Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Acts 1:20
For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishopric let another take.
20. The passages quoted by St Peter are from Psa 69:25, where it is written “Let their habitation be desolate, and let none dwell in their tents;” and Psa 109:8, “Let his days be few, and let another take his office.” St Peter changes the plural of the former verse into the singular in his quotation, for David was speaking of many enemies of his own, yet though Judas was the instrument through which the many enemies of Jesus wrought out their will, it is the punishment which came on the chief offender that St Peter is now desirous to illustrate and point to as a fulfilment of prophecy. The fulfilment in the case of the Jewish nation came at a later date, though their days as a nation were now few, and their destruction, when it came, as terrible as that of Judas.
Let his habitation be ] Rather, become, or be made.
and his bishoprick ] Now that this word has so restricted a meaning in English it is better to use the more general term office which is given in the margin. In Act 1:25 this ministry is used of the same charge, and might be rendered this diaconate. A comma placed after the second and in this verse will make it clear that there are two quotations from different places. There is no contradiction between the two passages quoted by St Peter, for though the habitation of Judas is to become desolate, and have none dwelling therein, the office which he had been chosen to fill is still to be occupied, and the purpose of God in the choice of the twelve is not to be left incomplete through the offence of the traitor. And it is on the necessity for filling his place that St Peter immediately dwells, saying, For this reason must a new member be chosen. In one passage of the Psalmist the Spirit speaks of the vacancy in the Apostolic office through Iscariot’s transgression, in the other of the necessity for filling it up.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
For it is written … – See Psa 69:25. This is the prediction doubtless to which Peter refers in Act 1:16. The intermediate passage in Act 1:18-19, is probably a parenthesis; the words of Luke, not of Peter. So Calvin, Kuinoel, Olshausen, DeWette, and Hackett understand it. It is not probable that Peter would introduce a narrative like this, with which they were all familiar, in an address to the disciples. The Hebrew in the Psalm is, Let their habitation (Hebrew: fold, enclosure for cattle; tower, or palace) be desolate, and let none dwell in their tents. This quotation is not made literally from the Hebrew, nor from the Septuagint. The plural is changed to the singular, and there are some other slight variations. The Hebrew is, Let there be no one dwelling in their tents. The reference to the tents is omitted in the quotation. The term habitation, in the Psalm, means evidently the dwelling-place of the enemies of the writer of the Psalm. It is an image expressive of their overthrow and defeat by a just God: Let their families be scattered, and the places where they have dwelt be without an inhabitant, as a reward for their crimes.
If the Psalm was originally composed with reference to the Messiah and his sufferings, the expression here was not intended to denote Judas in particular, but one of his foes who was to meet the just punishment of rejecting, betraying, and murdering him. The change, therefore, which Peter made from the plural to the singular, and the application to Judas especially as one of those enemies, accords with the design of the Psalm, and is such a change as the circumstances of the case justified and required. It is an image, therefore, expressive of judgment and desolation coming upon his betrayer – an image to be literally fulfilled in relation to his habitation, drawn from the desolation when a man is driven from his home, and when his dwelling-place becomes tenantless. It is not a little remarkable that this Psalm is repeatedly quoted as referring to the Messiah: Psa 69:9, The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up, expressly applied to Christ in Joh 2:17, Joh 2:21, They gave me also gall for my meat; and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink – the thing which was done to Jesus on the cross, Mat 27:34.
The whole Psalm is expressive of deep sorrow of persecution, contempt, weeping, being forsaken, and is throughout applicable to the Messiah; with what is remarkable, not a single expression necessarily limited to David. It is not easy to ascertain whether the ancient Jews referred this Psalm to the Messiah. A part of the title to the Psalm in the Syriac version is, It is called a prophecy concerning those things which Christ suffered, and concerning the casting away of the Jews. The prophecy in Act 1:25 is not to be understood of Judas alone, but of the enemies of the Messiah in general, of which Judas was one. On this principle the application to Judas of the passage by Peter is to be defended.
And his bishopric let another take – This is quoted from Psa 109:8, Let his days be few, and let another take his office. This is called a Psalm of David, and is of the same class as Psa 6:1-10; Ps. 22; Ps. 25; Ps. 38; Psa 42:1-11; This class of Psalms is commonly supposed to have expressed Davids feelings in the calamitous times of the persecution by Saul, the rebellion of Absalom, etc. They are all also expressive of the condition of a suffering and persecuted Messiah, and many of them are applied to him in the New Testament. The general principle on which most of them are applicable is, not that David personated or typified the Messiah which is nowhere affirmed, and which can be true in no intelligible sense – but that he was placed in circumstances similar to the Messiah; was encompassed with like enemies; was persecuted in the same manner. They are expressive of high rank, office, dignity, and piety, cast down, waylaid, and encompassed with enemies.
In this way they express general sentiments as really applicable to the case of the Messiah as to David. They were placed in similar circumstances. The same help was needed. The same expressions would convey their feelings. The same treatment was proper for their enemies. On this principle it was that David deemed his enemy, whoever he was, unworthy of his office, and desired that it should be given to another. In like manner, Judas had rendered himself unworthy of his office, and there was the same propriety that it should be given to another. And as the office had now become vacant by the death of Judas, and according to one declaration in the Psalms, so, according to another, it was proper that it should be conferred on some other person. The word rendered office in the Psalm means the care, charge, business, oversight of anything. It is a word applicable to magistrates, whose care it is to see that the laws are executed; and to military men who have charge of an army, or a part of an army.
