16—19.
429
17. Awd δὲ τῆς Μιλήτου πέµψας εἲς Ἔφεσον, µετεκαλέσατο τοὺς
πρεσβυτέρους τῆς ἐκκλησίας.
18. ὡς δὲ παρεγένοντο πρὸς αὐτόν,ὶ
εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, Ὑμεῖς ἐπίστασθε, ἀπὸ πρώτης ἡμέρας ap ἧς ἐπέβην
eis τὴν ᾿Ασίαν,2 πῶς μεθ) ὑμῶν τὸν πάντα χρόνον ἐγενόμην, 19. δου-
, ~ ή Q , ‘ a , λεύων τῷ Kupiw μετὰ πάσης ταπεινοφροσύνης καὶ πολλῶν δακρύων
καὶ πειρασμῶν, τῶν συμβάντων por ἐν ταῖς ἐπιβουλαῖς τῶν Ιουδαίων -
1 After αυτον (A)D (E, Gig., Vulg.) add οµοσε οντων αυτων, so Blass in β text. Harris, Four Lectures, etc., p. 61, thinks conflation here of a and β, so Gig. is double and reads ‘‘cum convenissent ad eum simulque essent’’,
2 After Ασιαν D adds ws τριετιαν η και πλειον, the form of the phrase does not look original; τριετια occurs in xx. 31 and nowhere else in N.T. Vogel, it may be
noted, classes it as one of the medical words in Luke’s writings ; see on ver. 31.
For
πως D has ποταπως, nowhere else in N.T.; but ποταπος six times in N.T., twice in
Jerusalem in time we are not told. St. Chrysostom maintained that he did, see also Ramsay, St. Paul, pp. 296, 297; McGiffert, p. 340 (on the other hand, Weiss, Renan, Felten). Mr. Turner, Chron. of N. T., p. 422, holds that the Apostle probably reached Jeru- salem just in time, while Farrar sees in xxiv. II an intimation that he arrived on the very eve of the Feast. The Penta- costal Feast was the most crowded, most attended by foreigners, cf. ii. 1.
Ver. 17. ᾿Απὸ δὲ τῆς M. π.: Appar- ently the Apostle could reckon on a stay of some days at Miletus. If we take into account the landing, the despatch- ing a messenger to Ephesus, and the summoning and journeying of the elders to Miletus, probably, as Ramsay thinks, the third day of the stay at Miletus would be devoted to the presbyters.— µετεκαλέσατο: “called to him,” R.V., cf. ii. 39 (and see on vii. 14, only in Acts), indicating authority or earnestness in the invitation.—rovs πρεσβ., see on xii. 25, and also below on ver. 28. For Pauline words and phraseology characterising the addresses, see following notes.
When Spitta remarks (Apostelge- schichte, p. 252 ff.) that the speech at Miletus is inferior to no part of Acts, not even to the description of the voyage in chap. xxvii., in vividness of expression and intensity of feeling, he expresses the opinion of every unbiassed reader. He justly too lays stress upon the fact that while ¢riticism admits the forcible and direct impression derived from the speech, it fails to account for it in the most natural way, viz., by the fact that whilst for the addresses delivered in the Pisidian Antioch and in Athens we are dependent upon a report
derived from hearsay, we are here in possession of the testimony of an eye- witness, and of a hearer of the speech (p. 252). Spitta (p. 254) defends the speech against the usual objections. It is disappointing to find that Hilgenfeld is content to regard the whole speech as interpolated by his “author to Theo- philus””. Clemen refers the whole speech to his R. or to R.A.; thus whilst ver. 192 is referred to R., τοῦ with its reference to the plots of the Jews is ascribed to R.A. (Redactor Antijudaicus); Jiingst ascribes ver. τοῦ from the words καὶ δακρύων . . . Ἰονδ. to the Redactor, but the previous part of the chap. xxi. to- ταπεινοφροσύνης, ver. 19, to his source A. So ver. 38 with its reference to ver. 25 is referred to the Redactor; whilst Clemen refers ver. 38a to his R.A., 38> to R.
Ver. 1δ. tpets: “ye yourselves,” R.V., ipsi, emphatic, cf. x. 37, xv. 7 ἀπὸ π. ἡ.: to be connected with what follows, although it is quite possible that the word may hold a middle place (Α|- ford), connected partly with ἐπίσ. and partly with ἐγεν.- ἐπέβην: “set foot in Asia,” R.V., only in Acts, except Matt. xxi. 5, also with the dative of place, Acts xxv. I, but the local meaning is doubtful (LXX, Josh. xiv. 9). Rendall renders “I took ship for Asia,” but although the ex- pression elsewhere refers to a voyage, cf.. xxi. 2, 4, 6, xxvii. 2, it is not always so used, 6.5., xxv. 1.---πῶς pe’ ὑ. . . . ἐγέν., cf. vii. 38 (versor cum), ix. το, Mark xvi. το. Bethge points out that the phrase is always used of intimate association and contrasts the less intimate significance of σύν. See also critical note and read- ing in D.