Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Acts 1:16
Men [and] brethren, this Scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus.
16. Men and brethren ] The original is meant for one epithet, and would be fully enough rendered by brethren alone, here and in other places where it occurs.
this scripture, &c.] “ This ” is omitted by the best authorities. Read The scripture, &c. It is to be noticed that Peter can thus speak because he had now been taught to understand the Scriptures (Luk 24:45).
must needs have been fulfilled ] Christ was to die on the cross, betrayed to death by one in whom He had trusted. David had spoken in the Psalms of his own afflictions from a similar treachery and also of the destruction which he invoked upon those who were guilty of such infidelity. But while David spake of himself and of his own circumstances, the Holy Ghost through him was speaking of the betrayal of the “Son of David,” and the words which had been true of David, must have their still more complete fulfilment in the betrayal of the Saviour, by him “who was guide to them that took Jesus” (Mat 26:47, &c.).
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Men and brethren – This is a customary mode of address, implying affection and respect, Act 13:26. The Syriac renders it more appropriately than by the introduction of the conjunction and – Men, our brethren.
This scripture – This prediction contained in the writings of the Old Testament. Compare the notes on Joh 5:39. The passage to which Peter refers is commonly supposed to be that recorded in Psa 41:9, Yea, mine own familiar friend …hath lifted up his heel against me. This is expressly applied to Judas by our Saviour, in Joh 13:18. But it seems clear that the reference is not to the 41st Psalm, but to the passage in the 69th Psalm which Peter proceeds to quote in Act 1:20.
Must needs have been fulfilled – It would certainly be fulfilled. Not that there was any physical necessity or any compulsion; but it could not but occur that a prediction of God would be fulfilled. This makes no affirmation about the freedom of Judas in doing it. A man will be just as free in wickedness if it be foretold that he will be wicked, as if it had never been known to any other being but himself.
The Holy Ghost … – This is a strong attestation to the inspiration of David, and accords with the uniform testimony of the New Testament, that the sacred writers spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit, 2Pe 1:21.
Concerning Judas – In what respect this was concerning Judas, see Act 1:20.
Which was guide … – Mat 26:47; Joh 18:3.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Act 1:16-20
Men and brethren, this Scripture must needs have been fulfilled concerning Judas.
The subserviency of crime to the purposes of God
We know not a more remarkable expression than The wrath of man shall praise Thee, the remainder of wrath shalt Thou restrain. The manner in which God overrules wickedness, and by which crime is as much an instrument in His hands as obedience, evidences our Makers greatness as well as His unlimited dominion. God is able to reckon with thorough certainty upon the commission of a crime, and yet leave men quite free in the commission. We are so accustomed to denounce the traitor for his crime, that we are apt to overlook the important ends which are eventually subserved. It will be our object to exhibit generally the testimony to Christianity which is furnished by the treason of Judas.
I. Let us premise one or two observations upon the character of Judas; for bad as this was, it may by possibility be misrepresented. We see no reason to believe that Judas had any design on the life of his Master, for, seeing the consequences of his treachery, he was tern with mortification and remorse. He might have supposed it highly improbable that, by placing Christ in the hands of His enemies, he would have been instrumental in His death; for the Jews had then no legal power of putting to death; and it was not likely that the Romans would pay attention to their accusations. Judas then may have calculated that all that could be done to Christ would be putting some restraint upon His person, and preventing Him from further propagating the religion, by whose precepts he himself was condemned.
II. We shall proceed, on this supposition, in tracing the ends which the treachery subserved. You may imagine that the traitor seized a favourable opportunity of indulging his avarice, and of stopping the diffusion of a religion, which, as a money-grasping man, he must have cordially disliked, Now, if he had been possessed of any information which at all tended to invalidate its truth, how eagerly would he have adduced it, and the chief priests have received it! The mere putting to death was as nothing compared with the proving Him a deceiver. And yet Judas, eager as he was for money, and anxious to crush the new religion, has no intelligence to give which may disprove Christs pretensions. This is amongst the strongest of proofs that Christ was a teacher sent from God.
1. Our Lords pretensions rested chiefly on His miracles, so that to show deceit in the one would have overthrown the other. Infidelity will sometimes argue that there might have been collusion in the miracles. Now, had this been the case, Judas must have known it, and if Judas must have known, this would have been a fine piece of intelligence to have sold to the chief priests, and by communicating it he would at once have enriched himself and destroyed Christianity. Nay, he would have done a righteous deed; and while gratifying his avarice, he would have laid up no food for remorse.
2. The infant religion might have been assailed with at least equal power through the moral character of its Founder. And one of the most beautiful arguments by which we may defend Christianity is derived from the more than human purity of Christ. And if it were possible to invalidate in the least degree the truth that Christ did no sin, neither was guile found in His mouth, the whole system would fall to the ground. Mark, that the chief priests and all the council sought for witness against Jesus to put Him to death; and they found none. Yet they were bargaining with Judas, one of His intimate associates, who must have been accurately acquainted with all the flaws, if such there were, in His character. In the silence of this traitor in selling his Master, we find irresistible attestation to the fact that Christ Jesus was indeed a lamb without blemish and without spot.
