοβος τε ην µεγας επι παντας, so Tisch.; but omitted by BDE, Sah., Syrr. (P. and H.), Arm., Aeth., Chrys.—perhaps assimilation to iv. 33, v. 5; it has been already expressed in the first clause of the verse, and as the authorities for its retention are mainly the same as for ev lep., it would seem that the former addition may also be rejected.
2 noav επι το αυτο και ειχον, So Tisch., Hilg.; but B 57, Orig., so W.H., Weiss, Wendt have only επι το αυτο ειχον--ησαν and και might easily be added, but their falling out is difficult to imagine.
3 D (cf. Pesch.) reads και οσοι κτηµατα ειχον η υπαρξεις επιπρασκον; so Hilo. Be- fore πασι D, Gig., Par. insert καθ ηµεραν. For καθοτι .. . ειχε D reads τοις αν τις χρειαν ειχεν ίτοις χρειαν εχουσιν in β); cf.iv.35. The remarks of Belser and Weiss on the passage should be compared—the former sees in B a more precise account and, at the same time, a more moderate account of the ‘‘community of goods” at Jerusalem than is sometimes derived from this passage (see comments), whilst here
Weiss sees in D nothing but fruitless and even senseless emendations,
interpretation, viz., that the words point to a communion in one kind only, Apos- telgeschichte, Ῥ. 94. It is possible that the introduction of the article before at least one of the words τῇ κλάσει (cf. R.V.) emphasises here the Lord’s Supper as distinct from the social meal with which it was connected, whilst ver. 46 may point to the social as well as to the devotional bearing of the expression (cf. Zéckler, note in loco), and this possibility is increased if we regard the words τῶν ἀποστόλων as characterising the whole sentence in ver. 42. But unless in both verses some deeper meaning was attached to the phrases tq κλάσει τοῦ ἄρτου--κλῶντες -ἄρτον, it seems superfluous, as Schéttgen remarked, to introduce the mention of common food at the time of a community of goods. No doubt St. Chrysostom (so Oecum., Theophyl.) and Bengel inter- pret the words as simply = victus frugalis, but elsewhere St. Chrysostom speaks of them, or at least when joined with κοινωνία, as referring to the Holy Com- munion (see Alford’s note in loco), and Bengel’s comment on ver. 42 must be compared with what he says on ver. 46. ---καὶ ταῖς προσευχαῖς, “and [in] the prayers” R.V. Dr. Hort suggests that the prayers may well have been Christian prayers at stated hours, answering to Jewish prayers, and perhaps replacing the synagogue prayers (not recognised in the Law), as the Apostles’ ‘‘ teaching”’ had replaced that of the scribes (¥udais- tic Christianity, p. 44, and Ecclesia, p. 45). But the words may also be taken
to include prayers both new and old, cf. iv. 24, James v. 13 (Eph. ii. 19, Col. iii. 16), and also Acts iii. 1, where Peter and John go up to the Temple ‘at the hour of prayer,” cf. Wendt, Die Lehre Fesu, ii., p. 159.
Ver. 43. πάσῃ Ψψυχῇῃ, 7-¢., every person, and so iii. 23, Hebraistic, cf.
ws of Lev. vii. 17, xvii. 12, etc., and
cf. 1 Mace, ii. 38. In ver. 41 the plural is used rather like the Latin capita in enumerations, cf. Acts vii. 14, xxvii. 37, and LXX, Gen. xlvi. 15, Exod. i. 5, Num. xix. 18, etc. But Winer-Moulton (p. 194, xxii. 7) would press the meaning of ψυχή here, and contends that the fear was pro- duced in the Aeart, the seat of the feelings and desires, so that its use is no mere Hebraism, although he admits that in Rom. xiii. 1 (x Peter iii. 20) the single πᾶσα ψυχή = every person, but see ᾖ.ο. ---φόβος, cf. iii, το, 2.e., upon the non- believers, for ‘‘ perfect love casteth out fear”. Friedrich notes amongst the characteristics of St. Luke that in his two books one of the results of miracu- lous powers is fear. Here the φόβος means rather the fear of reverential awe or the fear which acted quasi freno, (Calvin), so that the early growth of the Church was not destroyed prematurely by assaults from without. There is surely nothing inconsistent here with ver. 47, but Hilgenfeld ascribes the whole of ver. 43 to his ‘‘ author to Theophilus,” partly on the ground of this supposed inconsistency, partly be-