Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Acts 20:28
Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
28. Take heed therefore unto yourselves ] The best MSS. omit “therefore.” The Apostle now resigns into their hands a charge which before had been his own, and the form of his language would remind them that the discharge of their duty after his example would be the means of saving both themselves and those over whom they were placed.
and to all the flock ] He commits to them, as Christ had at first to St Peter, the charge to feed both lambs and sheep, in the name, and with the word, of the “good Shepherd” himself.
over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers ] These men who are called “elders,” i.e. “presbyters” before (Act 20:17) he now calls “overseers,” i.e. “bishops,” (see note there). The Rev. Ver. gives “ In the which, &c. bishops.” We have no information how these “elders” had been chosen or appointed, but we can see from this verse that there had been some solemn setting apart of the men for their office. The Church, as in Act 13:2, had recognised some indication that they were to be placed over the church. By reminding them from whence their appointment came, St Paul would enforce on them the solemnity of their position. Though they be “in the flock” they are not as others, more has been given unto them, and so more will be required.
to feed the church of God ] Perhaps no text in the New Testament has been more discussed than these words. “Many ancient authorities (says Rev. Ver. in a note,) read the Lord ” instead of “God.” The Revisers have kept “God” in the text, and that reading is accepted as of most authority by Westcott and Hort. The variation, which has much support from MSS., has been discussed and the evidence for it most fully stated by Dr Ezra Abbott, of Harvard University. The text as it stands asserts most strongly the Divinity of our Blessed Lord, but the form of the sentence implies, from what follows, the use of such a phrase as “the blood of God” which is not like the New Testament mode of expression, though it is found in the Epp. of Ignatius, who perhaps derived it from this passage. Because in other places where “the Church of God” is used “God” cannot be taken, as it must here, to mean Christ, some have given a strong force to the word own, which follows, and have explained “His own blood,” i.e. “the blood of His own Son.” And as the Greek text, which has been accepted, as of most authority, by Westcott and Hort, reads , it has been suggested that after this peculiar collocation of words, has fallen away in very early times. This would make all easy, rendering “with the blood of his own Son.” But there is no evidence that the word “Son” was ever there, and though the death of Christ is in Scripture spoken of as something “given up” by the Father “for us all” (Rom 8:32), yet the price paid and the purchase made are as definitely (1Co 7:22-23) referred to Christ. The direct assertion of Christ’s Godhead has been the occasion of the questioning of this text, and may in early times have led to the various readings. That doctrine does not stand or fall by this verse, but as the authority of MSS. is in favour of the reading “God” we gladly accept it, and feel that to the first readers the harshness of the expression “blood of God” was not much regarded, as the words are not so written, but only suggested by the close of the verse.
which he hath purchased blood ] Better, as the price was paid once for all, “ which he purchased.” The verb implies the “making of what is bought peculiarly one’s own.” It is not the usual word for “buying.”
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Take heed, therefore – Attend to; be on your guard against the dangers which beset you, and seek to discharge your duty with fidelity.
Unto yourselves – To your own piety, opinions, and mode of life. This is the first duty of a minister; for without this all his preaching will be vain. Compare Col 4:17; 1Ti 4:14. Ministers are beset with unique dangers and temptations, and against them they should be on their guard. In addition to the temptations which they have in common with other people, they are exposed to those special to their office – arising from flattery, and ambition, and despondency, and worldly-mindedness. And just in proportion to the importance of their office is the importance of the injunction of Paul, to take heed to themselves.
And to all the flock – The church; the charge entrusted to them. The church of Christ is often compared to a flock. See the John 10:1-20 notes; also Joh 21:15-17 notes. The word flock here refers particularly to the church, and not to the congregation in general, for it is represented to be what was purchased with the blood of the atonement. The command here is:
(1) To take heed to the church; that is, to instruct, teach, and guide it; to guard it from enemies Act 20:29, and to make it their special object to promote its welfare.
(2) To take heed to all the flock the rich and the poor, the bond and the free, the old and the young. It is the duty of ministers to seek to promote the welfare of each individual of their charge not to pass by the poor because they are poor, and not to be afraid of the rich because they are rich. A shepherd regards the I interest of the tenderest of the fold as much as the strongest; and a faithful minister will seek to advance the interest of all. To do this he should know all his people; should be acquainted, as far as possible, with their unique needs, character, and dangers, and should devote himself to their welfare as his first and main employment.
Over the which the Holy Ghost – Though they had been appointed, doubtless, by the church, or by the apostles, yet it is here represented as having been done by the Holy Spirit. It was by him:
- Because he had called and qualified them for their work; and,
- Because they had been set apart in accordance with his direction and will.
Overseers – episkopous. Bishops. The word properly denotes those who are appointed to oversee or inspect anything. This passage proves that the name bishop was applicable to elders; that in the time of the apostles, the name bishop and presbyter, or elder, was given to the same class of officers, and, of course, that there was no distinction between them. One term was originally used to denote office, the other term denotes age, and both words were applied to the same persons in the congregation. The same thing occurs in Tit 1:5-7, where those who in Tit 1:5 are called elders, are in Tit 1:7 called bishops. See also 1Ti 3:1-10; Phi 1:1.
To feed – poimainein. This word is properly applied to the care which a shepherd exercises over his flock. See the notes on Joh 21:15-16. It is applicable not only to the act of feeding a flock, but also to that of protecting, guiding, and guarding it. It here denotes not merely the duty of instructing the church, but also of governing it; of securing it from enemies Act 20:29, and of directing its affairs so as to promote its edification and peace.
The church of God – This is one of three passages in the New Testament in regard to which there has been a long controversy among critics, which is not yet determined. The controversy is, whether is this the correct and genuine reading. The other two passages are, 1Ti 3:16, and 1Jo 5:7. The mss. and versions here exhibit three readings: the church of God tou Theos the church of the Lord tou Kuriou; and the church of the Lord and God Kurios kai Theos. The Latin Vulgate reads it God. The Syriac, the Lord. The Arabic, the Lord God. The Ethiopic, the Christian family of God. The reading which now occurs in our text is found in no ancient mss. except the Vatican Codex, and occurs nowhere among the writings of the fathers except in Athanasius, in regard to whom also there is a various reading.
It is retained, however, by Beza, Mill, and Whitby as the genuine reading. The most ancient mss., and the best, read the church of the Lord, and this probably was the genuine text. It has been adopted by Griesbach and Wetstein; and many important reasons may be given why it should be retained. See those reasons stated at length in Kuinoel in loco; see also Griesbach and Wetstein. It may be remarked, that a change from Lord to God might easily be made in the transcribing, for in ancient mss. the words are not written at length, but are abbreviated. Thus, the name Christ Christos is written ChoS; the name God theos is written ThoS; the name Lord kurios is written KOS; and a mistake, therefore, of a single letter would lead to the variations observable in the manuscripts. Compare in this place the note of Mill in his Greek Testament. The authority for the name God is so doubtful that it should not be used as a proof text on the divinity of Christ, and is not necessary, as there are so many undisputed passages on that subject.
Which he hath purchased – The word used here periepoiesato occurs but in one other place in the New Testament – 1Ti 3:13, For they that have used the office of deacon well, purchase to themselves a good degree and great boldness in the faith. The word properly means to acquire or gain anything; to make it ours. This may be done by a price, or by labor, etc. The noun ( peripoiesis) derived from this verb is used several times in the New Testament, and denotes acquisition: 1Th 5:9, God hath appointed us to obtain (unto the obtaining or acquisition of) salvation; 2Th 2:14, Whereunto he called you by our gospel to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ; 1Pe 2:9; Tit 2:14; Eph 1:14. In this place it means that Christ had acquired, gained, or procured, the church for himself by paying his own life as the price. The church is often represented as having thus been bought with a price, 1Co 6:20; 1Co 7:23; 2Pe 2:1.
With his own blood – With the sacrifice of his own life; for blood is often put for life, and to shed the blood is equivalent to faking the life. See the notes on Rom 3:25. The doctrines taught here are:
(1) That the death of Christ was an atoning sacrifice; that he offered himself to purchase a people to his own service.
(2) That the church is, therefore, of special value a value to be estimated by the price paid for it. Compare 1Pe 1:18-19.
(3) That this fact should make the purity and salvation of the church an object of special solicitude with ministers of the gospel. They should be deeply affected in view of that blood which has been shed for the church; and they should guard and defend it as having been bought with the highest price in the universe. The chief consideration that will make ministers faithful and self-denying is, that the church has been bought with a price. If the Lord Jesus so loved it; if he gave himself for it, they should be willing to deny themselves; to watch, and toil, and pray, that the great object of his death the purity and the salvation of that church – may be obtained.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Act 20:28-31
Take heed therefore unto yourselves and to all the flock.
Take heed
I. To yourselves. To your–
1. Doctrine.
2. Walk.
II. To the flock. To its–
1. Divine dignity.
2. Human infirmity.
III. To the wolves. Those who–
1. Threaten without.
2. Look within its fold. (W. W. Wythe.)
Take heed
The logic and the theology of the sentence are equally good. The first care of the spiritual shepherd is for himself, the next for the flock. In some parts they paint garden walls black, that they may absorb more of the suns heat and so impart more warmth to the fruit trees that lean on them. Those who in any sphere care for souls stand in the position of the garden wall. The more that the teacher absorbs for himself of Christs love, the more benefit will others obtain from him. It is not the wall which glitters most in the sunshine that does most for the trees that are trained against it: it is the wall which is least seen that takes in most heat for itself: and the wall that has most heat in itself gives out most for the benefit of the trees. So it is not the preacher who flashes out into the greatest flame himself that imparts most benefit to inquirers who sit at his feet. Those who drink in most of the Masters spirit are most useful in the world. Those who first take heed to themselves will be most effective in caring for the spiritual weal of those who look up to them. (W. Arnot, D. D.)
Eastern shepherds and their flocks
The work of a shepherd in the East is in many respects different from a shepherds work among ourselves. The Oriental flock does not graze within fenced pasturages, but moves hither and thither through the wild pasture lands, following the lead of the shepherd, and often going to a great distance from inhabited places. It therefore takes all the shepherds vigilance to keep his flock together–to prevent one part of it from straying gradually, in search of pasturage, to the north, another to the south, another to the east, and another to the west. In these remote districts, too, attacks from wild beasts are not uncommon; a wolf or a bear will pounce suddenly upon an unsuspecting sheep, and the shepherd must risk his own life, as David did, to rescue the imperilled sheep. The shepherd, or overseer, is responsible to his employer for the safety of the sheep, and he must render a strict account of that which has been lost, or which has perished. Here is an extract from Oriental law on this point, as quoted by Paxton: Cattle shall be delivered over to the cowherd in the morning; the cowherd shall tend them during the whole day with grass and water; and in the evening shall re-deliver them to the master, in the same manner as they were entrusted to him. If, by the fault of the cowherd, any of the cattle be lost or stolen, that cowherd shall make it good. When a cowherd has led cattle to any distant place to feed, if any die of distemper, in spite of the fact that the cowherd applied the proper remedy, the cowherd shall carry the head, the tail, the forefoot, or some such convincing proof taken from the animals body, to the owner of the cattle. Having done this, he shall be no further answerable. If he neglects to act thus, he shall make good the loss. Paul, therefore, compares the Ephesian Church to a flock of sheep, seeking pasturage under the guidance of their shepherds, yet prone of themselves to wander, and constantly exposed to peril from wild beasts. The shepherds, he teaches, are answerable not only for the divisions which occur in the flock through their neglect, but also for the attacks of wild beasts, permitted by the same neglect. (S. S. Times.)
Over the which the Holy Ghost has made you overseers.
The minister in the flock
The word over should be rendered in. The minister is in the flock; he is in no sense extraneous to it. He is part of it. Some have read the word over violently and offensively, and have asserted rights of dominion over faith, practice, and ritual such as were contrary to the whole idea of the gospel. One is your Master even Christ, etc. The minister is in the flock–
I. As to his personal hope.
1. He is a sinner, and if conscientious feels himself even more so than others. Negligence in him is more serious, example for evil more influential.
2. He wants a Saviour, if possible more than his people. If he is to be the overlooker, he must first be the penitent and the forgiven. It is this which gives pathos, solemnity, and authority, to every part of his ministration–because he is in the flock and partakes with it of the refreshing streams and free pastures.
II. As to all the relations and responsibilities of his life. Before he is anything else he must be a good man. The ministry is not a separate caste, living its whole life by itself, having a tariff of habits, and rules quite different from the ordinary rules and duties of Christian men. The ministry is exemplary before it is episcopal. Its whole idea is that of going before and showing the way in all that is pure and beautiful and of good report.
III. As to sympathy. If the minister were over the flock he might be sorry for its distresses and sins. Sympathy there can only be where there is insideness to the flock. Even our Lord must incorporate Himself with us if He would make us know and feel that He can sympathise.
IV. As to comfort. Oh the comfort of being just one of the worshippers, of losing the official in the personal, the minister in the Christian–in communion, in prayer, in preaching. (Dean Vaughan.)
To feed the Church of God.—
The Church of God
Is here regarded as a society–
I. Of priceless value.
1. It is a flock, a name given to the Church of the Old Testament (Isa 40:11; Isa 63:11; Jer 13:17; Jer 23:2; Jer 31:10; Eze 34:3; Mic 7:14, etc., etc.), and which Christ also applied to His disciples (Luk 12:32). It was a favourite figure with the apostle Peter (1Pe 5:2-3).
2. This flock is incalculably precious because it has been purchased with the blood of God, or rather of the Lord, referring to the Lord Jesus Christ. Other societies exist irrespective of Christs mediation–scientific, political, commercial–but the Church is acquired by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Had He not died, it never would have been.
II. Well guarded.
1. It is put in charge of earthly shepherds. There is here–
(1) Self-vigilance; Take heed, therefore, unto yourselves. The spiritual shepherd must take care of himself first. He must enlighten his own judgment, discipline his own heart, and train his own soul into Christian virtues first. He must save himself before he can save others (1Ti 4:14).
(2) Church vigilance. And to all the flock. They are to take heed of the Church, to instruct, guide, guard it, and in every way promote its spiritual welfare.
2. The earthly shepherds are appointed by the Holy Ghost.
III. Assailed by enemies (Act 20:29).
1. Those who would come from without–worldly men, malignant persecutors.
2. Those who would spring up from within–professed members. The Churchs greatest enemies have sprung from her own bosom.
IV. Demanding the utmost attention. Pauls labour was–
1. Incessant. Night and day.
2. Earnest. With tears. (D. Thomas, D. D.)
Church membership
I. The claims of the Church. These are founded–
1. In the language of Scripture upon the subject of the Church. The Bible ever speaks of the inward as above the outward, elevates the power of godliness above the mere form of it, and tells us of at least one who, without baptism or the Church, went into paradise. Still, the Bible has some very strong language on the subject. Take the statement of the text. Can you imagine that that for which such a price was paid, has no claim upon your allegiance? But take other testimonies (Isa 49:15-16; Eph 1:22-23; Eph 5:22-27).
2. In the relation of Christ to the Church. It is true that there is much in the Church for which Christ gave no warrant. Church vestments and ceremonies, and the minute ramifications of Church creeds, all come under this head. As upon an old vessel, so upon the Church in her navigation of the sea of Time, many barnacles have fastened, and these, so far from being a necessary part of the Church, do but oppose her power and impede her progress. But we must take Christs idea of the Church. He called His followers out from among men into a special relationship to Himself and to each other. One is your Master, even Christ, and all ye are brethren. And by these words He constituted a Church. And this brotherhood, which He so organised in the world, He arranged to perpetuate, by inaugurating two rites, which, for all time, should separate His people from the world, and bind them together in a compact and visible body. Now the Church being Christs own arrangement, to reject it is to reject Him.
3. In the conduct of the apostles, who, under the direction of Christ, and in possession of the Spirit, at once set up the Church and began to use it as the school, the home, the sanctuary of the disciples whom they called. That little band in the upper room was the Church. And no sooner did others, through their words, believe on Christ than they were formally added to this organisation (Act 2:47). And when Peter went to preach to Cornelius he baptized him. The believer in Jesus he enrolled as a member of the Church. So, when Paul kneeled to Jesus, he was also baptized. And so throughout all that early period. And shall anyone in view of this fact say, I will be a Christian outside of the Church? The apostles knew of no such thing as a Christian willingly outside the Church.
4. In the fact that there is nothing so distinctly characteristic of the Christian life as the spirit of obedience. What wilt Thou have me to do? is the voice which comes out of the very essence of every Christian life. If ye love Me, keep My commandments. And here is the duty of Church membership, about which the Bible speaks most plainly.
5. In the principle that Christ gains men through men. This is in its widest sense the ordinance of preaching. And the widest, the most continuous, and the most forcible preaching, is by example. But how can we thus testify for Christ if we refuse to place ourselves in a Christian attitude before the eyes of the world?
II. The objections with which it is common to meet these claims.
1. There are in the Church many who give no evidence of Christian character. This is sadly true. But–
(1) Christ never declared that His Church was to be a perfect body, but said that the tares would grow with the wheat until harvest.
(2) Because another makes a mock of duty it is no reason why you should neglect it.
2. I can live a good life outside the Church. Perhaps so. But if your hope for eternity is in Christ, then to despise the Church is to despise the blood with which it was purchased; and surely no one can do this, and, at the same time, rest upon Christ for salvation.
3. I cannot agree with all the doctrines of the Church. But no Church makes the reception of all the articles of its creed a condition of membership.. Trust in Christ for salvation and a Christian life, make up the one condition of Church membership. And what is there here which you cannot receive?
4. I am not fit to be a Church member. This–
(1) May be a fact. There are those who are determined to live just as they please, without regard to Christ or conscience, and who do not care what lies beyond. Such, of course, are fit only for membership with devils. In such communion they are even now.
(2) May be a plea of simulated humility in order to get rid of duty. The man says, I am not fit, because he is not willing.
(3) May be the expression of a true consciousness of imperfection. And here it is a mistake. Christ came not to call the righteous, but sinners.
Conclusion:
1. The amazing character of mens indifference here. Christ says, Behold My Church, for which I gave My blood! And men pass the Church by without notice.
2. These are words of invitation. Again the Church, through the blood by which she has been purchased, speaks unto you, asking for your attention, for your allegiance. What shall be your answer? (S. S. Mitchell, D. D.)
Which He hath purchased with His own blood.–
The infinite purchase
I. The Church of God.
1. The body of His people in all ages, whom He has called out and separated from the world.
2. Always has been, and always will be, represented by a visible organisation in the world.
3. In Gods apprehension not bounded by, nor identified with, the visible organisation by which it is represented.
II. The relation of the Church to God.
1. Belongs to Him as His purchased possession. His peculiar, not His odd or eccentric people, but the people who belong to Him.
2. Under His government and instruction through officers Divinely appointed. Over which the Holy Ghost has made you overseers.
3. To the Church God has committed the truth and treasure of the gospel, together with the sacraments, and all the means of grace, as instruments for the conquest of the world.
III. The price God paid for the Church even His own blood.
1. The blood of Christ is the blood of God.
2. In the person of Christ the Divine and human natures, though distinct, are so united, that His one Person may be designated and described by the attributes of either nature.
3. The sacrifice of Christ derives an infinite value from His Divine nature. It was the Lord of glory who was crucified (1Co 2:8). Application: We are bound to belong to the visible Church as the representative of the invisible; to love it, and to labour for its advancement. It is not the gospel, but the Church, by means of the gospel, which is to conquer and reform the world. (H. J. Van Dyke, D. D.)
Pauls farewell
I. The great responsibility (Act 20:28). To feed the Church of God.
1. Nourish, strengthen, and build up the souls of men with the doctrines of grace. But before souls can be fed they must be converted. This can only be done by the Holy Ghost applying the atonement of Jesus Christ. The Church is composed of men and women who have been purchased with the blood of the Lord.
2. To do this work we must Take heed–
(1) To ourselves; our own souls must first of all each day be cared for.
(2) To the flock.
II. The reasons of the responsibility (Act 20:29-30). There is great danger ahead. Grievous wolves shall enter in among you, not sparing the flock.
1. External foes–infidelity, intemperance, etc., are wolves.
2. Internal foes–black sheep in the flock–selfish, designing men, speaking perverse things. Oh how Sabbath schools and churches are destroyed by grievous wolves and black sheep!
III. The means by which this responsibility is to be discharged (Act 20:31-38).
1. By watchfulness Therefore watch. Watch and pray was one of the Masters greatest exhortations.
2. Perseverance–a night and day toil and anxiety (Act 20:31).
3. An unswerving trust in God and in the Word of His grace (Act 20:32).
4. Self-sacrifice–we must not covet money, fame, ease, or anything that man can bestow. We must be–like our Master and like Paul–givers, not receivers (Act 20:33-35). The concluding verses (36-38) are most suggestive of the spirit we all need–prayer, love, gratitude, deep sorrow in parting with friends, and especially with those who have blessed us in the Lord! (A. H. Moment, D. D.)
Pauls farewell
I. Faithful counselling. Lessons: Take heed–
1. Unto yourselves, for you can do little for others until your own heart is set right.
2. To all the flock, for you cannot be a faithful shepherd of the Lords sheep unless you value their safety as your own.
3. To feed the Church of God. Christ was glad to purchase the sheep at the cost of His own life; ought you not willingly to make the slight sacrifice of caring for those whom He purchased at such a price.
4. Against the wolves. The bark of materialism and spiritualism and destructive criticism is a good deal worse than their bite, still you need to be watchful lest it drive some of the more timid souls out of the fold.
5. For from among yourselves men will arise with all sorts of perverse religious notions, and you will have to combat them. Do it discreetly.
6. And take courage, remembering how much easier is your testifying than was Pauls, and that your helping words and deeds, as well as his, all receive Gods approval.
II. Trustful commending. Lessons:
1. Paul commended the Ephesians unto God, and God commended Paul for the zeal with which he laboured for the welfare of the Ephesians.
2. Paul did not covet gold or silver, but he did long for something vastly more precious. What could have exceeded his eagerness to save souls.
3. Paul laboured for the necessities, not for the luxuries of life.
4. Paul laboured not only for himself, but also for those who were with him. Every one for himself is a motto of the devil. Bear ye one anothers burdens is the law of Christ.
5. Paul gave to the Ephesians an active living example of what a Christian worker should be. So doing, he gave to his words a tremendous vital force.
6. Paul worked with his hands, and was rather proud than ashamed of the fact. Hands hardened by honest toil are a much nobler possession than a soft head, or a heart hardened by an empty pride of birth.
III. Prayerful parting. Lessons: Parting–
1. Loses half its bitterness when those who are about to be separated feel that they will remain united in love for the same Saviour.
2. With a beloved pastor is a sad trial, but it is one to be borne as cheerfully as possible, if Providence is evidently calling him elsewhere.
3. Becomes easier to those who approach the hour of separation on their knees.
4. Is greatly saddened if we feel that the bodily separation is to be forever, but there may be something bitterer than that.
5. Becomes well nigh despairing to those who must harbour the fear that it is final, bodily and spiritually. But such separations were very scarce among those with whom such as Paul have been labouring. (S. S. Times.)
Pauls farewell
The Persian had conquered here, and the story of his triumphs, as the tragedian pictured it, had caused an Athenian audience to burst into tears. There are wet eyes on this Miletian shore, over a capture far more significant than Darius ever made. Hearts have been won here and knit, so as no ties of relationship can unite. They are soon to be separated. Spite of the excitement of the scene, this servant of Jesus Christ is self-possessed; his vision is clear; his advice well considered. There is review and outlook. Lessons of humility, fidelity, courage, and charity are taught by a master here, in a few graphic sentences, which the Christian Church still needs to ponder. They are condensed Epistles. There is–
I. Admonition. These were prominent members of the Church, and very dear to him. Their trials had been his, as were their victories. Knowing that they were in the world, he can but be solicitous now that he can no longer personally aid them.
1. They must first take heed unto themselves. The Church is made up of individuals. Strength or weakness in them is power or feebleness in it. Christ had redeemed them, but they must each work out their own salvation. The Holy Ghost had renewed them, but they must each say with the apostle, I am pure from the blood of all men. Only the saved can save them that hear him. The prayerless cannot inspire others to pray; nor can the ignorant, sceptical, or trifling lead any to knowledge, faith and soberness. After the close of the service in which George Herbert was inducted into the charge of Bemerton Church, a friend, wondering at his delay in leaving the building, looked in at a window and found him prostrate on the ground before the altar. Then and there he made the vow, I will be sure to live well, because the virtuous life of a clergyman is the most powerful eloquence, to persuade all that see it, to reverence and love, and at least to desire to live like him. The more precious the treasure, the more does its keeper arm himself. The Church in its collective capacity must have guardianship. Our Lords figure for it is taken from the timid sheep. The shepherd is essential to the flock. Did these brethren realise the vast responsibility? Being right themselves, they might hope rightly to perform it. They were to feed the Church. This was to be with food adapted to it. No more than the shepherd is obliged to make the grass grow upon which the flock lives, were they to create spiritual supplies. The minister has never to produce the truth for his people. He has only to find it, in its richness and freshness, and bring them to it, or it to them. To try to satisfy the cravings of the soul with mere moralities, humanities, philosophies, speculations, socialities, amusements, is to enfeeble and make it ready to perish. The Church is sound and strong, only as it incarnates the Christ.
II. Prophecy.
1. He saw not far away grievous wolves. Persecution and error were only biding their time to waste and destroy the flock. The bloody vision was realised when Aurelius and: Diocletian published the edict that the Christian name be blotted out; and before a century had passed, seducers appeared. If to be forewarned is to be forearmed, then might these Christians be secure.
2. Is it not still true that cruelty and sophistry are the enemys chosen methods of subverting the Church? Whenever it interferes with the schemes of wicked men they will attack it. Inquisitorial tortures are their resort when strong enough. Ostracism, slander, and ridicule are their milder weapons.
III. Confidence. Though such severe trials might be in store, he knew where they would be safe and prosperous. As was his habit he commends them unto One, by whom he himself in full view of bonds and affliction was able to say, None of these things move me. The gracious Word which He had given was the only means of their sanctification. Through this only did they get wisdom to read their title and secure the heavenly inheritance. Has the method changed? Over against all guesses and denials, changing as the lights and shadows of a spring day, stands now as then this rock of the truth, at once a refuge and an inspiration.
IV. Self-devotion. It is a brief rehearsal–how earnestly and honestly he had toiled, asking nothing of them in return. It had been reward enough for him to preach the gospel. And it had all been in full realisation of that matchless saying of the Lord, It is more blessed to give than to receive. Till so profound a law has been discovered and honoured by the Christian, the advance of the heavenly kingdom must be slow.
V. Prayer. Through this intercourse with God they had first really found each other. At His feet their partings must be made. How very like to that scene, sixteen hundred years after, on the shore of Holland, where another company of pilgrims were assembled, when, as the chronicler says, Ye tide (which stays for no man) calling them away ye were thus loathe to departe, their Reverd pastor falling down on his knees (and they all with him) with watrie cheeks commended them, with most fervent prairers to the Lord and his blessing. So do we clasp hands with our children, with our youth departing for their life work, with our missionaries, with our dying ones.
VI. Parting. Intelligent souls are alone capable of profound emotion. The more brutal men become, the more indifferent are they to the breaking of companionship; the more saintly the more sensitive. (D. S. Clark.)
What Paul leaves behind
1. When the apostle goes, will not the whole fabric which he seemed to represent and sustain go along with him? Is Christianity the heroism of one personality? If Pauls estimation of himself had been that of an idolater or of a superstitious person, he would have reminded the Ephesian elders that in the removal of his personality they had themselves no longer any official standing, or any claim upon public attention.
2. When Paul goes, what will be left? The Church! and the Church is greater than any member of it; the Word! and the Word is infinitely greater than all the ministers that preach it. The blood that bought the Church! and that blood is alone in its meaning, energy, and grace. Then everything will be left when Paul goes. That is the mystery of Divine love. We can take nothing away from Christs Church. The firstborn dies, but the Church is as strong as ever; the most eloquent tongue is silent, but the music of the Cross loses no note of its enchantment. It is even good for us that the apostle should be taken away: it was expedient for us that Christ Himself did not remain upon the earth in visible presence. Christianity does not depend upon its great or its little men. Like its Lord, it is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
3. Pauls charge is Paul himself, Take heed therefore unto yourselves. Paul was a severe disciplinarian. He was always undergoing the discipline of an athlete; he kept his body under lest he himself should become a castaway. Self-heed is the secret of public power. Take heed unto yourselves, and you will be gentle to other people. Take heed also to all the flock. That is the balancing consideration. The minister is not a monk, he is a public, a social man with a great shepherdly heart, that can understand and love a thousand varieties of men. Pauls conception of the ministry was regulated and inspired by his conception of the Church. Was the Church a club, a little gathering of men called together for superficial purposes or for transient enjoyment? It was a flock; it was purchased with the blood of God. Then the Church makes the ministry. The ministry has no existence apart from the Church. The minister–be he Paul or Apollos or Cephas–is but an upper seat holder.
4. Paul uses language full of suggestion and pathos. The Church of God which He hath purchased with His own blood. What grander word is there than blood? Until we contaminated it, it stood next to love. The blood is the life; the life is the blood. God purchased the Church with His own life. When you understand sin you Will understand blood. When you see the hell which sin deserves you will see the Cross which God built.
5. Why should a man care anything about the world he is going to leave? That depends upon the quality of the man. There are those who want peace in their time, and want to leave all thorny questions to he determined by those who come after them. But Paul was anxious for the fortunes of the Church at Ephesus, though he would himself see that Church no more. Christianity is not a new way of sneaking out of responsibility; Christianity is not a cunning method of leaving posterity to take care of itself. Christian love claims all time, all ages, all lands. Paul–great economist, great statesman, supreme prince of the legions of Christ–could not leave Ephesus saying, I am glad I shall suffer no more there; but he cared for Ephesus as much as if he were going to spend the remainder of his days in the endeavour to convert its citizens. Paul knew that after his departing grievous wolves should enter into the Church, not sparing the flock. The wolves could not come in so long as Paul was there. God takes away from us our mighty men that He may train us as much by their absence as He did by their presence. Who would not long to have a whole year with John Bunyan, or the greater Milton, or the fiery Baxter, or the profound Howe and Owen? Yet God is training us by their withdrawal, and Gods greatest men are always the men who are still to come. The ages do not live backward. (J. Parker, D. D.)
Personal contact with souls
As I recall my own ministerial experience I can testify that nearly all the converting work done has been by personal contact with souls. For example, I once recognised in the congregation a newcomer, and at my first visit to his house was strongly drawn to him as a very noble-hearted, manly character. A long talk with him seemed to produce little impression; but before I left, he took me upstairs to see his three or four rosy children in their cribs. As we stood looking at the sleeping cherubs, I said to him, My friend, what sort of father are you going to be to these children? Are you going to lead them towards heaven, or–the other way! That arrow lodged. He gave himself to Christ, and at our next communion season he was at the Masters table, and soon became a most useful officer in the church. (T. L. Cuyler.)
The ministers weeping time
Thomas Toller, of Kettering, exerted an extraordinary influence over the feelings of his audience, while he himself remained apparently unmoved. Being once asked, How is it possible for you to remain calm yourself while the people are weeping before you? he replied, with evident emotion, My weeping time was yesterday.
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 28. Made you overseers] , Appointed you bishops; for so we translate the original word in most places where it occurs: but overseers, or inspectors, is much more proper, from , over, and , I look. The persons who examine into the spiritual state of the flock of God, and take care to lead them in and out, and to find them pasture, are termed episcopoi, or superintendents. The office of a bishop is from God; a true pastor only can fulfil this office: it is an office of most awful responsibility; few there are who can fill it; and, of those who occupy this high and awful place, perhaps we may say there are fewer still who discharge the duties of it. There are, however, through the good providence of God, Christian bishops, who, while they are honoured by the calling, do credit to the sacred function. And the annals of our Church can boast of at least as many of this class of men, who have served their God and their generation, as of any other order, in the proportion which this order bears to others in the Church of Christ. That bishop and presbyter, or elder, were at this time of the same order, and that the word was indifferently used of both, see noticed on Ac 20:17.