3. The prophecies might have been frustrated. It had been declared, in Zechariah, that the Messiah should be sold for thirty pieces of silver, and this price be given to the potter. Now had the chief priest and scribes offered more than thirty pieces, or had Judas been contented with fewer, or had the price of blood, when returned by the traitor, been spent on the land of any but a potter, there would have been a defect in the evidence that Jesus was the Christ. And the infatuated rulers could not see this. Perhaps they drove a hard bargain with Judas, beating him down till they reached the exact sum which prophecy specified as the number of the pieces of metal. They never thought, when exulting that they had bought Jesus at the price of a slave, that they had completed the evidence of His being their king. The like may be said of the potters field. With all their profligacy, they were scrupulous in touching the money; and therefore will they use it in proving Jesus the Christ. It shall buy the potters field–the only purpose to which it can be turned; and after being the price of His blood it shall serve to prove His commission. The only prophecies with which infidelity could be successfully pressed are those in which it is impossible that the parties professedly interested should have planned or procured the accomplishment. Nothing can more directly answer this commission than those which have reference to the compact with Judas. Conclusion: This is our consolation whilst the heathen rage and the people imagine a vain thing–we know that the will of our Creator shall take effect. Hostility and malice and treachery shall prevail nothing against the Lord and His Christ. They shall but defend and consolidate the Church. Judas Iscariot vindicates the Master he betrayed, and sustains the cause from which he apostatised. Therefore need we be nothing dismayed if the wicked combine to oppose Christianity. There is one that sits above the tempest, and so directs it, that its fury shall be spent on those by whom it has been raised. (H. Melvill, B. D.)
Judas: his sin
He was guide to them that took Jesus.
I. There are two ways to take Christ.
1. Faith takes Jesus. It takes Christ at His word.
(1) In His promises.
(2) In His warnings, when He directs the life by those careful provisions and restrictions which are found everywhere in His Word.
(3) In His precepts, when it strives to obey that which He commands, to submit to that which He appoints.
(4) In His person.
(5) In His covenanted presence in this world by the Spirit.
2. Falseness takes Christ. Inspired by hatred of His words, by restlessness under His control, by uncongeniality with His spirit, it cries, I will not; have this man to reign over me. And when that spirit of opposition is developed there is no mode of destruction too vile for falseness to accept. The world is full of those who are controlled by this hostility. Opposition to Jesus among men only lacks leadership; and whensoever such a guide is found they covenant with him even to a costly sacrifice if he will deliver the Jesus of the Church into their hands. Pilates timidity, and Herods overweening, weak curiosity, are bad enough in condemning Christ; but He says, He that delivered Me unto thee hath the greater sin. It is not enough that the Judas who guides this hostility should plead his own freedom from violence. He adds meanness to his other sins when he shirks the responsibility he has assumed. There are multitudes who need no accusers before Gods throne. There are those who confess that they are opponents, and mean to be such, and whose only apology is, At all events, we do not profess to be anything better, and in Gods book of remembrance their apology becomes their accusation. Then there are those who say, We know the truth perfectly. Then, brother, if thy life is still against Christ, when thou shalt stand before that terrible bar thine own faith shall testify against thee. Of all dooms there is none so dreadful as that of him who strives to hold the privilege of professed discipleship, and yet is a guide to them that take Jesus.
II. Three steps which such a guide must take. Only three? How short a journey it is! David sums it up with other words in his first Psalm. The likeness of Judas life in these three respects can be traced, I fear, in that of some of us.
1. He counsels with Jesus enemies.
2. He reveals His hiding.
3. He perverts a profession of affection. (S. H. Tyng, D. D.)
Gods foreknowledge practically considered
Foreknowledge and predestination are not subjects for a careless, trifling, or cavilling mind to grapple with. Neither are they subjects which, under any circumstances, admit of being treated in an abstract or mere speculative way. That God foreknows all actions, and all occurrences, we cannot deny, without at once stripping Him of an essential attribute of His being. That His foreknowledge comprehends the final destiny of every human being, is clear. In order, however, to get rid of this inevitable conclusion, the doctrine of contingencies is sometimes resorted to; and we are asked how a thing can be certainly foreknown which is dependent upon occurrencies that may or may not take place. This is a mere evasion–the raising of a second difficulty, in order to dispose of the first. Is it more difficult for God to foresee the working contingencies, and the specific movements of pure volition, than it would be to foresee those results if they were suspended upon an absolute decree? But we are told that by pressing the doctrine of foreknowledge we place ourselves on the threshold of predestination; inasmuch as a thing definitely foreknown is as certain as a thing positively foreordained. I have neither the power nor the will to resist this inference, because I believe it to be a legitimate conclusion arising out of undeniable premisses. But then we are told, further, and by another class of persons, that foreknowledge and predestination involve in them the execution of a decree, whereby a large portion of mankind are reprobated and doomed to eternal misery; and the case of Judas is referred to as an instance in point. Here we are completely at issue with them, and for this plain reason–that the Bible speaks a different; language from that which they see fit to employ on the subject. The Bible represents the door of mercy as being wide open for the admission of every son and daughter of Adam. If the language actually employed by the inspired writers does not tell me that Christ died for all, could any other language have been adopted by them, calculated to convey the idea more forcibly, admitting that they wished to convey it at all? A second thought which presses itself upon the attention, as the result of a fair survey of the book of God, is,–that where the offers of mercy are rejected, such rejection is altogether voluntary: in other words, that obstacles to salvation rest entirely with man; and that every sinner who perishes under a blaze of evangelical light, is, to all intents, a