Ver. 14. % Zau.: here the district; Weiss traces the revising hand of St. Luke (but see on the other hand Wendt, in loco). ‘There is nothing surprising in the fact that the preaching of the Gospel in the town should be regarded by the Apostles at Jerusalem as a proot that the
216
πρὸς αὐτοὺς τὸν Πέτρον καὶ Ιωάννην" 15. οἵτιες καταβάντες
προσηύξαντο περὶ αὐτῶν, ὅπως λάβωσι Πνεῦμα "Άγιον.
(16. οὕπω
9 = = tte ud ‘ Bla > , ’ δὲ , γὰρ qv ἐπ᾽ οὖδενὶ αὐτῶν ἐπιπεπτωκός, µόνον δὲ βεβαπτισμένοι
good news had penetrated throughout the district, or that the people of the town should themselves have spread the Gospel amongst their countrymen (cf. John iv. 28).---δέδεκται τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θ.: the phrase is characteristic of St. Luke, as it is used by him, Luke viii. 13, Acts xi. I, xvii. 11, but not by the other Evan- gelists—it is found once in St. Paul, τ Thess. i. 6 (cf. ii. 13 and James i. 21). In the mention of John here, as in ili. 4, Weiss can only see the hand of a reviser, since the beloved disciple is mentioned with Peter in a way for which, as Weiss alleges, no reason can be assigned, ili. 4, II, iv. 13; but nothing was more likely than that Peter and John should be associated together here as previously in the Gospels, see Plumptre’s note on Acts ili. 1.
Ver. 15. οἵτινες: on this form of the relative see Rendall, ἐπ loco; Blass how- ever regards it as simply = ot, Grammatik, p. 169, cf. xii. το.--καταβάντες, cf. xxiv. 1 (Luke ii. 42), xi. 2, xxi. 12,15. Wendt defends the historical character of this journey to Samaria as against Zeller and Ονετδρεεζ.-- προσηύξαντο περὶ: here only with περί; the verb is characteristic of St. Luke, and he alone has the construction used in this verse, cf. Luke vi. 28, W.H.
The exact phrase is found in St. Paul’s:
Epistles four or five times (and once in Hebrews), but often in LXX, and ef. Baruchi., 11,13; 2 Macc.i.6,xv.14. The laying on of hands, as in vi. 7 and xiii. 3, is here preceded by prayer, see Hooker, Eccles. Pol., v., chap. lxvi., Τ-4.--ὅπως λάβωσι Πν. Άγιον: the words express the chief and highest object of the Apostles’ visit: it was not only to ascertain the genuineness of the conversions, or to form a connecting link between the Church of Samaria and that of Jerusa- lem, although such objects might not have been excluded in dealing with an entirely new and strange state of things —the recognition of the Samaritans in a common faith. It has been argued with great force that the expression Holy Spirit is not meant here in its dogmatic Pauline sense; Luke only means to include in it the ecstatic gifts of speaking with tongues and prophecy. This view is held to be supported by ἰδών in ver. 18, intimating that outward manifestations which meet the eye must have shown
themselves, and by the fact that the same verb, ἐπέπεσε, is used in cases where the results which follow plainly show that the reception of the Holy Ghost meant a manifestation of the out- ward marvellous signs such as marked the day of Pentecost, x. 44, 46, xi. 15 (cf. xix. 6). In the case of these Samari- tans no such signs from heaven had followed their baptism, and the Apostles prayed for a conspicuous divine sanction on the reception of the new converts (Wendt, Zéckler, Holtzmann, and see also Hort, Ecclesia, pp. 54, 55). But even supposing that the reception of the Holy Ghost could be thus limited, the gift of tongues was no mere magical power, but the direct result of a super natural Presence and of a special grace— of that Presence speaking with tongues, prophesyings, and various gifts, 1 Cor. xiv. I, 14, 37, were no doubt the outward manifestations, but they could not have been manifested apart from that Presence, and they were outward visible signs ot an inward spiritual grace. In a book so marked by the working of the Holy Spirit that it has received the name of the ‘“‘ Gospel of the Spirit” it is difficult to believe that St. Luke can mean to limit the expression λαμβάνειν here and in the following verse to anything less than a bestowal of that divine indwelling of the spirit which makes the Christian the temple of God, and which St. Paul speaks of in the very same terms as a permanent possession, Gal. ili. 2, Rom. viii. 15 (Gore, Church and the Ministry, p. 258). St. Paul’s language, 1 Cor. xii. 30, makes it plain that the advent of the Holy Spirit was not of necessity attested by any peculiar manifestations, nor were these manifestations essential accom- paniments of it: ‘Do all speak with tongues ?”’ he asks, “ Are all prophets ?”’ See further on ver. 17.