In Job 10:12 it is rendered thy visitation. In Num 4:16, and to the office of Eleazar, etc. In the case of David it refers to those who were entrusted with military or other offices who had treacherously perverted them to persecute and oppose him, and who had thus shown themselves unworthy of the office. The Greek word which is used here, episkopen, is taken from the Septuagint, and means the same thing as the Hebrew. It is well rendered in the margin office, or charge. It means charge or office in general, without in itself specifying of what kind. It is the concrete of the noun episkopous, commonly translated bishop, and means his office, charge, or duty. That word means simply having the oversight of anything, and as applied to the officers of the New Testament, it denotes merely their having charge of the affairs of the church, without specifying the nature or the extent of their jurisdiction.
Hence, it is often interchanged with presbyter or elder, and denotes the discharge of the duties of the same office: Act 20:28, Take heed (presbyters or elders, Act 20:17) to yourselves, and to all the flock over the which the Holy Spirit hath made you overseers – episkopous – bishops; Heb 12:15, Looking diligently, etc. – episkopountes; Phi 1:1, with the bishops and deacons; Paul called presbyters bishops, for they had at that time the same name (Theodoret, as quoted by Sehleusner); 1Pe 5:2, Feed the flock of God (that is, you who are elders, or presbyters, 1Pe 5:1), taking the oversight thereof – episkopountes. These passages show that the term in the New Testament designates the supervision or care which was exercised over the church, by whomsoever performed, without specifying the nature or extent of the jurisdiction. It is scarcely necessary to add that Peter here did not intend to affirm that Judas sustained any office corresponding to what is now commonly understood by the term bishop.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 20. For it is written in the book of Psalms] The places usually referred to are Ps 69:25: Let their habitation be desolate, and let none dwell in their tents. And Ps 109:8: Let his days be few, and let another take his office, pekudato, his overseership, his charge of visitation or superintendence, translated by the SEPTUAGINT, , VULGATE, episcopatum; and WE, following both, bishopric, but not with sufficient propriety, for surely the office or charge of Judas was widely different from what we call bishopric, the diocess, estate, and emoluments of a bishop. , episcopos, which was corrupted by our Saxon ancestors into [Anglo-Saxon], biscop, and by us into bishop, signifies literally an overseer or superintendent, from , over, and , I see, a person who had the inspection, overseeing, or superintendence of others. The ancient were persons who had the care of different congregations of the Church of Christ; who travelled, preached, enforced the discipline of the Church, and took care to prevent false doctrines, heresies, c. Those who still deserve this title, and it is an august and noble one, walk by the same rule, and mind the same thing. , episcopus, or bishop, is a scriptural and sacred title was gloriously supported in the primitive Church; and many to the present day are not less ornaments to the title, than the title is ornamental to them. The best defenses of the truth of God, and the Protestant faith, are in the works of the bishops of the British Churches.
The words quoted from the Psalms were originally spoken against the enemies of David; and as David, in certain particulars, was a type of Christ, the words are applied to him in an especial manner who had sinned against his own soul and the life of his Master.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
For it is written in the book of Psalms; viz. Psa 69:25. What there is in general spoken by David concerning his enemies, is here applied particularly to Judas, who betrayed our Saviour; whose type David was, as Doeg was of Judas.
His bishopric; his charge or office, or prefecture, as of a shepherd over his flock.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
20. his bishopricor “charge.”The words are a combination of Psa 69:25;Psa 109:8; in which the apostlediscerns a greater than David, and a worse than Ahithophel and hisfellow conspirators against David.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
For it is written in the book of Psalms,…. In
Ps 69:25. These are the words of Peter, citing the Scripture he had said must be fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost, by David, had spoke concerning Judas:
let his habitation be desolate. The Arabic and Ethiopic versions render it, “his city”; meaning, perhaps, the city of Jerusalem; and which afterwards did become desolate, and was utterly destroyed:
and let no man dwell therein; in his habitation. The psalm, out of which these words are cited, is a psalm concerning the Messiah, and there are many passages cited out of it in the New Testament, and applied to him, or referred unto; see Joh 2:17 compared with Ps 69:4 and what the psalmist says of the enemies of the Messiah in general, is applied by the apostle to Judas in particular. In the Hebrew text, in Ps 69:25 the words are in the plural number, “let their habitation be desolate, and let none dwell in their tents”; and refer to all the enemies of Christ, the chief priests, elders of the people, Scribes and Pharisees, who covenanted with Judas to give him so much money to betray Christ into their hands; and who delivered him to the Roman governor, by whom, at their instigation, he was crucified; and particularly may well be thought to include Judas, who betrayed him to them; and therefore are very fitly interpreted of him: though not to be understood to the exclusion of the others, whose house was to be left desolate, and was left desolate, as our Lord predicted, Mt 23:38. The first word in the Hebrew text rendered “habitation”, signifies a very magnificent dwelling; it is sometimes translated a “castle”, Ge 25:16 and sometimes a “palace”, Cant. 8:9, Eze 25:4 and it is interpreted by , “a palace”, here, by several Jewish writers s; and so may intend the dwelling places of the richer sort of Christ’s enemies, as the palaces of the high priest, and