self-destroyer. Still, however, though the theory of absolute unconditional reprobation is disproved by the testimony of Scripture, there is a rebounding echo which says that foreknowledge is certainty; and that if God foreknows who of His creatures will be finally saved, and who of them will be eternally lost, it amounts to the same thing, so far as the single point of destination is concerned, as if He had positively decreed life to some and death to others. This, again, is a position which I shall not attempt to controvert; and yet it is a position requiring to be taken in connection with the elucidation of certain principles which are constantly and practically operating in the affairs of human life. God foreknows everything; and yet man acts as if He foreknew nothing. Volition is as perfect, the will is as unfettered in the one case as it would or could be in the other. Simple foreknowledge, as distinguished from absolute predestination, is founded on free agency, and in no way does it influence or control it. The very certainty by which it is characterised is the result of free agents acting as they please, of rational intelligences ranging at large in the wide field of unrestrained liberty. If men are not saved, it is because they refuse to be saved, and for no other cause; and hence we may well ask, Where is the humility, where is the wisdom, where is the piety, of persons disquieting their minds, because their Creator is an omniscient Intelligence, and because the attribute of omniscience involves foreknowledge and certainty? You will observe that I have confined myself to the point of foreknowledge, leaving that of predestination, excepting incidently, untouched. I have done so because I consider it as irrelevant to the case of Judas, and not propounded, either directly or by implication, in the text. Predestination stands closely connected with sovereignty; and sovereignty has exclusively to do with the bestowment of good; exerting itself solely in acts of beneficence; decreeing blessings, not curses; ordaining men to life, not dooming them to destruction. At the same time, I cannot refrain from saying, in reference to predestination, that, in a practical point of view, it presents, so far as I can judge, no greater difficulties to the mind than those connected with foreknowledge. It is equally consistent with the freedom of man as a rational agent, with the universality of gospel offers, and with the fulness of gospel grace. Conclusion:
1. The subject we have considered constitutes a loud call to humanity. Instead of cavilling at difficulties, let us resolve them into the imperfection of mortal vision; and, instead of boasting our mental powers, let us lie prostrate at the Divine footstool, as those who feel their own littleness, and are sensible how blind and ignorant they are, in reference to heavenly things.
2. The subject should guard us against the error of suffering ourselves to be fettered by any human system. Let promises and precepts, doctrines, and duties, decrees and responsibilities, occupy the places assigned to them on the page of Scripture; and what God has joined together let not the presumptuous hand of man dare to put asunder.
3. The contemplation of Gods foreknowledge should never be engaged in otherwise than in close connection with gospel promises and gospel precepts. God knows no such character as a sincere inquirer shut out from mercys gate; and sooner shall the sun be shorn of its beams–sooner shall the rainbow discharge its beauteous colours–than a praying soul shall perish, because Divine foresight takes cognizance of human destination.
4. The doctrine of Divine foreknowledge, as taught in Scripture directly and inferentially, tends, when duly apprehended, through a spiritual medium, both to impart comfort, and to prompt exertion. In proportion as faith and hope ripen into assurance, the soul is perceptibly strengthened for the performance of its active duties; and on the same principle, the certainty of Divine foreknowledge, irradiated with the bright beams of evangelical promise, so stimulates the believers energies Chat he becomes ready to every good work–steadfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord. (Wm. Knight, M. A.)
Judass iniquity and its consequences
From these learn–
1. How great a sin avarice is, and to what a depth of wickedness it precipitates a man.
2. How deep the fall of those who fall from great grace and from high privileges.
3. How grievous the sin of desperation. It was this which made the difference between the sin of the traitor and that of the denier. (Cornelius Lapide.)
Judas: his fate
He fell headlong, or, rather, flat on his face (cf. Josephus, Jewish Wars, 6:1-6)
, a fact not contradictory, but additional, to the circumstances mentioned in Mat 27:5, where the word is the same as that used by the LXX. concerning Ahithophel. Theophylact explained that the rope broke, Judas having flung himself off some height. It will be remembered that ten thousand Idumean captives, cast down from the top of a rock, after Amaziahs victory, were all broken in pieces (2Ch 25:12). (Bp. Jacobsen.)
A traitors death
The Duke of Buckingham, having by an unfortunate accident lost the army which he had raised against the usurper Richard III., was forced to flee for his life without page or attendant. At last he took refuge in the house of Humphrey Bannister at Shrewsbury, who, being one of his servants, and having formerly raised him from a low condition, would, he trusted, be ready to afford him every possible protection. Bannister, however, upon the kings proclamation, promising 1,000 reward to him that should apprehend the Duke, betrayed his master to John Merton, high sheriff of Shropshire, who sent him under a strong guard to Salisbury, where the king then was, by whom he was condemned to be beheaded. But Divine vengeance pursued the traitor and his family; for, on demanding the 1,000, that was the price of his masters blood, King Richard refused to pay it, saying, He that would be false to so good a master ought not to be encouraged. He was afterwards hanged for manslaughter: his eldest son fell into a state of derangement, and died in a hog-sty; his second son became deformed and lame; his third son was drowned in a small pool of water, and the rest of his family perished miserably.
The potters field
At Jerusalem traces of an ancient gateway have been discovered, apparently that known as The Gate of the Potters, the quarter where earthenware was manufactured. Opposite to this lies the Potters Field, still called Aceldama, on which rises an old ruin thirty feet long and twenty feet wide, the whole forming a flat-roofed cover to a dismal house of the dead. Two caverns open in the floor, their rocky sides pierced with holes for bodies; and galleries of holes run into the hill from the bottom. Holes in the roof are still seen through which the corpses were let down by ropes, and there are marks of the steps by which the tombs were entered. (C. Geikie, D. D.)
