-6---δ.
233
Κύριος πρὸς αὐτόν, ᾿Ανάστηθι καὶ εἴσελθε εἰς τὴν πόλιν, καὶ λαληθή-
, - - σεταί σοι τί σε δεῖ ποιεῖν.
εἰστήκεισαν évveot,!
7. οἱ δὲ ἄνδρες of συνοδεύοντες αὐτῷ
~
t
ἀκούοντες μὲν τῆς Hovis, µηδένα δὲ θεωροῦντες.
8. ἠγέρθη δὲ ὁ Σαῦλος ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς: ἀνεφωγμένων δὲ τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν
> A 39 , ” ~ A DI > , > αὐτοῦ, οὐδένα έβλεπε, Χειραγωγοῦντες δὲ αὐτὸν εἰσήγαγον eis
1 εννεοι L; but ενεοι ΝΑΒΟΕΗΡ 61, Syr. Harcl. mg., so Tisch., W.H., Blass,
Hilg. ; see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 55.
Blass reconstructs the conclusion of ver. 7 and
the first half of ver. 8; Flor. (and partly Gig., Par., Wern.) µηδενα Se θεωρ. ped” ου ελαλει: εφη δεπρος αυτους’ εγειρατεµε απο της γης και εγειραγτων δε αυτον ουδεν εβλ. avewyp. T. oO. χειραγωγ. te—probably these additions arose partly from the wish to explain the µηδενα standing absolutely in νετ. 7 (cf: xxii. 9), partly to repre- sent the blindness as coming on Saul at once (and not after he had risen), and thus
making him need immediate help.
cum Christi est ecclesia, membra sunt fideles”’.
Ver. 5. Tis et, Κύριε; the title is here used in reverent and awestruck response to the question of a speaker, in whose voice, accompanied as it was by the supernatural light, Saul recognised a divine utterance—it is therefore more than a mere word of respect, as in xvi. 30, xxv. 26; it indicates, as St. Chry- sostum noted, a purpose to follow the voice, whether it was that of an angel or of God Himself (Felten), ‘‘ Jam parat se ad obediendum, qui prius insaniebat ad persequendum,” Augustine.—Ey® ... σὺ: both pronouns are emphatic, and contrasted: “Ingots, cf. xx. 8, and note. For rest of verse see critical notes.
Ver. 6. For this verse see critical notes and also xxii. το. ᾿Ανάστηθι: verb -characteristic of St. Luke, see on v. 7. Here, if we compare xxvi. 16 (xiv. το), it is evidently used in a literal sense.—xal λαληθήσεταί σοι, see note on xxvi. 15.
Ver. 7. οἱ συνοδεύοντες: probably riding in company with him; not found in classical Greek, but used in the same sense as here in Plutarch—not elsewhere in N. T ; but see Wisdom vi. 23, and Tobit v. 16 S (AB al.), so according to S? in Zech. viii. 21 (ABS 5 al.), cf. also Symm. in Gen. xxxili. 12.--εἰστήκεισαν ἐννεοί. The form ἐννεός is incorrect, see critical notes: in LXX, cf. Prov. xvii. 28, Isa. lvi. το, Epist. of Jer. 41 (Symm. in Hos, ix. 7) ; see critical notes. It is frivolous to find a contradiction here with xxvi. 14. No stress is laid upon εἱστήκ., which may be used like εἶναι, and even if there is, it does not preclude a previous falling. We have merely to suppose that the sight and sound had affected Saul’s com- panions in a less degree than Saul, and that they rose from the ground before
him, to make the narratives quite con- sistent (see Felten, p. 193, Hackett, in loco; B.D.1, iv., “Paul” p. 733). Or it is quite possible, as Weiss points out on xxvl. 14, that here the narrative em- phasises the impression made by the hearing of the voice, and in xxvi. 14 the immediate result produced by the light, and that the narrator is quite unconscious of any contradiction in his recital (see notes below on xxii., xxvi.).—pySéva δὲ θεωροῦντες: there is no contradiction be- tween this statement and xxii. 9, where it is said that they saw the light—here it is not denied that they saw a light, but only that they saw no person. Holtz- mann apparently forgets this, and says that whilst in xxix. 9 they see the light, in ix. 7 they see nothing; but the pro- noun is not neuter, but masculine; µηδένα (see critical notes and reading in B). The inference is that Saul saw Jesus, but al- though this is not stated in so many words here, it is also to be inferred from the words of Ananias in ver. 17, and xxii. 14, and from St. Paul’s own statement in I Cor. xv. 8, and ix. 1. St. Chrysostom refers ἀκούοντες μὲν τῆς >. to the words of Saul, but this is certainly not natural, for τῆς ϕ. evidently refers back to ἤκουσα φωνήν in ver. 4.