of the prince, or president of the sanhedrim, and the stately houses of the members of it, of the chief priests and elders of the people, and of the Scribes and Pharisees; all which became desolate at the destruction of Jerusalem: the other word, rendered “tents”, may design the cottages of the meaner sort of people, who, with united voices, cried aloud for the crucifixion of Christ; and which also shared the same fate when Jerusalem was destroyed: now inasmuch as Judas was of the meaner sort, the apostle here makes use of a word which signifies but a poor and mean habitation, though it is sometimes used of grander ones, and which seems to answer to the latter; for as there are two words in the original text expressive of habitation, he might choose which he would, and did choose that which was most pertinent in the application of the passage to Judas. However, a Jew has no reason to find fault with this version, since the Targum renders both words by “habitation”, thus;
let their habitation be desolate, and in their habitations let no one dwell: where Judas’s habitation was is not certain; but that he might have one as well as the Apostle John, is not at all improbable, and from hence seems evident:
and his bishopric let another take; which passage stands in
Ps 109:8 and is fitly applied to Judas, and was verified in him, who not only died a violent and infamous death, by which he was in consequence stripped of his office, as a bishop, or overseer; but another was to be put into it, invested with it, and exercise it; and therefore very pertinently does Peter produce it, his intention being to move the disciples to choose another in his room. These words are produced by the apostle, as if they were to be found in the same place with the preceding; whereas they stand in another psalm, as has been observed: and this is no unusual thing with the writers of the New Testament, to put several passages of Scripture together, as if they were in one place, when they are to be sought for in different places; an instance of this, among many, that might be mentioned, is in Ro 3:10 and this is a very common way of citing Scripture with the Jews. Surenhusius t has given a variety of instances, in proof of this, out of their writings, as in the margin u, which the learned reader may consult and compare at leisure. The psalm, out of which this passage is cited, is not to be understood of David literally, and of what he met with from his enemies, and of his imprecations upon them, either Doeg the Edomite, as Kimchi interprets it, or Ahithophel, as others, but of the Messiah, with whom the whole agrees; against whom the mouth of the wicked Jews, and particularly of the deceitful Pharisees, were opened; and against whom the false witnesses spoke with lying tongues; and who, all of them, compassed him with words of hatred to take away his life, and acted a most ungenerous and ungrateful part; opposed him without a cause, and became his enemies for his love showed to them, both to soul and body, preaching the Gospel, and healing diseases, Ps 109:2. The poverty and distress he submitted to; the griefs and sorrows which he bore; the fatigues he underwent at his examination; and the weakness of body he was then reduced to, as well as the reproach cast upon him on the cross, when his enemies shook their heads at him, are in a very lively manner described, Ps 109:22 and whereas one of his enemies particularly is singled out from the rest, what is said concerning him, by way of imprecation, suits with Judas, and had its accomplishment in him, Ps 109:6 who had a wicked man set over him, as over the rest of the Jews, Pilate, the Roman governor, a very wicked man; and at whose right hand Satan stood, as one of his council, as Aben Ezra interprets it, and put it into his heart to betray his master, and prompted him to it, and then accused him of it, and brought him to black despair for it; and who, when this affair was brought home to his own conscience, and there arraigned for it, was convicted and self-condemned, as he also will be at the general judgment; and as he found no place of mercy then, whatever prayers or entreaties he might make, so neither will he hereafter: his days were but few, being cut off in the prime of them, as may be concluded from the many years which some of his fellow apostles lived after him; and his bishopric, or office, as an apostle, was taken by another, even by Matthias, who was chosen in his room, of which we have an account in the following part of this chapter; for this is to be understood neither of his money, nor of his wife, nor of his own soul committed to his trust, as some of the Jewish writers w explain it; but of his apostleship, with which he was invested by Christ. The word signifies an oversight, care, or charge; and so the Hebrew word is rendered in Nu 3:32 and designs any office, as the office of the priests and Levites in the house of God; see Nu 4:16. Jarchi interprets it here by , “his greatness”, or “dignity”; and explains it by the Spanish word “provostia”, an office of honour and authority, as this of being an apostle of Christ was; than which, a greater external dignity could not be enjoyed in the church of God, in which he has set first apostles, 1Co 12:28. That this psalm refers to Judas Iscariot, and to his affair, was so clear a point with the ancients, that they used to call it the Iscariotic Psalm. I lay no stress upon the observation some have made, that thirty curses are contained in it, the number of the pieces of silver for which he betrayed his master, since this may be thought to be too curious.
s Kimchi & Sol. ben Melech in Psal. 69. 25. R. Nathan. Concordant. t Biblos Katallages, p. 45, 46. u T. Bab Roshhoshana, fol. 4. 2. Beracot, fol. 13. 1. Sabbat, fol. 20. 1. Maccot, fol. 13. 2. & 16. 1. Tanchuma, fol. 17. 1, 4. & 25. 1, 4. w Aben Ezra, Kimchi, & Sol. ben Melech in loc.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
For it is written ( ). Luke here returns to the address of Peter interrupted by verses Acts 1:18; Acts 1:19. Perfect passive indicative, the usual idiom in quoting scripture, stands written. Ps 69 is often quoted as Messianic in Matthew and John.
His habitation ( ). Only here in the N.T., a country house, cottage, cabin.
