CHAPTER XX.—Ver. 1. peta δὲ τὸ παύσ.: the words may indicate not only the fact of the cessation of the tumult, but that Paul felt that the time for de- parture had «οπιε.---θόρ., cf. Matt. xxvi. 5, xxvii. 24, Mark xiv. 2; three times in Acts, xxi. 34, xxiv. 18, and several times in LXX. In xxi. 34 it is used more as in classics of the confused noise of an assembly (cf. Mark v. 38), but in the text it seems to cover the whole riot, and may be translated “riot”. — ἄσπασά- pevos: “non solum salutabant osculo advenientes verum etiam discessuri,” Wetstein, and references; so in classical Greek, cf. also xxi. 6, 7, 19.
Ver. 2. διελθὼν δὲ, see above on xiii. 6, “and when he had gone through,” ina missionary progress τὰ µέρη ἐκεῖνα, {.6., of Macedonia, the places where he had founded Churches, Thessalonica, Berea, Philippi. From Rom. xv. 19 it would appear that his work continued some time, and that round about even unto Illyricum he fully preached the Gospel.
αἲ--ᾱ. ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ 421
λόγω πολλῷ, ἦλθεν cis τὴν Ἑλλάδα: 3. ποιήσας τε µῆνας τρεῖς, γενομένης αὐτῷ ἐπιβουλῆς ὑπὸ τῶν Ιουδαίων 1 µέλλοντι ἀνάγεσθαι εἲς
1D, Syr. H. mg., Ephr. read after Ιουδαιων ηθελησεν αναχθηναι εις Σ., which gives rather a different idea, viz., that a plot of the Jews induced Paul to leave Corinth (so Belser, p. 108; Hilgenfeld also adopts, Zw. Th., 1896, p. 368) ; but Blass transposes the clauses and reads in B: ποιη. τε p. τ. ηθελ. αναχθῆναι εις Σ. και γενηθεισης αυτῳ επιβουλης vireo των |.; see as against this transposition by Blass, Wendt (1899), p. 5ο. For εγενετο γνωμης του υπο. D, Syr. H. mg., Gig. read ειπεν δε το πνευμα. Blass omits δε in B, and so the antithesis is not maintained. Weiss, p- 98 (note), condemns Blass for making ειπεν το πν. the equivalent of εγεν. γνωμης, whilst in xix. 1 a distinction is decisively drawn between the ιδια βονλη (= γνωμη)
of the Apostle and the guidance of the Spirit. NAB*E 133, 15, 18, Tisch., W.H., R.V., Weiss, Wendt.
On the connection of 2 Cor. with this part of Acts, see “II. Corinthians ”’ (Robertson), Hastings’ B.D., i., pp. 493, 495 ; Ramsay, St. Paul, p. 286 ; and on the coincidence between Acts and Romans, t.c.,see Paley, Hore Paulina, Π., {.---τὴν Ἑλλάδα, 1.ε., Achaia in its Roman sensé (approximately at all events); the stay might have included a visit to Athens, but at all events Corinth was visited. A wider sense of the epithet ‘‘ Greek” would comprise Macedonia also, and Macedonia and Achaia are thus spoken of in close connection as forming the Greek lands in Europe, ¢f. xix. 21, and Rom. xv. 26, 2 Cor. ix. 2, 1 Thess. i. 8, “Achaia” (Ramsay), Hastings’ B.D.
Ver. 3. ποιήσας τε μῆνας τρεῖς, cf. XV. 33, XViii. 23.--ἐπιβουλῆς: only in Acts in N.T., see above on ix. 24; the plot may have been formed in the antici- pation that it would be easy to carry it through on a pilgrim ship crowded with Jews of Corinth and Asia, hostile to the Apostle; or it may have been the pur- pose of the conspirators to kill Paul in a crowded harbour like Cenchrez before the ship actually κιατίεά.---μέλλ, ἀνάγ., see on xiii. 13. If we read ἐγέν. γνώμης (genitive) (cf. 2 Peter i. 20), nowhere else in N.T., cf. Thuc., i., 113, ὅσοι τῆς αὐτῆς γνώμης ἧσαν, see also Winer-Schmiedel, Ρ. 260.---τοῦ ὑποσ., {.ε., the return jour- ney to Jerusalem (Ramsay), but see also Wendt (1899), p. 323.
Ver. 4. συνείπετο δὲ αὐτῷ: only here in N.T., cf. 2 Macc. xv. 2, 3 Macc. v. 48, vi. 21, but frequent in classics.—daxpu τῆς ᾿Α.: among more recent writers Rendall has argued strongly for the re- tention of the words, whilst he maintains, nevertheless, that all the companions of the Apostle named here accompanied him to Jerusalem. In his view the words are an antithesis to ᾿Ασιανοὶ δέ, so that whilst on the one hand one party, %iz., six of the deputies, travel with Paul