Feed the Church of God] This verse has been the subject of much controversy, particularly in reference to the term , of GOD, in this place; and concerning it there is great dissension among the MSS. and versions. Three readings exist in them, in reference to which critics and commentators have been much divided; viz. , the Church of GOD; , of the LORD; , of the LORD and GOD. From the collections of Wetstein and Griesbach, it appears that but few MSS., and none of them very ancient, have the word , of GOD; with these only the Vulgate, and the later Syriac in the text, agree. , of the LORD, is the reading of ACDE, several others, the Sahidic, Coptic, later Syriac in the margin, Armenian, AEthiopia, and some of the fathers. , of the LORD and of GOD, is the reading of the great majority; though the most ancient are for , of the LORD: on this ground Griesbach has admitted this reading into the text, and put in the margin, as being next in authority.
Mr. Wakefield, who was a professed and conscientious Unitarian, decides for , of GOD, as the true reading; but, instead of translating , with his own blood, he translates, by his own Son, and brings some passages from the Greek and Roman writers to show that and sanguis are used to signify son, or near relative; and, were this the only place where purchasing with his own blood occurred, we might receive this saying; but, as the redemption of man is, throughout the New Testament, attributed to the sacrificial death of Christ, it is not likely that this very unusual meaning should apply here. At all events, we have here a proof that the Church was purchased by the blood of Christ; and, as to his Godhead, it is sufficiently established in many other places. When we grant that the greater evidence appears to be in favour of , feed the Church of the Lord, which he has purchased with his own blood, we must maintain that, had not this Lord been GOD, his blood could have been no purchase for the souls of a lost world.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Take heed therefore unto yourselves; be mindful of your own salvation: for he that neglects his own, will not be careful of the salvation of another.
The Holy Ghost hath made you overseers;
1. By his choosing and nominating of them, which was then by a special instinct, or immediate warrant from the Spirit, Act 1:24; 13:2. Or:
2. Because they were constituted by the apostles, who were filled with the Spirit, enabling them to the choice of such persons, Act 14:23. But also:
3. Whosoever is set apart to this office, according to the will of God, is made an overseer by the Holy Ghost; God owning his institutions, and concurring with them.
Overseers; the same who {Act 20:17} are called elders; they were certainly such as had the government and care of the church committed unto them.
To feed; as a shepherd does, (for the apostle continues here the metaphor), Jer 23:4; Joh 21:16,17.
The church of God; our Saviour is so called; for the Word was God, Joh 1:1.
Which he hath purchased; Christ by his bloody death hath redeemed his church, and obtained power to gather it, to rule over it, to protect and preserve it, Isa 53:10; Phi 2:8-10.
With his own blood; the blood of Christ, called truly the blood of God, there being in Christ two natures in one person, and a communion of the properties of each nature. If Christ had not been man, he could have had no blood to shed: had he not been God, the blood which he shed could not have been a sufficient price of redemption. Oh the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God, who found out such a ransom; and the breadth, and length, and depth, and height of the love of Christ, who paid this ransom for us! Rom 11:33; Eph 3:18,19.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
28. Take heed . . . untoyourselvesCompare 1Ti 3:2-7;1Ti 4:16; 1Ti 6:11.
and to all the flockCompareHeb 13:17. Observe here howthe personal is put before the pastoral care.
over . . . which the HolyGhost hath made youCompare Joh 20:22;Joh 20:23; Eph 4:8;Eph 4:11; Eph 4:12;Rev 3:1. (Ac14:23 shows that the apostle did not mean to exclude humanordination).
overseersor, as thesame word is everywhere else rendered in our version,”bishops.” The English Version has hardly dealt fairin this case with the sacred text, in rendering the word “overseers,”whereas it ought here, as in all other places, to have been”bishops,” in order that the fact of elders and bishopshaving been originally and apostolically synonymous, might beapparent to the ordinary English reader, which now it is not[ALFORD]. The distinctionbetween these offices cannot be certainly traced till the secondcentury, nor was it established till late in that century.
to feed the church of Godor,”the Church of the Lord.” Which of these two readings ofthe text is the true one, is a question which has divided the bestcritics. The evidence of manuscripts preponderates in favor of “THELORD”; some of themost ancient Versions, though not all, so read; and ATHANASIUS,the great champion of the supreme Divinity of Christ early in thefourth century, says the expression “Church of God” isunknown to the Scriptures. Which reading, then, does the internalevidence favor? As “Church of God” occurs nine timeselsewhere in Paul’s writings, and “Church of the Lord”nowhere, the probability, it is said, is that he used his wontedphraseology here also. But if he did, it is extremely difficult tosee how so many early transcribers should have altered it into thequite unusual phrase, “Church of the Lord”; whereas, if theapostle did use this latter expression, and the historian wrote it soaccordingly, it it easy to see how transcribers might, from being soaccustomed to the usual phrase, write it “Church of God.”On the whole, therefore, we accept the second reading as mostprobably the true one. But see what follows.
which he hath purchased“madeHis own,” “acquired.”
with his own blood“Hisown” is emphatic: “That glorified Lord who from the righthand of power in the heavens is gathering and ruling the Church, andby His Spirit, through human agency, hath set you over it, cannot beindifferent to its welfare in your hands, seeing He hath given for itHis own most precious blood, thus making it His own by the dearest ofall ties.” The transcendent sacredness of the Church of Christis thus made to rest on the dignity of its Lord and the consequentpreciousness of that blood which He shed for it. And as thesacrificial atoning character of Christ’s death is here plainlyexpressed, so His supreme dignity is implied as clearlyby the second reading as it is expressed by the first. What amotive to pastoral fidelity is here furnished!
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Take heed therefore unto yourselves,…. Since the blood of men may be required of those, who are negligent or partial in their office, and shun to declare the whole counsel of God: this exhortation is given them not merely as men, to take care of their bodily health, the outward concerns of life, and provide for themselves and families; nor merely as Christians, but as ministers of the Gospel; that they would take heed to their gifts, to use and improve them, and not neglect them; to their time, that they spend it aright, and not squander it away; and to their spirit, temper, and passions, that they are not governed by them; and to their lives and conversations, that they be exemplary to those who are under their care; and to their doctrine, that it be according to the Scriptures; that it be the doctrine of Christ, and the same with the apostles; that it be according to godliness, and that it tends to edification; that it be sound and incorrupt, pure and unmixed, and all of a piece and consistent with itself; and that they be not infected and carried away with errors and heresies:
and to all the flock; the church and all the members of it, which are compared to a flock of sheep, which are to be looked after and watched over by the ministers of the word, who are as shepherds to them, lest they should be infected, or any damage done them. The people of God are compared to sheep on many accounts; before conversion, for their going astray, when they are as lost sheep; after conversion, for their meek and inoffensive carriage and behaviour, and for their patience in bearing sufferings, to which they are exposed: and a church of Christ is compared to a flock of them, being in Gospel order, folded together and feeding in the same pasture, attending the word and ordinances, under the care of shepherds appointed by Christ the chief shepherd; whose business it is to take heed unto them, and care of them, to learn to know their state and condition, to watch over them, and to feed them with knowledge and with understanding, for which they are qualified by Christ; and they are to take heed unto everyone in the flock, the poor of the flock as well as others, the lambs as well as the sheep, and the sick and the diseased, the torn, and straying, and driven away, as well as the fat and the strong: and this flock, though a little flock, is a holy and beautiful one, a flock of men, and of the souls of men dear to God, to Christ and the blessed Spirit; and a special regard should be had unto them, and that for reasons following:
over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers; or “bishops”; this is said to the elders of the church, Ac 20:17 which shows that the office of an elder and a bishop is one and the same office; and this contains in it more than one argument why they should take heed to the flock; as because they are the overseers of it, who have the care and oversight of the flock, that is under their inspection, and is their proper province, and office; and this they were put into by the Holy Ghost, who gave them gifts to qualify them for it, and called, and inclined them to undertake it, as well as moved the people to make choice of them for this purpose; and since, therefore, this was an affair in which the Holy Ghost was so much concerned, it became them very diligently to attend it:
to feed the church of God; with knowledge and understanding; and discharge the whole office of faithful shepherds to the flock, by feeding the flock and not themselves, strengthening the diseased, healing the sick, binding up the broken, bringing again that which was driven away, and seeking up that which was lost: and here is another argument suggested, to stir up to a diligent performance of this work; and that is, that this flock is the church of God, a set of men whom God has chosen for himself, and called by his grace out of the world, and separated for his own use and glory, and among whom he dwells; and therefore to be fed with the faithful word, with the finest of the wheat, and not with the chaff of human schemes, and with the wind of false doctrine, nor with anything that is vain, trifling, and deceitful; but with the solid doctrines of the Gospel, with the words of faith and good doctrine, with the wholesome words of Christ Jesus, which have in them milk for babes and meat for strong men, and with and by the ordinances of the Gospel, which are the green pastures they are to be guided into, and abide in; and in all they are to be directed to Christ, the sum of the word and ordinances, who is the bread of life, and food of faith; and that the church should be thus fed, is the will of Christ, who has appointed and ordered his ministers to feed his lambs and sheep, and has furnished them with what is necessary for this work; this is the design of the ministry of the Gospel, and the administration of ordinances; and the churches of Christ are placed where food may be had, where the word is faithfully preached, and the ordinances truly administered: some copies read, “the church of the Lord”; and others, and so the Complutensian edition, “the church of the Lord and God”:
which he hath purchased with his own blood; which being the blood not only of a pure and innocent man, but of one that is truly and properly God as well as man, was a sufficient ransom price to redeem the church and people of God from sin, the law, its curse and condemnation: so that this is no inconsiderable proof of the true and proper deity of Christ; and contains a fresh argument, or reason, why the flock of God and “church of Christ”, as the Syriac version reads; or “the church of the Lord and God”, as in five of Beza’s exemplars: or “of the Lord God”, as the Arabic version, should be taken heed unto and fed; because it must needs be dear to God and Christ, and precious to them, since so great a price has been paid for it. The purchaser is God, Christ who is God over all, blessed for ever, not a creature; that could never have made such a purchase, it could not have purchased a single sheep or lamb in this flock, no man can redeem his brother, or give to God a ransom for him, much less the whole flock; but Christ being God, was able to make such a purchase, and he has actually made it, and given a sufficient price for it; not to Satan, with whom these sheep were a prey, and from whom they are taken in virtue of the ransom given; but to God, from whom they strayed, against whom they sinned, and whose law they broke; and this price was not silver and gold, nor men, nor people: but Christ himself, his life and blood; and which were his “own”, the human nature, the blood of which was shed, and its life given being in union with his divine person, and was in such sense his own, the property of the Son of God, as the life and blood of no mere man are theirs: and this purchase now being made in this way, and by such means, is a very proper one; it is not made without price, but with an invaluable one; and it is a legal purchase, a valuable consideration being given for it, perfectly equivalent to it; and therefore is a complete one, there is nothing wanting to make it more firm, it is a finished purchase; and it is a very peculiar one, it is a peculiar people that are purchased, called the purchased possession, Eph 1:14 and a peculiar price which is paid for it; there is no other of the same kind, nor any thing like it, and it is made by a peculiar person, one that is God and man in one person.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Take heed unto yourselves ( ). The full phrase had , hold your mind on yourselves (or other object in the dative), as often in old writers and in Job 7:17. But the ancients often used the idiom with understood, but not expressed as here and Acts 5:35; Luke 12:1; Luke 17:3; Luke 21:34; 1Tim 1:4; 1Tim 3:8; 1Tim 4:13. is so used in 1Ti 4:16.
To all the flock ( ). Contracted form of = (Joh 10:16) already in Lu 12:32 and also in Acts 20:29; 1Pet 5:2; 1Pet 5:3. Common in old Greek.
Hath made (). Did make, second aorist middle indicative of , did appoint. Paul evidently believed that the Holy Spirit calls and appoints ministers.
Bishops (). The same men termed elders in verse 17 which see.
To shepherd (). Present active infinitive of purpose of , old verb to feed or tend the flock (, ), to act as shepherd (). These ministers are thus in Paul’s speech called elders (verse 17), bishops (verse 28), and shepherds (verse 28). Jesus had used this very word to Peter (Joh 21:16, twice , feed, Acts 21:15; Acts 21:17) and Peter will use it in addressing fellow-elders (1Pe 5:2) with memories, no doubt of the words of Jesus to him. The “elders” were to watch over as “bishops” and “tend and feed as shepherds” the flock. Jesus is termed “the shepherd and bishop of your souls” in 1Pe 2:25 and “the great Shepherd of the sheep” in Heb 13:20. Jesus called himself “the good Shepherd” in Joh 10:11.
The church of God ( ). The correct text, not “the church of the Lord” or “the church of the Lord and God” (Robertson, Introduction to Textual Criticism of the N.T., p. 189).
He purchased (). First aorist middle of , old verb to reserve, to preserve (for or by oneself, in the middle). In the N.T. only in Luke Acts 17:33; Acts 20:28; 1Tim 3:13. The substantive (preservation, possession) occurs in 1Pe 2:9 (“a peculiar people” = a people for a possession) and in Eph 1:14.
With his own blood ( ). Through the agency of () his own blood. Whose blood? If (Aleph B Vulg.) is correct, as it is, then Jesus is here called “God” who shed his own blood for the flock. It will not do to say that Paul did not call Jesus God, for we have Rom 9:5; Col 2:9; Titus 2:13 where he does that very thing, besides Col 1:15-20; Phil 2:5-11.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
To yourselves and to all the flock. To yourselves first, that you may duly care for the flock. Compare 1Ti 4:16.
Overseers [] . Denoting the official function of the elders, but not in the later ecclesiastical sense of bishops, as implying an order distinct from presbyters or elders. The two terms are synonymous. The elders, by virtue of their office, were overseers. 26 To feed [] . See on Mt 2:6. The word embraces more than feeding; signifying all that is included in the office of a shepherd : tending, or shepherding.
Purchased [] . Only here and 1Ti 3:13. See on peculiar people, 1Pe 2:9. The verb means, originally, to make [] to remain over and above [] : hence to keep or save for one’s self; to compass or acquire.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
ELDERS, WHO WERE ALSO BISHOPS, CHARGED, AND COMMENDED V. 28-32
1) “Take heed therefore unto yourselves,” (prosechete heautois) “Take heed or be ye therefore cautious unto yourselves,” toward your choices and conduct of life, 1Co 9:27; Col 4:17; 1Ti 4:16. As elders, mature ordained leaders, teachers – men as candidates qualified for election to: 1)The office of a deacon or, 2)The office of a Bishop; There was no office of Elders in New Testament churches, 1Ti 3:1; 1Ti 3:13. A Bishop is an ordained elder, elected by a church as an overseer of that flock, the office-holder over that flock.
2) “And to all the flock,” (kai panti to poimnio) “And to or toward all the flock,” the congregation, the house of God in a particular location, 1Ti 3:15; Mat 26:31-32; Isa 40:11; Luk 12:32; Eph 2:19-22; 1Pe 5:1-4.
3) “Over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers,” (en ho humas to pneuma to hagion etheto epiekopous) “In which (position or location) the Holy Spirit placed you all (as) overseers,” (as pastors, to feed both the lambs and the sheep, the mature and immature believers in Christ, 1Pe 5:1-4. In one place only, in the New Testament, is it indicated that a local church may have more than one bishop, one officer as overseer, and that was at Philippi, Php_1:1.
4) “To feed the church of God,” (poimainein ten ekkIesian tou theou) “To shepherd (feed, lead, and defend or protect) the church (congregation or located assembly) of God,” that belongs to God, that is called Christ’s bride, which He loved, for which He too gave Himself, Joh 3:28-29; 2Co 11:1-2; Rev 19:5-9; Eph 5:25; Eph 3:21. To feed means to provide for the spiritual needs of the flock, in pastoral care, Joh 21:16-17.
5) “Which He hath purchased with His own blood.” (en periepoiesato dia tou haimatos tou idiou) “Which He acquired (purchased) through His own blood,” or the blood of His own Son Jesus Christ, who loved the church and gave Himself for her, Eph 5:25; 1Ti 3:15-16. The (Gk. periesato) is used in the sense of “to gain for one’s self.”
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
−
28. Take heed, therefore. He doth now apply his speech unto them, and by many reasons showeth that they must watch diligently, and that he is not so careful but because necessity doth so require. The first reason is, because they be bound to the flock over which they be set. The second, because they were called unto this function not by mortal man, but by the Holy Ghost. The third, because it is no small honor to govern the Church of God. The fourth, because the Lord did declare by an evident testimony what account he doth make of the Church, seeing that he hath redeemed it with his blood. As touching the first, he doth not only command them to take heed to the flock, but first to themselves. For that man will never be careful for the salvation of other men who will neglect his own. And in vain shall that man prick forward other to live godlily, who will himself show no desire of godliness. Yea, that man will not take pains with his flock who forgetteth himself, seeing he is a part of the flock. Therefore, to the end they may be careful for the flock to them committed, Paul commandeth and warneth that every one of them keep himself in the fear of God. For by this means it should come to pass, that every one should be as faithful towards his flock as he ought. For we said that Paul reasoneth from their calling, that they be bound to take pains in the Church of God, whereof they have the government. As if he should say, that they may not do whatsoever they like best, neither are they free after they be made pastors, but they be bound publicly to all the flock. −
The Holy Ghost hath made you overseers. By the very word he putteth them in mind, that they be placed, as it were, in a watch-tower, that they may watch for the common safety of all men. But Paul standeth principally upon this, that they were not appointed by men, but the charge of the Church was committed unto them by God. For which cause they must be the more diligent and careful, because they must give a straight account before that high seat of judgment. For the more excellent the dignity of that Lord and Master whom we serve is, the more reverence do we give him naturally, and the reverence itself doth sharpen our study and diligence. −
Moreover, though the Lord would have ministers of the word chosen from the beginning by the voices [suffrages] of men, yet doth he always challenge the government of the Church to himself, not only to the end we may acknowledge him to be the only governor thereof, but also know that the incomparable treasure of salvation doth come from him alone. For he is robbed of his glory if we think that the gospel is brought unto us, either by chance or by the will of men, or their industry. But this doth Paul attribute peculiarly to the Spirit, by whom God doth govern his Church, and who is to every man a secret witness of his calling in his own conscience. −
Concerning the word overseer or bishop, we must briefly note this, that Paul calleth all the elders of Ephesus by this name, as well one as other. − (435) Whence we gather, that according to the use of the Scripture bishops differ nothing from elders. But that it came to pass through vice and corruption, that those who were chief in every city began to be called bishops. I call it corruption, not because it is evil that some one man should be chief in every college or company; but because this boldness is intolerable, when men, by wresting the names of the Scripture unto their custom, doubt not to change the tongue of the Holy Ghost. −
To govern the Church. The Greek word ποιμαινειν doth signify to feed. But by a fit similitude it is translated unto every kind of government. And we have said that this is the third argument drawn from the excellency of the function; as the same Paul telleth Timotheus elsewhere, that he take heed and see how he ought to behave himself in the house of God, which is the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of truth. As if he should say, that there is no time to be idle in such a weighty calling, and that those are less excusable whom God hath made stewards of his family, the higher that degree of honor is, unless they be correspondent to so great dignity, that is, unless they do their duty diligently. Now, if bishops or overseers be made by the Holy Ghost, to the end they may feed the Church, the hierarchy of Papistry is ridiculous, wherein bishops being proud of their (painted sheath and) vain title, do not so much as once meddle with the function of teaching, no, not for fashion’s sake. −
Which he hath purchased. The four reasons, whereby Paul doth carefully prick forward the pastors to do their duty diligently, because the Lord hath given no small pledge of his love toward the Church in shedding his own blood for it. Whereby it appeareth how precious it is to him; and surely there is nothing which ought more vehemently to urge pastors to do their duty joyfully, than if they consider that the price of the blood of Christ is committed to them. For hereupon it followeth, that unless they take pains in the Church, the lost souls are not only imputed to them, but they be also guilty of sacrilege, because they have profaned the holy blood of the Son of God, and have made the redemption gotten by him to be of none effect, so much as in them lieth. And this is a most cruel offense, if, through our sluggishness, the death of Christ do not only become vile or base, but the fruit thereof be also abolished and perish; and it is said that God hath purchased the Church, to the end we may know that he would have it remain wholly to himself, because it is meet and right that he possess those whom he hath redeemed. −
Notwithstanding, we must also remember, that all mankind are the bond-slaves of Satan until Christ set us free from his tyranny, gathering us into the inheritance of his Father. −
But because the speech which Paul useth seemeth to be somewhat hard, we must see in what sense he saith that God purchased the Church with his blood. For nothing is more absurd than to feign or imagine God to be mortal or to have a body. But in this speech he commendeth the unity of person in Christ; for because there be distinct natures in Christ, the Scripture cloth sometimes recite that apart by itself which is proper to either. But when it setteth God before us made manifest in the flesh, it doth not separate the human nature from the Godhead. Notwithstanding, because again two natures are so united in Christ, that they make one person, that is improperly translated sometimes unto the one, which doth truly and in deed belong to the other, as in this place Paul doth attribute blood to God; because the man Jesus Christ, who shed his blood for us, was also God. This manner of speaking is caned, of the old writers, communicatio idiomatum, because the property of the one nature is applied to the other. And I said that by this means is manifestly expressed one person of Christ, lest we imagine him to be double, which Nestorius did in times past attempt; and yet for all this we must not imagine a confusion of the two natures which Eutychus went about to bring in, or which the Spanish dog, Servetus, hath at this time invented, who maketh the Godhead of Christ nothing else but a form or image of the human nature, which he dreameth to have always shined in God. −
(435) −
“
Indifferenter,” indifferently.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
THE CHURCH OF GOD
Act 20:28.
THE CHURCH OF GOD is so important a theme as to deserve separate and extensive treatment.
In recent years I have been associated with the construction of important buildings, and I have found it money well expended to employ a good architect in each instance, and in insisting that the contractor do every bit of his work in accordance with the plans provided for him. In our effort to build up the Church of Jesus Christ, there is but one right way of going about it, and that is to follow implicitly the Divine plan which has been perfected for us, and, in the Word, is placed before us.
The minutes of this morning, then, let us give to a study of the architects work that we may go on intelligently in our work upon The Church of God.
Four fundamental truths seem to be foundation-stones for the Church of God.
IT SHOULD HAVE A REGENERATE MEMBERSHIP
The denomination to which I belong has never, until modernism came, called this statement into question, or lost sight of it in its teaching. When one looks into the Scripture it is easy to see that our position in this matter was in keeping with the demands of the Word.
Regeneration is essential to salvation. The Master both clearly and fully taught this to Nicodemus when to that splendid moralist He said, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God; that which is born of the flesh is flesh and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit (Joh 3:3; Joh 3:5-6).
To the Corinthians Paul writes, Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of God, and thereby put his teaching in perfect keeping with that of His Master.
Dr. Wilbur Chapman tells us that he once had a blind neighbor whose custom it was to go all about the town alone. One day, just at the hour at which this neighbor was wont to go to dinner, Dr. Chapman saw him going in an opposite direction from his home, and asked him if he were going to dinner. He replied, I am. The Doctor said, You are going in the opposite direction. and, laying hold upon him, turned him about, and shortly saw him enter his own house. That is the necessity that Christ voiced. Men by nature are going in the wrong direction, and are only turned about when regenerated by the Spirit of God. No man is fit for the Church of God until he is a saved man.
Such only as are regenerated can receive this truth. In 1Co 2:14, Paul writes, The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God for they are foolishness to him, neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. And, one of the greater duties of the Church of God is to teach men the truth. Without truth there is no freedom, and without truth there is no growth. As Mr. Martineau says, Truth only subsists for him who has discovered it freshly for himself and it is realized only so far as it is apprehended. And the man who has not been regenerated cannot apprehend the truth as the Apostle tells us, and therefore is unfitted for the Church of Christ, the great feature of whose work is instruction in the things of the Scripture.
John McNeill tells the story of a man who said to his minister, I am amazed that a man like you should go to these conventions. What new thing cam these convention speakers tell you? It is all in the New Testament. Yes, replied the pastor, that is the trouble; too many people leave these things in the New Testament. What we are attempting in our assemblies is to get them out of the New Testament and into the lives of those who hear; but the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God.
Again, only the regenerate have the required character. Church membership with some means simply a name in the church manual, but church membership ought to mean a name to live, a character that will honor Christ.
Paul, in the Epistle to the Galatians (Gal 5:19-21), tells us what are the works of the flesh, and in Gal 5:22-23 what are the works of the Spirit. It is these latterlove, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and temperance that are needful to the Church of Christ, and they are the fruits of a regenerate life.
One of the books read in the early times was The Shepherd of Hermas, in which a temple is described as a building which stands in the midst of twelve mountainssome of them black, one of them very white. They had a saying that the stones from the white mountain of childhood are ready to be put into the temple, and the stones from the black mountain must be made like the white stones of childhood before they can be put into its walls.
These early Christians had a proper conception of the Temple of God built of the lively stones of regenerate men and women, for only such as have been made white through the cleansing power of the blood are fit to enter into it, adding their names and characters to the completion of this holy structure.
IT SHOULD BE NO RESPECTER OF PERSONS
Possibly no feature of the Church of God is better emphasized in the Scriptures than this:
The Church had its beginning with the common people. The first disciples and Apostles were plain fishermen for the most part, neither rich nor educated. Of Christ it is said, The common people heard Him gladly. And when John the Baptist in prison grew despondent, and sent two of his disciples to ask Jesus, Art thou He that should come, or do we look for another? Jesus answered and said to them, Go and show John those things which ye do hear and see; the blind receive their sight, and the lame walk; the lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear; the dead are raised up, and the poor have the Gospel preached unto them. You notice the climax of thought. Perhaps the best evidence of the divinity of the Lord, and certainly the one point at which He was positively differentiated from the Scribes and Phariseesthe reputed teachers of the time was this, that He preached the Gospel to the poor, and out of their number organized and began His Church.
It seems strange how little we learn from history. The great denominations of this day are in danger of forgetting their origin. There is not one of them but was born in poverty and bred in hardship, and yet those who having begun with nothing, under the Hand of God are enriched and increased with goods, often show the least sympathy toward those starting where they did. I have noticed that the hardest taskmaster for men is not one who was born a lord, but one who has risen from the bottom of the office to overseer. And it is a good deal so in churches. I should not be in the least surprised if the time comes when the Salvation Army will lose their interest in the slums. The Baptist denomination and the Methodistthe great peoples of this country numerically (and I doubt not financially as well)were once as poor as the Salvation Army and made their appeal to much the same people, and they were wise, for who knoweth which shall prosper, this or that?
Dr. A. C. Dixon says the great question in commerce is as to the refuse. A large silk manufacturer in Liverpool made little progress in business until he invented a machine that has utilized the refuse of his factory.
The Standard Oil Company has now an enormous income as a result of their using the refuse of their refineries. As with commerce, the great questions of the daysocial, political, and religiousare concerning the social nobodies, the great unchurched masses of our cities. The church that makes an appeal to them and succeeds in so giving them the Gospel that they will receive it, will see them not only becoming Christians, but prospering under the Lord, and will receive from their open hand an income which no man can calculate.
John D. Rockefeller had but fifteen dollars a month, we are told, when he was received to church-membership; and the senior Colgate, the noblest man of that noble house, was at one time a poverty-stricken boy in the city of New York, hunting for a job. The churches that received those two not only evinced their Christian spirit, but introduced into the denomination men whose millions have enriched the treasuries of the whole Baptist cause.
The Church of God should give cordial reception to the rich. He who is no respecter of persons may have more of sympathy for the poor, but not more of love. There is on the part of some people a positive aversion to the well-to-do. Anarchy and socialism sometimes creep into the church and voice themselves against every man who has been prospered of the Lord in material things.
I read some years ago that book which created such a stirDr. Strongs New Era. I gave somewhat careful study to his severe arraignment of the churches in their patronage of aristocrats and their neglect of the poor and the unlearned. He says, you remember, Now, it is the well-to-do who have the Gospel preached to them and who hear it gladly; and the humbler classes, with whose life Christs lot was cast, and who for eighteen centuries were more easily attracted to Him, are now estranged from His church. Once not many wise men, not many mighty, not many noble men were called. Now, not many ignorant, not many poor, not many humble, and then he proceeds to show that this has come about by the class spirit which characterizes the Church, all of which I question. There are always some cheap aristocrats, usually people of no means or people who have means for which they have not labored, who would feign shut out the poor; but I do not believe such is the spirit of the great body of present-day believers. I think the explanation of the intellectual and financial superiority of church people exists in the circumstance that Christianity makes for mind and money, and in my observation many of our well-to-do people stand more ready to stretch out a hand to help than some of their critics are to receive it. It is a popular misconception that the Christ who began His Church with the common people never received any other. Before His death the noble name of Nicodemus was probably enrolled among His followers, while the wealthy Joseph of Arimathaea was His friend, faithful to His death, and even afterwards. The ample house on the hill of Bethany where the fortunate Mary, and Martha, and Lazarus lived, was the most hospitable in all the land, and the Christ, who had not where to lay His head, found always the prophets chamber open there and the softest pillow awaiting His weary brow. Matthew was able to spread a sumptuous feast, and Zacchaeus was rich.
For one, I do not believe that all the well-to-do followers of Christ are dead. Modern church-membership has given worthy successors of these noble New Testament names. A. T. Stewart amassed his forty millions, and yet Swett Marsden says, with some justice at least, There was not a smirched dollar in all those millions. Charles N. Crittenton, New Yorks successful business man, used his silver and gold to save hundreds of girls out of the slums, and set up in our own city a monument to his Christianity that Minneapolis will more and more appreciate as the days go by. I have no doubt whatever that money, when rightly made and spiritually administered, is one of the mightiest powers for God and good known to this world, and I hope to see the day when the churches of Jesus Christ shall count their millions as they have never done, and contribute as He has prospered them.
Henry Ward Beecher was the most versatile minister of his time, and in my judgment a wonderfully broadminded, big-hearted man, and among the many sayings that having passed his lips are made immortal by their own worth, is this, A select church is a dead church. A churchs power consists in cutting the loaf from the top to the bottom, and I doubt if any church is worthy to wear Gods Name in which the rich and the poor cannot meet together and recognize that The Lord is the maker of them all.
THE CHURCH OF GOD SHOULD BE RULED BY THE HOLY GHOST
Here my appeal is also to the Scriptures, and they are replete with teaching upon this point. No matter what the business in hand, there is but one appointed ruler, and in this age that is the Holy Ghost Himself.
It is a part of His office to make choice of a pastor. Notice our text and its teaching upon this point. Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers (Act 20:28).
Truly, as Dr. Gordon says, The office of pastor and its incumbent were alike by direct and Divine appointment. In Eph 4:8-12 (R. V.) we read, When He ascended on high, He led captivity captive and gave gifts unto men; and He gave some to be Apostles, and some Prophets, and some Evangelists, and some Pastors, and Teachers, for the profiting of the saints; unto the work of the ministry, unto the building up of the body of Christ, In proportion as we depart from that teaching, interminable troubles are our lot. Look about you today and what do you see? In all the history of the church the relation between pastor and people was never so loose as now. The long pastorate has al most become obsolete. People speak of settling a pastor. They ought to say squatting one instead, keeping up the Western phraseology.
Dr. A. J. Gordon accomplished his decease nearly twenty-six years ago, just after the celebration of his twenty-fifth anniversary as pastor of the Clarendon Street Baptist Church. So long and noble a service would not have been possible, but for the fact that the people of that church waited upon their knees for much more than a year for Gods guidance in their choice of a man, in which time they extended a call to Dr. Gordon, which he refused; but so convinced were they of the mind of the Lord in the matter, that after waiting twelve months they called him again.
When more churches become Scriptural and surrender this matter of selecting a minister back into the hands of the Holy Ghost, there will be a man for these positions of whose appointment it may be said, as it was of Pauls, not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father (Gal 1:1).
The same truth obtains touching the election of officers. The Holy Spirit should be consulted as to those best suited for each position. Look into the sixth chapter of Acts and see how the first election of deacons was conducted. While the Apostles pray, the people are acting upon their suggestion of looking out seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, and when they present Stephen, Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas and Nicholas, they prayed again and laid hands on them. And note the result, And the Word of God increased and the number of disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly, and a great company of priests were obedient to the faith. And Stephen, full of faith and power, did great miracles among the people. What a contrast to that election was the one which Peter impatiently forced upon the disciples before the Holy Ghost had come upon them, and in which by lot they chose Matthias, whose election God never recorded and whose memory is forgotten, save his name. Paul was the twelfth Apostle and in due season the Spirit selected him, as he himself tells us.