His office ( ). Our word bishopric (Authorized Version) is from this word, office of bishop (). Only that is not the idea here, but over-seership (, ) or office as in 1Pe 2:12. It means to visit and to inspect, to look over. The ecclesiastical sense comes later (1Ti 3:1).
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Habitation [] . Only here in New Testament. The word is used in classical Greek of a place for cattle. So Herodotus (i., 111) : “The herdsman took the child in his arms, and went back the way he had come, till he reached the fold” [] . Also of a farm – building, a country – house..
Bishopric [] . See on 1Pe 2:12. Rev., better, office, with overseership in margin. Compare Luk 19:44.
Another [] . And different person. See on ch. Act 2:4.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “For it is written in the book of Psalms,” (gegraptai gar en Biblo psalmon) “For it has been written in the book of Psalms,” the scroll-roll of Psalms, Psa 69:25.
2) “Let his habitation be desolate,” (genetheto he epaulis autou eremos) “Let his estate become deserted or empty; The prophecy of Psa 69:15 seems to indicate that this habitation to be left desolate was that of Israel in her worship program, not merely Judas’s alone.
3) “And let no man dwell therein” (kai me esto ho katoikon en aute) “And let not (do not permit) even one or anyone to dwell in it (his estate),” he joined estate with natural Israel in the betrayal, openly showed himself to love money and the Jewish enemies of Christ more than the Savior. It may therefore be concluded that the desolation referred to him and his chosen identity with Christ rejecting Israel, Mat 23:37-38; Joh 1:11-12.
4) “And his bishoprick let another take.” (kai ten episkopen autou labeto heteros) “And his office let or permit another (of different kind or character) take or receive.” The term bishoprick means “overseership,”
referring to what is later called the “Office of a bishop,” 1Ti 3:1; Tit 1:7. The office in which he received the oversight of a specific group or number of the Lord’s people, in the administration of a specific (not universal invisible) congregation or assembly (church) of Jesus Christ. The office of Bishop which Judas held as one of the apostles was to be filled by another, to be chosen by the church, from among the brethren assembled at this time of Peter’s address.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
(20) For it is written in the book of PsalmsSt. Peters speech is continued after the parenthetical note. His purpose in making the quotation is to show that the disciples should not be staggered by the treachery of Judas, and the seeming failure of their hopes. The Psalms had represented the righteous sufferer as the victim of treachery. They had also spoken of the traitor as receiving a righteous punishment such as had now fallen upon Judas. No strange thing had happened. What had been of old was typical of what they had heard or known. We need not in this place discuss either the historical occasions of the Psalms cited, or the ethical difficulties presented by their imprecations of evil. Neither comes, so to speak, within the horizon of St. Peters thoughts. It was enough for him to note the striking parallelism which they presented to what was fresh in his memory, and to believe that it was not accidental.
His bishoprick let another take.Better, as in Psa. 109:8, let another take his office. The Greek word is episcop, which, as meaning an office like that of the episcopos, is, of course, in one sense, rightly translated by bishoprick. The latter term is, however, so surrounded by associations foreign to the apostolic age that it is better to use the more general, and, therefore, neutral, term of the English version of the Psalm. The use of bishoprick may be noted as an instance of the tendency of the revisers of 1611 to maintain the use of bishop and the like where the office seemed to be placed on a high level (as here and in 1Pe. 2:25), while they use overseer and oversight (as in Act. 20:28, and 1Pe. 5:2) where it is identified with the functions of the elders or presbyters of the Church. Bishoprick had, however, been used in all previous versions except the Geneva, which gives charge.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
20. For Referring to David spake in Act 1:16. The distance of the reference shows that Act 1:18-19 are Luke’s parenthesis inserted in Peter’s speech.
Psalms Peter here quoted Psa 69:25; Psa 109:8, both of which are considered by biblical scholars as Messianic Psalms. That is, Christ is represented in those Psalms by his great type, the royal David, the psalmist himself. The psalmist’s words are, “Let their habitation be desolate, and let none dwell therein,” where, probably, Ahithophel is really indicated under the plural them, which Peter explains by rendering it his.
So, habitation and tents meaning the same thing, Peter omits the last. In Psa 108:9, the words in our English translation are, Let another take his office. The word bishopric is here capriciously used by our translators for the Greek of the Septuagint, , overseer-ship. But though the application of these words to Judas is to be admitted by every believing Christian, and served to guide the apostles aright on this occasion, yet this prophecy could not be conclusively used to convince a sceptic. Prophetic passages are divisible into two classes, namely, those which are explicit and demonstrative, and may be used to convince infidels of the divinity of the Scriptures; and those which can be used only within the Church, by her own interpretation, to guide her own belief and action. The clause in the last-quoted psalm, Let another take his office, was proof to the present assembly that a successor was required in Judas’ apostolate. The promise of twelve apostolic thrones was originally made to include Judas; but another was to inherit that promise in his place, just as Gentiles inherit the Abrahamic promises.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
“For it is written in the book of Psalms, ‘Let his habitation be made desolate, And let no man dwell in it’, and, ‘His office (episkope) let another take’.
Peter then cites two Scriptures which had especially struck him in connection with the incident, one found in Psa 69:25 and the other in Psa 109:8. From them he recognised the justice of what had happened to Judas, and that therefore, because of the important ministry to which he had been called, it was necessary that he be replaced.
