Ver. 8. ἐξαλλόμενος: not leaping out of his couch (as has sometimes been sup- posed), of which there is no mention, but leaping up for joy (cf. Isaiah lv. 12, Joel ii. 5) (on the spelling with one A see Blass, p. 51); cf. also Isaiah xxxy. 6. This seems more natural than to suppose that he leaped because he was incredu- lous, or because he did not know how to walk, or to avoid the suspicion of hypo- crisy (Chrys., Hom., viii., so too Oecu- menius). St. Chrysostom remarks that it was no less than if they saw Christ risen from the dead to hear Peter saying: “In the name,” etc., and if Christ is not
8—10,
αἰνῶν τὸν Θεόν.
107
4 a 3 7 ~ c A ~ 4 Q. καὶ εἶδεν αὐτὸν πᾶς 6 λαὸς περιπατοῦντα καὶ
- , / αἰνοῦντα τὸν Θεόν’ 1Ο. ἐπεγίνωσκόν τε αὐτὸν ὅτι οὗτος ἦν ὁ πρὸς
‘ eX , θή 3 8 - Yo ιό DX a ¢ a ‘ την ἐλεημοσύνην καθήµενος έπι TH Ώραίᾳ πύλη τοῦ ἱεροῦ: καὶ
ἐπλήσθησαν θάµβους καὶ | ἐκστάσεως ἐπὶ τῷ συµβεβηκότι αὐτῷ.
1 εκστασεως, before this word Flor., Par.) insert παντες.
Vor θαµβ. και εκστασ.
Flor., Ρατ.ὶ read εκστασ. και εθαµβουντο ed’ w αυτῳ συµβεβηκεν ταοις; but D with a accepts γεγενηµενω instead of συµβεβ., cf. iv. 22; so Hilg.
raised, how account for it, he asks, that those who fled whilst He was alive, now dared a thousand perils for Him when dead }--ἔστη καὶ περιεπάτει: “ he stood and began to walk” R.V., thus marking the difference between the aorist and the imperfect. Such vivid details may have been derived trom St. Peter himself, and they are given here with a vividness characteristic of St. Mark’s Gospel, of which St. Peter may reasonably be re- garded as the main source. If St. Luke did not derive the narrative directly from St. Peter, he may easily have done so from the same Evangelist, John Mark, see on chap. xii., and Scharfe, Die petrinische Stromung der Ν. T. Literatur, pp. 59, 60 (1803).---αἰνῶν τὸν θεόν: commentators from the days of St. Chrysostom have noted that by no act or in no place could the man have shown his gratitude more appropriately ; characteristic of St. Luke, to note not only fear, but the ascription of ptaise to God as the result of miracu- lous deeds; ¢f., e.g., Luke xix. 37, xxiv. 53, Acts iii. 9, iv. 21, xi. 18, and other instances in Friedrich (Das Lucasevan- gelium, pp. 77, 78). On the word see further, p. 97. Spitta regards ver. 8 as modelled after xiv. 10, a passage attributed by him to his inferior source B. But on the other hand both Feine and Jiingst regard the first part of ver. 8 as belong- ing to the original source.
Ver. 10. ἐπεγίνωσκόν τε: “took know- ledge of him” or perhaps better still “recognised”. The word is so used of recognising any one by sight, hearing, or certain signs, to perceive who a person is (Grimm), cf., ¢.g., Luke xxiv. 16, 31, Matt. xiv. 35, Mark vi. 54.—6... καθή- µενος: imperfect, may refer to the cus- tomary action of the man: or may be equivalent here to an imperfect, a force of the imperfect usual in similar cases when reference is made to a time before the actual time of recognition, Blass, Grammatik des N. G., p. 1δδ.---ἐπὶ: for the local dative cf. ν.ο, Matt. xxiv. 33, Mark xiii, 29, John v. 2, Rev. ΙΧ. 14.— θάµβους, cf. Luke iv. 36 and v. 9. A
word peculiar to St. Luke in the N.T. (so St. Luke alone uses ἔκθαμβος, ver. 11); used from Homer downwards, of amazement allied to terror or awe, cf. LXX, Ezek. vii. 18, Cant. iii. 8, vi. 3 (4), 9 (19).---ἐκστάσεως: for the word in a similar sense, Mark v. 42, xvi. 8, Luke v. 26. Its use in ordinary Greek expresses rather distraction or disturbance of mind’ caused by a shock. The word is very common both in Hippocrates and Are- taeus. In the LXX it is employed in various senses, cf. Deut. xxviii. 28, ἐκστάσει διανοίας; elsewhere it is used of agitation, trouble, 2 Chron. xxix. 8,. and most frequently of terror, fear, 1 Sam. xi. 7, Ezek. xxvi. 16. See further on. Here the word expresses more than simpleastonishmentasits collocation with θάµβος shows (Wendt, in loco), rather “bewilderment,” cf. Mark v.42. See on ii. 43 for this characteristic of St. Luke. But there is no occasion to conclude with Weiss that these strong expressions as to the effect of the miracle show that it must have been the first which the disciples performed. It was the unique nature of the miracle which affected the beholders so powerfully.