Every caucus held for the purpose of putting some favorite into church office is a rebellion against the Holy Spirit. Every argument that looks to the distribution of church offices by way of patronage to certain important people, or to the currying of favor with some dissenter, is a subversion of the whole spirit and teaching of the New Testament, and a grief to the Spirit, who in the ancient time chose the elders of the Church at Ephesus, selected Paul and Barnabas as officials, and administered the offices of His own creation. He that hath an ear to hear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.
Of course the only way to discover the mind of people touching whom they would have fill these positions, is by some sort of vote; but let us remember that it should mean more than a mere show of hands. No man is fitted to vote until he has first asked for and heard the voice of God, and the only majority that God regards is the company of those who represent the will of His Spirit. In the administration of the business of the church the Holy Spirit should govern.
All that I have said pertaining to voting for officers applies to the vote upon any question that can come before the body of believers.
In my humble judgment, when the Church of God comes together to transact business for the Lord, no man having any other will than to do that of the Divine Spirit, the business meeting of the church will be as attractive as the noblest song service, and when the vote is cast there will be no minority. The Holy Ghost has but one mind; why should not His people wait before Him until they find that out?
Be sure the worship and service of the church are the subjects of this same administration. A text taken without any reference to the mind of the Spirit cannot result in a good sermon. A discourse prepared without prayer to Him is still-born. Hymns and anthems, prayers and offerings, all should be made to conserve and express the mind of the Spirit, and in proportion as we approach the Church of God, we will commit her whole ministry to the Holy Ghost, and find as the fruit of such a method a church that will be the righteous pride of men and the joy of the Lord.
ITS OBJECT SHOULD BE SOUL SAVING
This was certainly the Masters idea. Of His own ministry He said, The Son of Man is come to seek and to save that which was lost. Of the mission of His followers He said, As the Father hath sent Me, even so send I you (Joh 20:21).
I often wish for myself and my brethren that we might be possessed every one of the Masters Spirit as was Paul.
Dr. Meyer says, It was Pauls passion to save men. Send him to Philippi and he will not be there a day before he has turned the devil out of the poor demoniac girl. Put him in jail, and before midnight he will be baptizing his jailor. Send him to Athens, and he will gather a congregation upon Mars Hill. Put him at a bench beside Aquilla and Priscilla, and while he makes tents he will so talk to them that they will accept his Christ. Stand him before a judge, and when he has finished his defense the judge will say, Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian. The whole passion of the man was to see men saved.
Oh, Church of God, what need of such men in your membership!
If I know anything of the spirit of the Scriptures, or the mind of the Master, this is at once the privilege and duty of the present church. Nay, more! It is our first duty, our highest privilege. Before it all other things fade. Educational work the church will do, but that is subsidiary; social service is a virtue of Christianity, but that is secondary. The humanity that helps mens bodies has the example of Christ Himself for its impetus, but the church whose members are most active and intelligent in winning men from wickedness to the path of the just, and showing them how to escape their sins and enter into the joy of salvation, is the Church of God.
The brightest days in the history of the New Testament Church are recorded in the second and fourth chapters of the Book of Acts. In the first of these (Act 2:41) three thousand souls were saved, and in the second the number of the men was about five thousand (Act 4:4), and it will be a great day for the Church of God when her Spirit-filled members, forgetting the frivolities that have engaged us too often, and remembering the commission of our Master, turn our talents to this work which engaged the very God Himself while He was upon the earth.
Dr. Talmage once said, The tendency in churches of this day is to spend their time in giving fine touches to Christians already polished. * * It is high time that we throw off the Sunday clothes of sickly sentimentality, and put on the work-a-day dress of active earnest Christianity. It is ours to go out into the highways and hedges and invite the world to come in; ours to issue the invitation long since ordered, and His words are Come, for all things are now ready.
Some years ago two hundred men were buried in the Hartley Colliery of England. The Queen of England from her throne telegraphed, Is there any hope for the men? Afterwards the answer came over the wires, No hope; they are dead.
Here is a whole race buried in sin and darkness and woe. The question that thrills up to the Throne of God today is, Is there any hope for the men? Answering intelligence comes back from the Throne of God, verily through the worlds darkness, verily through the worlds woe, Yes, hope for one; hope for all.
But, beloved, if the Church of God is to be His agent of redemption to these that are in darkness and are threatened with death, it must have a regenerated membership. It must be no respecter of persons. It must be ruled by His Holy Spirit, and it must set out after the lostseeking to save!
Fuente: The Bible of the Expositor and the Evangelist by Riley
(28) Over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers.Better, in which the Holy Ghost set you as watchers. The word used is the same as that commonly translated bishops, but, as used here in connection with the idea of the flock, it requires a word less technically ecclesiastical. It will be noticed that the word is commonly used in the New Testament as associated with this imagery. So in 1Pe. 2:25, we have the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls, and the corresponding verb in 1Pe. 5:2, feed the flock of God . . . taking the oversight thereof. The appointment, as referred to the Holy Ghost, implies, probably, (1) the inward call, the impulse which drew the man to the office; (2) the attestation of that call by the voices of the prophets, as in Act. 13:2, 1Ti. 4:1; (3) the bestowal of gifts fitting them for the work.
To feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.It is clear that the words as they stand in the text are of immense importance, as bearing their witness to the belief of the Apostolic Church at once in the absolute divinity of Christ and in the nature of His redemptive work. The MSS., however, vary in their readings. Some of the best uncials and versions give God; others, of almost equal authority, give Lord; others, again, combine the two Lord and God. The fact that elsewhere St. Paul invariably speaks of the Church of God (e.g., 1Co. 1:2; 2Co. 1:1; Gal. 1:13; 1Th. 2:14, et al.), and never the Church of the Lord, may be allowed, from one point of view, some weight as internal evidence in favour of the Received reading; while from another it may be urged that it might have tempted a transcriber to substitute a familiar for an unfamiliar phrase. Accepting that reading, the words not only confirm the great truths of the Churchs creed, but give an implicit sanction to the language of theology or devotion, when it applies to the divine nature of our Lord predicates that belong strictly to the human nature which was associated with it. So Ignatius (Romans 6) spoke of the passion of my God, and Tertullian (Ad Uxor, ii. 3) and Clement of Alexandria (Quis dives, c. 34) use the very phrase the blood of God which this passage suggests, and the Eastern Church at the council of Ephesus gave to the Blessed Virgin the title of Theotkos Deipara, the mother of the very God. So in the liturgy which bears the name of St. James the brother of the Lord, he is described as Adelphotheos, the brother of God, and that name is still current among the Greek Christians of Jerusalem. The general drift of the language of the New Testament writers was, however, in the other direction, and predicated human acts and attributes of the man Christ Jesus, Divine acts and attributes of the eternal Son; and it is obvious that this tends at once to greater accuracy of thought, and is really more reverential than the other.
In the word purchased (or, more literally, acquired for himself), we recognise the idea, though not the word, of redemption. The same verb is used in 1Ti. 3:13. The thought seems to have been one which specially characterised the teaching of St. Paul at Ephesus (Eph. 1:14 : the redemption of the purchased possession). Comp. also, ye were bought with a price, in 1Co. 6:20, which, it will be remembered, was written from that city. The same idea is expressed in the peculiar people of 1Pe. 2:9; literally, a people for a purchased possession, and so, as it were, the peculium, or personal property of Him who had paid the purchase money.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
28. Holy Ghost Held to be, through the instrumentalities of the Church, the truer appointer of the ministry.
Overseers The original Greek episcopos, from which our word bishop is in fact derived, (by clipping both ends,) is compounded of a preposition signifying over and a noun signifying seer, and is exactly synonymous with the word superintendent.
In post-apostolic times the word episcopos ascended (probably by the custom of one elder’s being president-presbyter of a number of presbyters) into a higher official meaning. The presidency or episcopate of one over a number of elders took place so early as to imply some apostolic concurrence. Strict ministerial equality of function in all cases cannot be clearly deduced from Scripture.
Church of God Whether the word God or Lord here is the true reading has long been s subject of earnest controversy; specially earnest as it involves the question of the divinity of Christ. At the present time the probability is strongly in favour of God. 1. Internal evidence: (1.) From the fact that Church of the Lord is a phrase unknown to Scripture, while Church of God is the ordinary form, (2.) If God were the original reading it would be a strong trinitarian text, and therefore there would be temptation for anti-trinitarians to alter it: but not vice versa, for Church of the Lord would be no contradiction to Trinitarianism. 2. Patristic evidence, from the fact that the earliest Christian writers, Ignatius, Tertullian, and Clement of Alexandria, use the phrase “blood of God.” 3. Manuscript authority, which, since the readings of the Vatican and Sinaitic are found to be God, is strongly balanced in its favour. It must be fairly held to be the true reading.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
“Take heed to yourselves, and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you bishops (overseers), to feed the church of the Lord which he purchased with his own blood.”
He makes clear to them their prime future responsibility:
o He warns them first to watch for themselves. Only by careful attention to the word of God, and a watchful care for each other, will they be able to steer a sure course, and be faithful undersheperds. The undershepherds must first ensure their own soundness in the faith.
o Then he tells them that as faithful undershepherds they must carefully watch over all the flock, not just the nice ones, but the awkward and weak ones as well. They have a responsibility before God for every single one of them, and must give account for them all.
o He reminds them of their privilege. The Holy Spirit Himself has appointed them as overseers/guardians (‘bishops’) of the flock. Their responsibility is from God Himself, so that they too might be humble, following Paul’s (Act 20:19) and Christ’s (Mat 11:29; Mar 10:45) example. Note the plurality of bishops in each city, and that the elders and bishops are synonymous. The church was not monarchic, but oligarchic. They ruled by common agreement as guided by the Holy Spirit, as servants of God’s people, not as their masters.
The Holy Spirit may have appointed them through prophecy, or as a result of general acceptance by the church because of their gifts, or more probably both. This plural oversight is in the end essential in the church, otherwise it becomes a dictatorship and response to ideas can become stilted, or alternately too much emphasis is laid on the minister with the result that he can become like a god, and when he goes many drop away.
o And the reason that they have been made overseers and guardians is so that they might feed ‘the church of the Lord’, not be fed by it. They are to remember that it is the Lord’s church, purchased with His own blood, and that they must therefore as faithful undershepherds be responsible to the Chief Shepherd (1Pe 5:4) for ensuring that it is properly fed and watched over. Jesus had said to Peter three times, ‘feed/tend my sheep’ (Joh 21:15-17). This was now the responsibility of all the elders of the churches.
o ‘Which he purchased with his own blood.’ Or ‘with the blood of One Who is His own’. Either way this is a statement of the full deity of Christ, and of the doctrine of redemption through His blood sacrifice, through the sacrifice of Christ (1Co 5:7). He paid a price in death that we might live. See Rom 3:24; 1Co 6:20; 1Co 7:23; Eph 1:7; Eph 5:25; Heb 9:11-14; Heb 10:10-14 ; 1Pe 1:18-20. The emphasis is on the price paid, not on to whom it is paid, although in the end it is paid to the justice of God. Man had to be bought from under the legal consequences of his own sin, by the payment of the necessary price, and had to be set free from the bondage of Satan. There had to be ‘satisfaction’. In the Old Testament, the idea of redemption often includes the idea of the exertion of power in deliverance. That too lies behind these words. But we cannot get away from an emphasis on the cost.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The special charge to the elders:
v. 28. Take heed therefore unto yourselves and to all the flock over the which the Holy’ Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the Church of God, which He hath purchased with His own blood.
v. 29. For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.
v. 30. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.
v. 31. Therefore watch and remember that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears. With the example of the apostle before them, and with his challenge ringing in their ears, the elders of Ephesus should take heed, should attend closely, should watch over themselves. He purposely places this care first, as that which must precede the care of the flock. For only by constant watchfulness over themselves would they also be able to take proper care of the flock, of the congregation, which was in need of proper feeding and the most faithful attendance. For they are still members of the flock, though the Holy Ghost has placed them in the midst of the flock as overseers, with the one aim and purpose, namely, to feed and nourish the congregation, the Church of the Lord at this place, with spiritual food in proper amounts. Note that the elders are here addressed as bishops, or overseers, showing that in the times of the apostles there was no difference between the two offices, the names being used indiscriminately. No hierarchy has been established by God’s command. It is most significant that Paul describes the congregation of the Lord as being purchased, acquired by purchase, through His own blood. “This is surely a clear text, from which follows without all contradiction that Christ, our Lord, through whose blood the Church was purchased, is God, to whom the Church belongs. For he says’ clearly: It is God, who through His blood has won the Church and whose own the Church is. Since now, as we have heard, the persons are distinct, and it still is written here that God Himself through His blood has purchased the Church, therefore the conclusion comes with great force that God has His own blood which He has shed for His Church, that is, that Christ, our Savior, is true God, born of the Father from eternity, thereafter also by the Virgin Mary in time become a man and born. ” The responsibility being so great, therefore, with such precious souls to give an account for, Paul’s warning against two dangers which his prophetic vision could foresee, came with double emphasis. He knew that after his departure from them, in a future which was not greatly distant, there would enter into the flock from without grievous, ravening, ferocious wolves, false teachers that would have no mercy on the flock, but would use every means to disrupt the congregation, to murder the souls by trying to persuade them to accept false doctrine. And in addition there would be factionists from within, out of their own membership, men that would arise without call and authority and establish themselves as teachers, with a doctrine full of perverse and antichristian matter, with the intention of drawing away those that were already Christians, the latter thereby becoming guilty of apostasy from the truth and from the true Church of Christ. These two dangers looming up before them, the elders of Ephesus should watch, be on their guard, exert constant vigilance, always remembering that Paul, for a space of three years, in round numbers, had not ceased night and day to admonish every single one of them with tears. His faithfulness should therefore serve as a continual incentive to them in the entire work of their responsible office. Note: To this day it is the Holy Ghost that gives to the congregations the teachers of the Gospel. For though He does not call immediately, yet He uses the congregations as His instruments and directs the affairs of His Church; therefore the congregations should also accept the pastors chosen by them in this spirit, and pledge them to teach and to watch, just as Paul here did the elders of Ephesus.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Act 20:28. Hath made you overseers, &c. ‘, Inspectors, or bishops. The expression over which the Holy Ghost hath made, &c. applied to men who had been regularly set apart to the ministerial office, shews how absurd it is for any to reject the ministry in general, under a pretence that they have the Holy Ghost to teach them. This passage must be allowed as an incontestable proof, that the blood of Christ is here called the blood of God, as being the blood of that Man, who is God with us,God manifested in the flesh; and who is over all, God blessed for ever.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Act 20:28 . ] Therefore , since I am innocent, and thus the blame would be chargeable on you.
. . . ] in order that as well ye yourselves, as the whole church (Luk 12:32 ; Joh 10:1 ff.), may persevere in the pure truth of the gospel. See Act 20:29-30 . On the prefixing of comp. 1Ti 4:16 .
. . . ] This was designed to make them sensible of the whole sacredness and responsibility of their office. The Holy Spirit ruling in the church has Himself appointed the persons of the presbyters, not merely by the bestowal of His gifts on those concerned, but also by His effective influence upon the recognition and appreciation of the gifts so bestowed at the elections (see on Act 14:23 ). Comp. Act 13:2 ; Act 13:4 .
(also very common with classical writers), as overseers, as stewards , [113] denotes the official function of the presbyters (Act 20:17 ), and is here chosen (not ) because in its literal meaning it significantly corresponds to the . “Ipso nomine admonet velut in specula locatos esse,” etc., Galvin. [114] The figurative (Isa 40:11 ; Jer 2:8 ; Eze 34:2 ; Joh 10:14 ; Joh 21:15 ; and see Dissen, ad Pind. Ol. x. 9, p. 124) comprehends the two elements, of official activity in teaching (further specially designated in Eph 4:11 ; comp. 1Ti 3:2 ), and of the oversight and conduct of the discipline and organization of the church. For the two together exhaust the (1Pe 5:2 ).
On . . (see the critical remarks), comp. Rom 16:16 ; Mat 16:18 . With the reading this passage was a peculiarly important locus for the doctrine of the divinity of Christ and the communicatio idiomatum against the Socinians. See especially Calovius.
. . .] which He has acquired (for His possession, Eph 1:14 ; Tit 2:14 ; 1Pe 2:9 ) by His own blood , by the shedding of which He has redeemed believers from the dominion of the devil and acquired them for Himself as heirs of His eternal salvation. “Hic ergo grex est pretiosissimus,” Bengel. Comp. on Eph 1:14 ; 1Co 6:20 ; 1Co 7:23 ; 1Pe 1:7 ; 1Pe 1:19 .
[113] The comparison of the Athenian in dependent cities, with a view to explain this official name (Rothe, p. 219 f.; see on these also Hermann, Staatsalterth . 157. 8), introduces something heterogeneous.
[114] How little ground this passage gives for the hierarchical conception of the spiritual office, see on Eph 4:11 ; Hfling, Kirchenverf. p. 269 f.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
Ver. 28. Hath made you overseers ] . But many are Aposcopi rather than Episcopi, saith Espensaeus; byseers rather than overseers.
Which he hath purchased with his blood ] The Church is to Christ a bloody spouse, an Aceldama, or field of blood; for she could not be redeemed with silver and gold, but with the blood of God; so it is called by a communication of properties, to set forth the incomparable value and virtue thereof.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
28. . ] If we might venture to trace the hand of Luke in the speech, it would be perhaps in this phrase: which occurs only as in reff.
. ] This similitude does not elsewhere occur in Paul’s writings. We find it (reff.) where we should naturally expect it, used by him to whom it was said, ‘Feed my sheep.’ But it is common in the O. T. and sanctioned by the example of our Lord Himself.
. . .] See ch. Act 13:2
] So Paul, reff. 1 Cor.
] See on Act 20:17 , and Theodoret on Phi 1:1 , (Olsh.).
The question between and rests principally on internal evidence which of the two is likely to have been the original reading. The manuscript authority, now that it is certain that [105] has a prima manu , as also [106] , is weighty on both sides. The early patristic authority for the expression is considerable. Ignat. Eph 1 , p. 644, has . Tertull. ad Uxor. ii. 3, vol. i., p. 1293, “pretio empti, et quali pretio? sanguine Dei.” Clem [107] Alex., ‘Quis dives salvus,’ c. 34, vol. ii., p. 344, has , . , . . On the other hand Athanasius (contra Apol. ii. 14, vol. ii., p. 758) says, , . In attempting to decide between the two readings, the following alternatives and considerations may be put: (I.) IF WAS THE ORIGINAL, it is very possible (1) that some busy scribe may have written at the side, as so often occurs , . This having been once done, the interests of orthodoxy would perpetuate the gloss, and by degrees it would be adopted into the text and supersede the original word , or become combined with it, as is actually the case in [108] [109] and a vast body of mss. Or, continuing supposition I., it may have been (2) that the expression , not found any where else, may have been corrected into the very usual one , . ( ) , which occurs eleven times in the Epistles of Paul. Or (3), which I consider exceedingly improbable (see below), the alteration may have been made solely in the interest of orthodoxy . Such are possible, and the two former not improbable, contingencies.
[105] The CODEX VATICANUS, No. 1209 in the Vatican Library at Rome; and proved, by the old catalogues, to have been there from the foundation of the library in the 16th century. It was apparently, from internal evidence, copied in Egypt. It is on vellum, and contains the Old and New Testaments. In the latter, it is deficient from Heb 9:14 to the end of the Epistle; it does not contain the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon; nor the Apocalypse. An edition of this celebrated codex, undertaken as long ago as 1828 by Cardinal Angelo Mai, has since his death been published at Rome. The defects of this edition are such, that it can hardly be ranked higher in usefulness than a tolerably complete collation, entirely untrustworthy in those places where it differs from former collations in representing the MS. as agreeing with the received text. An 8vo edition of the N.T. portion, newly revised by Vercellone, was published at Rome in 1859 (referred to as ‘Verc’): and of course superseded the English reprint of the 1st edition. Even in this 2nd edition there were imperfections which rendered it necessary to have recourse to the MS. itself, and to the partial collations made in former times. These are (1) that of Bartolocci (under the name of Giulio de St. Anastasia), once librarian at the Vatican, made in 1669, and preserved in manuscript in the Imperial Library (MSS. Gr. Suppl. 53) at Paris (referred to as ‘Blc’); (2) that of Birch (‘Bch’), published in various readings to the Acts and Epistles, Copenhagen, 1798, Apocalypse, 1800, Gospels, 1801; (3) that made for the great Bentley (‘Btly’), by the Abbate Mico, published in Ford’s Appendix to Woide’s edition of the Codex Alexandrinus, 1799 (it was made on the margin of a copy of Cephalus’ Greek Testament, Argentorati, 1524, still amongst Bentley’s books in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge); (4) notes of alterations by the original scribe and other correctors. These notes were procured for Bentley by the Abb de Stosch, and were till lately supposed to be lost. They were made by the Abbate Rulotta (‘Rl’), and are preserved amongst Bentley’s papers in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge (B. 17. 20) 1 . The Codex has been occasionally consulted for the verification of certain readings by Tregelles, Tischendorf, and others. A list of readings examined at Rome by the present editor (Feb. 1861), and by the Rev. E. C. Cure, Fellow of Merton College, Oxford (April 1862), will be found at the end of these prolegomena. A description, with an engraving from a photograph of a portion of a page, is given in Burgon’s “Letters from Rome,” London 1861. This most important MS. was probably written in the fourth century (Hug, Tischendorf, al.).
[106] The CODEX SINAITICUS. Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf. The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century . The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are: A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us -corr 1 ; B (cited as 2 ), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; C a (cited as 3a ) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in 1 , it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that C a altered it to that which is found in our text; C b (cited as 3b ) lived about the same time as C a , i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here 6 .
[107] Clement of Alexandria, fl. 194
[108] The Codex Wolfii B, now in the Public Library at Hamburg. Its history is the same as that of the last MS. Its contents, the Gospels, with many lacun: its assigned date, about the end of the ninth century . It was collated by Wolf, Tregelles, and Tischendorf.
[109] The Codex Regius Parisiensis (Bibliothque Impriale Manuscrit grec, No. 62 [olim 2861 and 1558]), contains the Gospels with some lacun. Edited by Tischendorf in his Monumenta Sacra, 1846, pp. 57 399. Its text, both in various readings and in grammatical forms, is of the kind which has been called Alexandrine, and is very nearly related to that of B. From the careless positions of the accents, Scholz and Griesbach think it to have been copied from some more ancient MS. which had no accents. Ascribed by Tischendorf to the eighth century; by Tregelles and others, to the ninth 4 .
On the other hand (II.) IF WAS THE ORIGINAL, but one reason can be given why it should have been altered to , and that one was sure to have operated . It would stand as a bulwark against Arianism, an assertion which no skill could evade, which must therefore be modified . If stood in the text originally, it was sure to be altered to . The converse was not sure, nor indeed likely, from similar reasons, the passage offering no stumbling-block to orthodoxy. (III.) PAULINE USAGE must be allowed its fair weight in the enquiry. It must be remembered that we are in the midst of a speech, which is (as observed in the Prolegg. to Acts, ii. 17 a) a complete storehouse of Pauline words and expressions. Is it per se probable, that he should use an expression which no where else occurs in his writings, nor indeed in those of his contemporaries ? Is it more probable, that the early scribes should have altered an unusual expression for an usual one, or that a writer so constant to his own phrases should here have remained so? Besides, in most of the places where Paul uses , it is in a manner precisely similar to this , as the consummation of a climax , or in a position of peculiar solemnity, cf. 1Co 10:32 ; 1Co 15:9 ; Gal 1:13 ; 1Ti 3:5 ; 1Ti 3:15 ; and, cteris paribus, I submit that the present passage loses by the substitution of the peculiar emphasis which its structure and context seem to require in the genitive, introduced as it is by , and followed by the intensifying clause . (IV.) On the whole then, weighing the evidence on both sides, seeing that it is more likely that the alteration should have been to than to , more likely that the speaker should have used than , and more consonant to the evidently emphatic position of the word, I have decided for the rec. reading, which in Edd. 1, 2 I had rejected. And this decision is confirmed by observing the habits of the great MSS. respecting the sacred names. It appears that [110] has no bias for where the others have : we find it thus reading in Luk 2:38 (so [111] [112] [113] 1 [114] [115] ); ch. Act 16:10 (so [116] [117] [118] [119] ); Act 17:27 (so [120] [121] [122] [123] ); Act 21:20 (so [124] [125] [126] [127] [128] ); Col 3:16 (so [129] [130] 1 D 1 F [131] ); while on the other hand it has in Rom 15:32 , where the others have or ; in Eph 5:21 , where rec. has ; in ch. Act 8:22 , with ACDE [132] , where rec. and the mss. have : similarly in ch. Act 10:33 , and Act 15:40 ; in Rom 10:17 , with [133] [134] 1 [135] 1 , for : Act 14:4 , with [136] [137] 1 [138] , for . This evidence seems to remove further off the chance of deliberate alteration here to , and leaves the above considerations their full weight. (V.) Of course any reading which combines the two, and , is by the very first principles of textual criticism inadmissible. (VI.) The principal names on either side are for the rec. , Mill, Wolf, Bengel, Matthi, Scholz: for , Grotius, Le Clerc, Wetst., Griesb., Kuin., De Wette, Meyer, Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles.
[110] The CODEX VATICANUS, No. 1209 in the Vatican Library at Rome; and proved, by the old catalogues, to have been there from the foundation of the library in the 16th century. It was apparently, from internal evidence, copied in Egypt. It is on vellum, and contains the Old and New Testaments. In the latter, it is deficient from Heb 9:14 to the end of the Epistle; it does not contain the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon; nor the Apocalypse. An edition of this celebrated codex, undertaken as long ago as 1828 by Cardinal Angelo Mai, has since his death been published at Rome. The defects of this edition are such, that it can hardly be ranked higher in usefulness than a tolerably complete collation, entirely untrustworthy in those places where it differs from former collations in representing the MS. as agreeing with the received text. An 8vo edition of the N.T. portion, newly revised by Vercellone, was published at Rome in 1859 (referred to as ‘Verc’): and of course superseded the English reprint of the 1st edition. Even in this 2nd edition there were imperfections which rendered it necessary to have recourse to the MS. itself, and to the partial collations made in former times. These are (1) that of Bartolocci (under the name of Giulio de St. Anastasia), once librarian at the Vatican, made in 1669, and preserved in manuscript in the Imperial Library (MSS. Gr. Suppl. 53) at Paris (referred to as ‘Blc’); (2) that of Birch (‘Bch’), published in various readings to the Acts and Epistles, Copenhagen, 1798, Apocalypse, 1800, Gospels, 1801; (3) that made for the great Bentley (‘Btly’), by the Abbate Mico, published in Ford’s Appendix to Woide’s edition of the Codex Alexandrinus, 1799 (it was made on the margin of a copy of Cephalus’ Greek Testament, Argentorati, 1524, still amongst Bentley’s books in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge); (4) notes of alterations by the original scribe and other correctors. These notes were procured for Bentley by the Abb de Stosch, and were till lately supposed to be lost. They were made by the Abbate Rulotta (‘Rl’), and are preserved amongst Bentley’s papers in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge (B. 17. 20) 1 . The Codex has been occasionally consulted for the verification of certain readings by Tregelles, Tischendorf, and others. A list of readings examined at Rome by the present editor (Feb. 1861), and by the Rev. E. C. Cure, Fellow of Merton College, Oxford (April 1862), will be found at the end of these prolegomena. A description, with an engraving from a photograph of a portion of a page, is given in Burgon’s “Letters from Rome,” London 1861. This most important MS. was probably written in the fourth century (Hug, Tischendorf, al.).
[111] The CODEX CANTABRIGIENSIS, or BEZ, so called because it was presented by Beza in 1581 to the University Library at Cambridge; where it is now exposed to view in a glass case. He procured it in 1562, from the monastery of St. Irenus at Lyons. It is on parchment, and contains the Gospels and Acts, with a Latin version. Its lacun, which are many, will be perceived by the inner marginal letters in this edition. It once contained the Catholic Epistles: 3Jn 1:11-14 in Latin is all that now remains. It was edited with very accurate imitative types, at the expense of the University of Cambridge, by Dr. Kipling, in 1793. A new edition carefully revised and more generally accessible was published by Mr. Scrivener in 1864, and has been collated for this Edition. In the introduction some ten or twelve correctors are distinguished, whose readings are found in the notes at the end of the volume. The text of the Codex Bez is a very peculiar one, deviating more from the received readings and from the principal manuscript authorities than any other. It appears to have been written in France, and by a Latin transcriber ignorant of Greek, from many curious mistakes which occur in the text, and version attached. It is closely and singularly allied to the ancient Latin versions, so much so that some critics have supposed it to have been altered from the Latin: and certainly many of the phnomena of the MS. seem to bear out the idea. Where D differs in unimportant points from the other Greek MSS., the difference appears to be traceable to the influence of Latin forms and constructions. It has been observed, that in such cases it frequently agrees with the Latin codex e (see the list further on). Its peculiarities are so great, that in many passages, while the sense remains for the most part unaltered, hardly three words together are the same as in the commonly received text. And that these variations often arise from capricious alteration, is evident from the way in which the Gospels, in parallel passages, have been more than commonly interpolated from one another in this MS. The concurrence with the ancient Latin versions seems to point to a very early state of the text; and it is impossible to set aside the value of D as an index to its history; but in critical weight it ranks the lowest of the leading MSS. Its age has been very variously given: the general opinion now is that it was written in the latter end of the fifth or the sixth century .
[112] The Codex Regius Parisiensis (Bibliothque Impriale Manuscrit grec, No. 62 [olim 2861 and 1558]), contains the Gospels with some lacun. Edited by Tischendorf in his Monumenta Sacra, 1846, pp. 57 399. Its text, both in various readings and in grammatical forms, is of the kind which has been called Alexandrine, and is very nearly related to that of B. From the careless positions of the accents, Scholz and Griesbach think it to have been copied from some more ancient MS. which had no accents. Ascribed by Tischendorf to the eighth century; by Tregelles and others, to the ninth 4 .
[113] The Codex Monacensis, formerly Ingoldstadiensis. [It is a folio in two columns, and was presented by Gerard Vossius (1577 1641) to Ingoldstadt, transferred with the University to Landshut in 1803, to Munich in 1827.] (University Library, Munich, I. 26.) Contains the four Gospels with numerous lacun. [Burgon states that it does not contain Mat 6:6-10 , but Mat 6:10-11Mat 6:10-11 .Mar 14:61-64Mar 14:61-64 ; Mar 14:72 to Mar 15:4 has perished; Act 15:32 (latter half) Act 16:8 (former half) has nearly perished.] It is accompanied by an interspersed commentary [that on Matt. and John abbreviated from Chrys.: on Luke from Titus (not Bostr., but rather later). There is no comm. on Mark]. Ascribed to the end of the ninth , or beginning of the tenth century . Collated by Tischendorf and Tregelles.
[114] CODEX ZACYNTHIUS. Edited by Tregelles, London, 1861, with the types cast for printing the Codex Alexandrinus. The following is an abridgment of his account of the MS.: “On the 11th of August, 1858, I received a letter from Dr. Paul de Lagarde of Berlin, informing me that a palimpsest MS., hitherto unused, containing a considerable portion of St. Luke’s Gospel, with a Catena, was in the library of the British and Foreign Bible Society. It is noted in the Catalogue, and on the back, ‘24, Greek Evangelisterium. Parchment .’ In many parts the ancient writing is illegible, except in a very good light. The later writing is a Greek Lectionary from the Four Gospels, and belongs, I suppose, to the thirteenth century. The elder writing must have been part of a volume of large folio size; for the leaves are now folded across, the later writing running the other way. The text is in round full well-formed uncial letters, such as I should have had no difficulty in ascribing to the sixth century, were it not that the Catena of the same age has the round letters ( ) so cramped as to make me believe that it belongs to the eighth century . Besides the ordinary or , this MS. contains also the same chapters as the Vatican MS., similarly numbered. The only other document in which I have ever seen this Capitulatio Vaticana is the Vatican Codex itself; nor do I know of its being found elsewhere. Occasionally the same portion of Scripture occurs twice, when accompanied by a different Patristic extract.”