Aceldama, the field of blood
Bought with the price of blood (Mat 27:8), and, according to received tradition, stained with the blood of Judas. The name would remind Jewish readers of that bloodshedding, the consequences of which had been invoked on themselves and on their children. The place commonly shown as Aceldama has ever been famous on account of the sarcophagus virtue possessed by the earth in hastening the decay of dead bodies. Shiploads of it were carried to the Campo Santo in Pisa. (Bp. Jacobsen.)
Aceldama
The gambling spirit, which is at all times a stupendous evil, ever and anon sweeps over the country like an epidemic, prostrating uncounted thousands. There has never been a worse attack than that from which all the villages, towns, and cities are now suffering.
1. This sin works ruin, first, by providing an unhealthful stimulant.
2. Again, this sin works ruin by killing industry.
3. Furthermore, this sin is the source of dishonesty.
4. Notice also the effect of this crime upon domestic happiness. (T. de Witt Talmage.)
The prophecies in Peters speech
The first quotation (verse 20) down to therein is taken substantially from Psa 69:25, with some compression of LXX., and a variation in the number of the pronoun from plural to singular, by which Judas is taken as a representative of Christs enemies. This Psalm, quoted in the New Testament oftener than any other, except 22., is pre-eminently Messianic. Verse 9 is applied to Christ by John (Joh 2:17); the words immediately following by Paul (Rom 15:3); and the fulfilment of verse 21 is noted by John (Joh 19:28-30). The second quotation is taken with verbal exactness from LXX., Psa 109:8 –the Iscariot Psalm. The conduct of Judas warranted the identifying him with Doeg and Ahithophel. David and his enemies are treated as types of Christ and His enemies. And after the exposition given by our Lord (Luk 24:44), it is out of the question to impute to Peter misunderstanding or misapplication. (Bp. Jacobsen.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 16. The Holy Ghost by the mouth of David] Thus is a strong attestation to the Divine inspiration of the book of Psalms. They were dictated by the Holy Spirit, and spoken by the mouth of David.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Men and brethren, an ordinary compellation; speaker and auditors were Hebrews of the Hebrews.
This Scripture, viz. Psa 41:9, must need, have been fulfilled; yet Gods foreknowledge and prediction excused not Judass sin.
Which was guide to them that took Jesus; not only leading them in the way when they took our Saviour, but being director of their counsels against him. This the apostle premises to abate the offence that the horrible fall of Judas might have occasioned.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
Men and brethren,…. Which is said not so much by Peter to express his modesty, and humility, and his brotherly love; or on account of the spiritual relation that subsisted between him and the persons he speaks to, as it was a common form used in addresses; see Ac 7:2 it should seem, that the women, were not reckoned into the number of the hundred and twenty here addressed; and the Syriac version calls that number, “the number of men”, unless they are supposed to be included in them:
this Scripture must needs have been fulfilled; or “must needs be fulfilled”: referring either to Ps 41:9 or rather to the passages after cited out of Ps 69:25. There was a necessity of the fulfilling of it, consistent with the prescience of God, his counsel, and decree, and the veracity of the Scripture; which necessity does not at all excuse the sin of Judas, who acted freely from the wickedness of his own heart, and not from any force that this laid upon him: and the apostle might observe this also, to make the minds of the disciples easy, under this awful providence, since it was no other than what was predicted: and
which the Holy Ghost, by the mouth of David, spake before; even many hundreds of years before the event; and which shows the omniscience, and so the deity of the Holy Ghost, and the divine authority of David’s Psalms; as well as the honour that was put upon him to be the instrument by which the Holy Ghost speaks, and to be his amanuensis: the particular referred to, is, “concerning” Judas; who is sometimes called Iscariot, to distinguish him from another apostle of the same name; and what is hereafter said sufficiently does that; or
concerning that Judas, as the Syriac version renders it:
which was a guide to them that took Jesus; to the band of soldiers and officers, who came with swords and staves, as to take a thief, or a robber; before these Judas went and showed them, not only the place where he was, but gave them a sign by which they should know him, and also advice to take him and hold him fast, and lead him away safely; so that he was not only a guide as to the way, but was a director, and conductor, and manager of the whole affair. And it may be observed, that though Peter did not conceal, but declares the sin of Judas; yet not in a rough manner, aggravating it, but with much softness and tenderness; though with no design to lessen it, as appears by what follows, and which may be instructive to us in speaking of other men’s sins.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Brethren ( ). Literally, men, brethren or brother men. More dignified and respectful than just “brethren.” Demosthenes sometimes said . Cf. our “gentlemen and fellow-citizens.” Women are included in this address though refers only to men.
It was needful (). Imperfect tense of the impersonal with the infinitive clause (first aorist passive) and the accusative of general reference as a loose subject. Peter here assumes that Jesus is the Messiah and finds scripture illustrative of the treachery of Judas. He applies it to Judas and quotes the two passages in verse 20 (Ps 69:25; Ps 109:8). The Holy Spirit has not yet come upon them, but Peter feels moved to interpret the situation. He feels that his mind is opened by Jesus (Lu 24:45). It is a logical, not a moral, necessity that Peter points out. Peter here claims the Holy Spirit as speaking in the scriptures as he does in 2Pe 1:21. His description of Judas as “guide” () to those who seized () Jesus is that of the base traitor that he was. This very verb occurs in Lu 22:54 of the arrest of Jesus.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Men and brethren [ ] . Lit., men, brothers.
Brother – men. More dignified and solemn than the simple brethren.
This scripture. The best texts substitute the. See on Mr 12:10.
The Holy Ghost [ % ] . Lit., The Spirit, the Holy.
