THE
PULPIT COMMENTARY, EDITED BY THE
VERY REV. H. D. M. SPENCE, D.D., DEAN OF GLOUCESTER;
AND BY THE
REV. JOSEPH S. EXELL, M.A.
WITH
INTRODUCTIONS BY THE
VERY REV. F. W. FARRAR, D.D., F.R.S., DEAN OF CANTERBURY. RIG RT REV. H. COTTERILL, D.D., F.R.S.E. VERY REV. PRINCIPAL J. TULLOCH, D.D. REV. CANON G. RAWLINSON, M.A. REV. A. PLUMMER, M.A., D.D.
NEW F,,IJITION.
FUNK & WAGNALLS COMPANY LONDON AND NEW YORK 1909 ~ E D BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LlMlTED. LONDON AND BECCLES.
\ TM ,irla. of tr1M1latw,. lUUl o/ reJrorJuetlon are 1'1$trtlett.) THE
PULPIT COMMENTARY, EDITED BY TH"&
VERY REV. H. D. M. SPENCE, D.D., DEAN 01" GLOUCBBTBB J
AND BY TBE
REV. JOSEPH S. EXELL, M.A.
THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. @xposftfon anb l!'!omfletfcs THE RIGHT HON . .A.ND RIGHT REV. LORD A. C. HERVEY, D.D., LOBD BIBHOP OF DA.T.11 A.ND WBLLS.
~omflfes b11 1:Tatious ~utbots. REV. PROll'. P. 0. BARKER, M.A. REV. PROF. E. JOHNSON, M.A. REV. PROF. R. A. BEDFORD, M.A. REV. R. TUCK., B.A. REV. W. CLARKSON B.A.
VOL. II.
NEW EDITION.
FUNK & WAGNALLS COMPANY LONDON AND NEW YORK 1909 THE
ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. EXPOSITION.
OHAPTER XV. it. St. Pe.nl's mention of his visit to Jeru- salem might naturally recall the incident I/er. 1.-Came doton . .. and taught for which h11d led to it, and which was another wnich came down •• , taught, A.V. ; Baying example of his own independence. Farrar forandeaid,A. V.: custom({Bos) for manner, places Pater's visit to Antioch between the A.V. Except ye be circumcised, etc. The Council of Jerusalem and the quarrel with question thus raised nearly effected the Barnabas, in the time indicated in ver. 35 disruption of the Church, and was the most of this chapter (vol. i. oh. xxiii.),. and so do serious controversy that had yet a.risen. ~ Oonybeare and Howson (vol. i. p. 238), the views broached by these Judrean Chris- Meyer, and Alford (' Proleg. ,' p. 24 ; note tiane had prevailed, the whole character of on eh. xv. 36, and Gal. ii. 11). Rena.n (' St. Christianity would have been changed, and Paul,' p. 290, etc.) and Lewin (vol. i. eh. its existence probably cut short. How great xiii.) place it after St. P11ul's return to the danger was appears from even Peter Antioch, lit the conclusion of his second and Barnabe.e having wavered in their missionary journey (eh. xviii 22, 23). No opinion. (For St. Paul's treatment of the 11bsolute certainty can be arrived at, but see subject, see Rom. ii. 25, etc.; iv. ; Ge.I. v. note to ver. 35. Custom (see eh. xvi. 21); 2-6; vi. 12-15, etc.) The expression, T,vh ,.,. (871 is the technical term for the Mosaic 1Ca.Te/l.60V'T<S u,ril Tijs 'Iov5a.la.s, 1s so like that institutions, used by Josephus and Philo in Ge.I. ii. 11, Ilpb TOV h,Beiv ,.,,,as u,rb 'Ia,,c.S- (see too eh. vi. 14; xxi. 21, note). ~ov, a3 to suggest very strongly the con- Ver. 2.-.And when for when therefore, sideration whether Peter was not at Antioch A.V.; questioning for disputation, A.V.; at this time, o.nd whether the scene relnted the brethren (in italics) appointed for they in Gal. ii. 11, eto., did not precede, and in detennined, A.V. Certain other of them. fact ce.11Be, the Council of Jerusalem. In One of these would be Titus (Ga.I. ii. 1). this case the " dissension and disputation" The circumstance that, on this occasion, St. spoken of in ver. 2 would include and P11ul did go up to those who were 11postles jirectly point to the memorable rebuke before him, to consult with them on o. given by Paul to Peter; and we should un- m11tter of doctrine, shows e.t once why he derstand that Peter, accepting Paul's rebuke, refers so pointedly to tl.Jis visit in Gal. ii. 1, preceded him and Barnabas, and prepared etc., e.nd is 11lmost oonclusive evidence the.t the woy at Jerusalem for the solution this visit is the one there referred to. The arrived at. And, indeed, Pater's words at companionship of Barna.bas; the agreement Jerusalem ore almost e.n echo of Paul's of the expression, "I went up by reve! .. tion," wor<1s addressed to him e.t Antioch. If with the fa.et th11t he was sent by the Bame.bas had shown a leaning towards the Church, doubtless in obedience to some Judaizing party, he would thti more readily voice of the Spirit, like that mentioned in have been e.ccepted br them as one of the oh. xiii. 2; the ocC11Bion, 11 dispute a.bout embassy. The ohie objection to this the ciroumcision of Gentile converts; the hypothesis is that in Gal. ii. 11 Pater's line ta.ken by Paul e.nd Barn11b1111 in de• visit to Anti()(lh seems to be spoken of as ola.ring the conversion of the Gentiles (eh. 1<1mething subsequent to the journey of St. xv. 4, 12; Ge.l. ii. 27), 11nd the result (eh. Paul and Barna.bas to Jeruso.lem. But it xv. 19; Gill.. ii. 5, 7, 9), 111'0 1111 strong, not I.a not in the le11st necessary so to understand to say conclusive, n:uuks of the identity of A<Tl'S--IL B 2 THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. [err. xv. 1-41.