[115] The CODEX SINAITICUS. Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf. The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century . The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are: A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us -corr 1 ; B (cited as 2 ), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; C a (cited as 3a ) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in 1 , it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that C a altered it to that which is found in our text; C b (cited as 3b ) lived about the same time as C a , i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here 6 .
[116] The MS. referred to by this symbol is that commonly called the Alexandrine, or CODEX ALEXANDRINUS. It once belonged to Cyrillus Lucaris, patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople, who in the year 1628 presented it to our King Charles I. It is now in the British Museum. It is on parchment in four volumes, of which three contain the Old, and one the New Testament, with the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians. This fourth volume is exhibited open in a glass case. It will be seen by the letters in the inner margin of this edition, that the first 24 chapters of Matthew are wanting in it, its first leaf commencing , ch. Mat 25:6 : as also the leaves containing , Joh 6:50 , to , Joh 8:52 . It is generally agreed that it was written at Alexandria; it does not, however, in the Gospels , represent that commonly known as the Alexandrine text, but approaches much more nearly to the Constantinopolitan, or generally received text. The New Testament, according to its text, was edited, in uncial types cast to imitate those of the MS., by Woide, London, 1786, the Old Testament by Baber, London, 1819: and its N.T. text has now been edited in common type by Mr. B. H. Cowper, London, 1861. The date of this MS. has been variously assigned, but it is now pretty generally agreed to be the fifth century .
[117] The CODEX EPHRAEMI, preserved in the Imperial Library at Paris, MS. Gr. No. 9. It is a Codex rescriptus or palimpsest, consisting of the works of Ephraem the Syrian written over the MS. of extensive fragments of the Old and New Testaments 2 . It seems to have come to France with Catherine de’ Medici, and to her from Cardinal Nicolas Ridolfi. Tischendorf thinks it probable that he got it from Andrew John Lascaris, who at the fall of the Eastern Empire was sent to the East by Lorenzo de’ Medici to preserve such MSS. as had escaped the ravages of the Turks. This is confirmed by the later corrections (C 3 ) in the MS., which were evidently made at Constantinople 3 . But from the form of the letters, and other peculiarities, it is believed to have been written at Alexandria, or at all events, where the Alexandrine dialect and method of writing prevailed. Its text is perhaps the purest example of the Alexandrine text, holding a place about midway between the Constantinopolitan MSS. and most of those of the Alexandrine recension. It was edited very handsomely in uncial type, with copious dissertations, &c., by Tischendorf, in 1843. He assigns to it an age at least equal to A, and places it also in the fifth century . Corrections were written in, apparently in the sixth and ninth centuries: these are respectively cited as C 2 , C 3 .
[118] The Codex Basileensis (Public Library at Basle, formerly B. vi. 21; now K. iv. 35). Contains the four Gospels with some considerable lacun. Collated by Tischendorf and Tregelles. Said to be of the middle of the eighth century . [Burgon gives the press-mark as A. N. iii. 12; and assigns the MS. to the seventh century.]
[119] The CODEX SINAITICUS. Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf. The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century . The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are: A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us -corr 1 ; B (cited as 2 ), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; C a (cited as 3a ) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in 1 , it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that C a altered it to that which is found in our text; C b (cited as 3b ) lived about the same time as C a , i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here 6 .
[120] The MS. referred to by this symbol is that commonly called the Alexandrine, or CODEX ALEXANDRINUS. It once belonged to Cyrillus Lucaris, patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople, who in the year 1628 presented it to our King Charles I. It is now in the British Museum. It is on parchment in four volumes, of which three contain the Old, and one the New Testament, with the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians. This fourth volume is exhibited open in a glass case. It will be seen by the letters in the inner margin of this edition, that the first 24 chapters of Matthew are wanting in it, its first leaf commencing , ch. Mat 25:6 : as also the leaves containing , Joh 6:50 , to , Joh 8:52 . It is generally agreed that it was written at Alexandria; it does not, however, in the Gospels , represent that commonly known as the Alexandrine text, but approaches much more nearly to the Constantinopolitan, or generally received text. The New Testament, according to its text, was edited, in uncial types cast to imitate those of the MS., by Woide, London, 1786, the Old Testament by Baber, London, 1819: and its N.T. text has now been edited in common type by Mr. B. H. Cowper, London, 1861. The date of this MS. has been variously assigned, but it is now pretty generally agreed to be the fifth century .
[121] The Codex Wolfii B, now in the Public Library at Hamburg. Its history is the same as that of the last MS. Its contents, the Gospels, with many lacun: its assigned date, about the end of the ninth century . It was collated by Wolf, Tregelles, and Tischendorf.
[122] The Codex Regius Parisiensis (Bibliothque Impriale Manuscrit grec, No. 62 [olim 2861 and 1558]), contains the Gospels with some lacun. Edited by Tischendorf in his Monumenta Sacra, 1846, pp. 57 399. Its text, both in various readings and in grammatical forms, is of the kind which has been called Alexandrine, and is very nearly related to that of B. From the careless positions of the accents, Scholz and Griesbach think it to have been copied from some more ancient MS. which had no accents. Ascribed by Tischendorf to the eighth century; by Tregelles and others, to the ninth 4 .
[123] The CODEX SINAITICUS. Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf. The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century . The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are: A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us -corr 1 ; B (cited as 2 ), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; C a (cited as 3a ) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in 1 , it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that C a altered it to that which is found in our text; C b (cited as 3b ) lived about the same time as C a , i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here 6 .
[124] The MS. referred to by this symbol is that commonly called the Alexandrine, or CODEX ALEXANDRINUS. It once belonged to Cyrillus Lucaris, patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople, who in the year 1628 presented it to our King Charles I. It is now in the British Museum. It is on parchment in four volumes, of which three contain the Old, and one the New Testament, with the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians. This fourth volume is exhibited open in a glass case. It will be seen by the letters in the inner margin of this edition, that the first 24 chapters of Matthew are wanting in it, its first leaf commencing , ch. Mat 25:6 : as also the leaves containing , Joh 6:50 , to , Joh 8:52 . It is generally agreed that it was written at Alexandria; it does not, however, in the Gospels , represent that commonly known as the Alexandrine text, but approaches much more nearly to the Constantinopolitan, or generally received text. The New Testament, according to its text, was edited, in uncial types cast to imitate those of the MS., by Woide, London, 1786, the Old Testament by Baber, London, 1819: and its N.T. text has now been edited in common type by Mr. B. H. Cowper, London, 1861. The date of this MS. has been variously assigned, but it is now pretty generally agreed to be the fifth century .
[125] The CODEX EPHRAEMI, preserved in the Imperial Library at Paris, MS. Gr. No. 9. It is a Codex rescriptus or palimpsest, consisting of the works of Ephraem the Syrian written over the MS. of extensive fragments of the Old and New Testaments 2 . It seems to have come to France with Catherine de’ Medici, and to her from Cardinal Nicolas Ridolfi. Tischendorf thinks it probable that he got it from Andrew John Lascaris, who at the fall of the Eastern Empire was sent to the East by Lorenzo de’ Medici to preserve such MSS. as had escaped the ravages of the Turks. This is confirmed by the later corrections (C 3 ) in the MS., which were evidently made at Constantinople 3 . But from the form of the letters, and other peculiarities, it is believed to have been written at Alexandria, or at all events, where the Alexandrine dialect and method of writing prevailed. Its text is perhaps the purest example of the Alexandrine text, holding a place about midway between the Constantinopolitan MSS. and most of those of the Alexandrine recension. It was edited very handsomely in uncial type, with copious dissertations, &c., by Tischendorf, in 1843. He assigns to it an age at least equal to A, and places it also in the fifth century . Corrections were written in, apparently in the sixth and ninth centuries: these are respectively cited as C 2 , C 3 .
[126] The Codex Basileensis (Public Library at Basle, formerly B. vi. 21; now K. iv. 35). Contains the four Gospels with some considerable lacun. Collated by Tischendorf and Tregelles. Said to be of the middle of the eighth century . [Burgon gives the press-mark as A. N. iii. 12; and assigns the MS. to the seventh century.]
[127] The Codex Regius Parisiensis (Bibliothque Impriale Manuscrit grec, No. 62 [olim 2861 and 1558]), contains the Gospels with some lacun. Edited by Tischendorf in his Monumenta Sacra, 1846, pp. 57 399. Its text, both in various readings and in grammatical forms, is of the kind which has been called Alexandrine, and is very nearly related to that of B. From the careless positions of the accents, Scholz and Griesbach think it to have been copied from some more ancient MS. which had no accents. Ascribed by Tischendorf to the eighth century; by Tregelles and others, to the ninth 4 .
[128] The CODEX SINAITICUS. Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf. The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century . The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are: A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us -corr 1 ; B (cited as 2 ), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; C a (cited as 3a ) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in 1 , it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that C a altered it to that which is found in our text; C b (cited as 3b ) lived about the same time as C a , i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here 6 .
[129] The MS. referred to by this symbol is that commonly called the Alexandrine, or CODEX ALEXANDRINUS. It once belonged to Cyrillus Lucaris, patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople, who in the year 1628 presented it to our King Charles I. It is now in the British Museum. It is on parchment in four volumes, of which three contain the Old, and one the New Testament, with the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians. This fourth volume is exhibited open in a glass case. It will be seen by the letters in the inner margin of this edition, that the first 24 chapters of Matthew are wanting in it, its first leaf commencing , ch. Mat 25:6 : as also the leaves containing , Joh 6:50 , to , Joh 8:52 . It is generally agreed that it was written at Alexandria; it does not, however, in the Gospels , represent that commonly known as the Alexandrine text, but approaches much more nearly to the Constantinopolitan, or generally received text. The New Testament, according to its text, was edited, in uncial types cast to imitate those of the MS., by Woide, London, 1786, the Old Testament by Baber, London, 1819: and its N.T. text has now been edited in common type by Mr. B. H. Cowper, London, 1861. The date of this MS. has been variously assigned, but it is now pretty generally agreed to be the fifth century .
[130] The CODEX EPHRAEMI, preserved in the Imperial Library at Paris, MS. Gr. No. 9. It is a Codex rescriptus or palimpsest, consisting of the works of Ephraem the Syrian written over the MS. of extensive fragments of the Old and New Testaments 2 . It seems to have come to France with Catherine de’ Medici, and to her from Cardinal Nicolas Ridolfi. Tischendorf thinks it probable that he got it from Andrew John Lascaris, who at the fall of the Eastern Empire was sent to the East by Lorenzo de’ Medici to preserve such MSS. as had escaped the ravages of the Turks. This is confirmed by the later corrections (C 3 ) in the MS., which were evidently made at Constantinople 3 . But from the form of the letters, and other peculiarities, it is believed to have been written at Alexandria, or at all events, where the Alexandrine dialect and method of writing prevailed. Its text is perhaps the purest example of the Alexandrine text, holding a place about midway between the Constantinopolitan MSS. and most of those of the Alexandrine recension. It was edited very handsomely in uncial type, with copious dissertations, &c., by Tischendorf, in 1843. He assigns to it an age at least equal to A, and places it also in the fifth century . Corrections were written in, apparently in the sixth and ninth centuries: these are respectively cited as C 2 , C 3 .
[131] The CODEX SINAITICUS. Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf. The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century . The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are: A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us -corr 1 ; B (cited as 2 ), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; C a (cited as 3a ) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in 1 , it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that C a altered it to that which is found in our text; C b (cited as 3b ) lived about the same time as C a , i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here 6 .
[132] The CODEX SINAITICUS. Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf. The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century . The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are: A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us -corr 1 ; B (cited as 2 ), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; C a (cited as 3a ) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in 1 , it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that C a altered it to that which is found in our text; C b (cited as 3b ) lived about the same time as C a , i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here 6 .
[133] The CODEX EPHRAEMI, preserved in the Imperial Library at Paris, MS. Gr. No. 9. It is a Codex rescriptus or palimpsest, consisting of the works of Ephraem the Syrian written over the MS. of extensive fragments of the Old and New Testaments 2 . It seems to have come to France with Catherine de’ Medici, and to her from Cardinal Nicolas Ridolfi. Tischendorf thinks it probable that he got it from Andrew John Lascaris, who at the fall of the Eastern Empire was sent to the East by Lorenzo de’ Medici to preserve such MSS. as had escaped the ravages of the Turks. This is confirmed by the later corrections (C 3 ) in the MS., which were evidently made at Constantinople 3 . But from the form of the letters, and other peculiarities, it is believed to have been written at Alexandria, or at all events, where the Alexandrine dialect and method of writing prevailed. Its text is perhaps the purest example of the Alexandrine text, holding a place about midway between the Constantinopolitan MSS. and most of those of the Alexandrine recension. It was edited very handsomely in uncial type, with copious dissertations, &c., by Tischendorf, in 1843. He assigns to it an age at least equal to A, and places it also in the fifth century . Corrections were written in, apparently in the sixth and ninth centuries: these are respectively cited as C 2 , C 3 .
[134] The CODEX CANTABRIGIENSIS, or BEZ, so called because it was presented by Beza in 1581 to the University Library at Cambridge; where it is now exposed to view in a glass case. He procured it in 1562, from the monastery of St. Irenus at Lyons. It is on parchment, and contains the Gospels and Acts, with a Latin version. Its lacun, which are many, will be perceived by the inner marginal letters in this edition. It once contained the Catholic Epistles: 3Jn 1:11-14 in Latin is all that now remains. It was edited with very accurate imitative types, at the expense of the University of Cambridge, by Dr. Kipling, in 1793. A new edition carefully revised and more generally accessible was published by Mr. Scrivener in 1864, and has been collated for this Edition. In the introduction some ten or twelve correctors are distinguished, whose readings are found in the notes at the end of the volume. The text of the Codex Bez is a very peculiar one, deviating more from the received readings and from the principal manuscript authorities than any other. It appears to have been written in France, and by a Latin transcriber ignorant of Greek, from many curious mistakes which occur in the text, and version attached. It is closely and singularly allied to the ancient Latin versions, so much so that some critics have supposed it to have been altered from the Latin: and certainly many of the phnomena of the MS. seem to bear out the idea. Where D differs in unimportant points from the other Greek MSS., the difference appears to be traceable to the influence of Latin forms and constructions. It has been observed, that in such cases it frequently agrees with the Latin codex e (see the list further on). Its peculiarities are so great, that in many passages, while the sense remains for the most part unaltered, hardly three words together are the same as in the commonly received text. And that these variations often arise from capricious alteration, is evident from the way in which the Gospels, in parallel passages, have been more than commonly interpolated from one another in this MS. The concurrence with the ancient Latin versions seems to point to a very early state of the text; and it is impossible to set aside the value of D as an index to its history; but in critical weight it ranks the lowest of the leading MSS. Its age has been very variously given: the general opinion now is that it was written in the latter end of the fifth or the sixth century .
[135] The CODEX SINAITICUS. Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf. The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century . The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are: A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us -corr 1 ; B (cited as 2 ), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; C a (cited as 3a ) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in 1 , it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that C a altered it to that which is found in our text; C b (cited as 3b ) lived about the same time as C a , i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here 6 .
[136] The MS. referred to by this symbol is that commonly called the Alexandrine, or CODEX ALEXANDRINUS. It once belonged to Cyrillus Lucaris, patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople, who in the year 1628 presented it to our King Charles I. It is now in the British Museum. It is on parchment in four volumes, of which three contain the Old, and one the New Testament, with the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians. This fourth volume is exhibited open in a glass case. It will be seen by the letters in the inner margin of this edition, that the first 24 chapters of Matthew are wanting in it, its first leaf commencing , ch. Mat 25:6 : as also the leaves containing , Joh 6:50 , to , Joh 8:52 . It is generally agreed that it was written at Alexandria; it does not, however, in the Gospels , represent that commonly known as the Alexandrine text, but approaches much more nearly to the Constantinopolitan, or generally received text. The New Testament, according to its text, was edited, in uncial types cast to imitate those of the MS., by Woide, London, 1786, the Old Testament by Baber, London, 1819: and its N.T. text has now been edited in common type by Mr. B. H. Cowper, London, 1861. The date of this MS. has been variously assigned, but it is now pretty generally agreed to be the fifth century .
[137] The CODEX EPHRAEMI, preserved in the Imperial Library at Paris, MS. Gr. No. 9. It is a Codex rescriptus or palimpsest, consisting of the works of Ephraem the Syrian written over the MS. of extensive fragments of the Old and New Testaments 2 . It seems to have come to France with Catherine de’ Medici, and to her from Cardinal Nicolas Ridolfi. Tischendorf thinks it probable that he got it from Andrew John Lascaris, who at the fall of the Eastern Empire was sent to the East by Lorenzo de’ Medici to preserve such MSS. as had escaped the ravages of the Turks. This is confirmed by the later corrections (C 3 ) in the MS., which were evidently made at Constantinople 3 . But from the form of the letters, and other peculiarities, it is believed to have been written at Alexandria, or at all events, where the Alexandrine dialect and method of writing prevailed. Its text is perhaps the purest example of the Alexandrine text, holding a place about midway between the Constantinopolitan MSS. and most of those of the Alexandrine recension. It was edited very handsomely in uncial type, with copious dissertations, &c., by Tischendorf, in 1843. He assigns to it an age at least equal to A, and places it also in the fifth century . Corrections were written in, apparently in the sixth and ninth centuries: these are respectively cited as C 2 , C 3 .
[138] The CODEX SINAITICUS. Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf. The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century . The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are: A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us -corr 1 ; B (cited as 2 ), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; C a (cited as 3a ) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in 1 , it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that C a altered it to that which is found in our text; C b (cited as 3b ) lived about the same time as C a , i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here 6 .
.] Luke and Paul (in pastoral Epp. only), see reff.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Act 20:28 . ( cf. 1Ti 4:16 ), Luk 17:3 ; Luk 21:34 , Act 5:35 ; Act 8:6 . In LXX with , Gen 24:6 , Exo 10:28 , Deu 4:9 . “Non tantum jubet eos gregi attendere, sed primum sibi ipsis; neque enim aliorum salutem sedulo unquam curabit, qui suam negliget cum sit ipse pars gregis,” Calvin, in loco , and also Chrys. (Bethge, p. 144). : the figure was common in the O.T. and it is found in St.Luke, Luk 12:32 , in St. John, in St. Peter, but it is said that St. Paul does not use it, cf. however Eph 4:11 , where, and nowhere else, he writes . : “in the which,” R.V., not “over which”. is again emphatic, but the presbyters were still part of the flock, see Calvin, u. s. , cf. 1Co 12:28 , 1Ti 1:12 ; 1Ti 2:7 , 2Ti 1:11 . There is no ground whatever for supposing that the here mentioned were not ordained, as the words . . may be used without any reference whatever to the actual mode of appointment. Dr. Hort allows that here the precedent of Act 6:3-6 may have been followed, and the appointment of the elders may have been sealed, so to speak, by the Apostle’s prayers and laying-on-of-hands, Ecclesia , pp. 99, 100. The thought of appointment by the Holy Spirit, although not excluding the ordination of Apostles, may well be emphasised here for the sake of solemnly reminding the Presbyters of their responsibility to a divine Person, and that they stand in danger of losing the divine gifts imparted to them in so far as they are unfaithful to their office. : “to tend” as distinct from “to feed,” although the act of feeding as well as of governing is associated also with the former word; see on Joh 21:16 . The figurative pastoral language in this passage was probably not unknown as applied to Jewish elders, Edersheim, Jewish Social Life , p. 282; Hort, Ecclesia , p. 101. : the word, which occurs five times in the N.T., is applied four times to officers of the Christian Church: in this passage, again at Ephesus in 1Ti 3:2 , at Philippi in Phi 1:1 , at Crete in Tit 1:7 ; and once to our Lord Himself, 1Pe 2:25 ( cf. the significant passage, Wis 1:6 , where it is applied to God). In the LXX it is used in various senses, e.g. , of the overseers of Josiah, 2Ch 34:12 ; 2Ch 34:17 ; of task-masters or exactors, Isa 60:17 ; of minor officers, Neh 11:9 ; Neh 11:14 ; of officers over the house of the Lord, 2Ki 11:18 ; and in 1Ma 1:51 of overseers or local commissioners of Antiochus Epiphanes to enforce idolatry, cf. Jos., Ant. , xii., 5, 4. In classical Greek the word is also used with varied associations. Thus in Attic Greek it was used of a commissioner sent to regulate a new colony or subject city like a Spartan “harmost,” cf. Arist., Av. , 1032, and Boeckh, Inscr. , 73 (in the Roman period ); but it was by no means confined to Attic usage. In another inscription found at Thera in the Macedonian period mention is made of two receiving money and putting it out at interest, and again at Rhodes, in the second century B.C., . are mentioned in inscriptions, but we do not know their functions, although Deissmann claims that in one inscription, I. M. A. e. , 731, the title is used of a sacred office in the Temple of Apollo, but he declines to commit himself to any statement as to the duties of the office: cf. also Loening, Die Gemeindeverfassung des Urchristenthums , pp. 21, 22; Gibson, “Bishop,” B.D. 2 ; Gwatkin, “Bishop,” Hastings’ B.D.; Deissmann, Neue Bibelstudien , p. 57; Lightfoot, Philippians , p. 95. M. Waddington has collected several instances of the title in inscriptions found in the Haurn, i.e. , the south-eastern district of the ancient Bashan (see the references to Le Bas Waddington in Loening, u. s. , p. 22, note, and Gore, Church and the Ministry , p. 402), but none of these give us precise and definite information as to the functions of the . But it is important to note that M. Waddington is of opinion that the comparative frequency of the title in the Haurn points to the derivation of the Christian use of the word from Syria or Palestine rather than from the organisation of the Greek municipality ( Expositor , p. 99, 1887). It has been urged that the officers of administration and finance in the contemporary non-Christian associations, the clubs and guilds so common in the Roman empire, were chiefly known by one or other of two names, or , Hatch, B.L. , p. 36, and hence the inference has been drawn that the primary function of the primitive in the Christian Church was the administration of finance; but Dr. Hatch himself has denied that he laid any special stress upon the financial character of the , although he still apparently retained the description of them as “officers of administration and finance,” see Expositor, u. s. , p. 99, note, thus adopting a position like that of Professor Harnack, who would extend the administration duties beyond finance to all the functions of the community. But however this may be (see below), there is certainly no ground for believing that the title in the Christian Church was ever limited to the care of finance (see the judgment of Loening on this view, u. s. , p. 22), or that such a limitation was justified by the secular use of the term. If indeed we can point to any definite influence which connects itself with the introduction of the title into the Christian Church, it is at least as likely, one might say more likely when we consider that the Apostles were above all things Jews, that the influence lies in the previous use in the LXX of and , and the direct appeal of St. Clement of Rome, Cor [340] , 42:5, to Isaiah (LXX) Isa 60:17 in support of the Christian offices of and may be fairly quoted as pointing to such an influence. But whatever influences were at work in the adoption of the term by the early believers, it became, as it were, baptised into the Christian Church, and received a Christian and a higher spiritual meaning. This one passage in Act 20:28 is sufficient to show that those who bore the name were responsible for the spiritual care of the Church of Christ, and that they were to feed His flock with the bread of life (see the striking and impressive remarks of Dr. Moberly, Ministerial Priesthood , p. 266). This one passage is also sufficient to show that the “presbyter” and “bishop” were at first practically identical, cf. Act 20:17 ; Act 20:28 , Steinmetz, Die zweite rmische Gefangenschaft des Apostels Paulus , p. 173, 1897, and that there is no room for the separation made by Harnack between the two, see his Analecta zu Hatch , p. 231, or for his division between the “patriarchal” office of the and the “administrative” office of the (Loening, u. s. , pp. 23 27; Sanday, Expositor, u. s. , pp. 12, 104; Gwatkin, u. s. , p. 302). In the Pastoral Epistles the identity between the two is even more clearly marked, although Harnack cannot accept Tit 1:5-7 as a valid proof, because he believes that Act 20:7-9 were interpolated into the received text by a redactor; cf. also for proof of the same 1Ti 3:1-13 ; 1Ti 5:17-19 ; 1Pe 5:1-2 , although in this last passage Harnack rejects the reading (and it must be admitted that it is not found in [341] [342] , and that it is omitted by Tisch. and W. H.), whilst he still relegates the passages in the Pastoral Epistles relating to bishops, deacons and Church organisation to the second quarter of the second century, Chron. , i., p. 483, note. In St. Clement of Rome, Cor [343] , xlii., 4, xliv. 1, 4, 5, the terms are still synonymous, and by implication in Didach , xv., 1 (Gwatkin, u. s. , p. 302, and Gore, u. s. , p. 409, note). But if we may say with Bishop Lightfoot that a new phraseology began with the opening of a new century, and that in St. Ignatius the two terms are used in their more modern sense, it should be borne in mind that the transition period between Acts and St. Ignatius is exactly marked by the Pastoral Epistles, and that this fact is in itself no small proof of their genuineness. In these Epistles Timothy and Titus exercise not only the functions of the ordinary presbyteral office, but also functions which are pre-eminent over those of the ordinary presbyter, although there is no trace of any special title for these Apostolic delegates, as they may be fairly called. The circumstances may have been temporary or tentative, but it is sufficiently plain that Timothy and Titus were to exercise not only a general discipline, but also a jurisdiction over the other ministers of the Church, and that to them was committed not only the selection, but also the ordination of presbyters (Moberly, Ministerial Priesthood , p. 151 ff.; Bright, Some Aspects of Primitive Church Life , p. 28 ff., 1898; Church Quarterly Review , xlii., pp. 265 302). . , see critical note. , cf. Psa 74:2 . It has been thought that St. Paul adopts and adapts the language of this Psalm; in comparing his language with that of the LXX we can see how by the use of the word instead of in the Psalm he connects the new Christian Society with the ancient of Israel, whilst in employing instead of (LXX), and retaining the force of , LXX, by reference to the of the new Covenant, a deeper significance is given to the Psalmist’s language: a greater redemption than that of Israel from the old Egyptian bondage had been wrought for the Christian Ecclesia (Hort, Ecclesia , pp. 14 and 102). The verb only in St. Luke and St. Paul in N.T., but in a different sense in the former, Luk 17:33 . In 1Ti 3:13 ( 1Ma 6:44 ) it is found in the sense of “gaining for oneself,” so in classical Greek. But it is to be noted that the cognate noun is associated by St. Paul in his Ephesian letter with the thought of redemption, “unto the redemption of God’s own possession,” R.V. . ., see critical note.
[340] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[341] Codex Sinaiticus (sc. iv.), now at St. Petersburg, published in facsimile type by its discoverer, Tischendorf, in 1862.
[342] Codex Vaticanus (sc. iv.), published in photographic facsimile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi.
[343] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Take heed. Greek. prosecho. The sixth occurs in Acts. See note on Act 8:6, Act 8:10, Act 8:11.
flock. Greek. poimnion, little flock. Only here, Act 20:29. Luk 12:32. 1Pe 5:2, 1Pe 5:3. For poimne, see Joh 10:16.
over = in, or on. Greek. en. App-104. Out of 2,622 occurances of en, it is rendered “over” only here.
overseers. Greek. epiakopos. Elsewhere translated “bishop”. Php 1:1, Php 1:1. 1Ti 3:2. Tit 1:7. 1Pe 2:26. They are called “elders”, in Act 20:17, which makes it clear that “elders” (presbuteroi) and bishops (episkopoi) are the same. App-189.
feed = shepherd. Greek. poimaino. Occurs eleven times; translated “feed” seven times; “rule” in Mat 2:6. Rev 2:27; Rev 12:5; Rev 19:15.
God. Some texts read “Lord”, but Alford gives good reasons for rejecting the change, due to Arian and Socinian attempts against the Lord’s Deity.
purchased = gained possession of, or acquired. Greek. peripoieomai. Only here and 1Ti 3:13. Compare 1Pe 2:9.
with = by means of. Greek. dia. App-104. Act 20:1.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
28. . ] If we might venture to trace the hand of Luke in the speech, it would be perhaps in this phrase: which occurs only as in reff.
. ] This similitude does not elsewhere occur in Pauls writings. We find it (reff.) where we should naturally expect it, used by him to whom it was said, Feed my sheep. But it is common in the O. T. and sanctioned by the example of our Lord Himself.
. . .] See ch. Act 13:2
] So Paul, reff. 1 Cor.
] See on Act 20:17, and Theodoret on Php 1:1, (Olsh.).
The question between and rests principally on internal evidence-which of the two is likely to have been the original reading. The manuscript authority, now that it is certain that [105] has a prima manu, as also [106], is weighty on both sides. The early patristic authority for the expression is considerable. Ignat. Ephesians 1, p. 644, has . Tertull. ad Uxor. ii. 3, vol. i., p. 1293, pretio empti, et quali pretio? sanguine Dei. Clem[107] Alex., Quis dives salvus, c. 34, vol. ii., p. 344, has , . , . . On the other hand Athanasius (contra Apol. ii. 14, vol. ii., p. 758) says, , . In attempting to decide between the two readings, the following alternatives and considerations may be put: (I.) IF WAS THE ORIGINAL, it is very possible (1) that some busy scribe may have written at the side, as so often occurs, . This having been once done, the interests of orthodoxy would perpetuate the gloss, and by degrees it would be adopted into the text and supersede the original word, or become combined with it, as is actually the case in [108] [109] and a vast body of mss. Or, continuing supposition I., it may have been (2) that the expression , not found any where else, may have been corrected into the very usual one, . () , which occurs eleven times in the Epistles of Paul. Or (3), which I consider exceedingly improbable (see below), the alteration may have been made solely in the interest of orthodoxy. Such are possible, and the two former not improbable, contingencies.
[105] The CODEX VATICANUS, No. 1209 in the Vatican Library at Rome; and proved, by the old catalogues, to have been there from the foundation of the library in the 16th century. It was apparently, from internal evidence, copied in Egypt. It is on vellum, and contains the Old and New Testaments. In the latter, it is deficient from Heb 9:14 to the end of the Epistle;-it does not contain the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon;-nor the Apocalypse. An edition of this celebrated codex, undertaken as long ago as 1828 by Cardinal Angelo Mai, has since his death been published at Rome. The defects of this edition are such, that it can hardly be ranked higher in usefulness than a tolerably complete collation, entirely untrustworthy in those places where it differs from former collations in representing the MS. as agreeing with the received text. An 8vo edition of the N.T. portion, newly revised by Vercellone, was published at Rome in 1859 (referred to as Verc): and of course superseded the English reprint of the 1st edition. Even in this 2nd edition there were imperfections which rendered it necessary to have recourse to the MS. itself, and to the partial collations made in former times. These are-(1) that of Bartolocci (under the name of Giulio de St. Anastasia), once librarian at the Vatican, made in 1669, and preserved in manuscript in the Imperial Library (MSS. Gr. Suppl. 53) at Paris (referred to as Blc); (2) that of Birch (Bch), published in various readings to the Acts and Epistles, Copenhagen, 1798,-Apocalypse, 1800,-Gospels, 1801; (3) that made for the great Bentley (Btly), by the Abbate Mico,-published in Fords Appendix to Woides edition of the Codex Alexandrinus, 1799 (it was made on the margin of a copy of Cephalus Greek Testament, Argentorati, 1524, still amongst Bentleys books in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge); (4) notes of alterations by the original scribe and other correctors. These notes were procured for Bentley by the Abb de Stosch, and were till lately supposed to be lost. They were made by the Abbate Rulotta (Rl), and are preserved amongst Bentleys papers in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge (B. 17. 20)1. The Codex has been occasionally consulted for the verification of certain readings by Tregelles, Tischendorf, and others. A list of readings examined at Rome by the present editor (Feb. 1861), and by the Rev. E. C. Cure, Fellow of Merton College, Oxford (April 1862), will be found at the end of these prolegomena. A description, with an engraving from a photograph of a portion of a page, is given in Burgons Letters from Rome, London 1861. This most important MS. was probably written in the fourth century (Hug, Tischendorf, al.).
