The Pulpit Commentary — Acts — Volume 1 — Section 11

(Gal. i. l!J); " the _brethren of th~ L?rd "are him by lot. The language is taken from l!Ja mentioned 1 Cor. u:. 5; and agam m John O_lcl Testament (see e.g. Josh. xviii. 10, 11; vii. 3, 6, 10, " the brethren of J eeus" are Jax. 1, 10, etc.). Those who received such a. ■ poken of. Thie is not the place to enter portion (1<71.~pov) were clergy. upon thediffioult question of their pRrento.ge. Vor. 18.-0btained for purchased, A.V., an Uut it mo.y suffice to ea.y that if James and nnnecesse.ry change; his iniquity for ini1uity, JudRS a.re the two o.postles of that name A.V. It is obvious the.t this verse and ver. (wbioh Alford, however, thinks they cer- 19, which are ple.ced in a. pe.rentheeis in the tainly were not, referring to John vii. 5, R.V., are not pa.rt of St. Pater's discourse, compared with vi. 67), then the brethren but are expla.ne.tory words inserted by St. here spoken of as distinct from the o.postles Luke for the instruction of Theophilus e.nd would be Joses o.nd Simon. hiB other readers. Falling headlong; i.e. Ver. 15.-These for those, A.V.; brethren from the tree or gollows on which he hung for disciples, A.V. ond 'l'.R.; and there was himself (eee Matt. xxvii. 3-8). The only a multitude of persons gathered together for apparent discrepancies in the e.cconnh of the number of names together were, A.V.; a St. Matthew and St. Luke in regard to the for an, A.V. Peter justifies his primo.cy by purche.ee of the field, and the name given to taking the lend in the first onward move- it, are that, e.ccording to St. llfatthew's more ment of the Church. Names is a. common detailed e.cconnt, it wos tho chief priests who Hebraism for "persons" (see Rev. iii 4; e.ctually pnrchnsed the field with Judas'a Numb. i. 2). Gathered together; i.e. to one money, whereas St. Lukesays,less accurately, plo.ce and at one time (sea the same phrase, the.t Judas purchased it. Again, St. lllattbew eh. ii. I, 44). Wordsworth quotes lgne.t., 'Ad explains the name Alcel-dama o.s being given l\fagnes' vii., e.nd Ulem. Hom. i. 4, where to the field because it wns the price of the the so.me phre.se, brl -ro a.!JTb, indicative of "innocent blood" of Jesus betrayed by Church unity occurs. Judas, whereas St. Luke's account ro.ther Ver. 16.-Brethren, ii was needful that suggests that it we.e J ude.s's own blood shed the Scripture should be fulfilled for men and in his fall which gave the name. But both brethren, this Scripture must needs hawe been accounts of the name might be trne, some fulfilled, A.V.; spalce before by the mouth of nnderstanding the name in one sense e.nd David for by the mouth of Dawid spake before, some in the other. (Compare the different A.V. It was needful, etc. So our Lord de- accounts of the name of Bcer-sheba in Gen. ele.red, "The Scriptures cannot be broken" xxi. 31 and xxvi. 32, 33; of the origin ot' (John x. 35); e.nd "All things must be ful- the proverb," Is Saul among the prophets?" filled which were written," etc. (Luke xxiv. 1 Sam. x. 11, 12 e.nd xx. 2±; e.nd other 25-27, 44--46). It is most important to our similar cases.) Though, !Jowevcr, there is Christian integrity that we should view the no serious discrepancy between St. Luke Scriptures in the ea.me light e.s our Lord and and St. Matthew, it is probable, from the his apostles did,e.s containing real prophecies, ve.rie.tious e.bovo named, t!Jat St. Lnke had spoken by the Holy Ghost. (Compare the not seen St. Matthew's account. manner in which the sixty-ninth pee.Im is Ver, 19.-Became known for teas /;nown, here quoted with the.tor Heh. iii. 7.) So the A.V.; that in their language that field was Creed, "I believe in the Holy Ghost, . . . called .dlceldama for as that field is called in who epe.ke by the prophets" (comp. eh. iv. their proper tongue, .Aceldama, A.V. and T.Il. 25; nviii. 25). Who was guide, etc. If St. Ver. 20.-Made desolate for desolate, A.V.; Peter had only been o.dclressing hie brother office (e.s in margin) for bishopric, A. V. The apostles, who were well acquainted with the book of Pse.l.ms, one of the recognized divi- tree.c!Jery of Judas, it would scarcely hRve sions of the canonical Scriptures, as we fi0<.l been 1mture.l to introduce these words; they Luke xxiv. 44, "The law of Moses, nnd tho would hove seemed rather to be exple.ne.tory prophets, e.nd the psnlms," tbe le.at standing words added by the historian. Dut ~he for the Hagiogmpha., of which it wns the eircumste.ncee might be very imperfecUy first nnd prinoipe.l book. Here, however, as known to many of the hundred e.nd twenty in Luke xx. 42, it may re.ther mean the Beak brethren assembled on this occnsion; and if of Pse.lms proper. (For similar quotations so, the reference to J ude.s'e treachery would from the PsRims, see eh. xiii. &"l...-35; Heb. not be out of place in St. Peter's mouth. i., ii., iii., iv., v., x., etc.) His office let another Ver. 17.-.dmong for toith, A.V.; recefred tue. Bishop being the English translitere.- his portion in for had obtained part of, A.V. tion of bria1<01ror, bishopric is, of course, For he was numbered, etc. This is said in the literal rendering of ;1r1a1<0..-I, ; if taken order to allow thu.t the passage in ihe Psnlms in its wider and more geuerul sense, e.s iu applied strictly to Judas, seeing he had held the well-known work of Archdeacon Evans, his portion in the ministry and office of un '' tho bishopric of souls." This samo office upoetle (see John vi. 71). His portion; is callccl a 1i,a1<,vb (a dcacouship), 11ud lit11rnlly, lii6 lot; i.e. tile portion which fell to ci.-oa-ru71.i) (nn npostleship) in vers. 17 o.uli  6 THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. [ou. 1. 1-~.