We should note that Peter only uses Psa 69:25 generally in the sense that it indicated that those who opposed the house of David (it was a Davidic psalm) would suffer a dreadful end and lose their wealth. He does not apply the words ‘his habitation be made desolate and let no man dwell in it’ to the specific purchasing of a field that became a cemetery, for he does not mention this fact in his explanation. That is described in Mat 27:6-8.
The reference to Psa 109:8 introduces the idea of a servant of the Davidic house being replaced by another. This indicates to him that it is necessary for Judas to be replaced because he has lost his position as the servant of the son of David through treachery and sin. After all Jesus had had good reason for appointing twelve Apostles. They represented the twelve patriarchs, and therefore the true Israel. It was therefore right that before their outgoing ministry began the twelve be made up as the campaign commenced. No such necessity was suggested when James was later slain (Act 12:1-2) so that the thought was not of continually maintaining the twelve. The thought was rather that they must start with a full complement because the lack had arisen due to iniquity. With regard to James later things were totally different. It was probably kept in mind that James had not ‘died’. Unlike Judas he merely ‘slept’. Thus the twelve was not to be seen as deficient just because one of its members was with God.
So his point here is that they must follow God’s revealed way of working. God had commenced the process. He had made Judah’s habitation desolate. Now it was necessary for another to take his place in his important office. Note that Jesus Himself had drawn attention to this Psalm as relating to His own situation (Joh 15:25 compare Joh 2:17; Rom 15:3)
Note on Peter’s Use of the Psalms.
The question might arise as to whether Peter saw the death of Judas’ as the actual fulfilment of the Psalms. The answer is probably both yes and no. It is probable that he saw it as a fulfilling of the principles enunciated in the Psalm, and as a fulfilment that was ominously necessary, but not necessarily as the sole fulfilment. What it was, was its greatest fulfilment.
Firstly we must remember that prophecy in Scripture is usually not intended to be a forecasting of specific events in the future, although that sometimes necessarily comes into it, but as something taught in order to enable those living at the time to be aware of trends that God would bring about in the future, and in order to enable future generations to be aware of God’s ways. They could therefore be seen as having a number of applications, and each ‘prophecy’ as having several partial fulfilments. This was especially true of Psalms which could be applied to every generation. Psalms 69, which is quoted here, is a psalm of the Davidic house. It describes the suffering of a member of that house, and would therefore be seen as applicable to each ‘David’ (see 1Ki 12:16) who came one after another in succession. Each ‘David’ would sing these Psalms seeing them as applying to himself. That was why the Psalms continued to be sung. They were seen as applying anew to each generation. They had continuing contexts.
There were apparently many who caused suffering to the house of David and suffered this fate. It was necessarily so, for God’s purposes were to be fulfilled through that house, and there would always be resistance to them. And that was what the Psalmist was seen as expressing. Here therefore Peter saw no inconsistency in applying it to the greatest of the house of David, and to His enemy, and saw in the situation of Jesus and Judas one which fulfilled the particular verse to the letter.
Often we take Joh 3:16 and apply it individually. ‘God so loved Jim Bloggs that He gave His only begotten Son so that if Jim Bloggs should believe in Him — he should have everlasting life.’ Is that then wrong? Is this to misrepresent Scripture? Surely not, for Jim Bloggs is a part of the world. And that is what Peter did here. He points out that among the persecutors of the house of David here was one, among many, who caused suffering to a member of the house of David in this way. What was described by the Psalmist has happened again to the house of David, to David’s greater son. Judas was thus a prime example of what was spoken of in the Psalm. The ‘prophecy’ has been fulfilled. But he would almost certainly not have denied that it had also happened in the past. It was not a sole fulfilment.
The same principle applies to Psalms 109. Again it was a Psalm of the Davidic house which applied to each generation. In each generation, where the Davidic representative was faithful to God, his cry was that his opponents be replaced. And so here it now applies to Jesus as the greater David. Peter was thus taking it right in context for no Christian doubted that Jesus summed up the house of David. And here Peter’s point is that God had ordained that when a scion of the house of David was oppressed, and was under God’s protection as a righteous king, his oppressor would be removed from his office and replaced by another. Peter was not changing the sense in any way. He was simply applying Scriptural principles to a specific case.
We must beware of laying down rules for how New Testament writers should have used Scripture. As we all are, they were free to use them as they saw fit as long as the result was Scriptural truth. Some preachers today quote exactly, others paraphrase in order to make the point more clear. That cannot be faulted as long as the sense remains unchanged. It does not mean that they do not see them as Scripture or as prophecy. They are rather making clear the sense. This is what Peter is doing here with regard to Judas, and so he gives the verse in the Psalm a singular sense.
Furthermore we must note that most of the early church only ever used translations (as we do). The original Old Testament text was in Hebrew and Aramaic, but the New Testament writers used Greek. In fact they often used the Septuagint, a Greek Old Testament translation. Just as we have varying translations, so had they, in Greek. The Septuagint (LXX) was not the only one. That is why we often cannot be sure whether they themselves are translating or are using a version. They might even have been using an anthology of favourite verses., for not many had access to full manuscripts. Someone today might use AV, RV, ASV, RSV, NEB, NIV and so on, and see it in each case as ‘quoting Scripture’ and thus feel free to say ‘it is written’. It is only if we have grounds for thinking that it was a mistranslation that we should not do so.