[106] The CODEX SINAITICUS. Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf. The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century. The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are:-A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us -corr1; B (cited as 2), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; Ca (cited as 3a) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in 1, it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that Ca altered it to that which is found in our text; Cb (cited as 3b) lived about the same time as Ca, i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here6.
[107] Clement of Alexandria, fl. 194
[108] The Codex Wolfii B, now in the Public Library at Hamburg. Its history is the same as that of the last MS. Its contents, the Gospels,-with many lacun: its assigned date, about the end of the ninth century. It was collated by Wolf, Tregelles, and Tischendorf.
[109] The Codex Regius Parisiensis (Bibliothque Impriale Manuscrit grec, No. 62 [olim 2861 and 1558]), contains the Gospels with some lacun. Edited by Tischendorf in his Monumenta Sacra, 1846, pp. 57-399. Its text, both in various readings and in grammatical forms, is of the kind which has been called Alexandrine, and is very nearly related to that of B. From the careless positions of the accents, Scholz and Griesbach think it to have been copied from some more ancient MS. which had no accents. Ascribed by Tischendorf to the eighth century; by Tregelles and others, to the ninth4.
On the other hand (II.) IF WAS THE ORIGINAL, but one reason can be given why it should have been altered to , and that one was sure to have operated. It would stand as a bulwark against Arianism, an assertion which no skill could evade, which must therefore be modified. If stood in the text originally, it was sure to be altered to . The converse was not sure, nor indeed likely, from similar reasons, the passage offering no stumbling-block to orthodoxy. (III.) PAULINE USAGE must be allowed its fair weight in the enquiry. It must be remembered that we are in the midst of a speech, which is (as observed in the Prolegg. to Acts, ii. 17 a) a complete storehouse of Pauline words and expressions. Is it per se probable, that he should use an expression which no where else occurs in his writings, nor indeed in those of his contemporaries? Is it more probable, that the early scribes should have altered an unusual expression for an usual one, or that a writer so constant to his own phrases should here have remained so? Besides,-in most of the places where Paul uses , it is in a manner precisely similar to this,-as the consummation of a climax, or in a position of peculiar solemnity, cf. 1Co 10:32; 1Co 15:9; Gal 1:13; 1Ti 3:5; 1Ti 3:15; and, cteris paribus, I submit that the present passage loses by the substitution of the peculiar emphasis which its structure and context seem to require in the genitive, introduced as it is by , and followed by the intensifying clause . (IV.) On the whole then, weighing the evidence on both sides,-seeing that it is more likely that the alteration should have been to than to ,-more likely that the speaker should have used than , and more consonant to the evidently emphatic position of the word, I have decided for the rec. reading, which in Edd. 1, 2 I had rejected. And this decision is confirmed by observing the habits of the great MSS. respecting the sacred names. It appears that [110] has no bias for where the others have : we find it thus reading in Luk 2:38 (so [111] [112] [113]1[114] [115]); ch. Act 16:10 (so [116] [117] [118] [119]); Act 17:27 (so [120] [121] [122] [123]); Act 21:20 (so [124] [125] [126] [127] [128]); Col 3:16 (so [129] [130]1D1F[131]); while on the other hand it has in Rom 15:32, where the others have or ; in Eph 5:21, where rec. has ; in ch. Act 8:22, with ACDE[132], where rec. and the mss. have : similarly in ch. Act 10:33, and Act 15:40; in Rom 10:17 , with [133] [134]1[135]1, for : Act 14:4, with [136] [137]1[138], for . This evidence seems to remove further off the chance of deliberate alteration here to , and leaves the above considerations their full weight. (V.) Of course any reading which combines the two, and , is by the very first principles of textual criticism inadmissible. (VI.) The principal names on either side are-for the rec. , Mill, Wolf, Bengel, Matthi, Scholz: for , Grotius, Le Clerc, Wetst., Griesb., Kuin., De Wette, Meyer, Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles.
[110] The CODEX VATICANUS, No. 1209 in the Vatican Library at Rome; and proved, by the old catalogues, to have been there from the foundation of the library in the 16th century. It was apparently, from internal evidence, copied in Egypt. It is on vellum, and contains the Old and New Testaments. In the latter, it is deficient from Heb 9:14 to the end of the Epistle;-it does not contain the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon;-nor the Apocalypse. An edition of this celebrated codex, undertaken as long ago as 1828 by Cardinal Angelo Mai, has since his death been published at Rome. The defects of this edition are such, that it can hardly be ranked higher in usefulness than a tolerably complete collation, entirely untrustworthy in those places where it differs from former collations in representing the MS. as agreeing with the received text. An 8vo edition of the N.T. portion, newly revised by Vercellone, was published at Rome in 1859 (referred to as Verc): and of course superseded the English reprint of the 1st edition. Even in this 2nd edition there were imperfections which rendered it necessary to have recourse to the MS. itself, and to the partial collations made in former times. These are-(1) that of Bartolocci (under the name of Giulio de St. Anastasia), once librarian at the Vatican, made in 1669, and preserved in manuscript in the Imperial Library (MSS. Gr. Suppl. 53) at Paris (referred to as Blc); (2) that of Birch (Bch), published in various readings to the Acts and Epistles, Copenhagen, 1798,-Apocalypse, 1800,-Gospels, 1801; (3) that made for the great Bentley (Btly), by the Abbate Mico,-published in Fords Appendix to Woides edition of the Codex Alexandrinus, 1799 (it was made on the margin of a copy of Cephalus Greek Testament, Argentorati, 1524, still amongst Bentleys books in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge); (4) notes of alterations by the original scribe and other correctors. These notes were procured for Bentley by the Abb de Stosch, and were till lately supposed to be lost. They were made by the Abbate Rulotta (Rl), and are preserved amongst Bentleys papers in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge (B. 17. 20)1. The Codex has been occasionally consulted for the verification of certain readings by Tregelles, Tischendorf, and others. A list of readings examined at Rome by the present editor (Feb. 1861), and by the Rev. E. C. Cure, Fellow of Merton College, Oxford (April 1862), will be found at the end of these prolegomena. A description, with an engraving from a photograph of a portion of a page, is given in Burgons Letters from Rome, London 1861. This most important MS. was probably written in the fourth century (Hug, Tischendorf, al.).
[111] The CODEX CANTABRIGIENSIS, or BEZ,-so called because it was presented by Beza in 1581 to the University Library at Cambridge; where it is now exposed to view in a glass case. He procured it in 1562, from the monastery of St. Irenus at Lyons. It is on parchment, and contains the Gospels and Acts, with a Latin version. Its lacun, which are many, will be perceived by the inner marginal letters in this edition. It once contained the Catholic Epistles: 3Jn 1:11-14 in Latin is all that now remains. It was edited with very accurate imitative types, at the expense of the University of Cambridge, by Dr. Kipling, in 1793. A new edition carefully revised and more generally accessible was published by Mr. Scrivener in 1864, and has been collated for this Edition. In the introduction some ten or twelve correctors are distinguished, whose readings are found in the notes at the end of the volume. The text of the Codex Bez is a very peculiar one, deviating more from the received readings and from the principal manuscript authorities than any other. It appears to have been written in France, and by a Latin transcriber ignorant of Greek, from many curious mistakes which occur in the text, and version attached. It is closely and singularly allied to the ancient Latin versions, so much so that some critics have supposed it to have been altered from the Latin: and certainly many of the phnomena of the MS. seem to bear out the idea. Where D differs in unimportant points from the other Greek MSS., the difference appears to be traceable to the influence of Latin forms and constructions. It has been observed, that in such cases it frequently agrees with the Latin codex e (see the list further on). Its peculiarities are so great, that in many passages, while the sense remains for the most part unaltered, hardly three words together are the same as in the commonly received text. And that these variations often arise from capricious alteration, is evident from the way in which the Gospels, in parallel passages, have been more than commonly interpolated from one another in this MS. The concurrence with the ancient Latin versions seems to point to a very early state of the text; and it is impossible to set aside the value of D as an index to its history;-but in critical weight it ranks the lowest of the leading MSS. Its age has been very variously given: the general opinion now is that it was written in the latter end of the fifth or the sixth century.
[112] The Codex Regius Parisiensis (Bibliothque Impriale Manuscrit grec, No. 62 [olim 2861 and 1558]), contains the Gospels with some lacun. Edited by Tischendorf in his Monumenta Sacra, 1846, pp. 57-399. Its text, both in various readings and in grammatical forms, is of the kind which has been called Alexandrine, and is very nearly related to that of B. From the careless positions of the accents, Scholz and Griesbach think it to have been copied from some more ancient MS. which had no accents. Ascribed by Tischendorf to the eighth century; by Tregelles and others, to the ninth4.
[113] The Codex Monacensis, formerly Ingoldstadiensis. [It is a folio in two columns, and was presented by Gerard Vossius (1577-1641) to Ingoldstadt, transferred with the University to Landshut in 1803, to Munich in 1827.] (University Library, Munich, I. 26.) Contains the four Gospels with numerous lacun. [Burgon states that it does not contain Mat 6:6-10, but Mat 6:6; Mat 6:10-11. Mar 14:61-64; Mar 14:72 to Mar 15:4 has perished; Act 15:32 (latter half)-Act 16:8 (former half) has nearly perished.] It is accompanied by an interspersed commentary [that on Matt. and John abbreviated from Chrys.: on Luke from Titus (not Bostr., but rather later). There is no comm. on Mark]. Ascribed to the end of the ninth, or beginning of the tenth century. Collated by Tischendorf and Tregelles.
[114] CODEX ZACYNTHIUS. Edited by Tregelles, London, 1861, with the types cast for printing the Codex Alexandrinus. The following is an abridgment of his account of the MS.: On the 11th of August, 1858, I received a letter from Dr. Paul de Lagarde of Berlin, informing me that a palimpsest MS., hitherto unused, containing a considerable portion of St. Lukes Gospel, with a Catena, was in the library of the British and Foreign Bible Society. It is noted in the Catalogue, and on the back, 24, Greek Evangelisterium. Parchment. In many parts the ancient writing is illegible, except in a very good light. The later writing is a Greek Lectionary from the Four Gospels, and belongs, I suppose, to the thirteenth century. The elder writing must have been part of a volume of large folio size; for the leaves are now folded across, the later writing running the other way. The text is in round full well-formed uncial letters, such as I should have had no difficulty in ascribing to the sixth century, were it not that the Catena of the same age has the round letters () so cramped as to make me believe that it belongs to the eighth century. Besides the ordinary or , this MS. contains also the same chapters as the Vatican MS., similarly numbered. The only other document in which I have ever seen this Capitulatio Vaticana is the Vatican Codex itself; nor do I know of its being found elsewhere. Occasionally the same portion of Scripture occurs twice, when accompanied by a different Patristic extract.
[115] The CODEX SINAITICUS. Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf. The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century. The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are:-A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us -corr1; B (cited as 2), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; Ca (cited as 3a) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in 1, it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that Ca altered it to that which is found in our text; Cb (cited as 3b) lived about the same time as Ca, i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here6.
[116] The MS. referred to by this symbol is that commonly called the Alexandrine, or CODEX ALEXANDRINUS. It once belonged to Cyrillus Lucaris, patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople, who in the year 1628 presented it to our King Charles I. It is now in the British Museum. It is on parchment in four volumes, of which three contain the Old, and one the New Testament, with the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians. This fourth volume is exhibited open in a glass case. It will be seen by the letters in the inner margin of this edition, that the first 24 chapters of Matthew are wanting in it, its first leaf commencing , ch. Mat 25:6 :-as also the leaves containing , Joh 6:50,-to , Joh 8:52. It is generally agreed that it was written at Alexandria;-it does not, however, in the Gospels, represent that commonly known as the Alexandrine text, but approaches much more nearly to the Constantinopolitan, or generally received text. The New Testament, according to its text, was edited, in uncial types cast to imitate those of the MS., by Woide, London, 1786, the Old Testament by Baber, London, 1819: and its N.T. text has now been edited in common type by Mr. B. H. Cowper, London, 1861. The date of this MS. has been variously assigned, but it is now pretty generally agreed to be the fifth century.
[117] The CODEX EPHRAEMI, preserved in the Imperial Library at Paris, MS. Gr. No. 9. It is a Codex rescriptus or palimpsest, consisting of the works of Ephraem the Syrian written over the MS. of extensive fragments of the Old and New Testaments2. It seems to have come to France with Catherine de Medici, and to her from Cardinal Nicolas Ridolfi. Tischendorf thinks it probable that he got it from Andrew John Lascaris, who at the fall of the Eastern Empire was sent to the East by Lorenzo de Medici to preserve such MSS. as had escaped the ravages of the Turks. This is confirmed by the later corrections (C3) in the MS., which were evidently made at Constantinople3. But from the form of the letters, and other peculiarities, it is believed to have been written at Alexandria, or at all events, where the Alexandrine dialect and method of writing prevailed. Its text is perhaps the purest example of the Alexandrine text,-holding a place about midway between the Constantinopolitan MSS. and most of those of the Alexandrine recension. It was edited very handsomely in uncial type, with copious dissertations, &c., by Tischendorf, in 1843. He assigns to it an age at least equal to A, and places it also in the fifth century. Corrections were written in, apparently in the sixth and ninth centuries: these are respectively cited as C2, C3.
[118] The Codex Basileensis (Public Library at Basle, formerly B. vi. 21; now K. iv. 35). Contains the four Gospels with some considerable lacun. Collated by Tischendorf and Tregelles. Said to be of the middle of the eighth century. [Burgon gives the press-mark as A. N. iii. 12; and assigns the MS. to the seventh century.]
[119] The CODEX SINAITICUS. Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf. The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century. The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are:-A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us -corr1; B (cited as 2), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; Ca (cited as 3a) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in 1, it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that Ca altered it to that which is found in our text; Cb (cited as 3b) lived about the same time as Ca, i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here6.
[120] The MS. referred to by this symbol is that commonly called the Alexandrine, or CODEX ALEXANDRINUS. It once belonged to Cyrillus Lucaris, patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople, who in the year 1628 presented it to our King Charles I. It is now in the British Museum. It is on parchment in four volumes, of which three contain the Old, and one the New Testament, with the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians. This fourth volume is exhibited open in a glass case. It will be seen by the letters in the inner margin of this edition, that the first 24 chapters of Matthew are wanting in it, its first leaf commencing , ch. Mat 25:6 :-as also the leaves containing , Joh 6:50,-to , Joh 8:52. It is generally agreed that it was written at Alexandria;-it does not, however, in the Gospels, represent that commonly known as the Alexandrine text, but approaches much more nearly to the Constantinopolitan, or generally received text. The New Testament, according to its text, was edited, in uncial types cast to imitate those of the MS., by Woide, London, 1786, the Old Testament by Baber, London, 1819: and its N.T. text has now been edited in common type by Mr. B. H. Cowper, London, 1861. The date of this MS. has been variously assigned, but it is now pretty generally agreed to be the fifth century.
[121] The Codex Wolfii B, now in the Public Library at Hamburg. Its history is the same as that of the last MS. Its contents, the Gospels,-with many lacun: its assigned date, about the end of the ninth century. It was collated by Wolf, Tregelles, and Tischendorf.
[122] The Codex Regius Parisiensis (Bibliothque Impriale Manuscrit grec, No. 62 [olim 2861 and 1558]), contains the Gospels with some lacun. Edited by Tischendorf in his Monumenta Sacra, 1846, pp. 57-399. Its text, both in various readings and in grammatical forms, is of the kind which has been called Alexandrine, and is very nearly related to that of B. From the careless positions of the accents, Scholz and Griesbach think it to have been copied from some more ancient MS. which had no accents. Ascribed by Tischendorf to the eighth century; by Tregelles and others, to the ninth4.
[123] The CODEX SINAITICUS. Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf. The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century. The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are:-A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us -corr1; B (cited as 2), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; Ca (cited as 3a) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in 1, it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that Ca altered it to that which is found in our text; Cb (cited as 3b) lived about the same time as Ca, i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here6.
[124] The MS. referred to by this symbol is that commonly called the Alexandrine, or CODEX ALEXANDRINUS. It once belonged to Cyrillus Lucaris, patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople, who in the year 1628 presented it to our King Charles I. It is now in the British Museum. It is on parchment in four volumes, of which three contain the Old, and one the New Testament, with the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians. This fourth volume is exhibited open in a glass case. It will be seen by the letters in the inner margin of this edition, that the first 24 chapters of Matthew are wanting in it, its first leaf commencing , ch. Mat 25:6 :-as also the leaves containing , Joh 6:50,-to , Joh 8:52. It is generally agreed that it was written at Alexandria;-it does not, however, in the Gospels, represent that commonly known as the Alexandrine text, but approaches much more nearly to the Constantinopolitan, or generally received text. The New Testament, according to its text, was edited, in uncial types cast to imitate those of the MS., by Woide, London, 1786, the Old Testament by Baber, London, 1819: and its N.T. text has now been edited in common type by Mr. B. H. Cowper, London, 1861. The date of this MS. has been variously assigned, but it is now pretty generally agreed to be the fifth century.
[125] The CODEX EPHRAEMI, preserved in the Imperial Library at Paris, MS. Gr. No. 9. It is a Codex rescriptus or palimpsest, consisting of the works of Ephraem the Syrian written over the MS. of extensive fragments of the Old and New Testaments2. It seems to have come to France with Catherine de Medici, and to her from Cardinal Nicolas Ridolfi. Tischendorf thinks it probable that he got it from Andrew John Lascaris, who at the fall of the Eastern Empire was sent to the East by Lorenzo de Medici to preserve such MSS. as had escaped the ravages of the Turks. This is confirmed by the later corrections (C3) in the MS., which were evidently made at Constantinople3. But from the form of the letters, and other peculiarities, it is believed to have been written at Alexandria, or at all events, where the Alexandrine dialect and method of writing prevailed. Its text is perhaps the purest example of the Alexandrine text,-holding a place about midway between the Constantinopolitan MSS. and most of those of the Alexandrine recension. It was edited very handsomely in uncial type, with copious dissertations, &c., by Tischendorf, in 1843. He assigns to it an age at least equal to A, and places it also in the fifth century. Corrections were written in, apparently in the sixth and ninth centuries: these are respectively cited as C2, C3.
[126] The Codex Basileensis (Public Library at Basle, formerly B. vi. 21; now K. iv. 35). Contains the four Gospels with some considerable lacun. Collated by Tischendorf and Tregelles. Said to be of the middle of the eighth century. [Burgon gives the press-mark as A. N. iii. 12; and assigns the MS. to the seventh century.]
[127] The Codex Regius Parisiensis (Bibliothque Impriale Manuscrit grec, No. 62 [olim 2861 and 1558]), contains the Gospels with some lacun. Edited by Tischendorf in his Monumenta Sacra, 1846, pp. 57-399. Its text, both in various readings and in grammatical forms, is of the kind which has been called Alexandrine, and is very nearly related to that of B. From the careless positions of the accents, Scholz and Griesbach think it to have been copied from some more ancient MS. which had no accents. Ascribed by Tischendorf to the eighth century; by Tregelles and others, to the ninth4.
[128] The CODEX SINAITICUS. Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf. The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century. The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are:-A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us -corr1; B (cited as 2), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; Ca (cited as 3a) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in 1, it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that Ca altered it to that which is found in our text; Cb (cited as 3b) lived about the same time as Ca, i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here6.
[129] The MS. referred to by this symbol is that commonly called the Alexandrine, or CODEX ALEXANDRINUS. It once belonged to Cyrillus Lucaris, patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople, who in the year 1628 presented it to our King Charles I. It is now in the British Museum. It is on parchment in four volumes, of which three contain the Old, and one the New Testament, with the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians. This fourth volume is exhibited open in a glass case. It will be seen by the letters in the inner margin of this edition, that the first 24 chapters of Matthew are wanting in it, its first leaf commencing , ch. Mat 25:6 :-as also the leaves containing , Joh 6:50,-to , Joh 8:52. It is generally agreed that it was written at Alexandria;-it does not, however, in the Gospels, represent that commonly known as the Alexandrine text, but approaches much more nearly to the Constantinopolitan, or generally received text. The New Testament, according to its text, was edited, in uncial types cast to imitate those of the MS., by Woide, London, 1786, the Old Testament by Baber, London, 1819: and its N.T. text has now been edited in common type by Mr. B. H. Cowper, London, 1861. The date of this MS. has been variously assigned, but it is now pretty generally agreed to be the fifth century.
[130] The CODEX EPHRAEMI, preserved in the Imperial Library at Paris, MS. Gr. No. 9. It is a Codex rescriptus or palimpsest, consisting of the works of Ephraem the Syrian written over the MS. of extensive fragments of the Old and New Testaments2. It seems to have come to France with Catherine de Medici, and to her from Cardinal Nicolas Ridolfi. Tischendorf thinks it probable that he got it from Andrew John Lascaris, who at the fall of the Eastern Empire was sent to the East by Lorenzo de Medici to preserve such MSS. as had escaped the ravages of the Turks. This is confirmed by the later corrections (C3) in the MS., which were evidently made at Constantinople3. But from the form of the letters, and other peculiarities, it is believed to have been written at Alexandria, or at all events, where the Alexandrine dialect and method of writing prevailed. Its text is perhaps the purest example of the Alexandrine text,-holding a place about midway between the Constantinopolitan MSS. and most of those of the Alexandrine recension. It was edited very handsomely in uncial type, with copious dissertations, &c., by Tischendorf, in 1843. He assigns to it an age at least equal to A, and places it also in the fifth century. Corrections were written in, apparently in the sixth and ninth centuries: these are respectively cited as C2, C3.
[131] The CODEX SINAITICUS. Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf. The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century. The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are:-A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us -corr1; B (cited as 2), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; Ca (cited as 3a) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in 1, it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that Ca altered it to that which is found in our text; Cb (cited as 3b) lived about the same time as Ca, i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here6.
[132] The CODEX SINAITICUS. Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf. The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century. The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are:-A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us -corr1; B (cited as 2), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; Ca (cited as 3a) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in 1, it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that Ca altered it to that which is found in our text; Cb (cited as 3b) lived about the same time as Ca, i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here6.
[133] The CODEX EPHRAEMI, preserved in the Imperial Library at Paris, MS. Gr. No. 9. It is a Codex rescriptus or palimpsest, consisting of the works of Ephraem the Syrian written over the MS. of extensive fragments of the Old and New Testaments2. It seems to have come to France with Catherine de Medici, and to her from Cardinal Nicolas Ridolfi. Tischendorf thinks it probable that he got it from Andrew John Lascaris, who at the fall of the Eastern Empire was sent to the East by Lorenzo de Medici to preserve such MSS. as had escaped the ravages of the Turks. This is confirmed by the later corrections (C3) in the MS., which were evidently made at Constantinople3. But from the form of the letters, and other peculiarities, it is believed to have been written at Alexandria, or at all events, where the Alexandrine dialect and method of writing prevailed. Its text is perhaps the purest example of the Alexandrine text,-holding a place about midway between the Constantinopolitan MSS. and most of those of the Alexandrine recension. It was edited very handsomely in uncial type, with copious dissertations, &c., by Tischendorf, in 1843. He assigns to it an age at least equal to A, and places it also in the fifth century. Corrections were written in, apparently in the sixth and ninth centuries: these are respectively cited as C2, C3.
[134] The CODEX CANTABRIGIENSIS, or BEZ,-so called because it was presented by Beza in 1581 to the University Library at Cambridge; where it is now exposed to view in a glass case. He procured it in 1562, from the monastery of St. Irenus at Lyons. It is on parchment, and contains the Gospels and Acts, with a Latin version. Its lacun, which are many, will be perceived by the inner marginal letters in this edition. It once contained the Catholic Epistles: 3Jn 1:11-14 in Latin is all that now remains. It was edited with very accurate imitative types, at the expense of the University of Cambridge, by Dr. Kipling, in 1793. A new edition carefully revised and more generally accessible was published by Mr. Scrivener in 1864, and has been collated for this Edition. In the introduction some ten or twelve correctors are distinguished, whose readings are found in the notes at the end of the volume. The text of the Codex Bez is a very peculiar one, deviating more from the received readings and from the principal manuscript authorities than any other. It appears to have been written in France, and by a Latin transcriber ignorant of Greek, from many curious mistakes which occur in the text, and version attached. It is closely and singularly allied to the ancient Latin versions, so much so that some critics have supposed it to have been altered from the Latin: and certainly many of the phnomena of the MS. seem to bear out the idea. Where D differs in unimportant points from the other Greek MSS., the difference appears to be traceable to the influence of Latin forms and constructions. It has been observed, that in such cases it frequently agrees with the Latin codex e (see the list further on). Its peculiarities are so great, that in many passages, while the sense remains for the most part unaltered, hardly three words together are the same as in the commonly received text. And that these variations often arise from capricious alteration, is evident from the way in which the Gospels, in parallel passages, have been more than commonly interpolated from one another in this MS. The concurrence with the ancient Latin versions seems to point to a very early state of the text; and it is impossible to set aside the value of D as an index to its history;-but in critical weight it ranks the lowest of the leading MSS. Its age has been very variously given: the general opinion now is that it was written in the latter end of the fifth or the sixth century.
[135] The CODEX SINAITICUS. Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf. The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century. The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are:-A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us -corr1; B (cited as 2), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; Ca (cited as 3a) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in 1, it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that Ca altered it to that which is found in our text; Cb (cited as 3b) lived about the same time as Ca, i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here6.
[136] The MS. referred to by this symbol is that commonly called the Alexandrine, or CODEX ALEXANDRINUS. It once belonged to Cyrillus Lucaris, patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople, who in the year 1628 presented it to our King Charles I. It is now in the British Museum. It is on parchment in four volumes, of which three contain the Old, and one the New Testament, with the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians. This fourth volume is exhibited open in a glass case. It will be seen by the letters in the inner margin of this edition, that the first 24 chapters of Matthew are wanting in it, its first leaf commencing , ch. Mat 25:6 :-as also the leaves containing , Joh 6:50,-to , Joh 8:52. It is generally agreed that it was written at Alexandria;-it does not, however, in the Gospels, represent that commonly known as the Alexandrine text, but approaches much more nearly to the Constantinopolitan, or generally received text. The New Testament, according to its text, was edited, in uncial types cast to imitate those of the MS., by Woide, London, 1786, the Old Testament by Baber, London, 1819: and its N.T. text has now been edited in common type by Mr. B. H. Cowper, London, 1861. The date of this MS. has been variously assigned, but it is now pretty generally agreed to be the fifth century.
[137] The CODEX EPHRAEMI, preserved in the Imperial Library at Paris, MS. Gr. No. 9. It is a Codex rescriptus or palimpsest, consisting of the works of Ephraem the Syrian written over the MS. of extensive fragments of the Old and New Testaments2. It seems to have come to France with Catherine de Medici, and to her from Cardinal Nicolas Ridolfi. Tischendorf thinks it probable that he got it from Andrew John Lascaris, who at the fall of the Eastern Empire was sent to the East by Lorenzo de Medici to preserve such MSS. as had escaped the ravages of the Turks. This is confirmed by the later corrections (C3) in the MS., which were evidently made at Constantinople3. But from the form of the letters, and other peculiarities, it is believed to have been written at Alexandria, or at all events, where the Alexandrine dialect and method of writing prevailed. Its text is perhaps the purest example of the Alexandrine text,-holding a place about midway between the Constantinopolitan MSS. and most of those of the Alexandrine recension. It was edited very handsomely in uncial type, with copious dissertations, &c., by Tischendorf, in 1843. He assigns to it an age at least equal to A, and places it also in the fifth century. Corrections were written in, apparently in the sixth and ninth centuries: these are respectively cited as C2, C3.
[138] The CODEX SINAITICUS. Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf. The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century. The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are:-A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us -corr1; B (cited as 2), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; Ca (cited as 3a) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in 1, it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that Ca altered it to that which is found in our text; Cb (cited as 3b) lived about the same time as Ca, i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here6.
.] Luke and Paul (in pastoral Epp. only), see reff.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Act 20:28. , take heed) This care I devolve from myself on you, Act 20:31.-) first to yourselves, then to the flock.- , the Holy Ghost) The Holy Spirit mediately, through the instrumentality of Paul, appointed them. Comp. ch. Act 14:23. But a call which has not been given by the Holy Spirit really, does not deserve to be termed even a mediate call.-, overseers or bishops) At this time the appellation, bishops, was not yet the customary and peculiar one (applied to those subsequently bearing that name): but here it has the meaning which the force of its etymological derivation requires, and is applicable to all presbyters, whose title (Presbyter) was a more customary one, owing to its existence in the Jewish Church. Afterwards Timothy and Titus, whom the apostles had set over the presbyters in a certain peculiar manner, were entitled bishops: and yet the bishops also did not cease to be entitled presbyters: Tit 1:7; Tit 1:5, where he who is called a bishop in Act 20:7, is called an elder in Act 20:5; 1Pe 5:2; 1Pe 5:1; Php 1:1.- , the Church of God) Others read ; many, with the Slavonic Version, . Paul often uses the appellation, the Church of God, in the Ep. to the Thess. Cor. Gal. Tim., never the Church of the Lord. Nor does he use the expression at all, Lord and God, interposing the particle and between. Therefore it remains that we read the Church of GOD: although, if in this passage Paul used the expression, Church of the Lord, according to the parallelism of the Old Testament it would be the Church of Jehovah.[123]- , which He hath purchased) This therefore is a most precious flock [as having cost so dearly].-, His own) For it is the blood of the Son of GOD: 1Jn 1:7, The blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanseth us from all sin.
[123] is supported by B Vulg. (oldest MSS.), Harclean Syriac, Cyril of Alexandria, Epiphanius. is read by ACDEde Memph. Theb. Iren. (Latin) 201, Eusebius, Lucifer 226, Jerome. , the common reading of MSS., is supported by none of the oldest authorities: the Slavonic Version of the 9th cent. is no good authority. , in connection with blood, is the more difficult reading, and therefore so far less likely to be an interpolation. But is a still less likely reading to be interpolated, as the phrase is found nowhere else in the N. Test., so that a transcriber would readily change it into , as in 1Co 1:2 : and 1Pe 5:2, , might also suggest the change. Even if the preponderance of testimony lead to the reading , still the infinite value of Christs own blood, as alone equal to meet the justice of an infinite God, is clearly brought out. B, the oldest MS. is weighty authority for . Alford shows that there was greater reason for Arians to change the text to , than for the orthodox to change it to . The latter, if left untouched, would be fatal to Arianism; the former, if untouched, does not militate against orthodoxy in the least.-E. and T.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Commended to God
Act 20:28-38
Notice the change of the Revised Version in Act 20:28. The elder, whether presbyter or bishop, is not put over the flock; he is in it like the rest, needing redemption through the same precious blood. Notice also that remarkable expression, the Church of God, which He hath purchased with His own blood, Act 20:28. It clearly indicates Pauls view of the deity of our Lord.
The prediction of Act 20:30 was but too soon fulfilled, 1Ti 1:19-20. Tears are thrice mentioned in this short passage: tears of suffering, Act 20:19; of pastoral anxiety, Act 20:31; and of personal affection, Act 20:37.
The master builder was withdrawn before the edifice was completed, but he knew that God would continue, through other hands, to complete what he had begun, Act 20:32. We are in the company of Gods heirs. Let us meditate on the word of His grace, as fellow-heirs with Christ and all His saints; let us enter into possession of our inheritance. In Act 20:35 we have the only saying of our Lord in the New Testament which is not preserved in the Gospels. The blessedness applies to our Lord as well as to ourselves. Let us not think that he is tired of our requests. Every time we ask for anything that He can give us, we add to His blessedness, as well as to our own.