Guide. See on lead, Luk 6:39.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “Men and brethren,” (Andres, Adelphoi) “Men, brethren; This is a case of Peter’s direct address to the one hundred and twenty (120) mature church brethren who had spent more than three years following Jesus, Act 1:21-22.
2) “This scripture must needs have been fulfilled,” (edei plerothenai ten graphen) “it behoved, became or was necessary that this scripture be fulfilled; this Scripture he was about to quote, as Jesus often did, Luk 24:25-27; Luk 24:44-45.
3) “Which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before,” (hen proipen to pneuma to hagion dia stomatos David) “Which the Holy Spirit spoke long before (ago) through the mouth of David; Peter thus gives approval of or sanction to the credibility of David as an inspired prophet, a holy man, and old testament writer, Psa 41:9.
4) “Concerning Judas,” (peri louda) “Concerning or with regards to Judas,” who betrayed our Lord, Joh 13:18-19; Luk 22:1-6; Mat 26:47-50.
5) “Which was guide to them that took Jesus,” (tou genomenou hodegou tois suilabousin lesoun) “The one who became (acted as) a guide to those taking Jesus,” those who seized and arrested Him in Gethsemane, Joh 18:1-5; Luk 22:47-48. It is here said that Judas “went before” or led the way to Jesus in Gethsemane and kissed Him when He was arrested by the chief priests, captains of the temple, and elders of Israel, Luk 22:52-54.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
16. It was meet that the Scripture should be fulfilled. Because Peter doth speak in this their assembly, therefore the Papists will have him to be the head of the church. (57) As though no man might speak in any assembly of the godly but he should straightway be Pope. We do grant, that as in every assembly there must be some which must be chief, so in this assembly the apostles did ascribe this honor unto Peter. But what maketh this unto (the proving of) their Papacy? Wherefore, bidding them adieu, (58) let us consider what the Spirit doth speak by the month of Peter. He saith That the Scripture must needs have been fulfilled, lest any man’s mind should be troubled with that horrible fall of Judas. For it seemed a strange thing that he which was chosen by Christ unto so excellent a function, should so filthily fall in the beginning of his course. Peter removeth this stone of stumbling, when he saith that it was foretold by the Scripture. Whence we may gather an admonition very necessary for daily practice; namely, that we ought to attribute this honor unto the prophecies of the Scriptures, that they are able to appease all such fear as we conceive of the sudden event of things. For there is nothing which doth more trouble us than when we stay still in our own sense and understanding, and procure unto ourselves lets and doubts, (59) which the Lord would be ready to cure, if so be that we would hold fast this one thing, that nothing is absurd which he hath foreseen, appointed, and foretold, that he might make us more strong. Neither was Judas therefore excusable, because that which befell him was foretold, seeing that he fell away, not being compelled by the prophecy, but only by the malice of his own heart. The oration of Peter hath two parts. For, in the first place, he putteth away the offense which godly minds might have conceived by reason of the fall of Judas; whence also he gathereth an exhortation that the rest may learn to fear God. Secondly, he telleth them that it remaineth that they choose another into his place, both which he proveth by testimony of Scripture.
Which the Holy Ghost foretold Such manner of speeches bring greater reverence to the Scriptures, whilst we are taught by them that David and all the rest of the prophets did speak only as they were directed by the Holy Ghost; so that they themselves were not the authors of their prophecies, but the Spirit which used their tongues as an instrument. Wherefore, seeing that our dullness is so great, that we ascribe less authority unto the Scriptures than we ought, we must diligently note such manner of speeches, and acquaint ourselves with them, that we may oftentimes remember the authority of God to confirm our faith withal.
(57) “ Universae Ecclesiae,” the Universal Church.
(58) “ Illis valere jussis,” omitting these things.
(59) “ Offendicula,” small scandals.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(16) Men and brethren.Better, brethren only, the word being used as in the LXX. of Gen. 13:8. The tone of St. Peters speech is that of one who felt that his offence had been fully forgiven, and that he was now restored by the charge given him, as in Joh. 21:15-17, to his former position as guide and leader of the other disciples. To do that work faithfully was a worthier fruit of repentance than any public confession of his guilt would have been. This, of course, does not excludewhat is in itself probablethat he had previously confessed his fault, either to his special friend St. John, or to the whole company of Apostles and other disciples.
Which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake . . .We have here, obviously, the firstfruits of the new method of interpretation in which the Apostles had been instructed (Luk. 24:27; Luk. 24:45). They had already been taught that the Holy Spirit which their Lord had promised to them had before spoken by the prophets. The recurrence of the same mode of speech in the holy men of God who spake as they were moved (literally, borne along) by the Holy Ghost, in 2Pe. 1:21, is, as far as it goes, evidence in favour of the genuineness of that Epistle.
Which was guide to them that took Jesus.The actual word guide is not found in the Gospel narrative, but it appears as a fact in all four, notably in that of St. John (Joh. 18:2-3).
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
Peter’s First Speech that to the one hundred and twenty, Act 1:16-22.
16. Must needs have been fulfilled The divine foresight, anticipating what Judas would freely do, has provided for and adopted it into its plan for its own conduct. (See note on Mat 11:25.) They must, therefore, accept it as no unexpected event, and act accordingly.
Holy Ghost spake The inspiring Spirit, perhaps, had a higher and broader meaning than David himself understood.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
“Brethren, it was needful that the Scripture should be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spoke before by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who was guide to them that took Jesus. For he was numbered among us, and received his portion in this ministry (diakonia).”