But it goes deeper than that. Many prophecies have a near and a far meaning, and none more so than the Psalms. They looked to the future working of God, and this was seen as especially so of the Psalms ‘to/for David’. Sometimes that heading refers to David’s authorship, at other times it is probably referring to a dedication of the Psalm to the Davidic house. But all were seen as referring to ‘the anointed king’. Each crowned son of David was an ‘anointed’ (Hebrew : messiach) king, was a new ‘David’ (1Ki 12:16). These Davidic psalms could thus be used through the generations as applying to each anointed king. When the One came who summed up the anointed kingship, the Messiah, it would especially apply to Him. This is clear from a number of Psalms.
This was the nature of much prophecy. Prophecy was intended to bless each generation as well as the final generation in which it was finally fulfilled. It described the principles according to which God worked as well as His final plan. Prophecies spoke of the trend of history. So, yes, the principles were often applied to a like situation without it being seen as an exact prophecy. And yes some were exact prophecies. Which was intended must be gathered from the context. Of the Psalms quoted here in Acts 1 it can be said that they were both. Peter could have used the plural had he wanted to because the Psalm was fulfilled in the plural. Many had combined to bring about Jesus’ downfall. But he chose not to. He wanted all specifically to see a partial fulfilment in Judas. Judas did not alone fulfil the prophecy for others were involved as well. But he was a genuine part of its fulfilment.
The same will be seen to be true in Acts 2. The quotation from Joel there is an interpretive translation, an ‘amplified version’. Peter was speaking to those who may not have been sure of the context (which was the last days) and so he brings out that ‘afterwards’ means ‘the last days’. For they all saw the coming of Jesus as introducing ‘the last days’. The coming of Jesus was the final stage in the fulfilling of God’s purposes. (It still is). And he wanted those listeners who did not know Joel very well to jump straight into the context.
End of Note.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Act 1:20. And his bishoprick let another take. And let another take his office. Heylin.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Act 1:20 . ] The tragic end of Judas was his withdrawal from the apostolic office, by which a new choice was now necessary. But both that withdrawal and this necessity are, as already indicated in Act 1:16 , to be demonstrated not as something accidental, but as divinely ordained.
The first passage is Psa 69:26 , freely quoted from memory, and with an intentional change of the plural (LXX. ), because its historical fulfilment is represented in Judas. The second passage is Psa 109:8 , verbatim , after the LXX. Both passages contain curses against enemies of the theocracy, as the antitype of whom Judas here appears.
The is not that which had become desolate by the death of Judas (Chrysostom, Oecumenius, and others; also Strauss, Hofmann, de Wette, Schneckenburger), but it corresponds to the parallel , and as the is not to be considered as belonging to Judas (see on Act 1:18 ), the meaning is: “ Let his farm, i.e. in the antitypical fulfilment of the saying in the Psalm, the apostolic office of Judas, become desolate , forsaken by its possessor, and non-existent, i.e. let him be gone, who has his dwelling therein .”
.] the oversight (Lucian, D. D. xx. 8, frequently in the LXX. and Apocr.), the superintendence which he had to exercise, , in the sense of the : the apostolic office. Comp. 1Ti 3:1 (of the office of a bishop).
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
20 For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take.
Ver. 20. In the book of Psalms ] That common magazine of wholesome lessons, as Basil hath it. a
a
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
20. ] , the connexion being, ‘all this happened and became known,’ &c., ‘ in accordance with the prophecy,’ &c. Psa 69 is eminently a Messianic psalm, spoken in the first place of David and his kingdom and its enemies, and so, according to the universal canon of O. T. interpretation, of Him in whom that kingdom found its true fulfilment, and of His enemies. And Judas being the first and most notable of these, the Apostle applies eminently to him the words which in the Psalm are spoken in the plural of all such enemies. The same is true of Psa 109 , and there one adversary is even more pointedly marked out. See also Psa 55 .