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
Take: 2Ch 19:6, 2Ch 19:7, Mar 13:9, Luk 21:34, 1Co 9:26, 1Co 9:27, Col 4:17, 1Ti 4:16, Heb 12:15
all: Act 20:29, Son 1:7, Son 1:8, Isa 40:11, Isa 63:11, Jer 13:17, Jer 13:20, Jer 31:10, Eze 34:31, Mic 7:14, Luk 12:32, 1Pe 5:2, 1Pe 5:3
over: Act 13:2, Act 14:23, 1Co 12:8-11, 1Co 12:28-31, 1Ti 4:14
overseers: Phi 1:1, 1Ti 3:2, 1Ti 5:17, Tit 1:7, Heb 13:17, 1Pe 2:25, Greek
to feed: Psa 78:70-72, Pro 10:21, Isa 40:11, Jer 3:15, Eze 34:3, Mic 5:4, Mic 7:14, Zec 11:4, Mat 2:6,*Gr: Joh 21:15-17, 1Pe 5:2, 1Pe 5:3
the church: 1Co 1:2, 1Co 10:32, 1Co 11:22, 1Co 15:9, Gal 1:13, 1Ti 3:5, 1Ti 3:15, 1Ti 3:16
which he: Psa 74:2, Isa 53:10-12, Eph 1:7, Eph 1:14, Col 1:14, Heb 9:12-14, 1Pe 1:18, 1Pe 1:19, 1Pe 2:9, Rev 5:9
Reciprocal: Gen 39:4 – overseer Exo 15:16 – which thou Lev 13:3 – shall look Num 1:53 – there be Num 4:16 – the oversight Num 27:16 – set a man Num 27:19 – give him Num 31:30 – keep the Deu 31:14 – I may give Deu 32:6 – hath bought 2Sa 7:7 – feed 1Ki 2:1 – charged 1Ch 23:4 – set forward Neh 11:22 – overseer Psa 95:7 – people Psa 100:3 – we are his Son 8:12 – vineyard Isa 9:6 – The mighty God Jer 17:21 – Take Jer 23:4 – I Eze 3:17 – a watchman Mat 24:45 – is Luk 10:2 – the Lord Luk 12:42 – to give Joh 3:13 – even Joh 10:2 – he that Joh 14:26 – Holy Ghost Joh 21:16 – my sheep Act 16:6 – forbidden Act 20:17 – the elders Rom 9:5 – who is Rom 12:7 – ministry Rom 12:8 – ruleth 1Co 6:20 – ye 1Co 7:23 – are 1Co 9:7 – or Gal 4:5 – redeem Eph 1:22 – to the Eph 4:12 – perfecting Eph 5:23 – he Eph 5:25 – loved Col 1:28 – warning 1Th 5:12 – and are Heb 12:23 – the general 1Pe 5:1 – elders 2Pe 2:1 – bought 1Jo 3:16 – perceive 1Jo 5:20 – This is Rev 1:5 – washed Rev 3:2 – watchful Rev 7:17 – feed Rev 14:4 – redeemed
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
THE PURCHASED CHURCH
The Church of God, which He hath purchased with His own blood.
Act 20:28
Taking the Bible as our one sure light upon the Cross, standing at the point of sight where prophets, evangelists, and apostles stood, and where their Master stood Himself, we venture humbly but with resolve to say that
I. The Cross of Jesus was the divine index to man of the evil of his sin, of the cost and effort necessary to enable the forgiveness of God to deal fully with that sin, and of the Love which, in order that such forgiveness might be our blessed portion, delivered up its Best-Beloved to die.
II. The Cross tells us irrefragably of the Life, risen and eternal, of the Crucified.It calls us joyfully to a living Jesus, to be joined by simplest faith to Him in His life, that we may reap all the merits and all the peace of His finished sacrifice, and may daily live with a life which is Christ in us, the hope of glory.
Bishop H. C. G. Moule.
Illustration
What a wonder, in the Christian Creed, is the glory of the Cross! Did it ever occur to us to think what a paradox it is? It would be so easy to conceive, beforehand, that some other symbol or sign than the Cross should have distinguished the Church and cause of Jesus Christ. Why not the Palm of victory? Why not the Crown of universal empire? Why not the Sun, risen with healing in his wings? Why not the mystic Tongues and Flames of pentecostal mission? As a fact, the Cross is the immemorial and universal heraldry of the Christian, and of the Church.
(SECOND OUTLINE)
OUR UNHAPPY DIVISIONS
We should measure the world, and our own love or fear of it, its praises, censures, rewards, and punishments, by the plumb-line of the Cross; and it is well that we should regard the divisions of Christendom from the standpoint of the Cross; look at them with the light thrown upon them in the Passion; measure them in the spirit of those splendid words: The Church of God, which He hath purchased with His own Blood.
I. Is the spirit of division rebuked from the Cross?Was the outward as well as the inward unity of the Church an object or desire with Jesus in His Passion? Notice most briefly only three points:
(a) First, the prayer of consecration of our great High Priest, on the very steps of the throne of the Cross. It is a prayer for the unity of the Church. Our Master was not indifferent to the losses of disunion. He was not unmindful of the blessings and gains of unity. Neither pray I for these alone, the Apostles, the disciples, the little flock, but for them also which shall believe on Me through their word. That they all may be one. Our Lord went to His Cross with an intense yearning for the unity of the Church which He was about to purchase with His own Blood.
(b) The measure of the unity of the faithful was to be found in the awful unapproachable oneness existing in the mystery of the Blessed Trinity. That they all may be one, as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be one in Us I in them, and Thou in Me, that they may be made perfect in one. The unity of the Church was meant to be an outward expression of the unity of heaven, nay, of the very unity of God.
(c) Once more our Master prayed that His Church might be one in order that the world might believe in His own Divine Mission, and in the Fathers love for the ChurchThat they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that Thou hast sent Me. That they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that Thou hast sent Me, and hast loved them, as Thou has loved Me. The mission of Christ in history is disbelieved and disowned in consequence of the divisions of Christendom. Men cannot believe that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world when the instrument for extending that mission speaks with so many and scarcely harmonious voices. Neither can they believe in the love of God for His Church, That Thou hast loved them, as Thou hast loved Me, when the subject of the infinite charity of God seems to be so feeble an exponent of charity within itself, and consequently so impoverished a witness of the Divine charity to the world. Thou hast loved them, therefore they must perforce love each other, and live, and pray, and work together with one mind in the house of God.
II. Suffer one or two closing words of counsel and hope.
(a) Ever remember that the divisions of Christendom are entirely contrary to the will of God. They are the result of the sinfulness and impatience of man, and are no slight contribution to the measure of the worlds sin, which nailed Jesus to His cross.
(b) To labour for peace, to labour and to pray, is to place ourselves on the side of God, to help to secure that most sacred unity for which Christ wrestled on the eve of His Passion, to aid in restoring to the distracted Church that gift of peace which it must be His will to restore, but for which we are not ready as yet.
(c) Deplore and forsake that spirit of self-will, the fruitful cause of so much disunion and so many misunderstandings. We carry our self-will and our self-love into our religion and almost every act of it. It asserts its presence too often in our worship of God, our work for God, our interpretation of the will of God. Self-will is too often the substitute for Gods will. Wilfulness spoils too often the glory of Catholic worship, it mars the harmony of the Catholic life.
(d) Above all, continue to pray for the visible reunion of the Church, for the healing of the wounds of Christendom. To pray thus very humbly and very hopefully is to carry on the prayer which was first uttered on the confines of Gethsemane; it is to impose a limit upon the reign of sin, it is to anticipate the hour when the divisions of Christendom are seen to be only a painful but Divinely permitted incident in the life of the Church which had a beginning in timewhich has passed through her trials and her cleansing fires, and is now a glorious Church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing, but holy and without blemish. The true spouse of Jesus Christthe mystical bride adorned for her Husband.
Rev. C. W. H. Baker.
Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary
28Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.
1.Take heed to yourselves – The first obligation of any leader is to make sure their life is correct. One can not lead where they are not willing to live.
2.And to the flock – The church, Christians, are the flock of God.
3.Among – Elders can not care for sheep that are in another country or territory. The elders were to be local, living among the flock they were seeking lead and feed.
4.Holy Spirit made – The revelation of the Holy Spirit has given us the requirements and qualifications for the office of a bishop. See 1Ti 3:1-16 and Tit 1:1-16 for lists of the qualities needed to be an elder.
5.Overseers – The Greek word translated “overseer” refers to a manager or foreman. It is the task of a manager to see to it that the work done by others is done correctly. This describes the work of an elder.
6.Shepherd – The flock of God needs guidance and leadership, just as sheep need a shepherd.
7.Purchased – The church is a “blood-bought” institution.
NOTE:
1.There are three terms that refer to the same office and are used together.
2.All three words are in Act 20:17; Act 20:28.
3.All three words are also in 1Pe 5:1-2.
Greek WordEnglish termsMeaning
PresbuterosElderOlder, mature, wisdom
EpiskoposBishop, OverseerManager, Makes sure work done by others is correct
PoimenPastor, ShepherdOne who tends, feeds and cares for the flock
Acts 20:29
29For I know this, that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock.
1.Sheep need food and water. They also need protection. There are wolves out there and the job of the shepherd is to be alert for the wolves and protect the sheep from such dangers.
2.However, in the human analogy, the wolves look like sheep. They come in among the flock and deceive many. The elders must be vigilant and on guard. The wolves are a great danger.
Acts 20:30
30Also from among yourselves men will rise up, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after themselves.
1.Now the message becomes even more distressing and frightful. Paul says that some of the “wolves” will be from among the elders. They will not just look like the rest of the sheep in the flock, but some of them will look like shepherds.
2.This is a case of the wolf guarding the hen house.
Acts 20:31
31Therefore watch, and remember that for three years I did not cease to warn everyone night and day with tears.
1.Watch. Be alert. Always on guard. Diligent. Never let your guard down.
2.Paul did not stop warning during the three years he was in Ephesus. He warned them on a daily basis.
3.He warned them with tears because he knew the great danger that lurked in the days ahead.
Acts 20:32
32″So now, brethren, I commend you to God and to the word of His grace, which is able to build you up and give you an inheritance among all those who are sanctified.
1.With news like he has just given these elders, what can be said to encourage them?
2.Commend you to God – Don’t abandon your faith and your roots.
3.Word of His grace – Keep with the Word. Don’t leave the will of God.
1.Able to build you up – strengthen, support, encourage
2.Give you an inheritance – The Word of God is the place to learn how to receive the inheritance promised by God.
3.Among the sanctified – The charge of elders is to make sure that they serve God faithfully and keep the flock among them safe.
Acts 20:33
33I have coveted no one’s silver or gold or apparel.
1.Paul was not greedy. He was not in this work for the money. He did not send out letters seeking donations.
2.He did not seek to take – but to give. He did not charge for his work. He healed the sick, cast out demons, helped the lame, blind and deaf. Never did he charge a fee for this work.
Acts 20:34
34Yes, you yourselves know that these hands have provided for my necessities, and for those who were with me.
1.The elders at Ephesus are aware that Paul often worked (making tents and perhaps other tasks) to provide for what he needed.
2.Rather than charge fees, Paul would rather work second shift in a factory.
3.Not only was Paul in need, but all who were with him, including Timothy, Titus, Luke, and several others at various times during his journey. Paul made sure that all who were with him were cared for.
Acts 20:35
35I have shown you in every way, by laboring like this, that you must support the weak. And remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that He said, It is more blessed to give than to receive.'”
1.Paul practiced what he preached. He cared for all with him. He taught that we must support the weak.
2.Weak physically – Help supply them with food, clothes, shelter, and other physical needs.
3.Weak spiritually – support, teaching, edification, admonition and instruction to bring them to stronger faith and dedication.
4.Paul quotes Jesus. This particular statement is not recorded in any of the gospels or by any other source close the Jesus.
1.Some believe this is just a paraphrase of sentiments of Jesus.
2.Others have suggested that this is a statement of Jesus during the time he was instructed by Jesus in Arabia.
3.We must remember that not every word spoken by Jesus was recorded. There were many things He said and did that are not recorded.
4.Many statements of Jesus, heard by the multitudes, were passed on to others orally. It may be that this is one of those statements that is an oral tradition.
Acts 20:36
36And when he had said these things, he knelt down and prayed with them all.
1.Paul ends his speech to the Ephesian elders. He instructs. He warns. He encourages.
2.Now he kneels in prayer.
1.He prayed with them.
2.He prayed for them and the church at Ephesus.
3.He knelt in prayer. Years ago, most men would kneel at time of prayer. Today, we have gotten too sophisticated and fear that our pants might get dirty. What ever happened to kneeling in prayer? What happened to saying, “Amen”? What happened to wearing our “Sunday clothes” to assemble in worship?
Acts 20:37
37Then they all wept freely, and fell on Paul’s neck and kissed him,
1.The elders wept. They understood the awesome task ahead of them. They also understood that Paul would not be returning to Ephesus.
2.They hugged him and kissed him. It was a sad farewell.
Acts 20:38
38sorrowing most of all for the words which he spoke, that they would see his face no more. And they accompanied him to the ship.
1.Saddened that he was leaving.
2.They were sad for the warnings he issued. There was a real fear of the dangers the church would face.
3.Most of all, they were saddened because he would not be back. They understood that his life was in danger and he would not be able to return to see them again.
Acts 21:2
1Now it came to pass, that when we had departed from them and set sail, running a straight course we came to Cos, the following day to Rhodes, and from there to Patara.
1.From Miletus to Cos, to Rhodes and on to Patara. Apparently nothing of significance happened. They were just passing through these areas as they travelled back to Jerusalem.
1.Cos – Cos (also spelled Coos) is a small island most famous for grapes and wine. It is the birthplace of Hippocrates, the father of medicine.
2.Rhodes – 50 miles south of Cos is the larger island of Rhodes. It contained one of the seven wonders of the ancient world, the Colossus. This island is origin of the name for the state of Rhode Island.
3.Patara – was on the coast of Lydia and was the final destination of their ship.
Acts 21:2
2And finding a ship sailing over to Phoenicia, we went aboard and set sail.
1.Now they find another ship heading the direction they want to go. This ship is headed for Phoenicia. This city is part of Syria.
2.All of Paul’s party went and board and headed out. Notice the “we” in this verse means that Luke is a part of the group.
Acts 21:3
3When we had sighted Cyprus, we passed it on the left, sailed to Syria, and landed at Tyre; for there the ship was to unload her cargo.
1.They sailed within sight of Cyprus. This was the first stop on Paul’s first mission trip. Paul now knows that he is close to home.
2.The ship landed at Tyre. They are now on the shore of Israel.
1.This city was partly on an island and partly on the mainland.
2.It was the source of much rebuke and prophetic statements in the Old Testament and was mentioned by Jesus in Mat 11:21.
Acts 21:4
4And finding disciples, we stayed there seven days. They told Paul through the Spirit not to go up to Jerusalem.
1.Paul learns there is a church in Tyre, so he remains there seven days.
2.Inspired prophets told Paul that he should not go to Jerusalem.
Acts 21:5
5When we had come to the end of those days, we departed and went on our way; and they all accompanied us, with wives and children, till we were out of the city. And we knelt down on the shore and prayed.
1.Since Paul did made a similar stay in Troas (Act 20:6-7), it is assumed that he waited seven days so he could meet and worship with the assembled church at Tyre.
2.When it was time to leave many – men, women and children – escorted them to the edge of the city.
3.There a prayer service was held.
Acts 21:6
6When we had taken our leave of one another, we boarded the ship, and they returned home.
1.Paul and those with him boarded a ship.
2.The disciples from Tyre returned the their homes.
Acts 21:7
7And when we had finished our voyage from Tyre, we came to Ptolemais, greeted the brethren, and stayed with them one day.
1.It was a short trip from Tyre to Ptolemais, a city near Ceasarea.
2.They met with the brethren there and remained one day.
Acts 21:8
8On the next day we who were Paul’s companions departed and came to Caesarea, and entered the house of Philip the evangelist, who was one of the seven, and stayed with him.
1.Now they arrive at Caesarea and enter the house of Philip.
1.We last heard about Philip in Act 8:40. After the conversion of the Ethiopian, Philip traveled up the coast to Caesarea.
2.That was about 25 years ago. Now – 25 years later, Philip is still at the same location. If there was any doubt about the issue of “located preacher” – Philip is the answer. He was a preacher in the same city for 25 years. That is a located preacher.
2.This Philip is identified as one of the seven deacons appointed in Act 6:1-15 to care for the Greek speaking widows.
3.Paul’s group stayed with Philip.
Acts 21:9
9Now this man had four virgin daughters who prophesied.
1.Philip had four daughters, not married, who were inspired prophets.
2.Some attempt to make this passage approval for women to preach in the church. Not so. There were inspired women in they early church. Joe 2:1-32 says that there will be women who prophesy.
3.Women could use this gift to teach children. They could use this gift to teach other women. They could use this gift to evangelize the lost. This gift could be used in many ways outside the assembled church.
Acts 21:10
10And as we stayed many days, a certain prophet named Agabus came down from Judea.
1.Agabus, is a prophet from Judea (the area around Jerusalem).
2.He comes to meet with Paul and his companions.
Acts 21:11
11When he had come to us, he took Paul’s belt, bound his own hands and feet, and said, “Thus says the Holy Spirit, So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man who owns this belt, and deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.'”
1.There are several kinds of prophecy – oral, visual, apocalyptic, written.
2.Agabus used the visual method. The most famous of the visual prophets was Ezekiel.
3.Agabus takes Paul’s belt. He uses this belt to tie his own hands and feet.
4.Then he explains.
1.The man who owns this belt will be bound in by the Jews.
2.This will take place in Jerusalem.
3.He will be delivered into the hands of the Gentiles (Romans).
Acts 21:12
12Now when we heard these things, both we and those from that place pleaded with him not to go up to Jerusalem.
1.Now all in Paul’s party are joining with the disciples from Tyre.
2.They pleaded with Paul to stay away from Jerusalem.
Acts 21:23
13Then Paul answered, “What do you mean by weeping and breaking my heart? For I am ready not only to be bound, but also to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus.”
1.Paul’s response was clear.
1.Why are you breaking my heart?
2.I am ready to be bound.
3.I am ready to die for the name of the Lord Jesus.
2.Paul was told at the time of his confrontation with Jesus on the way to Damascus that he would suffer many things for the name of Jesus. (Act 9:16)
Acts 21:14
14So when he would not be persuaded, we ceased, saying, “The will of the Lord be done.”
1.Paul was not persuaded. Was he stubborn? Or, was he acknowledging the will of God?
2.”The will of the Lord be done” was the resignation of his companions. If this is the will of God, we can not prevent it.
Acts 21:15-16
15And after those days we packed and went up to Jerusalem.
16Also some of the disciples from Caesarea went with us and brought with them a certain Mnason of Cyprus, an early disciple, with whom we were to lodge.
1.With Paul determined, all the others could do was go along and “hope for the best.”
2.Some disciples from Caesarea joined them on their way to Jerusalem.
3.One of the early converts, Mnason, from Cyprus, was also in the group.
4.It seems that this convert was now living in Jerusalem. He had come to Caesarea and was now traveling with them to Jerusalem. When they get to Jerusalem, his home will be their place to stay.
Acts 21:17
17And when we had come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly.
1.Finally, they arrive in Jerusalem.
2.They are greeted with open arms and a warm welcome.
Acts 21:28
18On the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present.
1.The next day Paul meets with the elders at Jerusalem and James.
2.There are two possible James’ here:
1.James the Less, one of the original 12 apostles.
2.James the brother of Christ, known as a pillar in the church. He is a leader in the conference in Jerusalem (Act 15:1-41). He is mentioned by Paul in Gal 1:19; Gal 2:9,
3.NOTE: This James can not be the brother of John. James, the brother of John was killed in Act 12:1-25.
Acts 21:19
19When he had greeted them, he told in detail those things which God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry.
1.Paul now greets and reports on his work. He has been gone about 5 years and has much to talk about.
2.This third mission trip was more Gentile focused.
Acts 21:20
20And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord. And they said to him, “You see, brother, how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law;
1.There was great rejoicing as Paul talks about churches started and growing.
2.There was also some concerns.
1.Many thousands of Jews were converted. 3,000 on Pentecost (Act 2:41); 5,000 (Act 4:4); and multiplied greatly (Act 6:7).
2.Now, 25 years later, there are many thousands of Jewish converts.
3.BUT – they are zealous for the law. They are wanting to bind the Law of Moses on Gentile converts. This should have been settled in Act 15:1-41, but it is still a problem.
Acts 21:21
21but they have been informed about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs.
1.These Jewish Christians know about Paul and his work.
2.They are aware that Paul is teaching Jews and Gentiles to leave the Law of Moses.
3.They are upset that Paul has taught that circumcision is not important or necessary.
Acts 21:22
22What then? The assembly must certainly meet, for they will hear that you have come.
1.Word will get out that Paul is in town. There must be a meeting with these Jewish brethren to discuss their disagreement with Paul.
2.There must be an assembly called for this purpose.
Acts 21:23
23Therefore do what we tell you: We have four men who have taken a vow.
1.There are four men in the Jerusalem church which have taken a vow.
2.Their vow was about to expire and they must be purified – by Jewish law.
Acts 21:24
24Take them and be purified with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads, and that all may know that those things of which they were informed concerning you are nothing, but that you yourself also walk orderly and keep the law.
1.By having Paul take them for this purification, there would be a symbolic gesture, that Paul was not totally opposed to the Law of Moses and keeping its precepts.
2.This would show the Jews that Paul walks orderly.
Acts 21:25
25But concerning the Gentiles who believe, we have written and decided that they should observe no such thing, except that they should keep themselves from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality.”
1.However, the Gentiles are not under these rules. They restate what was decided in Act 15:1-41 at the conference in Jerusalem.
2.Other than these four things – the Gentiles are not required to observe Jewish laws.
Acts 21:26
26Then Paul took the men, and the next day, having been purified with them, entered the temple to announce the expiration of the days of purification, at which time an offering should be made for each one of them.
1.Paul took the men the next day so all of them could be purified and conclude their vow.
2.An offering was made to show that the vow was kept.
Acts 21:27
27Now when the seven days were almost ended, the Jews from Asia, seeing him in the temple, stirred up the whole crowd and laid hands on him,
1.During the period of seven days that were part of the purification process, trouble arose.
2.Jews from Asia had heard Paul teach against keeping the Law.
3.They stir up the crowd and capture Paul.
Acts 21:28
28crying out, “Men of Israel, help! This is the man who teaches all men everywhere against the people, the law, and this place; and furthermore he also brought Greeks into the temple and has defiled this holy place.”
1.They charge Paul with two crimes.
1.Paul teaches against the Law – telling people they do not have to keep the Law of Moses.
2.Paul defiled the Temple by bringing in Greeks (uncircumcised) into the temple.
Acts 21:29
29(For they had previously seen Trophimus the Ephesian with him in the city, whom they supposed that Paul had brought into the temple.)
1.This verse explains the second charge. They had seen Trophimus, from Ephesus, with Paul in the city.
2.They “supposed” that Paul brought him into the Temple.
Acts 21:30
30And all the city was disturbed; and the people ran together, seized Paul, and dragged him out of the temple; and immediately the doors were shut.
1.Now the whole city of Jerusalem is in an uproar.
2.They form a mob. They grab Paul and drag him out of the temple.
Acts 21:31
31Now as they were seeking to kill him, news came to the commander of the garrison that all Jerusalem was in an uproar.
1.Their intent was clear. They wanted to kill Paul.
2.News of this uproar came to the Roman army commander.
Acts 21:32
32He immediately took soldiers and centurions, and ran down to them. And when they saw the commander and the soldiers, they stopped beating Paul.
1.This Roman commander takes charge. He takes soldiers and centurions, and headed for the temple.
2.As the Roman officers approached, they stopped beating Paul.
Acts 21:33
33Then the commander came near and took him, and commanded him to be bound with two chains; and he asked who he was and what he had done.
1.Paul is now in the hands of the Romans.
2.He is bound with two chains.
3.Now they begin to inquire – Who is this man and what has he done?
Acts 21:34
34And some among the multitude cried one thing and some another. So when he could not ascertain the truth because of the tumult, he commanded him to be taken into the barracks.
1.The same thing happened here that occurred at the trial of Jesus. Many had charges. All different. None of them confirmed.
2.When the truth could not be learned from this mob of angry Jews, Paul was taken away to the Roman army barracks for his protection.
Acts 21:35
35When he reached the stairs, he had to be carried by the soldiers because of the violence of the mob.
1.The Roman palace was about 75 feet higher than the Temple grounds.
2.As they approached the stairs leading up the palace, soldiers had to carry Paul because of the potential for violence of the Jewish mob.
Acts 21:36
36For the multitude of the people followed after, crying out, “Away with him!”
1.The Jews were still bent on killing Paul.
2.”Away with him” means – put him to death. See Luk 23:18.
Acts 21:37
37Then as Paul was about to be led into the barracks, he said to the commander, “May I speak to you?” He replied, “Can you speak Greek?
1.Paul requests to speak to the commander.
2.The commander is surprised that Paul speaks in the Greek language because he supposes that Paul is Jewish and would only speak Hebrew.
Acts 21:38
38Are you not the Egyptian who some time ago stirred up a rebellion and led the four thousand assassins out into the wilderness?”
1.The commander has a case of mistaken identity.
2.He believes Paul to be an Egyptian that caused some problem and lead away 4,000 people.
Acts 21:39
39But Paul said, “I am a Jew from Tarsus, in Cilicia, a citizen of no mean city; and I implore you, permit me to speak to the people.”
1.Paul identifies himself – Paul – a Jew – from Tarsus – no small or unimportant city.
2.Then Paul requests to speak to the people – the mob of Jews.
Acts 21:40
40So when he had given him permission, Paul stood on the stairs and motioned with his hand to the people. And when there was a great silence, he spoke to them in the Hebrew language, saying,
1.The commander gave permission for Paul to address the crowd.
2.Paul stood on the stairs and motioned for silence.
3.When they were quiet – Paul spoke in the Hebrew language.
4.NOTE: This chapter ends with a comma. The next chapter is Paul’s speech to this crowd.
Acts 21:2
1Now it came to pass, that when we had departed from them and set sail, running a straight course we came to Cos, the following day to Rhodes, and from there to Patara.
1.From Miletus to Cos, to Rhodes and on to Patara. Apparently nothing of significance happened. They were just passing through these areas as they travelled back to Jerusalem.
1.Cos – Cos (also spelled Coos) is a small island most famous for grapes and wine. It is the birthplace of Hippocrates, the father of medicine.
2.Rhodes – 50 miles south of Cos is the larger island of Rhodes. It contained one of the seven wonders of the ancient world, the Colossus. This island is origin of the name for the state of Rhode Island.
3.Patara – was on the coast of Lydia and was the final destination of their ship.
Acts 21:2
2And finding a ship sailing over to Phoenicia, we went aboard and set sail.
1.Now they find another ship heading the direction they want to go. This ship is headed for Phoenicia. This city is part of Syria.
2.All of Paul’s party went and board and headed out. Notice the “we” in this verse means that Luke is a part of the group.
Acts 21:3
3When we had sighted Cyprus, we passed it on the left, sailed to Syria, and landed at Tyre; for there the ship was to unload her cargo.
1.They sailed within sight of Cyprus. This was the first stop on Paul’s first mission trip. Paul now knows that he is close to home.
2.The ship landed at Tyre. They are now on the shore of Israel.
1.This city was partly on an island and partly on the mainland.
2.It was the source of much rebuke and prophetic statements in the Old Testament and was mentioned by Jesus in Mat 11:21.
Acts 21:4
4And finding disciples, we stayed there seven days. They told Paul through the Spirit not to go up to Jerusalem.
1.Paul learns there is a church in Tyre, so he remains there seven days.
2.Inspired prophets told Paul that he should not go to Jerusalem.
Acts 21:5
5When we had come to the end of those days, we departed and went on our way; and they all accompanied us, with wives and children, till we were out of the city. And we knelt down on the shore and prayed.
1.Since Paul did made a similar stay in Troas (Act 20:6-7), it is assumed that he waited seven days so he could meet and worship with the assembled church at Tyre.
2.When it was time to leave many – men, women and children – escorted them to the edge of the city.
3.There a prayer service was held.
Acts 21:6
6When we had taken our leave of one another, we boarded the ship, and they returned home.
1.Paul and those with him boarded a ship.
2.The disciples from Tyre returned the their homes.
Acts 21:7
7And when we had finished our voyage from Tyre, we came to Ptolemais, greeted the brethren, and stayed with them one day.
1.It was a short trip from Tyre to Ptolemais, a city near Ceasarea.
2.They met with the brethren there and remained one day.
Acts 21:8
8On the next day we who were Paul’s companions departed and came to Caesarea, and entered the house of Philip the evangelist, who was one of the seven, and stayed with him.
1.Now they arrive at Caesarea and enter the house of Philip.
1.We last heard about Philip in Act 8:40. After the conversion of the Ethiopian, Philip traveled up the coast to Caesarea.
2.That was about 25 years ago. Now – 25 years later, Philip is still at the same location. If there was any doubt about the issue of “located preacher” – Philip is the answer. He was a preacher in the same city for 25 years. That is a located preacher.
2.This Philip is identified as one of the seven deacons appointed in Act 6:1-15 to care for the Greek speaking widows.
3.Paul’s group stayed with Philip.
Acts 21:9
9Now this man had four virgin daughters who prophesied.
1.Philip had four daughters, not married, who were inspired prophets.
2.Some attempt to make this passage approval for women to preach in the church. Not so. There were inspired women in they early church. Joe 2:1-32 says that there will be women who prophesy.
3.Women could use this gift to teach children. They could use this gift to teach other women. They could use this gift to evangelize the lost. This gift could be used in many ways outside the assembled church.
Acts 21:10
10And as we stayed many days, a certain prophet named Agabus came down from Judea.
1.Agabus, is a prophet from Judea (the area around Jerusalem).
2.He comes to meet with Paul and his companions.
Acts 21:11
11When he had come to us, he took Paul’s belt, bound his own hands and feet, and said, “Thus says the Holy Spirit, So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man who owns this belt, and deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.'”
1.There are several kinds of prophecy – oral, visual, apocalyptic, written.
2.Agabus used the visual method. The most famous of the visual prophets was Ezekiel.
3.Agabus takes Paul’s belt. He uses this belt to tie his own hands and feet.
4.Then he explains.
1.The man who owns this belt will be bound in by the Jews.
2.This will take place in Jerusalem.
3.He will be delivered into the hands of the Gentiles (Romans).
Acts 21:12
12Now when we heard these things, both we and those from that place pleaded with him not to go up to Jerusalem.
1.Now all in Paul’s party are joining with the disciples from Tyre.
2.They pleaded with Paul to stay away from Jerusalem.
Acts 21:23
13Then Paul answered, “What do you mean by weeping and breaking my heart? For I am ready not only to be bound, but also to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus.”
1.Paul’s response was clear.
1.Why are you breaking my heart?
2.I am ready to be bound.
3.I am ready to die for the name of the Lord Jesus.
2.Paul was told at the time of his confrontation with Jesus on the way to Damascus that he would suffer many things for the name of Jesus. (Act 9:16)
Acts 21:14
14So when he would not be persuaded, we ceased, saying, “The will of the Lord be done.”
1.Paul was not persuaded. Was he stubborn? Or, was he acknowledging the will of God?
2.”The will of the Lord be done” was the resignation of his companions. If this is the will of God, we can not prevent it.
Acts 21:15-16
15And after those days we packed and went up to Jerusalem.
16Also some of the disciples from Caesarea went with us and brought with them a certain Mnason of Cyprus, an early disciple, with whom we were to lodge.
1.With Paul determined, all the others could do was go along and “hope for the best.”
2.Some disciples from Caesarea joined them on their way to Jerusalem.
3.One of the early converts, Mnason, from Cyprus, was also in the group.
4.It seems that this convert was now living in Jerusalem. He had come to Caesarea and was now traveling with them to Jerusalem. When they get to Jerusalem, his home will be their place to stay.
Acts 21:17
17And when we had come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly.
1.Finally, they arrive in Jerusalem.
2.They are greeted with open arms and a warm welcome.
Acts 21:28
18On the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present.
1.The next day Paul meets with the elders at Jerusalem and James.
2.There are two possible James’ here:
1.James the Less, one of the original 12 apostles.
2.James the brother of Christ, known as a pillar in the church. He is a leader in the conference in Jerusalem (Act 15:1-41). He is mentioned by Paul in Gal 1:19; Gal 2:9,
3.NOTE: This James can not be the brother of John. James, the brother of John was killed in Act 12:1-25.
Acts 21:19
19When he had greeted them, he told in detail those things which God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry.
1.Paul now greets and reports on his work. He has been gone about 5 years and has much to talk about.
