above, so Hilgenfeld, who holds that this reading makes it conceivable how Paul and Barnabas could continue their work, On ixavés with χρόνος, peculiar to St. Luke, see p. 215. Ramsay sees the same force in the aorists, and there- fore ver. 3 seems so disconnected that he can only regard it as an early gloss similar to many which have crept into the Bezan text. He thus inclines to adopt here Spitta’s hypothesis, and to regard vv. I, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 aS a primitive docu- ment. The Bezan text is to him simply an attempt to remedy the discrepancy which was felt to exist between vv. 2 and 3, and it presupposes two tumults; one in ver. 2, and the other in vv. 4 and 5. But there seems nothing unnatural in taking otv as marking a result from the events of the two previous verses, not from the second alone, or in the extended stay of the Apostles in the divided city. (Wendt (1899) supposes that in the original source ver. 3 preceded ver. 2, which makes the sequence quite easy. Clemen is much more drastic in his
2---,
393
Αα / - A lol 1 ~ , > a“ A ΄ τῷ Kupiw τῷ μαρτυροῦντι τῷ λόγῳ Ἰ τῆς χάριτος αὐτοῦ, καὶ διδόντι
σημεῖα καὶ τέρατα γίνεσθαι διὰ τῶν Χειρῶν αὐτῶν. 4. ἐσχίσθη " δὲ
τὸ πλῆθος τῆς πόλεως; καὶ Ol μὲν ἦσαν σὺν τοῖς Ιουδαίοις, οἱ δὲ
σὺν τοῖς ἀποστόλοις. 5.° Ὡς δὲ ἐγένετο ὁρμὴ τῶν ἐθνῶν τε καὶ
Ιουδαίων σὺν τοῖς ἄρχουσιν αὐτῶν, ὑβρίσαι καὶ λιθοβολῆσαι αὐτοὺς,
1 Wendt (1899), p. 248, maintains that ver, 3 preceded ver. 2 in the source, thus simplifying, as he thinks, the order of thought. t@ λογῳ, in ΝΑ, Syr. Pesh. επι precedes, so Tisch., Wendt, and Weiss ; cf. Heb. xi. 4, but prep. om. by ΝΕΒΟΡΕΙ.Ρ, Chrys., so W.H., Blass, Hilg. και διδ., om. και ABDEP, Chrys., so W.H., Blass, R.V., Wendt, Weiss, Hilg.; διδοντος so Ν 4, 21, 133, Tisch.
Σεσχισθη, D, Syr. Pesh. ην εσχισµενον, and for οι δε D reads αλλοι δε, so Hilg. ; Harris regards these as cases of Latinisation, so Corssen, p. 43. At end of verse, D, Syr. Harcl. mg. add κολλωμενοι δια τον λογον τον Θεον (so Blass in β and so Hilg.), the verb is Lucan, but we cannot say that it is original.
5 Syr. Harcl. mg. has “ et iterum excitaverunt persecutionem secundo Judei cum Gentibus et lapidantes eos eduxerunt eos ex civitate,” so Blass in B; cf. also Ephrem; Harris, Four Lectures, etc., p. 23. Hilg. follows T.R. Harris also quotes ‘et iniuriaverunt et lapidaverunt eos,’ d, which he suspects to be more archaic than its Greek. It is difficult to see how this can agree with σνυνιδοντες in the next verse, which could not be used of an assault actually committed, but Syr. Harcl. omits
σννιδ.
methods, and refers ver. 2 and vv. 4-65 to his Redactor Antijudaicus.)—rapfno. : speaking boldly in spite of the opposition of the Jews, see above on the verb, p. 242. -—émt, cf. iv. 17, 18 (elsewhere with ἐν), the Lord being the ground and support of their preaching; Calvin notes that the words may mean that they spoke boldly in the cause of the Lord, or that relying on His grace they took courage, but that both meanings really run into each other. —t@ Kvpiw: difficult to decide whether the reference is to Jesus; Nosgen takes it 5ο, not only on account of St. Luke’s usual way of giving Him this title, but also because the Acts speak expressly of the miracles of the Apostles as works of Christ, iii. 16, cf. iv. 30. On the other hand Meyer-Wendt appeals to iv. 29, xx. 24, 32 (but for last passage see var. lect.), Heb. ii. 4.
Ver. 4. ἐσχίσθη δὲ, better “and the multitude” (see Page’s note on ver. 3), cf. xxiii. 7, John vii. 43. There is no such marked success in ver. 3 as in Ramsay’s view. In Thessalonica, xvii. 4, 5,4 similar division, cf. Luke xii. 51.— ἀποστόλοις: the note of Weiss here takes the word, not in its technical sense at all, but only as missionaries; but see above on xiii. I.