We see in these words clearly expressed Peter’s high view of Scripture. It represented ‘words which the Holy Spirit spoke’ and ‘must be fulfilled’. And it is clear that Peter had been meditating on the Scriptures and that they had brought home to him that there was a divine necessity with regard to Judas’ betrayal (compare Joh 6:64). He had come to see that it came within the divine plan. He, who had once rebuked Jesus for contemplating suffering (Mar 8:32), had now been brought to see that experiencing the opposition of others to God was a part of what must be expected in His service, and that among the faithful would always be those who were not reliable.
It was in this sense that he saw the Scriptures that he had in mind as speaking of Judas. For Judas had truly been numbered among them and had received his share of the ministry, and yet it was he who had guided those who arrested Jesus to Him. He had been a man who had been greatly privileged, and he had fallen heavily. He was ever a lesson to us all that even the most favoured can fail (as Peter also had cause to know).
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Act 1:16. Men and brethren, Literally, men brethren. So chap. Act 2:29. See chap. Act 7:2. Some have taken this for a Hebraism; and it is true, that it was usual with the Hebrews; but it was used also by the politest Greeks,Xenophon, Homer, Herodotus, &c. Instead of must needs have been fulfilled, Dr. Heylin reads must be fulfilled. His place must be supplied by a new election, as in the sequel. See Act 1:20.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Act 1:16-17 . is more honourable and solemn than the simple familiar . See Act 2:29 ; Act 2:37 , Act 7:2 , al. Comp. Xen. Anab. i. 6. 6 : . See generally Sturz, Lex. Xen. I. p. 238.
] It could not but be an especial object with Peter to lay the foundation for his judgment, by urging that the destruction of Judas took place not accidentally, but necessarily according to the counsel of God .
] this which stands written (comp. on Act 8:35 ) is not, with Wolf and Eckermann, to be referred to Psa 41:10 (Joh 13:18 ; Joh 18:3 ), because otherwise that passage must have been adduced; but to the passages contained in Act 1:20 , which Peter has already in view, but which he only introduces after the remarks which the vivid thoughts crowding on him as he names Judas suggest at Act 1:20 in connection with what was said immediately before.
.] is equivalent to , (Mar 16:14 ; Joh 2:18 ; Joh 9:17 ; 2Co 1:18 , al. ). If Judas had not possessed the apostolic office, the referred to, which predicted the very vacating of an apostolic post , would not have been fulfilled in his fate. This fulfilment occurred in his case, inasmuch as he was an apostle.
. . .] the lot of this (presenting itself in us apostles) ministry , i.e. the apostolic office . Comp. Rom 11:13 . is primarily the lot (Act 1:26 ), then that which is assigned by lot , and then generally what is assigned, the share ; just as in Greek writers. Comp. Act 8:21 ; Act 26:18 ; Wis 2:9 ; Wis 5:5 ; Sir 25:19 . Baumgarten gratuitously would understand it as an antitype of the share of the twelve tribes in the land of Canaan. The genitive is to be taken partitively (share in this ministry ), as the idea of apostolic fellowship , in which each has therefore his partial possession in the service, also occurs in the sequel (see Act 1:22 ; Act 1:26 ).
here not, as in Luk 1:9 , with the partitive genitive, but, as is usual (2Pe 1:1 ), with the accusative of the object. See Bernhardy, p. 176; Ellendt, Lex. Soph. II. p. 2. The word is the usual term for obtaining by lot , as in Luk 1:9 ; it next signifies generally to obtain , and is especially used of the receiving of public magistracies (Dem. 1306. 14; Plat. Gorg. p. 473 E). So here in reference to . . . . .; in which case, however, an allusion to a hierarchical constitution (Zeller) is excluded by the generality of the usus loquendi of the expressions, which, besides, might be suggested by the thought of the actual use of the lot which afterwards took place.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
16 Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus.
Ver. 16. Brethren ] Not underlings, as Popish bishops, who must say Placet It is pleasing, to that which in the pope’s name is proposed to them.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
16. ] We may enquire, by what change in mind and power Peter was able, before the descent of the Spirit , thus authoritatively to speak of Scripture and the divine purposes? The answer will be found in the peculiar gift of the Spirit to the Apostles, Joh 20:21 ; Joh 20:23 ; where see note.
The pre-eminency of Peter here is the commencement of the fulfilment of Mat 16:18-19 (see note there).
