rendering of the familiar Hebrew 5 (Lum-
by), which is so frequent in the LXX; see also Grimm-Thayer, sub v., and Delitzsch, Messianische Weissagungen, p. 46 ff., second edition (1899).
Ver. 23. ἔσται δὲ, cf. ii. 17. The expression, which is not in the Hebrew,
118
ἐξολοθρευθήσεται ἐκ τοῦ aod.”
24. καὶ πάντες δὲ of προφῆται
ἀπὸ Σαμουὴλ καὶ τῶν καθεξῆς,' ὅσοι ἐλάλησαν, καὶ προκατήγγειλαν
Ἰρσοι, D has ὃ ελαλησεν--Ηαττῖς accounts for as φμοάφιοςά of d, read as quod,
and so 6. icip;, Ρας...
seems to call attention to what follows.— ἐξολεθρευθήσεται ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ: “ shall be utterly ἀεείτογεά (ἐξ), R.V. In the LXX, Deut. xviii. 19, following the Hebrew, the words are ἐγὼ ἐκδικήσω ἐξ αὐτοῦ, “I will require it of him”. But the phrase which St. Peter uses was a very common one, from Gen. xvii. 14, for the sentence of death, cf. also Exod. xii. 15, 19, Lev. xvii. 4, g, Num. xv, 30. Here again the quota- tion is evidently made freely or from memory. The strong verb, although frequent in the LXX, is found only here in the N.T. It is used by Josephus and by Philo, but not in classical Greek. The warning is evidently directed against wilful disobedience, and is expressed in terms signifying the utterness of the de- struction from the people. But in their original meaning in the O.T. they need not refer to anything more than the penalty of the death of the body, and it is not necessary to see in them here any threat of eternal punishment in Gehenna (so Wendt, Holtzmann, Felten). If the word has any eschatological bearing it would support the theory of annihilation more easily. Grotius explains ἐξολεθ., “morte violenta aut immatura,’”’ and he adds “‘mystice etiam Rabbini hoc ad poenas post hanc vitam referunt,”’ but this is quite apart from the primary mean- ing of the word.
Ver. 24. Σαμουὴλ: On Samuel as the founder of the prophetic schools and the pattern of all later prophets, see Ham- burger, Real-Encyclopddie des Fuden- tums, i., 6, p. 854; “ Prophet,” cf. Midrash Shemuel, c. 24, where Samuel is called the Rabban, the chief and teacher of the prophets (Wetstein, in loco, and Lumby), cf. also Heb. xi. 32, Δανείδ τε καὶ 2. καὶ τῶν προφητῶν.- καὶ τῶν καθεξῆς: an unmistakable tautology. Wendt con- siders the expression as inaccurate, see his note, and for a full discussion cf. Winer-Moulton, Ixvii. 2, who compares Luke xxiv. 27, = “all the series of prophets beginning from Samuel ” (Page); ‘‘longa tamen successione, uno tamen consensu”’ (Calvin). καθεξ. used by St. Luke alone, Luke i. 3, viii. 1, Acts xi. 4, xviii. 23. In Greek writers =
Τ.Ε. has the support of ΝΒΟΕΡ: so W.H., Weiss.
ov in 0 Γὲ, Vulg.,
ἐφεξῆς, not found in LXX.—xai κατήγγ. τὰς ἡμέρας ταύτας: ‘have also told of these days,” i.e., the present days, cf. v. 36, Luke xxiv. 18. This interpreta- tion does not prevent the identification of “‘these days” with the χρόνοι τῆς ἀποκαταστάσεως, since in one sense the restoration had already begun with the coming of the forerunner and of the Christ, and in the acceptance
of the repentance which they had preached. Rendall renders ‘‘ yea, so said all the prophets from Samuel
. . . aS many as have spoken and told of these days,” as if the fact which St. Peter wished to emphasise was that all the prophets had spoken threats of utter destruction like Moses. But the Greek does not by any means of necessity bear this construction (Viteau, Le Grec du N. T., p. 55 (1896), and such an interpreta- tion seems too harsh. As Wendt admits, the reference is not merely to the pro- phetical sayings relating to the last judg- ment, but also to the promises of salva- tion and to all which is connected with the χρόνοι ἄποκατ. Moreover the refer- ence to Samuel is made because of Nathan’s prediction, ‘‘the fundamental prophecy respecting the seed of David,” 2 Sam. vii. 12 ff., in which it is foretold that mercy shall not be taken away even in the midst of punishment. Blass ex- plains the expression tas ἡμερ. ταύτ. ‘‘regni felicis Messianici”’; but we must remember that it does not follow that the popular views of the Messianic kingdom and judgment were still held by St. Peter. Ver. 25. ὑμεῖς, as in ver. 26, emphatic, ‘‘obligat auditores”” Bengel, cf. ii. 30, Rom. ix. 4, xv. 8; their preference and destiny ought to make them more sensible of their duty in the reception of the Messiah ; υἱοί, “‘sons”’ as in Matt. viii. 12, R.V. The rendering ‘ disciples ”’ (Matt. xii. 2), even if viot could be so rendered with προφητῶν (J. Lightfoot, Kuinoel), could not be applied to τῆς διαθήκης. The expression is Hebraistic, see Grimm-Thayer, sub vids, 2, and on many similar expressions Deissmann, Bibelstudien, p. 163 Π.---διαθ. διέθετο, cf. Heb. viii. ro, x. 16, Gen. xv. 18, 1 Macc. i. 11, for a similar construction in LXX