451
ἑκάστου αὐτῶν ἡ προσφορά. 27. ὡς δὲ ἔμελλον] ai ἑπτὰ ἡμέραι συντελεῖσθαι, ot ἀπὸ τῆς ᾿Ασίας ᾿Ιουδαῖοι, θεασάµενοι αὐτὸν ἐν τῷ
ἱερῷ,” συνέχεον πάντα τὸν ὄχλον, καὶ ἐπέβαλον τὰς χεῖρας ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν,
‘au επτα ημ., art. om. in E (ina text Blass brackets), Ὦ has συντελουµενης δε της εβδοµης ηµερας (so Blass in β text, Hilg.).
2 guvexeav is preferred by Blass with C and some mins., who thinks that the rst aor. is to be read here, because usually χυνω is pres. in N.T., but see, on the other
hand, Wendt (1899), p. 350 (Winer-Schmiedel, p. 111). Blass im B reads επιβαλλουσιν with D, so Hilg.
Weiss (Winer-Schmiedel, p. 112).
Gentile Christians, and that he expects St. Paul on his side to show that he has no desire to disparage the law in the eyes of Jewish Christians.
Ver. 26. τότε 6 Παῦλος: St. Paul’s conduct was another illustration of the rule laid down for himself when writing to Corinth, cf. 1 Cor. ix. 20. This is in itself an answer to the captious criticism which doubts the truth of his action on this occasion, so amongst recent writers Hilgenfeld (1896). The vow of Acts xviii. 18 is sufficient to show us that there is no reason to suppose that the Apostle was merely acting a part in following the advice of St. James. McGiffert discusses the question at length, p- 340 ff., and concludes that the Apostle may well have done just what he is reported to have done; and further, that as a simpler explanation of Paul’s arrest would have answered every purpose, the explanation given may fairly be assumed to be the true one. Renan, Saint Paul, p- 517, also accepts the narrative as an illustration of St. Paul’s own principle referred to above in 1 Cor. ix. 20, so too Wendt, J. Weiss, Pfleiderer, It seems strange that Wesley should have gone so far in the opposite direction as to believe that the Apostle actually suffered for his compliance with the wishes of James, ver. 33, cf. Speaker’s Commentary, in loco.—tq ἐχομ. ἡμέρα, taken either with παραλ. or with σὺν αὐτοῖς ayv., so R.V.; only in Luke, cf. Luke xiii. - 33, Acts xx. 15, without ἡμέρᾳ (so in Poly- bius) ; cf. xiii. 44, W. H. margin. In LXX r Chron. x. 8; 2 Macc. xii. 39 (1 Macc. iv. 28).—eloyer: according to our inter- pretation of the passage, the word means that Paul entered into the Temple, and stayed there for seven days with the four poor men until the period of their vow was fulfilled, Renan, Saint Paul, p. 520; but the expression need not mean more than that he entered into the Temple to give notice, or rather, giving notice, for the convenience of the priests of the day when the vow would be ended, and the
επεβαλαν Ν/Α, so W.H.,
necessary offerings brought.—é.ayyéA- λων: “declaring,” R.V., i.e, to the priests, not omnibus edicens (Grotius, so Grimm), ‘to signify” as in A.V., makes the participle future; verb only used by St. Luke in N.T. (Rom, xi. 17, quotation from LXX), 2 Macc. i. 33 (cf. its use in the sense of publication, Ps. ii. 7, lviii. 13, cf. 2 Macc. i. 33, iii. 34, Ecclesiast. xliti. 5).---τὴην ἐκπ. τῶν ἡ. τοῦ Gy., {.ε., the seven days, νετ. 27, which remained until the period of the vow was fulfilled, when the sacrifice was offered. Others however take ἕως οὗ with eioyer, “he entered in . . . (and remained) until the offering,” etc.—tmép ἑνὸς ἑκάστου αὐτῶν: there is no need to suppose with Nésgen that these words mean that the period of the full accomplishment of the vow was different in each of the four cases— at all events the whole period of “ puri- fication” did not extend over more than seven days.