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Act 1:16 . : a mode of address indicating not only respect but also the solemnity of the occasion and the importance of the subject. There is nothing unclassical in this use of the vocative without at the beginning of speeches. Demosthenes, at least on some occasions, used the phrase without . Simcox, ubi supra , p. 76, note, and see also Winer-Schmiedel, p. 258, note. : very frequent in St. Luke’s Gospel and the Acts; in the former nineteen, in the latter twenty-five times, and in all parts of the book, Friedrich, ubi supra , p. 22 (Lekebusch). It expresses a divine necessity, and is used by all the Evangelists, as by St. Peter here, and by St. Paul (1Co 15:25 ), of the events connected with and following upon the Passion. , oportet , expresses logical necessity rather than personal moral obligation , debuit , or the sense of fitness, , decebat . The three words are all found in Heb 2:1 ; Heb 2:17 ; Heb 2:10 , on which see Westcott, Hebrews , p. 36, and Plummer’s St. Luke , p. 247. St. Peter’s speech falls into two parts, one introduced by , and the other introduced by , Act 1:21 . : the reference is undoubtedly to the particular passages in the O.T. which follow, cf. Luk 4:20 , Act 8:35 ; see Lightfoot on Gal 3:22 . There is no reference to Psa 41:9 , or this passage would have been quoted, but to the passages in Act 1:20 . , cf. Luk 24:44-45 . (which is very frequently used by St. Luke, Friedrich, ubi supra , p. 40) means more than “fulfil” in the popular acceptation of the word; it implies “to fill up to the full”; “Not only is our Lord the subject of direct predictions in the Old Testament, but His claims go to the full extent of affirming that all the truths which are imperfectly, and frequently very darkly shadowed forth in the pages, are realised in Him as the ideal to which they pointed” (Row, Bampton Lectures , pp. 202, 203). . St. Luke uses this, or a similar expression, or , about forty times in Acts alone, whilst in St. Luke’s Gospel alone it is used about as many times as in the three other Evangelists together (Lekebusch, Apostelgeschichte , p. 65, and Plummer, St. Luke , p. 14). . . St. Peter simply states a fact, but does not heap scorn or abuse upon Judas (Chrysostom, Hom. , iii., cf. Theophylact). St. Matthew, St. Mark, St. John simply say of Judas , “he who delivered Him up,” or employ some similar expression; he is never called “ the traitor” (St. Luk 6:16 , , “ became a traitor,” see Plummer, in loco ). This self-restraint is remarkable on the part of men who must have regarded their Master’s Death as the most atrocious of murders (see Row, Bampton Lectures , pp. 179, 180, note). At the same time the word seems to bring before us the scene in Gethsemane, how Judas went before the multitude, and drew near to Jesus to kiss Him (Luk 22:47 ), and to show us how vividly the memories of the Passion were present to St. Peter; cf. 1Pe 2:21 ff.).
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Men and brethren. Compare Act 1:11.
scripture. Greek. graphe.
fulfilled = filled full. App-126.
Ghost = Spirit. App-101.
by = through. App-104. Act 1:1.
David. Peter asserts that Psa 69 was written by David, and was the utterance of the Holy Spirit. Compare 2Pe 1:21.
concerning. App-104.
was = became.
took = arrested. Greek. sullambano. Compare Mat 26:55.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
16.] We may enquire, by what change in mind and power Peter was able, before the descent of the Spirit, thus authoritatively to speak of Scripture and the divine purposes? The answer will be found in the peculiar gift of the Spirit to the Apostles, Joh 20:21; Joh 20:23; where see note.
The pre-eminency of Peter here is the commencement of the fulfilment of Mat 16:18-19 (see note there).
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Act 1:16. , men brethren) This is a more blessed mode of address than the well-known one of Demosthenes, etc., Men of Athens. It is an appellation expressive of honour and love, calculated to conciliate the hearers.-) this Scripture, viz. in Ps. 69. and 109.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Men: Act 2:29, Act 2:37, Act 7:2, Act 13:15, Act 13:26, Act 13:38, Act 15:7, Act 15:13, Act 22:1, Act 23:1, Act 23:6, Act 28:17
this: Act 2:23, Act 13:27-29, Mat 26:54, Mat 26:56, Joh 10:35, Joh 12:38-40, Joh 19:28-30, Joh 19:36
which the: Act 2:30, Act 2:31, Act 4:25-28, Act 28:25, 2Sa 23:2, Mar 12:36, Heb 3:7, Heb 3:8, 1Pe 1:11, 2Pe 2:21
spake: Psa 41:9, Psa 55:12-15, Mat 26:47, Joh 13:18, Joh 18:2-8
Reciprocal: 2Ki 15:12 – And so Psa 101:7 – He that worketh Psa 109:8 – another Mat 2:15 – that Mat 10:4 – and Mat 18:7 – for Mat 22:43 – General Mat 26:24 – but Mar 3:19 – Judas Mar 14:21 – but Mar 14:43 – while Luk 6:16 – Judas Iscariot Luk 22:22 – but Luk 22:47 – Judas Joh 6:71 – for Joh 13:21 – one Joh 17:12 – that Joh 18:3 – Judas Act 1:25 – from Act 2:24 – because Gal 1:1 – neither 1Ti 5:24 – General 1Ti 6:10 – the love 2Ti 3:16 – All Jam 2:23 – the scripture 1Pe 2:6 – it 2Pe 1:21 – by the Holy
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
6
The Holy Spirit had not yet come down, but the divine record afterwards indicates full approval of all the proceedings, hence we must conclude that what Peter and the others said and did was by the guidance of the Lord. Peter began his speech with a reference to Psa 69:22-25, pertaining to the conduct and fate of Judas.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Act 1:16. The Scripture must needs have been fulfilled. The Scripture referred to is Psalms 69 (LXX., Psalms 68) Psalms 26; and Psalms 109 (LXX., Psalms 108) Psalms 8. The quotations are freely made from the LXX. Version. The most important variation is in the first citation from Psalms 69, where in the original the plural instead of the singular is used,their habitation, their tents instead of His.
Guided by the Holy Spirit, St. Peter finds in these words of the two Psalms this especially sad episode in the history of Christ plainly foreshadowed, and discovers in them an injunction to proceed to the election of another to make up the number of the Twelve.
His bishoprick let another take. St. Peters words here give us the clue to the right understanding of the terrible imprecations found in some of the Psalms. They are no curses pronounced by David or any other king or prophet; they are never the expression of a longing for personal revenge, but are, as Chrysostom expresses it, a prophecy in the form of a curse pronounced upon some enemies of God and His Church, hereafter to arise. They are judicial sentences one day to be pronounced as the punishment for some sin which, in the foreknowledge of the Almighty, would be committed perhaps ages later on in the worlds history. Augustine in his twenty-second sermon, writing of Judas, well puts this view of the spirit in which the Psalmist wrote his words: Infigura optantis, praenuntiantis mens intelligenda est.
While believing that the view above given represents the real meaning of the imprecations found in the so-called denunciatory Psalms, the writer of this commentary thinks it desirable to quote another and quite a different interpretation. We find these prayers for vengeance, writes the Dean of Peterborough (Dr. Perowne, Hulsean Professor of Divinity, Cambridge), chiefly in four Psalms, the 7th, 35th, 69th, 109th. Are these anathemas to be excused as being animated by the spirit of Elias?a spirit not unholy, indeed, but far removed from the meekness and gentleness of Christ. Are they Jewish only? and may they be Christian also? Dean Perowne apparently decides that they were Jewish only; the older dispensation, he urges, was in every sense a sterner one than the new. The spirit of Elias, though not an evil spirit, was not the spirit of Christ. The Jewish nation had been trained in a sterner school, It had been steeled and hardened by the discipline which had pledged to a war of extermination with idolaters. … It is conceivable how even a righteous man under it, feeling it to be his bounden duty to root out evil whenever he saw it, and identifying, as he did, his own enemies with the enemies of Jehovah, might use language which to us appears unnecessarily vindictive. To men so trained and taught, what we call religious toleration was a thing not only wrong but absolutely inconceivable. See Perowne on Psalms 35, and General Introduction to Psalms, page 72.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Act 1:16-17. Men and brethren Though our Lord never addressed the people thus, (perhaps because it would have implied an equality not suitable to the dignity of his character,) yet the apostles frequently did, when they spoke to Jews or Christians, but never when speaking to the Gentiles. This implies, that they recognised a two-fold relation to their own countrymen, as men of the same nature, descended from Adam; and as brethren of the same favoured family, as descended from Abraham. Scott. This scripture must needs have been fulfilled Two prophecies are afterward quoted for this purpose, Act 1:20, from Psa 69:25; Psa 109:8; (on which passages see the notes;) and it has been matter of much debate, whether they do, in their original sense, refer to Judas or to the enemies of David. It is certain the sixty-ninth Psalm is not to be confined to Judas; for Paul (Rom 11:9-10) has quoted the 22d and 23d verses of it as applicable to the unbelieving Jews in general: and there are so many passages in both these psalms more applicable to David than to Christ, that I was very inclinable, says Dr. Doddridge, to render the words before us thus: The scripture which the Holy Ghost spake before, by the mouth of David, must necessarily have been fulfilled concerning Judas, &c.; and to have explained them as if the apostle had said, That vengeance which David foretold, as to be executed on his enemies, must much more fall on Judas, whose perfidious and cruel attack on Christ himself rendered him so much more criminal. But it is certain, the order of the Greek words will not naturally admit this interpretation. I therefore conclude that, while David prophesied of the calamities which should befall his persecutors, it was revealed to him by the Holy Spirit, that the enemies and murderers of the Messiah should inherit those curses in all their terror, and be yet more miserable than the persons on whom they were more immediately to fall. This fact I take to be asserted in these words, as what was revealed by the same Spirit to the Apostle Peter: an interpretation which may serve as a key to many other passages of the New Testament.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
See notes on verse 15
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
1:16 {7} Men [and] brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus.
(7) Peter anticipates the offence that might be taken at the falling away of Judas the betrayer, showing that all things which happened to him were foretold by God.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Peter addressed the assembled disciples in a way that was evidently customary when speaking to Jews. Here "brethren" is literally "men, brothers" (andres, adelphoi). This same salutation occurs elsewhere in Acts always in formal addresses to Jews (cf. Act 2:29; Act 2:37; Act 7:2; Act 13:15; Act 13:26; Act 13:38; Act 15:7; Act 15:13; Act 22:1; Act 23:1; Act 23:6; Act 28:17).
Notice the high regard with which Peter viewed the Old Testament. He believed David’s words came from the Holy Spirit (2Ti 3:16), and he viewed them as Scripture (holy writings). Peter interpreted David’s words about false companions and wicked men who opposed God’s servants as applying to Judas. What God had said through David about David’s enemy was also true of Jesus’ enemy since Jesus was the LORD’s Anointed whom David anticipated.
"Since David himself was God’s appointed king, many times Scripture treats him as typical of Christ, the unique Anointed One, and David’s enemy becomes a type of Jesus’ enemy." [Note: Kent, p. 27.]
"Of course the betrayal of the Messiah by one of his followers, leading to his death, required such an explanation, since this was no part of early Jewish messianic expectation." [Note: Witherington, p. 122.]
Peter said this Scripture "had" (Gr. dei, by divine necessity) to be fulfilled.
"The understanding [of Peter] here is . . . (1) that God is doing something necessarily involved in his divine plan; (2) that the disciples’ lack of comprehension of God’s plan is profound, especially with respect to Judas who ’was one of our number and shared in this ministry’ yet also ’served as guide for those who arrested Jesus’; and (3) that an explicit way of understanding what has been going on under divine direction is through a Christian understanding of two psalms that speak of false companions and wicked men generally, and which by means of the then widely common exegetical rule qal wahomer (’light to heavy,’ or a minore ad majorem) can also be applied to the false disciple and wicked man par excellence, Judas Iscariot." [Note: Longenecker, p. 263.]