= , office, or charge. The citations are freely from the LXX.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Act 1:20 . The quotation is twofold, the first part from Psa 69:26 (LXX, 68); in the LXX we have , changed here into with reference to Judas, whilst is omitted and the words , referring to , are added. The omission would make the application of the words more general than in the original, which related to the desolation of the encampment and tents of a nomadic tribe. The other part of the quotation is verbatim from Psa 108:8 (109), called by the ancients the Iscariot Psalm. With the exception of Psa 22 , no Psalm is more frequently quoted in the N.T. than 69; cf. Psa 108:9 with Joh 2:17 ; Psa 108:21 with Mat 27:34 , and with Joh 19:28 ; Psa 108:22-23 with Rom 11:9-10 ; and Psa 108:9 with Rom 15:3 . In these Psalms, as in the twenty-second Psalm, we see how the history of prophets and holy men of old, of a David or a Jeremiah, was typical of the history of the Son of man made perfect through suffering, and we know how our Lord Himself saw the fulfilment of the words of the suffering Psalmist Psa 41:9 ) in the tragic events of His own life (Joh 13:18 ). So too St. Peter in the recent miserable end of the traitor sees another evidence, not only of the general truth, which the Psalmists learnt through suffering, that God rewarded His servants and that confusion awaited the unrighteous, but also another fulfilment in the case of Judas of the doom which the Psalmists of old had invoked upon the persecutors of the faithful servants of God. But we are not called upon to regard Psa 109 as the Iscariot Psalm in all its details (see Perowne, Psalms , p. 538 (smaller edition)), or to forget, as Delitzsch reminds us, that the spirit of Elias is not that of the N.T. St. Peter, although he must have regarded the crime of Judas as a crime without a parallel, does not dwell upon his punishment, but passes at once to the duty incumbent upon the infant Church in view of the vacant Apostleship. : by many commentators, both ancient and modern (Chrys., Oecum., so too Nsgen, Overbeck, Wendt, Blass, Holtzmann, Zckler, Jngst), this is referred to the , which was rendered desolate by the death of Judas in it, on the ground that thus maintains its evident relation to what precedes. But if the two preceding verses are inserted by St. Luke, and form no part of St. Peter’s words, it would seem that must be regarded as parallel to in the second quotation. : “his office,” R.V. (“overseership,” margin), so for the same word in LXX, Psa 109:8 , from which the quotation is made. In the LXX the word is used, Num 4:16 , for the charge of the tabernacle. St. Peter uses the word in 1Pe 2:25 , and it is significant that there the translators of 1611 maintain the use of the word “bishop,” as here “bishoprick” (so R.V., “overseer,” margin), whilst they use “overseer” and “oversight” ( ), Act 20:28 and 1Pe 5:2 , where the reference is to the function of the elders or presbyters. The word , of course, could not have its later ecclesiastical force, but the Apostolic office of Judas might well be described as one of oversight, and care of others; and it is significant that it is so described, and not only as a (see below on Act 1:25 , and on , Act 20:28 , note): “St. Peter would not have quoted the Psalm containing the expression unless he had instinctively felt the word to be applicable to Judas’ position” (Canon Gore in Guardian , 16th March, 1898).
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
is = has been.
the = a: i.e. the second book, in Psa 69:25.
habitation = farm, or country house. Greek. epaulis. Only here.
desolate = desert: i.e. let the place he has thus acquired become a wilderness.
let, &c. Literally let there not (Greek. me.) be the dweller (Act 1:19).
therein = in (Greek. en App-104.) it.
bishoprick. Greek. episcope, the office of an episcopos, or overseer. Occurs only here; Luk 19:44. 1Ti 3:1. 1Pe 2:12. Compare Act 1:17. This is a composite quotation from Psa 69:25, and Psa 109:8. App-107.
another. Greek. heteros. App-124.
take = receive.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
20.] , the connexion being, all this happened and became known, &c., in accordance with the prophecy, &c. Psalms 69 is eminently a Messianic psalm,-spoken in the first place of David and his kingdom and its enemies, and so, according to the universal canon of O. T. interpretation, of Him in whom that kingdom found its true fulfilment, and of His enemies. And Judas being the first and most notable of these, the Apostle applies eminently to him the words which in the Psalm are spoken in the plural of all such enemies. The same is true of Psalms 109, and there one adversary is even more pointedly marked out. See also Psalms 55.
= , office, or charge. The citations are freely from the LXX.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Act 1:20. , …) Psa 69:25 (26), LXX., , .-) that is to say, , a mean dwelling, according to Eustathius.-, his) The Hebrew and LXX. have , their. But it is understood of Judas as being included in the plural pronoun, to accord with the present purpose of the apostle. Justus Jonas remarks, By the rejection of Judas, and the substituting of another, is indicated the casting away of the Jews, and of all who persecute Christ after He has been sent to them.-[, desolate) This is the lot that falls to all things which the ungodly possess in the world.-V. g.]- , let there not be) This was fulfilled when the field passed into a burying-place for strangers.- -) Psa 109:8. So clearly the LXX.-, another) Matthias, as an individual, was not more plainly designated, and so occasion arose for recourse to a holy casting of lots.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
bishoprick
(Greek – , overseership). See “elders” (See Scofield “Tit 1:5”)
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
in: Act 13:33, Luk 20:42, Luk 24:44
Let his: Psa 69:25, Psa 109:9-15, Zec 5:3, Zec 5:4
his: Act 1:25, Psa 109:8
bishopric: or, office, or charge
Reciprocal: Lev 14:42 – General 1Ki 2:35 – Zadok Job 5:3 – cursed Luk 19:26 – and from Phi 1:1 – the bishops 1Th 5:9 – not 1Ti 3:1 – the office
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
0
The quotation being cited is in Psa 69:25. Habitation means a house or place of dwelling, and to be desolate means that it was to be deserted. There is no information that the home of Judas was ever occupied by others, or that he left any family to take charge of it. Bishoprick is from EPISKOPE, and is the word for “office of a bishop” in 1Ti 3:1. Thayer defines the word as, “oversight, office, charge,” which explains why it was applied to the apostle Judas. Let another take denotes clearly that the man who is about to be appointed as apostle was to take the place of Judas, and should therefore be regarded as an apostle after the Lord has indicated his choice.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Quoting from Psa 69:25 ; Psa 109:8 , Peter reported that the Holy Spirit, through David, had said the habitation of Judas, perhaps as Ash suggests referring to the Field of Blood, would become desolate and another would be chosen to take his office. So, Peter set forth certain qualifications necessary for one to be chosen to take the office of an apostle. He had to have been with the Lord from the time of the baptism of John to the ascension. He would especially need to be able to stand forth as a witness of the resurrection ( Act 1:20-22 ).
Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books
20. The historian now resumes the report of Peter’s speech, which he had interrupted by the parenthesis. In the remarks already quoted, Peter bases the action which he proposes, not upon any commandment of Jesus, but upon a prophesy uttered by David. He also states, as the ground for the application of that prophesy which he is about to make, the fact that Judas had been numbered with them, and had “obtained part of this ministry.” He now quotes the prophesy alluded to: (20) “For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein. His office let another take.”
These two passages from the Psalms, when read in their original context, seem to apply to the wicked in general, and there is not the slightest indication that David had Judas in prophetic view when he uttered them. This is an instance, therefore, of the particular application of a general prophetic sentiment. If it be proper that the habitation of a wicked man should become desolate, and that whatever office he held should be given to another, then it was pre-eminently proper that such a crime as that of Judas should be thus punished, and that so important an office as that of Judas should be filled by a worthy successor.
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
20. His episcopacy let another take. Here we find that Judas was a bishop, like all the other apostles. The New Testament bishop is simply a pastor of the flock of Christ, the original word being episcopos from epi, over, and scopeoo, see. Hence it simply means an overseer, and applies legitimately and unequivocally to every class-leader, leader of a Holiness band or pastor in charge of a little bunch of Christians. The modern episcopacy is utterly unknown in the New Testament, and certainly a mistake in church economy, as out of it has developed priestcraft, prelacy, popery and the institutions of Antichrist which have girdled the globe with the abominations of spiritual Babylon. These facts do not necessarily preclude the legitimacy and the expediency of a judicious and Scriptural superintendency. They recognize but one qualification for the apostleship, and that is primitive and persevering discipleship with Jesus throughout His entire ministry. Now they present two candidates, both well qualified, and turn over the election to the Holy Ghost. The casting of lots, customary in that day, innocent, simple and recognized of God, was equivalent to drawing straws, a very simple and common method of decision at the present day. The lot having fallen on Matthias, he is at once recognized as a legal apostle, filling the vacancy created by the fall of Judas. This whole transaction has been severely criticized and condemned by theologians as destitute of divine authority, at the same time alleging that Matthias never served as an apostle, as we never hear of him afterward. This argument breaks down of its own weight, as the same may be said of the majority of the other apostles. Paul, with his vast learning, as a matter of course wrote up his ministry; while, for the very opposite reason, the other apostles wrote nothing, except four, and some of them but little; while we are dependent on secular history for our knowledge of the life, ministry and destiny of the majority. History informs us that Matthias entered courageously upon his great and responsible work. During the destruction of Jerusalem, A. D. 73, all the apostles, being Jews, with all other Jews and Christians who were nearly all Jews at that time, being driven out of Palestine went in all directions preaching the Word, doubtless like Paul each of them seeking a new field where he would build on no mans foundation. Matthias went on preaching, taking Africa for his field of labor, wandering far away into Abyssinia, where he preached faithfully till he was honored with a martyrs crown. Mark also went to Africa and finally suffered martyrdom in Alexandria, Egypt, being dragged by a cruel mob through the streets till he expired. Matthew also spent his life preaching in Africa, finally suffering martyrdom in a city of Ethiopia. Luke, the faithful writer of this book, was hung on an olive tree in Greece. Paul was beheaded by order of Nero, about one mile west of the Roman wall. Peter was crucified on the Campus Martins in Rome, with his head downward. Andrew became the apostle of Armenia, where he faithfully preached till they crucified him on a transverse cross. Philip was crucified in Asia Minor.
Bartholomew preached faithfully in Phrygia till ordered by the king to leave his country forever. Failing to obey the order, the enraged monarch had him skinned alive. Jude, the brother of our Lord, wandered far away into Northwestern Asia, preaching in Tartary and perhaps in China till they put him to death by tying him up to a tree and shooting his body full of arrows. James the Greater, the son of Zebedee and brother of John, was beheaded by Herod Antipas. James the Less, the son of Alphaeus, was precipitated from a pinnacle of the temple in Jerusalem, and then beaten to death with a fullers club. Thomas the doubter, all of his doubts and cowardice having been burned up when he received the fiery baptism, preached his way far out into India, where he faithfully preached and witnessed for Jesus till his enemies ran a cruel iron bar through his body and hung him up between two trees, thus complimenting him with a martyrs crown.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
1:20 For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his {s} bishoprick let another take.
(s) His office and ministry: David wrote these words against Doeg the King’s herdsman: and these words “shepherd”, “sheep”, and “flock” are used with reference to the Church office and ministry, so that the Church and the offices are called by these names.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Peter’s quotations are from Psa 69:25; Psa 109:8. Luke’s quotations from the Old Testament are all from Greek translations of it. [Note: Witherington, pp. 123-24.] Psalms 69 is an Old Testament passage in which Jesus Himself, as well as the early Christians, saw similarities to and foreviews of Jesus’ experiences (cf. Joh 2:17; Joh 15:25; Rom 11:9-10; Rom 15:3). [Note: See C. H. Dodd, According to the Scriptures, pp. 61-108.] Jesus fulfilled the passage Peter cited in the sense that His situation proved to be the same as David’s, only on a more significant messianic scale. Peter did not appeal to Psa 69:25 to justify replacing Judas with another apostle, however. He used the quotation from Psa 109:8 to do that. It is another verse that Peter applied to Jesus’ case since it described something analogous to Jesus’ experience. He used what David had written about someone who opposed the LORD’s king to support the idea that someone should replace Judas in his office as one of the Twelve.