182
cSeever.10. με *yxatédiov!-—ph αὐτοῖς “᾿ λογισθείη.---τ7. ὁ δὲ Κύριός μοι
ἃ Rom. ii. 26, iv. passim., 2
> a “παρέστη καὶ * ἐνεδυνάμωσέν με, ἵνα δι ἐμοῦ 5 τὸ " κήρυγμα ἢ πληρο-
Cor.v. 19, φορηθῇ καὶ ἀκούσωσιν 3. πάντα τὰ ἔθνη - καὶ ᾿ ἐρύσθην ἐκ στόματος
Gen. xv.
k k
6. Ps. λέοντος. 18. ῥύσεταί pe ὃ Κύριος ἀπὸ παντὸς “Epyou “ πονηροῦ XXX1. (xxXxil.) 2. a A ΛΑ
ε Acts xxvii. 23, Rom. xvi. 2. f See 1 Tim. i. 12. g 1 Cor. i. 21, Tit. i. 8. h See ver.
i See 2 Tim. iii. 11.
k John iii. το, vii. 7, Col. i, 21,1 John iii. το.
190 $§D*Ksil., most cursives; ἐγκατέλειπον ACDbeFGLP.
3 ἀκούσῃ KL.
plausible. But in this latter case again the language of Philippians has no traces of forsakenness. We decide therefore that St. Paul is here referring to the preliminary investigation (prima actio) which he underwent after he arrived at Rome a prisoner for the second time, and which resulted in his remand. He was now writing to Timothy during the interval between his remand and the second, and final, trial. But if we thus explain “ my first defence,’’ how are we to interpret ἵνα δι ἐμοῦ, κ.τ.λ. The explanation will be suggested by a com- parison of such passages as Rom. xv. 19, ‘From Jerusalem, and round about even unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the gospel of Christ”; Col. i. 23, “ The gospel which .. . was preached in all creation ’’. We annex a territory by the mere act of planting our country’s flag on a small portion of its soil; so in St. Paul’s thought a single proclamation of the gospel might have a spiritual, almost a prophetical, significance, immeasurably greater than could be imagined by one who heard it. ‘ Una szpe occasio max- imi est momenti”’ (Bengel). It is to be noted too that παρέστη and ἐνεδυνάμωσεν tefer to the occasion of the “first de- fence,’’ and St. Paul does not say that the Lord set him free; so that we are obliged to explain ἵνα δι᾽ ἐμοῦ, κ.τ.λ. of St. Paul’s bold assertion of his faith in Christ on that occasion, which however was a public one, not like his previous ptivate teaching to those who came to him ‘‘in his own hired dwelling’? (Acts XxViil. 30).
mapeyeveto: adfuit (Vulg.), supported meas “advocatus’’. The verb is used of appearing in a court of justicein reff. It simply means to come or arrive in 1 Cor. xvi. 3. This complaint is difficult to reconcile with ver 21. Perhaps here St. Paul is referring to old friends on whom he had a special claim.
Ver. 17. παρέστη: The Lord was my “* patronus,” cf. Rom. xvi. 2. But the
3 Ins. καὶ DcFerGKLP, g, syrr.
word is used ina purely local sense of the felt presence of a Divine Being in reff. in Acts.
ἐνεδυνάμωσεν: See note on 1 Tim. i. 12. πληροφορηθῇ: impleatur (Vulg.). As long as there had been no public procla- mation of the gospel by Paul himself in Rome, the function of κῆρυξ had not been completely fulfilled by him.
ἐρύσθην ἐκ στόματος λέοντος: This is most naturally understood as an echo of Ps. xxi.(xxii.) 22, σῶσόν pe ἐκ στόματος λέοντος. ῥῦσαι occurs in the verse pre- ceding. And what follows in the LXX seems to point to the most satisfactory explanation of the apostle’s meaning, Kal ἀπὸ κεράτων μονοκερώτων τὴν ταπείνωσίν μου. διηγήσομαι τὸ ὄνομα σου τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς μου, κιτιλ. If St. Paul had not been strengthened to com- plete his κήρυγμα, his failure would have been his ταπείνωσις. ‘As it was, he was delivered from that calamity, and enabled to declare God’s name to the Gentiles. It is impossible, in view of ἤδη σπένδομαι (ver. 6), to suppose that delivery from death is implied. πρώτῃ (ver. 16) proves that the apostle was aware that a second trial was awaiting him, the issue of which he knew would be his execution. It is still more in:possible to suppose that literal wild beasts are meant. Paul’s Roman citizenship secured him from that degradation. The Greek commentators take ‘‘ the lion ’’ to mean Nero, “" from his ferocity’? (Chrys.). Cf. Esth. xiv. 13, of Ahasuerus; Joseph. Antig. xviii. 6, το, of Tiberius. It is πο objection to this exegesis that the article is omitted before λέοντος, since, as we have seen, there is none in the Psalm. But deliverance from that lion’s mouth would be equiva- lent to acquittal by the Roman govern- ment; and it is evident that St. Paul was well aware that his sentence had been only deferred.