2.This third mission trip was more Gentile focused.
Acts 21:20
20And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord. And they said to him, “You see, brother, how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law;
1.There was great rejoicing as Paul talks about churches started and growing.
2.There was also some concerns.
1.Many thousands of Jews were converted. 3,000 on Pentecost (Act 2:41); 5,000 (Act 4:4); and multiplied greatly (Act 6:7).
2.Now, 25 years later, there are many thousands of Jewish converts.
3.BUT – they are zealous for the law. They are wanting to bind the Law of Moses on Gentile converts. This should have been settled in Act 15:1-41, but it is still a problem.
Acts 21:21
21but they have been informed about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs.
1.These Jewish Christians know about Paul and his work.
2.They are aware that Paul is teaching Jews and Gentiles to leave the Law of Moses.
3.They are upset that Paul has taught that circumcision is not important or necessary.
Acts 21:22
22What then? The assembly must certainly meet, for they will hear that you have come.
1.Word will get out that Paul is in town. There must be a meeting with these Jewish brethren to discuss their disagreement with Paul.
2.There must be an assembly called for this purpose.
Acts 21:23
23Therefore do what we tell you: We have four men who have taken a vow.
1.There are four men in the Jerusalem church which have taken a vow.
2.Their vow was about to expire and they must be purified – by Jewish law.
Acts 21:24
24Take them and be purified with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads, and that all may know that those things of which they were informed concerning you are nothing, but that you yourself also walk orderly and keep the law.
1.By having Paul take them for this purification, there would be a symbolic gesture, that Paul was not totally opposed to the Law of Moses and keeping its precepts.
2.This would show the Jews that Paul walks orderly.
Acts 21:25
25But concerning the Gentiles who believe, we have written and decided that they should observe no such thing, except that they should keep themselves from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality.”
1.However, the Gentiles are not under these rules. They restate what was decided in Act 15:1-41 at the conference in Jerusalem.
2.Other than these four things – the Gentiles are not required to observe Jewish laws.
Acts 21:26
26Then Paul took the men, and the next day, having been purified with them, entered the temple to announce the expiration of the days of purification, at which time an offering should be made for each one of them.
1.Paul took the men the next day so all of them could be purified and conclude their vow.
2.An offering was made to show that the vow was kept.
Acts 21:27
27Now when the seven days were almost ended, the Jews from Asia, seeing him in the temple, stirred up the whole crowd and laid hands on him,
1.During the period of seven days that were part of the purification process, trouble arose.
2.Jews from Asia had heard Paul teach against keeping the Law.
3.They stir up the crowd and capture Paul.
Acts 21:28
28crying out, “Men of Israel, help! This is the man who teaches all men everywhere against the people, the law, and this place; and furthermore he also brought Greeks into the temple and has defiled this holy place.”
1.They charge Paul with two crimes.
1.Paul teaches against the Law – telling people they do not have to keep the Law of Moses.
2.Paul defiled the Temple by bringing in Greeks (uncircumcised) into the temple.
Acts 21:29
29(For they had previously seen Trophimus the Ephesian with him in the city, whom they supposed that Paul had brought into the temple.)
1.This verse explains the second charge. They had seen Trophimus, from Ephesus, with Paul in the city.
2.They “supposed” that Paul brought him into the Temple.
Acts 21:30
30And all the city was disturbed; and the people ran together, seized Paul, and dragged him out of the temple; and immediately the doors were shut.
1.Now the whole city of Jerusalem is in an uproar.
2.They form a mob. They grab Paul and drag him out of the temple.
Acts 21:31
31Now as they were seeking to kill him, news came to the commander of the garrison that all Jerusalem was in an uproar.
1.Their intent was clear. They wanted to kill Paul.
2.News of this uproar came to the Roman army commander.
Acts 21:32
32He immediately took soldiers and centurions, and ran down to them. And when they saw the commander and the soldiers, they stopped beating Paul.
1.This Roman commander takes charge. He takes soldiers and centurions, and headed for the temple.
2.As the Roman officers approached, they stopped beating Paul.
Acts 21:33
33Then the commander came near and took him, and commanded him to be bound with two chains; and he asked who he was and what he had done.
1.Paul is now in the hands of the Romans.
2.He is bound with two chains.
3.Now they begin to inquire – Who is this man and what has he done?
Acts 21:34
34And some among the multitude cried one thing and some another. So when he could not ascertain the truth because of the tumult, he commanded him to be taken into the barracks.
1.The same thing happened here that occurred at the trial of Jesus. Many had charges. All different. None of them confirmed.
2.When the truth could not be learned from this mob of angry Jews, Paul was taken away to the Roman army barracks for his protection.
Acts 21:35
35When he reached the stairs, he had to be carried by the soldiers because of the violence of the mob.
1.The Roman palace was about 75 feet higher than the Temple grounds.
2.As they approached the stairs leading up the palace, soldiers had to carry Paul because of the potential for violence of the Jewish mob.
Acts 21:36
36For the multitude of the people followed after, crying out, “Away with him!”
1.The Jews were still bent on killing Paul.
2.”Away with him” means – put him to death. See Luk 23:18.
Acts 21:37
37Then as Paul was about to be led into the barracks, he said to the commander, “May I speak to you?” He replied, “Can you speak Greek?
1.Paul requests to speak to the commander.
2.The commander is surprised that Paul speaks in the Greek language because he supposes that Paul is Jewish and would only speak Hebrew.
Acts 21:38
38Are you not the Egyptian who some time ago stirred up a rebellion and led the four thousand assassins out into the wilderness?”
1.The commander has a case of mistaken identity.
2.He believes Paul to be an Egyptian that caused some problem and lead away 4,000 people.
Acts 21:39
39But Paul said, “I am a Jew from Tarsus, in Cilicia, a citizen of no mean city; and I implore you, permit me to speak to the people.”
1.Paul identifies himself – Paul – a Jew – from Tarsus – no small or unimportant city.
2.Then Paul requests to speak to the people – the mob of Jews.
Acts 21:40
40So when he had given him permission, Paul stood on the stairs and motioned with his hand to the people. And when there was a great silence, he spoke to them in the Hebrew language, saying,
1.The commander gave permission for Paul to address the crowd.
2.Paul stood on the stairs and motioned for silence.
3.When they were quiet – Paul spoke in the Hebrew language.
4.NOTE: This chapter ends with a comma. The next chapter is Paul’s speech to this crowd.
Acts 22:1
1″Brethren and fathers, hear my defense before you now.”
1.Paul is addressing his fellow Jews – not brethren in Christ.
2.The Greek word for “defense” is apologia and is the root for our word, apology.
3.Today this word means to seek pardon. It is a statement of contrition or remorse.
4.Thayer says this word means “a reasoned statement or argument.”
Acts 22:2
2And when they heard that he spoke to them in the Hebrew language, they kept all the more silent. Then he said:
1.He spoke in Hebrew. Hebrew was, by this time, an almost dead language. It was only used by Jewish leaders and scholars in the Law of Moses.
2.They saw Paul as:
1.Educated in the Jewish religion. Paul was not just a Jew, but a scholar of the Law.
2.On their side. He was speaking their language. The Romans around him had no idea what Paul was saying.
3.Now, they were ready to be quiet and listen to this man.
Acts 22:3
3″I am indeed a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, taught according to the strictness of our fathers’ law, and was zealous toward God as you all are today.
1.Paul identifies himself.
1.A Jew. Paul is a full-blooded Jew with both parents being Jewish.
2.Born in Tarsus.
3.Studied at the feet of Gamaliel.
4.Raised in the strict interpretation of the Law. Paul is not a liberal, but conservative.
5.Zealous toward God. Paul wants to do the will of God.
2.Paul identifies himself with those listening to him.
Acts 22:4
4I persecuted this Way to the death, binding and delivering into prisons both men and women,
1.Paul gained fame as a persecutor of the church.
2.Many were well aware of his early history, reputation and actions.
3.Paul caused death to some, arrest and imprisonment to others.
Acts 22:5
5as also the high priest bears me witness, and all the council of the elders, from whom I also received letters to the brethren, and went to Damascus to bring in chains even those who were there to Jerusalem to be punished.
1.Even the high priest can be called as a witness. Paul used letters from the high priest to give him power to arrest, bind and bring to Jerusalem those who claim to be Christians.
2.Paul adds that the the council of elders also approved his actions.
3.He was heading toward Damascus with this authority.
Acts 22:6
6″Now it happened, as I journeyed and came near Damascus at about noon, suddenly a great light from heaven shone around me.
1.Paul now begins to talk about his conversion. What caused Paul to change?
2.It was about noon.
3.There was a great (bright) light from heaven.
Acts 22:7
7And I fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to me, Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?’
1.Paul hears a voice asking why this persecution?
2.The voice is taking this persecution in a personal way. “You are persecuting me.”
Acts 22:8
8So I answered, Who are You, Lord?’ And He said to me, I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom you are persecuting.’
1.Lord is here used as a term of respect. We might have said, “Sir, who are you?”
2.The voice now identifies himself. “I am Jesus of Nazareth.”
3.”I am the one you are persecuting.”
Acts 22:9
9″And those who were with me indeed saw the light and were afraid, but they did not hear the voice of Him who spoke to me.
1.Here we come to, what some believe to be a contradiction.
1.Act 9:7 says the others heard a voice but saw no man.
2.Act 22:9 says they did NOT hear the voice of Him who spoke to Paul.
2.The answer to this is found in the third account of Paul’s conversion. Act 26:14 says that Jesus spoke to him “in the Hebrew tongue.”
3.The men who were with Paul were Jews, but not schooled and skilled in Hebrew. They did not see any man. They heard a voice (sound), but they did not hear any words they understood. They heard (sound), but they did not hear (understand) the message.
Acts 22:10
10So I said, What shall I do, Lord?’ And the Lord said to me, Arise and go into Damascus, and there you will be told all things which are appointed for you to do.’
1.Paul again addresses Jesus as “Lord” with knowledge of who he is. I am not sure that Paul is calling him Lord in the sense of submission, but it is still out of respect.
2.”What shall I do?”
1.Many would say, “Nothing. Jesus did it all. There is nothing for you to do.”
2.Others would say, “We are saved by grace, not by works.”
3.Jesus did not teach this. There IS something Paul must do.
1.He must go into Damascus and wait.
2.Someone will bring him the message of what must be done.
4.There is more. Not only would Paul be told what to do for his salvation. He would also be told what the plan of God was for him.
Acts 22:11
11And since I could not see for the glory of that light, being led by the hand of those who were with me, I came into Damascus.
1.Paul was blinded by the light. Not just temporarily. He remained blind for three days.
2.Paul had to be led by the hand to find his way to Damascus.
Acts 22:12
12″Then a certain Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good testimony with all the Jews who dwelt there,
1.Ananias is:
1.A Jew, raised and taught according to the law.
2.A devout man.
3.One with a good reputation among the Jews in Damascus.
Acts 22:13
13came to me; and he stood and said to me, Brother Saul, receive your sight.’ And at that same hour I looked up at him.
1.Ananias came to Saul (the Hebrew name of Paul) and offered him his sight.
2.Paul was now able to see again.
Acts 22:14
14Then he said, The God of our fathers has chosen you that you should know His will, and see the Just One, and hear the voice of His mouth.
1.God has chosen Paul for a special purpose.
2.Paul will:
1.Know His will.
2.See the Just One (Jesus).
3.Hear his voice.
Acts 22:15
15For you will be His witness to all men of what you have seen and heard.
1.God has a plan for Paul.
2.He is to be a living testimony to the Jesus he was persecuting.
3.He is to go to “all men” meaning Gentiles as well as Jews.
Acts 22:16
16And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.’
1.Why wait? Once one knows what they must do to obey God, there is no reason for delay.
2.Do not procrastinate. There is danger in delay.
3.Paul is instructed to arise and be baptized.
4.In doing so he will do two things:
1.In being baptized, he will wash away his sins. Not by the power of the water, but be the blood of Jesus Christ.
2.In being baptized, he will be calling (trusting, relying) on the name of the Lord.
5.Rom 10:13 says that whoever calls on the name of the Lord will be saved. Paul was told to be baptized. In being baptized he was calling on the name of the Lord, thus, in baptism, Paul would be saved.
Acts 22:17
17″Now it happened, when I returned to Jerusalem and was praying in the temple, that I was in a trance
1.Paul returned to Jerusalem and was praying in the temple.
2.Paul was in a trance – literally a “throwing of the mind” – His mind was focused on one thing when someone interrupted his thoughts.
Acts 22:18
18and saw Him saying to me, Make haste and get out of Jerusalem quickly, for they will not receive your testimony concerning Me.’
1.Paul now realizes there is someone else near him.
2.This person (Jesus) tells him to leave Jerusalem as quickly as possible.
3.The Jews will not take kindly to hearing of Paul’s change of heart.
Acts 22:19
19So I said, Lord, they know that in every synagogue I imprisoned and beat those who believe on You.
1.The Jews know of Paul, at least by reputation. They know about how he imprisoned those who believed in Jesus.
2.Paul even entered synagogues to arrest them.
Acts 22:20
20And when the blood of Your martyr Stephen was shed, I also was standing by consenting to his death, and guarding the clothes of those who were killing him.’
1.Paul now reminds Jesus of his involvement in the death of Stephen.
2.When Stephen died, Paul was:
1.Standing by.
2.Consenting to his death – agreeing that he should die.
3.Guarding the clothes of those who were actually throwing the stones.
Acts 22:21
21Then He said to me, Depart, for I will send you far from here to the Gentiles.'”
1.Jesus now give a clearer message about His plan for Paul.
2.Paul was to be sent. An apostle is “one sent”.
3.Paul was to be sent far from Jerusalem. He would travel great distances.
4.He was to focus his work among the Gentiles.
Acts 22:22
22And they listened to him until this word, and then they raised their voices and said, “Away with such a fellow from the earth, for he is not fit to live!”
1.Breaking point – is the point at which we stop listening. Here Paul reaches the breaking point for these Jews.
2.Paul is to preach to Gentiles! This becomes more than they can stand.
Acts 22:23
23Then, as they cried out and tore off their clothes and threw dust into the air,
1.They stopped listening at this point.
2.They tore their clothes – a sign of grief, distress, or anger.
3.They threw dust into the air. Albert Barnes says this was “expressive of them abhorrence and indignation.”
Acts 22:24
24the commander ordered him to be brought into the barracks, and said that he should be examined under scourging, so that he might know why they shouted so against him.
1.The speech is now over. They are not going to listen any more.
2.The Roman commander now steps in and orders Paul taken inside the barracks.
3.Paul had his chance with the Jews. Now the Romans want to examine him.
Acts 22:25
25And as they bound him with thongs, Paul said to the centurion who stood by, “Is it lawful for you to scourge a man who is a Roman, and uncondemned?”
1.The soldiers bound him, preparing to beat him.
2.Paul now appeals to his legal rights as a Roman citizen.
3.Romans could take a Jew and beat him – without a trial or hearing. In fact there was not even the necessity for a charge to be made.
4.However, Roman citizens had the right to be charged, accused, tried and only beaten if they were found guilty of the charges.
Acts 22:26
26When the centurion heard that, he went and told the commander, saying, “Take care what you do, for this man is a Roman.”
1.The centurion now informs his commander that Paul is a Roman citizen and must be treated as such.
2.Be careful what you do. This man is a Roman.
Acts 22:27
27Then the commander came and said to him, “Tell me, are you a Roman?” He said, “Yes.”
1.The commander wants to confirm what he has been told.
2.Paul affirms that he is a Roman citizen.
Acts 22:28
28The commander answered, “With a large sum I obtained this citizenship.” And Paul said, “But I was born a citizen.”
1.Many became Romans by paying a great fee. This Roman commander was a Roman citizen, at great cost.
2.Paul says, “I was born a citizen.” No cost. Tarsus was a Roman city. All born there were automatically Roman citizens.
Acts 22:29
29Then immediately those who were about to examine him withdrew from him; and the commander was also afraid after he found out that he was a Roman, and because he had bound him.
1.They had already overstepped their authority, by binding him. No beating. Just binding him was in violation of the law.
2.They were now afraid of Paul.
1.He speaks Hebrew to the Jews.
2.He speaks Greek to the Romans.
3.He is a free born Roman citizen.
4.He could have them arrested for this violation of his rights.
Acts 22:30
30The next day, because he wanted to know for certain why he was accused by the Jews, he released him from his bonds, and commanded the chief priests and all their council to appear, and brought Paul down and set him before them.
1.The next day Paul asks for a hearing.
2.What is the charge?
3.Paul is now brought in before the chief priests and the council to hear the charges.
Acts 23:1
1Then Paul, looking earnestly at the council, said, “Men and brethren, I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day.”
1.Paul looks his audience in the eye. He speaks directly to them.
2.Conscience is:
1.A trained reflex. We are trained (learn) to be attracted to or avoid certain things. We learn to fear. We learn to hate (prejudice) other people.
2.Conscience is only as reliable as it was taught and trained to be.
3.1 John 3:20-21 – 20 For if our heart condemns us, God is greater than our heart, and knows all things. 21Beloved, if our heart does not condemn us, we have confidence toward God.
4.Conscience must be checked, but we must not depend on it as the ONLY source of information for our actions.
5.If our conscience causes doubt – don’t. Rom 14:23 – But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because he does not eat from faith; for whatever is not from faith is sin.
3.While Paul was persecuting Christians, arresting them, sending them to prison, even killing them – He had a clear, clean, good conscience. He was ready to stand before God with confidence that he was doing the will of God.
Acts 23:2
2And the high priest Ananias commanded those who stood by him to strike him on the mouth.
1.Now the high priest, leader of this council, commands that Paul be struck in the mouth.
2.Not because his conscience was clear while persecuting Christians, but because his conscience was clear while converting Jews to New Testament Christianity.
Acts 23:3
3Then Paul said to him, “God will strike you, you whitewashed wall! For you sit to judge me according to the law, and do you command me to be struck contrary to the law?”
1.Paul responds in anger and pain. While the words are strong and harsh, they are truth.
2.We must be reminded that it is not just WHAT we say, but HOW we say it.
3.Our speech must be with grace, seasoned with salt. (Col 4:5)
4.TRUTH: While they are are sitting in judgment of his actions as violations of the Law of Moses, they are in rebellion of the very law they are judging him of breaking.
5.Whitewashed wall – This is a proverbial expression meaning – You hypocrite. The implication is that the wall is really dirty but just has a coat of paint on it to make it look new and polished.
6.Jesus talked in Mat 23:1-39 about tombstones that were whitewashed on the outside and full of dead mens bones. The expression here is similar.
7.Even with that being true – Paul was wrong to speak against the high priest.
Acts 23:4-5
4And those who stood by said, “Do you revile God’s high priest?”
5Then Paul said, “I did not know, brethren, that he was the high priest; for it is written, You shall not speak evil of a ruler of your people.'”
1.Paul is accused of speaking against the high priest of God.
2.Paul immediately apologizes. He did not know that this was the high priest.
3.He even quotes the law that he violated.
4.Question: Does this have any implication for us today? Are we allowed to speak evil against civil rulers? They are, after all, God’s ministers. (See Rom 14:1-23). I believe we can disagree with the decision of a ruler without speaking evil of the person.
Acts 23:6
6But when Paul perceived that one part were Sadducees and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, “Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee; concerning the hope and resurrection of the dead I am being judged!”
1.Paul sees that the possibility of having a rational discussion with them is not going to be achievable. They are not in a mood to listen to reason or logic.
2.Paul also sees the division among them – Sadducees and Pharisees.
3.For some of the major differences between these groups – see verse 8.
4.Paul affirms his belief in, and hope for, the resurrection. He is being accused because he stands firmly in the belief in the resurrection of Jesus and in the hope of his own resurrection.
Acts 23:7
7And when he had said this, a dissension arose between the Pharisees and the Sadducees; and the assembly was divided.
1.The council is now divided on this matter. Instead of being united against Paul, they are now divided against each other.
2.They were united – Now they are untied. Their unity has collapsed. They were trying to pretend that their differences did not matter and joined together in this common cause.
3.Now they are divided. Doctrine does matter.
1.The ecumenical movement seeks to ignore the matters of doctrine.
2.Some are now seeking union with those who use instrumental music in worship.
3.On every occasion doctrine is ignored, played down as unimportant, or of no significance.
Acts 23:8
8For Sadducees say that there is no resurrection-and no angel or spirit; but the Pharisees confess both.
1.Sadducees – In Mat 22:23 they came to Jesus with a “trick” question about the resurrection.
1.Deny resurrection – They believe in “this life only” and when you die, that is the end.
2.Deny angels – They do not believe that God has angels (messengers). They reject the idea of good or bad angels.
3.Renounce spirits – They do not believe man has a soul (spirit). They believed that man was a physical being only. Their use of the word “spirit” was only in reference to life and breath. There are some religious groups today that also teach that man is only a material being.
2.Pharisees – On all three of the above points, the Pharisees disagree with the Sadducees. To both sects of the Jewish religion, these were not just issues where they disagred; they were matters of doctrine.
Acts 23:9
9Then there arose a loud outcry. And the scribes of the Pharisees’ party arose and protested, saying, “We find no evil in this man; but if a spirit or an angel has spoken to him, let us not fight against God.”
1.A huge, loud, clamor arises as both sides try to out shout the other.
2.Suddenly, Paul is a friend to the Pharisees. He is on their side.
3.They argue that if Paul has heard a spirit or angel speak to him, it can’t be denied.
4.Their belief in angels and spirits is so strong that to deny Paul’s claim would be to fight against God.
Acts 23:10
10Now when there arose a great dissension, the commander, fearing lest Paul might be pulled to pieces by them, commanded the soldiers to go down and take him by force from among them, and bring him into the barracks.
1.Now the Roman commander needs to step in. He does not care about their discussion on spirits, angels or the resurrection. He only sees a mob becoming more agitated.
2.He fears that Paul might be attacked and killed by the unruly mob.
3.He also fears that Paul, being a Roman citizen, might have his rights violated.
4.Paul is now removed from the view of the crowd and taken inside the barracks.
Acts 23:11
11But the following night the Lord stood by him and said, “Be of good cheer, Paul; for as you have testified for Me in Jerusalem, so you must also bear witness at Rome.”
1.Paul is instructed and informed by Jesus.
1.Have courage – Be of good cheer. We would say, “Cheer up.” The Greek word used here means to have courage.
2.Jerusalem testimony – Paul was faithful and did not waver in his convictions as he was arrested and in his defense to the Jews.
3.Roman witness – Paul is now informed that this is not the end. He is also to stand before councils in Rome.
Acts 23:12
12And when it was day, some of the Jews banded together and bound themselves under an oath, saying that they would neither eat nor drink till they had killed Paul.
1.Some Jews are now more determined that before that Paul must die.
2.They take an oath. They will not eat or drink until Paul is dead.
Acts 23:13-14
13Now there were more than forty who had formed this conspiracy.
14They came to the chief priests and elders, and said, “We have bound ourselves under a great oath that we will eat nothing until we have killed Paul.
1.This band of more than forty men now report to the chief priests and elders.
2.They are so determined to kill Paul that they will not eat until the deed is done.
Acts 23:15
15Now you, therefore, together with the council, suggest to the commander that he be brought down to you tomorrow, as though you were going to make further inquiries concerning him; but we are ready to kill him before he comes near.”
1.To accomplish their mission, they needed some help from the council.
2.Their plan was for the council to request Paul be brought to them for further trial and discussion. This group of 40 men would kill Paul as he was brought to the council.
Acts 23:16
16So when Paul’s sister’s son heard of their ambush, he went and entered the barracks and told Paul.
1.We now learn that Paul has a sister. We also learn that Paul has a nephew.
2.Paul’s nephew becomes aware of this plan. He must have heard some of the men discussing the plan.
3.The nephew goes to the barracks and informs Paul of the plan to attack him.
Acts 23:17-18
17Then Paul called one of the centurions to him and said, “Take this young man to the commander, for he has something to tell him.”
18So he took him and brought him to the commander and said, “Paul the prisoner called me to him and asked me to bring this young man to you. He has something to say to you.”
1.Paul requests that his nephew be taken to the commander. There is information that he needs to know.
Acts 23:19-20
19Then the commander took him by the hand, went aside, and asked privately, “What is it that you have to tell me?”
20And he said, “The Jews have agreed to ask that you bring Paul down to the council tomorrow, as though they were going to inquire more fully about him.
1.The commander is ready to listen. He takes the young man aside so they can have a private conversation.
2.The nephew informs the commander of the plot.
Acts 23:21
21But do not yield to them, for more than forty of them lie in wait for him, men who have bound themselves by an oath that they will neither eat nor drink till they have killed him; and now they are ready, waiting for the promise from you.”
1.More than 40 men are ready to ambush and kill Paul.
2.They have taken an oath. They are serious in their plot.
3.They are just waiting for your approval to bring Paul to the council.
Acts 23:22
22So the commander let the young man depart, and commanded him, “Tell no one that you have revealed these things to me.”
1.The commander requests the Paul’s nephew tell no one about what has been revealed.
2.Telling anyone could put this young man in danger.
Acts 23:23
23And he called for two centurions, saying, “Prepare two hundred soldiers, seventy horsemen, and two hundred spearmen to go to Caesarea at the third hour of the night;
1.Two centurions (and all 200 soldiers under them) are called to action.
2.The commander also lines up 70 horsemen. Then he adds 200 spear men.
3.It is now 9 o’clock at night. Begin counting the night hours at 6 pm.
4.The commander is going to move Paul to a safer place in Caesarea.
Acts 23:24
24and provide mounts to set Paul on, and bring him safely to Felix the governor.”
1.Paul is now placed on a horse (or donkey) in the middle of this huge company of soldiers.
2.The command – Get Paul safely to Felix the governor.
Acts 23:25-27
25He wrote a letter in the following manner:
26Claudius Lysias, To the most excellent governor Felix: Greetings.
27This man was seized by the Jews and was about to be killed by them. Coming with the troops I rescued him, having learned that he was a Roman.
1.A letter is written to give the governor the background information.
2.The letter is written in formal language. From Claudius Lysias (the commander) to the governor, Felix.
3.With no other formalities the letter begins telling the story.
1.Paul was seized by the Jews.
2.Troops were brought to rescue him.
3.We learned he was a Roman citizen.
Acts 23:28
28And when I wanted to know the reason they accused him, I brought him before their council.
1.He was allowed a hearing before the council of Jewish leaders.
Acts 23:29
29I found out that he was accused concerning questions of their law, but had nothing charged against him deserving of death or chains.
1.The charges were dealing with their law.
2.None of the charges were matters of death. There are not charges worthy of even an arrest. Paul has committed no felony.
3.The only reason he is in custody is for his protection, not because he is a criminal.
Acts 23:30
30And when it was told me that the Jews lay in wait for the man, I sent him immediately to you, and also commanded his accusers to state before you the charges against him. Farewell.
1.The commander now explains the plot to kill Paul.
2.Paul is now in the hands of the Roman governor in Caesarea.
3.The commander has also sent word to the council that, if they seek to persue charges against Paul, they will have to go to Caesarea and present them to the governor.
Acts 23:31
31Then the soldiers, as they were commanded, took Paul and brought him by night to Antipatris.
1.This huge company travels about 35 miles to the city of Antipatris.
2.Albert Barnes says, “This town was anciently called Cafar-Saba. Josephus says that it was about 17 miles from Joppa. It was about 26 miles from Caesarea, and, of course, about 35 miles from Jerusalem. Herod the Great changed its name to Antipatris, in honor of his father Antipater. It was situated in a fine plain, and watered with many springs and fountains.”
3.They are now well away from Jerusalem. It is safe to travel the rest of the way with a smaller troop.
Acts 23:32-33
32The next day they left the horsemen to go on with him, and returned to the barracks.
33When they came to Caesarea and had delivered the letter to the governor, they also presented Paul to him.
1.The horsemen continue with Paul.
2.The 200 soldiers return to Jerusalem.
3.It is assumed that the spear men also return to Jerusalem.
4.Paul is now being escorted by 70 horsemen the rest of the way to Caesarea.
Acts 23:34
34And when the governor had read it, he asked what province he was from. And when he understood that he was from Cilicia,
1.Paul arrives without incident in Caesarea.
2.The governor reads the letter, learns that Paul is Roman and asks where he is from.
3.Paul tells him he is from Cilicia.
Acts 23:35
35he said, “I will hear you when your accusers also have come.” And he commanded him to be kept in Herod’s Praetorium.
1.The governor understands that he is dealing with a Roman citizen who has been accused by the Jews.
2.He decides to hold Paul until the accusers are able to come and make formal charges against him.
3.He is to be held in Herod’s Praetorium. This is the Judgment Hall in Caesarea. We would say he was held in the court house. With the court rooms there is also a jail to hold prisoners. Paul is held here.
Acts 24:1
1 Now after five days Annanias the high priest came down with the elders and a certain orator named Tertullus. These gave evidence to the governor against Paul.
1.Notice that it took them five days to get their lies together and decide how to make what they had done sound innocent.
2.They brought along an orator to be their spokseman.
Acts 24:2
2 And when he was called upon, Tertullus began his accusation, saying: “Seeing that through you we enjoy great peace, and prosperity is being brought to this nation by your foresight.
1.Tertullus begins with flowery language – that is clearly a lie. The purpose is to “butter up” Felix.
2.The Jews despised Roman rule over them. They were not enjoying peace because of Felix. In fact, to the the Jews, Felix was the source of their problems.
Acts 24:3
3 we accept it always and in all places, most noble Felix, with all thankfulness.
1.Another lie. They were not grateful for Felix.
Acts 24:4-5
4 Nevertheless, not to be tedious to you any further, I beg you to hear, by your courtesy, a few words from us.
5 For we have found this man a plague, a creator of dissension among all the Jews throughout the world, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes.
1.The charges are just name calling. He is called:
1.A Plague
2.Creator of dissension
3.Among ALL Jews throughout the world
4.A ringleader of a sect called the Nazarenes
2.Of course, none of these are true or correct.
1.Paul was not a plague.
2.Paul did not create the dissension. Everywhere Paul went it was the Jews who caused trouble, stirred up the people, and incited riots.
3.ALL Jews is way to broad of a brush. Many Jews accepted Paul.
4.The church is not a sect.
Acts 24:6
6 He even tried to profane the temple, and we seized him, and wanted to judge him according to our law.”
1.Notice the language here. He “tried” to profane the temple. Of course there is no evidence that he brought any Gentile into the temple. So all they can do is say that he tried.
2.The next lie – We want to judge him by our law. Actually, they wanted to kill him in violation of their law. They were going to kill him without a trial, without two witnesses, without an opportunity to defend. In fact, they were going to kill him before he was charged with any crime.
Acts 24:7
7 But the commander Lysias came by and with great violence took him out of our hands.
1.The truth is – They were a lynch mob ready to kill him and the commander, rescued Paul from the mob.
2.Paul was not taken with “great violence”. He was protected from an angry mob.
3.The violence was the plot to kill Paul which the commander foiled by moving Paul away from Jerusalem.
Acts 24:8
8 commanding his accusers to come to you. By examining him yourself you may ascertain all these things of which we accuse him.
1.Now the orator says that Felix can examine him and find that the accusations are true.
2.So far there has been lies and name calling. That’s all.
Acts 24:9
9 And the Jews also assented, maintaining that these words were so.
1.All those who came along with their orator, agreed with his statement.
2.They are, of course, a party to all the lies.
Acts 24:10
10 Then Paul, after the governor had nodded to him to speak, answered: “Inasmuch as I know that you have been for many years a judge to this nation, I do the more cheerfully answer for myself.
1.Now it is Paul’s turn. Felix gives Paul the nod and gives him a chance to speak.
2.This is more of a fair hearing than he has gotten in the past.
3.Paul does not begin with flowery words to “butter up” the governor.
4.Paul simply states that it is a pleasure to have the opportunity to respond for himself.
Acts 24:11
11 because you may ascertain that it is no more than twelve days since I went up to Jerusalem to worship.
1.Paul says that until 12 days ago he was out of the county. Paul was gone on his third missionary journey for about 5 years, perhaps longer.
2.Upon his return to Jerusalem, he went to Jerusalem to worship.
Acts 24:12
12 And they neither found me in the temple disputing with anyone nor inciting the crowd, either in the synagogues or in the city.
