181
, > 3 ς a - a 1 % a > ἔδ 3 Αν λ ταυτην εις ην ὑυμεις νυν κατοικειτε 5. και ουκ εὀθωκεν οαυτῷ KAT) po-
νοµίαν ἐν αὐτῇ, οὐδὲ βῆμα ποδός: καὶ 3 ἐπηγγείλατο αὐτῷ δοῦναι eis
ο ~ 3 κατάσχεσιν αὐτήν, καὶ τῷ σπέρµατι αὐτοῦ μετ αὐτόν, οὐκ ὄντος
αὐτῷ τέκνου.
αὐτοῦ πάροικον ἐν γῇ ἀλλοτρίᾳ, καὶ δουλώσουσιν αὐτὸ
6. ἐλάλησε δὲ οὕτως 6 Θεός, “OTL ἔσται τὸ σπέρμα
3 kal κακώσουσιν,
1 After κατοικειτε DE, Syr. Harcl. mg., Aug. add και οι πατερες υμων (ηµων) προ Όμων (npwv); Weiss (Codex D, p. 67) points out that the addition demands κατωκησαν; the words might have been easily added, cf. Ο.Τ. phraseology.
2 For και επηγ. D, Gig., Vulg. read αλλ᾽ επηγ., so Hilg, 3 avro; D, Gig., Vulg. read avrovs, so Hilg.; cf. LXX, Gen. xv. 13.
ham’s departure, cf. Gen. xi. 32, and xii. 1. One other solution has been attempted by maintaining that µετῴκισεν does not refer to the removal, but only to the quiet and abiding settlement which Abraham gained after his father’s death, but this view, although supported by Augustine and Bengel, amongst others, is justly condemned by Alford and Wendt. The Samaritan Pentateuch reads in Gen. xi. 32, 145 instead of 205, probably an alteration ‘to meet the apparent contradiction. But it is quite possible that here, as elsewhere in the speech, Stephen followed some special tradition (so Z6ckler).—peta with infinitive as a temporal proposition fre- quent in Luke (analogous construction in Hebrew), cf. Luke xii. 5, xxii. 20, etc., cf. LXX, Baruch i. 9; Viteau, Le Grec
du N. T., p. 165 (1893).—perwxicev, subject 6 Θεός: cf. for a_ similar
quick change of subject vi. 6. Weiss sees in this the hand of a reviser, but the fact that Stephen was speaking under such circumstances would easily account for a rapid change of subject, which would easily be supplied by his hearers; verb only in ver. 43 elsewhere, in a quotation —found several times in LXX, and also in use in classical. Greek.
Ver. 5. «Anpovopiav: the field which Abraham bought, Gen. xxiii. 9-17, could not come under this title—the field was Abraham’s purchase, not God's gift as κληρονοµία (see Meyer - Wendt, and Westcott, Heb. vi. 12, additional note, also Bengel, in loco); ver, 16 sufficiently shows that Stephen was fully acquainted with Abraham’s purchase of the field.— οὐδὲ βῆμα ποδός, cf. Deut. ii. 5, xi. 24, same Hebrew (cf. Heb. xi. 9), ‘‘ spatium ‘quod planta pedis calcatur’’ (Grimm) ; cf. also its use in Xen. It may have been a kind of proverbial expression, cf. Gen. viii. g (Schdttgen).—xKai ἐπηγγείλατο, cf. Gen. xii. 7 (xvii. 8, xlviii. 4), so that here again God appeared unto Abraham
in what was a strange and heathen land. See also for verb, James i. 12, ii. 5. On the force of the word see p. 54.—eis κατάσχεσιν: ‘in possession,” R.V., the A.V. renders the word in its secondary or derivative sense, which is found in νετ. 45.--οὐκ ὄντος αὐτῷ τέκνου: the faith of Abraham ‘‘tecte significatur” (Blass), first because nothing was given —there was only a promise—and secondly because the promise was made while yet he had no child.
Ver. 6. δέ: not in contrast to the fact just mentioned that Abraham had no child, but introducing a fuller account of God’s promise. The quotation is from LXX, Gen. xv. 13, with a few alterations ; in LXX and Heb., the second person, not the third, is used; instead of οὐκ ἰδίᾳ in LXX, ἀλλοτρίᾳ, cf. Heb. xi. g; and instead of αὐτούς, αὐτό corre- sponding to oméppa. Wendt takes ὅτι as ‘“‘recitantis,’’ and not with Meyer as a constituent part of the quotation itself, LXX: Γιγνώσκων γνώσῃ ὅτι κ.τ.λ.--- πάροικον in LXX as a Stranger or so- journer in a country not one’s own, several times in combination with ἐν γῇ ἀλλοτρία, cf. Gen. xxi. 23, 34, ΧχΧνΙ. 3, and in N.T. ef. this passage and ver. 29. In Eph. ii. 19, Pet. ii. 11, the word is also used, but metaphorically, although the usage may be said to be baséd on that of the LXX; cf. Epist. ad Diognet. v., 5, and Polycarp, Phil., inscript. See Kennedy, Sources of N. T. Greek, p. 102. ---ἔτη τετρακόσια: so too Gen. xv. 13. The period named belongs not only to κακώσουσιν but also to ἔσται, as Meyer rightly observes. But in Exod. xii. 4ο four hundred and thirty years are men- tioned as the sojourning which Israel sojourned in Egypt, and in both passages the whole space of time is so occupied; or, at all events it may be fairly said that this is implied in the Hebrew text in both Gen. xv. 13 and Exod. xii. 40: