40-43
2 ~ - αὐτῆς: καὶ ἰδοῦσα τὸν Πέτρον, ἀνεκάθισε.
249
41. δοὺς δὲ αὐτῇ χεῖρα,
2 ή > LA ή 4 » ς [ή ‘ 3 [ή ΄ ἀνέστησεν αὐτήν . φωνήσας δὲ τοὺς ἁγιους καὶ τὰς χήρας, παρεστησεν
ο & gan αὐτὴν Looay.
42. γνωστὸν δὲ ἐγένετο καθ ὅλης τῆς Ἰόππης,!
, 43. kal πολλοὶ ἐπίστευσαν ἐπὶ τὸν Κύριον" ἐγένετο δὲ ἡμέρας
ς 9 2 τιν 52 εκανας μειναι αυτον
> δι, , , 7 ἐν ᾿Ἱόππη παρά τινι Σίμωνι βυρσεῖ.
lens lows, on spelling see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 56. Art. om.- by W.H. after
BC!, but retained here by*Weiss.
2 avrov om. 9) Β, so Tisch., W.H. (Weiss) ; and there are various other readings
but none possessing such strong support.
classical for a dead body, so too in LXX, cf. Deut. xxi. 23,1 Kings xiii. 24, 1 Macc. xi. 4, 2 Macc. ix. 29. Everything, as Wendt admits (1888), points to the fact that no apparent death, or a raising by natural means, is thought of by the narrator. Holtzmann and Pfleiderer can only find a parallel here with xx. 9-12, but none can read the two narratives without seeing their independence, ex- cept in the main fact that both narrate a similar τηϊτας]ε.---ἤνοιξε τοὺς 68. : 'to this there is nothing corresponding in the details given by the Gospel narratives, as Blass points out.
Ver. 41. δοὺς δὲ αὐτῇ χ.: here for help to her to rise, after she had been restored to life, but in the Gospels Christ takes the damsel by the hand before she is re- stored, Mark v. 41, Luke vill. 54. Thus, while retaining a close resemblance, as we might surely expect, to our Lord’s action in St. Mark’s narrative, there is yet sufficient independence of detail to show that one description is not a slavish imita- tion of the οίπετ.-- τὰς χήρας: Rendall sees in the words reference to an organ- ised body, 1 Tim. v. 11-16, engaged in the service of the Church, but the con- text only points to the widows who had been previously mentioned, species post genus, as in ver. 36 (Blass).
Ver. 42. καθ᾽ ὅλης, see above on ver. 31.
Ver. 43. ἐγένετο δὲ, see on ver. 37, Plummer, St. Luke, p. 45, on the use of ἐγένετο. The phrase also marks (as often in Luke) a transition to the following narrative (Nésgen).—apépas ἱκανὰς, see on viii. 11, and xxvii. 7. Kennedy speaks of the adjective as used in the vernacular sense of “long,” “many,” Aristoph., Pax., 354.--βυρσεῖ, in classics βυρσοδέ- apns: it is difficult to suppose that the common estimate of the work of a tanner amongst the Jews as unclean, on account of their constant contact with dead ani- mals, has here no significance. At least ‘the mention of the trade seems to show
that St. Peter was already inastateof mind which would fit him for the further revela- tion of the next chapter, and for the instruc- tions to go and baptise the Gentile Cor- nelius. On the detestation in which this trade was held by the Jews, see Wetstein, in loco; Edersheim, Fewish Social Life, Ρ. 158; cf. Mishna, Khethuboth, vii., 1Ο. It does not in any way militate against the historical character of the narrative, as Overbeck maintains, to admit that the description is meant to introduce the “universalism ” of the following inci- dent. Both Chrysostom and Theophylact (so too Erasmus) dwell upon this inci- dent in St. Peter’s life as illustrating his unassuming conduct.—’Iémmy, see
on ver. 36. Heb. 45S, “beauty,” Faffa;
see for references Josh. xix. 46, 2 Chron. ii. 16, Jonah i. 3, Ezra iii. 7; the port of Jerusalem from the days of Solomon (from which it was distant some thirty- five miles), situated on a hill so high that people affirmed, as Strabo mentions, that the capital was visible from its summit. It was comparatively (Schirer) the best harbour on the coast of Palestine (al- though Josephus, Β. F., iii., 9, correctly describes it as dangerous), and in this lay its chief importance. The Maccabees were well aware of this, and it is of