1.None of the people making accusations saw him in the temple.
2.There is no witness to Paul disputing with anyone.
3.No one can tell about his inciting a crowd – in a synagogues or in the city streets.
Acts 24:13
13 Nor can they prove the things of which they now accuse me.
1.There is no one who can prove any of the charges.
2.They are empty phrases with no basis in fact.
Acts 24:14
14 But this I confess to you, that according to the Way which they call a sect, so I worship the God of my fathers, believing all things which were written in the Law and the Prophets.
1.There is one point to which Paul will agree and confess.
2.Paul is a part of the Way (which they call a sect).
1.The Way – Jesus is the Way. (Joh 14:6) Many turned this into a term similar to sect. It was used out of derision, but Paul used it as proper term.
2.Paul does deny that the church is a sect.
3.Thayer says that this word means – “dissensions arising from diversity of opinions and aims.” The Pharisees were a sect of the Jews. Christianity is not a sect.
3.Paul then affirms that he believes all things written in the Law (the five books of Moses) and the Prophets (the other inspired writings of the Old Testament).
Acts 24:15
15 I have hope in God, which they themselves also accept, that there will be a resurrection of the dead, both the just and the unjust.
1.Paul now affirms his hope. He states that those who accuse him believe the same. This means that most, if not all of those who came, were Pharisees.
2.Paul believes there will be a resurrection of the dead – good and wicked, just and unjust, righteous and unrighteous. ALL will be raised from the dead.
Acts 24:16
16 This being so, I myself always strive to have a conscience without offense toward God and men.
1.Believing that God will raise the dead (and judge them) is a motivating factor that has driven Paul to live without violating his conscience.
2.Paul does not want to offend God. He does not want to offend men. He wants to do the will of God.
Acts 24:17
17 Now after many years I came to bring alms and offerings to my nation.
1.After an absence of several years (on his third missionary journey) Paul has some “catching up” to do.
2.He came to bring offerings and alms to the Jewish people.
3.He did not go to Jerusalem to cause problems. He came to help by giving alms to the needy and to offer help to his people.
Acts 24:18
18 in the midst of which some Jews from Asia found me purified in the temple, neither with a mob nor with tumult.
1.The problem did not arise until some Jews from Asia arrived. They are the troublemakers.
2.They found Paul purified in the temple. No riot. No mob. No tumult. No dissension. No Gentiles. Just Paul obeying the law.
Acts 24:19
19 They ought to have been here before you to object if they had anything against me.
1.Now Paul makes a legal point. All the charges stem from these Jews from Asia. Where are they?
2.Paul has a right to face his accusers. If they think he has done something wrong, let them come forward.
Acts 24:20
20 Or else let those who are here themselves say if they found any wrongdoing in my while I stood before the council,
1.In the absence of these Jews from Asia, Paul welcomes any who are present to stand and state what wrong they witnessed from Paul.
2.Paul also says that he stood before the council and there were no charges brought.
Acts 24:21
21 unless it is for this one statement which I cried out, standing among them, ‘Concerning the resurrection of the dead I am being judged by you this day.'”
1.The only charge that could be made is the one about his faith in the resurrection.
2.The Pharisees agree with him on this point.
3.What is the crime is expressing faith is a point that many Jews also believe?
Acts 24:22
22 But when Felix heard these things, having more accurate knowledge of the Way, he adjourned the proceedings and said, “When Lysias comes down I will make a decision on your case.”
1.Felix knows that what the Jews have said are in contradiction to what the letter from the commander stated.
2.Felix is going to wait for the arrival of the commander, Lysias.
3.Only then can he get to the bottom of who is lying – the Jews or his commander.
Acts 24:23
23 So he commanded the centurion to keep Paul and to let him have liberty, and told him not to forbid any of his friends to provide for or visit him.
1.Paul was kept but given some freedom.
2.He could have friends and receive support.
3.Our “freedom” is often restricted or limited.
Acts 24:24
24 And after some days, when Felix came with his wife Drusilla, who was Jewish, he sent for Paul and hear him concerning the faith in Christ.
1.Drusilla now comes into the picture. She is:
1.The wife of Felix the governor.
2.The daughter of Herod Agrippa, who was eaten by worms in Act 12:23.
3.The sister of King Agrippa that Paul addresses in Act 25:1-27.
4.Jewish. She married a Gentile but was born of Jewish parents.
Acts 24:25
25 Now as he reasoned about righteousness, self-control, and the judgment to come, Felix was afraid and answered, “Go away for now; when I have a more convenient time I will call for you.”
1.Now Paul gets down to business. We only have the outline of what Paul was teaching Felix. We know that he talked about:
1.Righteousness – Paul discussed the need to always do what was right in the sight of God. The Word of God tells us what we must do. Do that and we will be right.
2.Self-control – The KJV uses the word “temperance.” But this word usually is connected with alcohol. The word used here is a word that requires us to be in control of our body, our mind, our actions, our speech, our attitude. The question we must ask is: WHO IS IN CHARGE OF MY LIFE? WHO IS IN THE DRIVERS SEAT?
3.Judgment to come – Paul assures Felix that there will come a day when all who are raised from the dead will give an account to God or our actions and behavior.
2.Felix feared. He was afraid of what would happen when he faced God in judgment. There are two motivators – Love and Fear. Fear is a proper motivator to get us to behave because of the consequences of doing wrong.
3.Felix’ choice – At the conclusion of a sermon is the opportunity to respond. Felix has some choices to make about what Paul has said.
1.He could repent, change his life, live for God, do what is right.
2.He could change his behavior and keep control of his life.
3.He could make adjustments in his life so that he could face judgment with confidence and peace.
4.The decision Felix made was to postpone a decision. Procrastination is a very active tool of Satan. I will obey the gospel – later. I will make changes in my life – later.
Acts 24:26
26 Meanwhile he also hoped that money would be given him by Paul that he might release him. Therefore he sent for him often and conversed with him.
1.Felix also had another motive for his decision to wait.
2.He wanted to get some bribe money. If Paul could give him a little cash under the table, he could walk out.
3.He often talked with Paul. He sent for Paul from time to time to hear more of the message Paul was giving him.
4.Felix was pretending to be interested – just hoping for a bribe. Not because he is interested.
Acts 24:27
27 But after two years Porctus Festus succeeded Felix; and Felix wanting to do the Jews a favor, left Paul bound.
1.We now skip forward two years.
1.Paul is still held in prison.
2.Felix is ready to retire and turn his office over to Festus.
3.He seems to have given up on getting any bribe from Paul.
4.He also has lost interest in the gospel message.
2.As a parting gesture he announces that he will keep Paul bound and in prison. This was done:
1.To please the Jews over whom he had ruled (and was despised).
2.To please his wife, Drusilla, who is a Jew.
3.To make sure that once he no longer had the protection of the Roman government, he would be safe to walk the streets of the city.
Acts 25:1
1 Now when Festus had come to the province, after three days he went up from Caesarea to Jerusalem.
1.Now Festus is the governor. He has been in office for three days and he makes a trip from the Roman capital of the region to the Jewish capital, Jerusalem.
2.It is a long journey, about 55-60 miles. Typically, it is a two-day trip each way.
Acts 25:2
2 Then the high priest and the chief men of the Jews informed him against Paul: and they petitioned him.
1.Festus meets with the chief priest. Not because he is the religious leader of the Jews, but because he is the civil leader, head of the council and highest civil officer among the Jews.
2.The high priest and the chief men inform him of Paul. Of course, this early in his reign as governor, he has not heard anything about Paul.
Acts 25:3
3 asking a favor against him, that he would summon him to Jerusalem – while they lay in ambush along the road to kill him.
1.These Jewish leaders asked that Festus send Paul back to Jerusalem to be tried.
2.Their real objective was, as was planned 2 years earlier, to ambush him and kill him.
Acts 25:4
4 But Festus answered that Paul should be kept at Caesarea, and that he himself was going there shortly.
1.Paul is now, and has been for 2 years, in Roman control. Festus was not about to release that control.
2.Instead, Festus invited these men, probably some of the same men that came to Felix two years earlier, to come present their case.
Acts 25:5
5 “Therefore,” he said, “let those who have authority among you go down with me and accuse this man to see if there is any fault in him.”
1.They were welcome to travel with Festus as he returned to Caesarea.
2.The trial will be held and he will determine the future of Paul.
Acts 25:6
6 And when he had remained among them more than ten days, he went down to Caesarea. And the next day, sitting on the judgment seat, he commanded Paul to be brought.
1.Festus stayed in Jerusalem for more than ten days before returning to his capital.
2.Upon returning to Caesarea, Festus sat in the official capacity of judge and was ready to hear the case against Paul.
3.Now Paul is brought in to hear the charges, again.
Acts 25:7
7 When he had come, the Jews who had come down from Jerusalem stood about and laid many serious complaints against Paul, which they could not prove.
1.There were many Jews in the court room. They had come from Jerusalem, again, to make a case against Paul before a Roman governor.
2.They made many complaints – but could prove nothing.
Acts 25:8
8 while he answered for himself, “Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar have I offended in anything at all.”
1.Paul is now given a chance to respond to these unfounded complaints.
2.Paul declares that he has not offended:
1.The law of the Jews.
2.The temple in Jerusalem.
3.Caesar.
4.Anyone, anytime, anywhere in anything at all.
Acts 25:9
9 But Festus, wanting to do the Jews a favor, answered Paul and said, “Are you willing to go up to Jerusalem and there be judged concerning these things?”
1.Festus, just beginning his reign, wants to have good relations with the Jews.
2.He knows that he can not, under Roman law, send Paul back to Jerusalem.
3.All he can do is see of Paul would go of his own free will. Festus asks Paul if he is willing to return to Jerusalem to have these charges heard.
Acts 25:10
10 So Paul said, “I stand at Caesar’s judgment seat, where I ought to be judged. To the Jews I have done no wrong, as you very well know.
1.Paul correctly responds with his legal right. Paul is in Caesar’s judgment seat. This is where judgment ought to take place.
2.Paul also says that the Jews know that he had done nothing wrong by Roman law or by Jewish law.
3.Paul knows that what they want is him to be killed.
Acts 25:11
11 For if I am an offender, or have committed anything deserving of death, I do not object to dying; but if there is nothing in these things of which these men accuse me, no one can deliver me to them. I appeal to Caesar.”
1.Paul states that if he had done wrong – he would suffer the consequences of his actions.
2.There is nothing charged against him, so there is not purpose in returning to Jerusalem.
3.The the bombshell – I appeal to Caesar.
Acts 25:12
12 Then Festus, when he had conferred with the council, answered, “You have appealed to Caesar? To Caesar you shall go.”
1.Festus is thrown for a loop. What does he do now?
2.He confers with the council, probably explaining the legal right that Paul has as a Roman citizen.
3.He reaches the only decision he could reach. Paul will go to Rome.
Acts 25:13
13 And after some days King Agrippa and Bernice came to Caesarea to greet Festus.
1.Now the “puppet king” Agrippa and his wife/sister come to visit the new governor.
2.Agrippa – is the son of Herod Agrippa, the king who killed James in Act 12:1-25.
3.Bernice – Thayer says, “The eldest daughter of Herod Agrippa I. Act 12:1 – She was first married to her uncle Herod, king of Chalcis, and after his death (A.D. 48) she lived under circumstances of great suspicion with her own brother, Agrippa II, in connection with whom she is mentioned as having visited Festus on his appointment as procurator of Judea.” She is also the sister of Drusilla, mentioned in Act 24:24.
Acts 25:14
14 When they had been there many days, Festus laid Paul’s case before the king saying, “There is a certain man left a prisoner by Felix,
1.Festus makes some conversation with Agrippa. He is facing a difficult decision.
1.He can send Paul to Jerusalem, knowing he is innocent and will be killed by the Jews.
2.He can release him, because he is innocent of any wrong.
3.He can send him to Rome. But, he needs some charge, some reason, for Caesar to hear the case.
2.This verse also reminds us that this is an issue that was left dangling by Felix.
Acts 25:15-16
15 about whom the chief priests and the elders of the Jews informed me, when I was in Jerusalem, asking for a judgment against him.
16 To then I answered, It is not the custom of the Romans to deliver any man to destruction before the accused meets the accusers face to face, and has opportunity to answer for himself concerning the charge against him.
1.Festus confirms that is not right to return him to Jerusalem after the Romans have taken over the case.
2.He has been held in prison for more than two years and has yet to have a charge made or any kind of trial to answer the charges.
Acts 25:17-19
17 Therefore when they had come together, without any delay, the next day I sat on the judgment seat and commanded the man to be brought in.
18 When the accusers stood up, they brought no accusations against him of such things as I supposed.
19 but has some questions against him about their own religion and about a certain Jesus, who had died, whom Paul affirmed to be alive.
1.Festus soon learned that the charges were not legal matters. They were matters of Jewish custom and involved details of the Jewish religion.
2.He also learned about Jesus and the resurrection were at the core of this dispute.
Acts 25:20-22
20 And because I was uncertain of such questions, I asked whether he was willing to go to Jerusalem and there be judged concerning these matters.
21 But when Paul appealed to be reserved for the decision of Augustus, I commanded him to be kept till I cold send him to Caesar.
22 Then Agrippa said to Festus, “I also would like to hear the man myself.” “Tomorrow,” he said, “you shall hear him.”
1.This case is of some interest to Agrippa.
2.Remember, his father killed James to persecute Christians.
3.Tomorrow Agrippa will get his turn to hear Paul and what this is all about.
Acts 25:23
23 So the next day, when Agrippa and Bernice had come with great pomp, and had entered the auditorium with the commanders and the prominent men of the city, at Festus’ command Paul was brought in.
1.A large assembly hall is used to hold all that are interested in hearing this case.
2.Agrippa and Bernice enter with great ceremony.
3.There are also many prominent men of Caesarea present.
4.Paul is brought in.
Acts 25:24-27
24 And Festus said, “King Agrippa and all the men who are here present with us, you see this man about whom the whole assembly of the Jews petitioned me, both at Jerusalem and here, crying out that he was not fit to live any longer.
25 But when I found that he had committed nothing deserving of death, and that he himself had appealed to Augustus, I decided to send him.
26 I have nothing certain to write to my lord concerning him. Therefore I have brought him out before you, and especially before you, King Agrippa, so that after the examination has taken place I may have something to write.
27 For it seems to me unreasonable to send a prisoner and not to specify the charges against him.”
1.Festus now explains the purpose of this meeting.
2.Notice – He does not say that this is done because Agrippa in curious.
3.Festus has a genuine problem. How can he send Paul to Rome – when there are no charges. Caesar would say, “If he is not charged, let him go free.”
4.Festus knows that he can not let him go free. He will be killed. He can’t send him back to Jerusalem. He will be killed. He is only in prison for two reasons:
1.Protetive custody to prevent the Jews from killing him.
2.Festus is seeking to please the Jews.
Acts 26:1
1 Then Agrippa said to Paul, “You are permitted to speak for yourself.” So Paul stretched out his hand and answered for himself.
1.Paul now has the best audience of all his attempts to defend himself.
2.The Jewish accusers are not present.
3.Two high Roman rulers are present – Festus and Agrippa.
Acts 26:2
2 I think myself happy, King Agrippa, because today I shall answer for myself before you concerning all the things of which I am accused by the Jews.
1.Paul addresses his remarks to King Agrippa.
2.Paul is glad to have the opportunity for a fair hearing.
Acts 26:3
3 especially because you are expert in all customs and questions which have to do with the Jews. Therefore I beg you to hear me patiently.
1.Knowing the background of Agrippa, his father and grandfather, Paul also knows that he is familiar with Jewish law, Jewish customs, and the Old Testament Scriptures.
2.Paul knows that Agrippa will understand, where others, not familiar with the Law of Moses, might not comprehend the issues involved.
Acts 26:4-5
4 My manner of life from my youth, which was spent from the beginning among my own nation at Jerusalem, all the Jews know.
5 They knew me from the first, if they were willing to testify, that according to the strictest sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee.
1.The entire life of Paul was live among the Jews. His parents were Jews. He was trained in the Law. He was active in his life as a Pharisee.
2.The Jews know that he was a Pharisee. They knew that he was a strict, conservative Jew.
Acts 26:6
6 And now I stand and am judged for the hope of the promise made by God to our fathers.
1.The real issue is resurrection. That is the thorn in the side of some Jews.
2.Paul reminds us that this is not just a New Testament concept. It was taught in the Old Testament.
Acts 26:7
7 To this promise our twelve tribes, earnestly serving God night and day, hope to attain. For this hope’s sake, King Agrippa, I am accused by the Jews.
1.This hope is not a new idea. Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the 12 tribes of Israel lived in this hope.
2.This is the issue against Paul.
Acts 26:8
8 Why should it be thought incredible by you that God raises the dead?
1.If you believe in God, what is so difficult about resurrection? If God can create the world; If God can create man in the Garden of Eden; then He can resurrect man from the dead.
2.God made man from the dust of the earth. When we die, our body returns to that same dust. God made us once; He can make us again.
Acts 26:9
9 Indeed, I myself thought I must do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth.
1.Paul admits that he did many things against Jesus.
2.He mentions several of them as specifics of his persecution against Christians.
Acts 26:10-11
10 This I also did in Jerusalem, and many of the saints I shut up in prison, having received authority from the chief priests; and when they were put to death, I cast my vote against them.
11 And I punished them often in every synagogue and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly enraged against them, I persecuted them even to foreign cities.
1.Paul mentions several ways he persecuted Christians.
1.In Jerusalem many saints were put in prison.
2.He got authority from the chief priest.
3.Some were put to death.
4.Paul cast his vote to put them to death.
5.He entered synagogues and caused them to blaspheme
6.He even traveled to other cities and other countries to persecute Christians.
Acts 26:12
12 While thus occupied, as I journeyed to Damascus with authority and commission from the chief priests.
1.With this background, Paul now moves to describe his conversion.
2.Something changed. He was with the Jews. The high priest was giving him authority. He was their hero. They were assisting him in his persecution of Christians. But something changed. Now they are ready to kill Paul. Why?
Acts 26:13
13 at midday, O king, along the road I say a light from heaven, brighter than the sun, shining around me and those who journeyed with me.
1.On the way to Damascus, at noon, a bright light began shining from heaven.
2.It was on Paul and all those Jews who were with him.
Acts 26:14
14 And when we all had fallen to the ground, I heard a voice speaking to me and saying in the Hebrew language, “Saul, Saul, wy are yo persecuting Me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.”
1.The entire party traveling with Paul fell to the ground.
2.Paul heard a voice. The others with Paul heard the sound of a voice, but did not understand the language, so it was just noise.
3.Hebrew language – the language of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The primary language of the Old Testament. The language used by Jews for reading scripture, prayers and other ceremonies in their religious activity and worship.
Acts 26:15
15 So I said, “Who are you, Lord?” And He said, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.
1.Now Paul identifies the voice as that of Jesus.
2.Jesus is the object of his persecution. Now Paul is confronted with Jesus.
Acts 26:16
16 But rise and stand on your feet; for I have appeared to you for this purpose, to make you a minister and a witness both of the things which you have seen and of the things which I will yet reveal to you.
1.Jesus has a purpose and a plan. God has a plan for each of us. This does not eliminate our freedom to follow God’s plan or to go against that plan. But God does have a plan for us.
2.Paul will be a minister; a witness.
Acts 26:17
17 I will deliver you from the Jewish people, as well as from the Gentiles, to whom I now send you.
1.Jesus tells Paul that he would be rescued from the Jewish people. Jesus knows that many of Paul’s friends will become his enemies, because of this change.
2.Therefore, Paul will spend his time being a minister to the Gentiles.
Acts 26:18
18 To open their eyes, in order to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, that they many receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who are sanctified by faith in Me.
1.Paul’s mission –
1.Open their eyes, enlighten them, bring them out of darkness (ignorance) and into the light
2.Turn them from the grip of Satan to faith in God
3.To help them receive forgiveness
4.To show them the eternal inheritance of eternal life with God in heaven.
Acts 26:19-20
19 Therefore, King Agrippa, I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision.
20 but declared first to those in Damascus and in Jerusalem, and throughout Judea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent, turn to God, and do works befitting repentance.
1.Convinced of the vision he saw, the words spoken by Jesus, he obeyed.
2.Immediately after his conversion Paul was in Damascus preaching the very message he had come there to extinguish. He was preaching the Jesus which he came there to persecute.
3.Here is one of those succinct passages which contain in summary the plan of salvation.
1.For ALL – Jerusalem, Judea and Gentiles are all subject to the same commands of God.
2.Repent – They should repent. This word involves a change of mind which results in a change of life.
3.Turn to God – Repentance suggests a turning away from sin and the way of the world. But in turning away from sin, we also need to turn TO something.
4.Works befitting repentance – Repentance demands a new way of living, acting, behaving. John told some to “bear fruits worthy of repentance.” (Mat 3:8) If we claim to repent, but our actions don’t demonstrate that change, it is not genuine repentance.
5.NOTE: This passage is not trying to say that we can “work” our way to heaven. Paul is not saying that we are saved by “works.”
Acts 26:21
21 For these reasons the Jews seized me in the temple and tried to kill me.
1.Because Paul was now preaching the message of Jesus, the Jews turned their hatred from all Christians to Paul.
2.Now they are trying to kill Paul, just as they (and he) killed others teaching Jesus.
Acts 26:22
22 Therefore, having obtained help from God, to this day I stand, witnessing both to small and great, saying no other things than those which the prophets and Moses said would come –
1.With God’s help, Paul has survived, revived, endured and prevailed.
2.Paul has been in several jails, beaten, stoned, driven out of several towns and harassed in every place he went.
Acts 26:23
23 that the Christ would suffer, that He would be the first to rise from the dead, and would proclaim light to the Jewish people and to the Gentiles.
1.The gospel is the message of the suffering, death, and resurrection of Jesus.
2.Paul would preach this message to Jews and Gentiles.
Acts 26:24
24 Now as he thus made his defense, Festus said with a loud voice, “Paul, you are beside yourself! Much learning is driving you mad!”
1.Festus tells Paul that he is mad, crazy, beside himself, and unbalanced.
2.Why would Festus say this? I believe there are a couple of reasons.
1.Paul’s fervor – Paul spoke with passion. His earnestness and passion might be interpreted by some as someone who has lost their mind and become a ranting lunatic.
2.Vision of a madman – Festus probably thought that Paul’s vision and belief in a man who died and was raised from the dead, was just a figment of his overactive imagination.
3.Emphasis on Resurrection – Festus was a typical Roman who believed in this life. They had no particular hope eternal life. They lived for today. Their philosophy was “Eat, Drink, and be Merry. Tomorrow we die.”
Acts 26:25
25 But he said, “I am not mad, most noble Festus, but speak the words of truth and reason.
1.Paul is not deranged.
2.Paul’s remarks were the truth. Paul spoke freely the words of truth.
3.Reason – The KJV says “soberness.” The word means “soundness of mind, self-control.” The response of Paul was sound, logical reasoning. It was not the wild ramblings of an out of control maniac.
Acts 26:26
26 For the king, before whom I also speak freely, knows these things; for I am convinced that none of these things escapes his attention, since this thing was not done in a corner.
1.Now Paul turns to King Agrippa.
2.Agrippa is familiar with Jewish laws and customs. He knows these things to be true. He can verify the truthfulness of these statements.
Acts 26:27
27 King Agrippa, do you believe the prophets? I know that you do believe.
1.King Agrippa is asked directly about his belief in the Old Testament prophets.
2.There is no record of his response. Paul already knows the answer.
3.The question may have been a rhetorical one. The question was asked, not to gain information, but to cause Agrippa to think about his faith.
Acts 26:28
28 Then Agrippa said to Paul, “You almost persuade me to become a Christian.”
1.The song is titled “Almost Persuaded.” Agrippa was almost moved to become a Christian.
2.Albert Barnes writes, “He could not deny that he believed the prophecies in the Old Testament. He could not deny that the argument was a strong one that they had been fulfilled in Jesus of Nazareth. He could not deny that the evidence of the miraculous interposition of God in the conversion of Paul was overwhelming; and instead, therefore, of charging him, as Festus had done, with derangement, he candidly and honestly avows the impression which the proof had made on his mind.”
3.There are many today in the same situation as Agrippa was. Almost, close, near, just about, all but.
4.There is a proverb that says, “Close only counts in horseshoes.” Almost is not a home run in baseball. Close is not a basket in basketball. Just about is not a goal in hockey.
5.Almost, but lost.
6.Some commentaries suggest that the statement of Agrippa was made in derision and mockery. They treat the statement as if Agrippa was saying, “So, you think you can convince me. Ha! No way!” I reject this view. I believe the statement of Agrippa was genuine. Paul’s response was as if the statement was a real expression of being almost convinced.
Acts 26:29
29 And Paul said, “I would to God that not only you, but also all who hear me today, might become both almost and altogether such as I am, except for these chains.”
1.Paul responds by saying that he want Agrippa and all who hear his voice to be, not just almost, but altogether persuaded.
2.If everyone in that hall could know the joy that Paul had, the hope that drove him, the faith that motivated him, the love of God that kept him going, they would be clamoring to become Christians.
Acts 26:30
30 When he had said these things, the king stood up, as well as the governor and Bernice and those who sat with them;
1.The meeting is now over.
2.The king stands up, along with the governor, Bernice and all those dignitaries that sat with them.
Acts 26:31-32
31 and when they had gone aside, they talked among themselves, saying, “This man is doing nothing deserving of death or chains.”
32 Then Agrippa said to Festus, “This man might have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar.”
1.Now they have a private conference. They talk among themselves.
2.The message is – This man is innocent. He should be set free. He has done nothing worthy of death. He had not done anything worthy of keeping him in prison.
3.There is no legal cause to hold him in prison – EXCEPT – he as appealed to Caesar.
Acts 27:1
1 And when it was decided to sail to Italy, they delivered Paul and some other prisoners to one named Julius, a centurion of the Augustan Regiment.
1.Julius is assigned the task, along with his 100 soldiers to take Paul, and some other prisoners to Rome.
2.We do not know much about the Augustan Regiment. The general concencus is that the name is for Augustus Caesar.
Acts 27:2
2 So, entering a ship of Adramyttium, we put to sea, meaning to sail along the coasts of Asia. Aristarchus, a Macedonian of Thessalonica, was with us.
1.Notice that these verses are in the “we” voice, indicating that Luke is along on the trip to Rome.
2.Also on this voyage is Aristarchus, from Thessalonica. It is assumed that he is a Christian.
3.You will also notice the number of nautical terms used, showing that Luke is familiar with ships, the terms for various parts and terms.
Acts 27:3
3 And the next day we landed at Sidon; and Julius treated Paul kindly and gave him liberty to go to his friends and receive care.
1.The ship has traveled north along the coast of Israel to the area of Tyre and Sidon. It is from here that ships usually head out toward Cyprus and beyond.
2.Paul is not shackled. He is free to roam the ship, unlike the other prisoners, that are held in chains below the main deck. Paul is allowed freedom to be with his friends. He has not had this freedom for over two years.
Acts 27:4
4 When we had put to sea from there, we sailed under the shelter of Cyprus, because the winds were contrary.
1.Under the shelter of Cyprus means that by sailing along the southern side of Cyprus, the island prevented the ship from being hit with the strong winds.
2.Contrary winds – Luke tells us that the winds were contrary. This means that they are a) strong; b) more difficult to head the way they wanted to go because the wind was from the wrong direction.
3.Contrary winds – We, also, have contrary winds in our lives. Things to do not go the way we would like for them to go. We often feel that we are fighting the winds. I know, when living in northern Russia, the winter wind was always contrary. What ever direction you were heading, the wind was in your face. We would go around a corner to get out of the wind, but it was still in our face.
Acts 27:5
5 And when we had sailed over the sea which is off Cilicia and Pamphylia, we came to Myra, a city of Lycia.
1.They have now passed Cyprus and are now in the territory where Paul landed on his first missionary journey. I can imagine his desire to stop and see how these early Christians are doing.
2.Cilicia and Pamphylia are the areas of Paul’s first mission work. He also visited here as he began his second missionary journey.
Acts 27:6
6 There the centurion found an Alexandrian ship sailing to Italy, and he put us on board.
1.They now change ships. The centurion finds a ship willing to take these soldiers and their prisoners to Rome.
2.Keep in mind, ships were for cargo. These are not cruise ships. They were cargo ships, that would take passengers along. They were not ships of comfort, but just to get from point A to point B.
3.I believe it would have been difficult to find a ship that was: a) heading for Rome; b) willing to take on 100 soldiers plus all the prisoners; and c) and knowing that winter weather was not a good time to travel.
Acts 27:7
7 When we had sailed slowly many days, and arrived with difficulty off Cnidus, the wind not permitting us to proceed, we sailed under the shelter of Crete off Salmone.
1.After several days they finally arrived near Crete. The wind was still contrary. The wind was against them making any progress toward Rome.
2.They are now under the protection of Crete. Like they did with Cyprus, they are sailing on the side of the island to break the wind.
3.Salmone is on the east edge of Crete.
Acts 27:8
8 Passing it with difficulty, we came to a place called Fair Havens, near the city of Lasea.
1.Fair Havens, also called Fair Shore, is a small island near Crete and occupied by Cretians.
2.Fair Havens is a harbor, not a city. There is a city close by, Lasea. This city is mentioned to further identify the location.
Acts 27:9
9 Now when much time had been spent, and sailing was not dangerous because the Fast was already over, Paul advised them,
1.They were hoping to be at Rome before the dangerous time for sailors. But, delays put them out on the sea at the most difficult time of year for ship travel.
2.Now, it is late September or early October.
3.The fast is a reference to the Day of Atonement. For Jews, this was on the 10th day of Tisri (which corresponds to our mid-September to mid-October.
4.The Day of Atonement was a day of fasting, repentance, prayer, sacrifice for their sins. The day is mentioned here because it identifies the time of year.
Acts 27:10
10 saying, “Men, I perceive that the voyage will end with disaster and much loss, not only of the cargo and ship, but also our lives.
1.I do not know if this statement is made because of some revelation from God or just from his knowledge of the seas.
2.Paul predicts – Disaster, Much loss of cargo, and Loss of lives.
Acts 27:11
11 Nevertheless the centurion was more persuaded by the helmsman and owner of the ship than by the things spoken by Paul.
1.The helmsman was the one who not only was steering the ship, but the one who gave orders to others about sails, rudder, and other duties of operating the ship. Today, we would call him the captain of the ship.
2.The one in charge of the ship and the owner of the ship persuade the centurion to keep going. The owner of the ship wants the ship to continue because, a ship in port is not making money. The quicker he gets his ship to Rome, the quicker he can unload his cargo, andload it with cargo for his next trip.
Acts 27:12
12 And because the harbor was not suitable to winter in, the majority advised to set sail from there also by any means that they could reach Phoenix, a harbor of Crete opening toward the southwest and northwest, and winter there.
1.While Fair Havens was a good port, it was not protected enough to be suitable for waiting out the winter storms.
2.Their next goal was to reach Phoenix (Phenice in the KJV). It would appear that many agreed that it was not safe or even possible to continue to Rome until the winter storms were over.
3.This harbor was curved. It was entered heading southwest, then curved to head northwest. This gave ships more protection from the high waves of the winter storms.
Acts 27:13
13 When the south wind blew softly, supposing that they had obtained their desire, putting out to sea, they sailed close by Crete.
1.Two things about the wind changed. It was now a more gentle wind. It was now from the south. The strong head-wind was now calmer and in a more favorable direction.
2.They decided to do two things. 1) They would remain close to Crete. 2) They would try to make it to Phoenix.
Acts 27:14
14 But not long after, a tempestuous wind arose, called Euroclydon.
1.There is some dispute about the meaning of the word “Euroclydon.” This word only occurs here in the New Testament.
2.The word means “a wind blowing from many quarters” and was used to describe hurricanes. It describes a swirling wind which causes strong and high waves.
3.The Greek word translated “tempestuous” is the Greek word – typhonicos – from which the word typhoon derives.
Acts 27:15
15 So when the ship was caught, and could not head into the wind, we let her drive.
1.With such strong and swirling winds, it was a hazard to the masts and sails to keep them up.
2.The best thing to do is take down all sails and let the wind and current drive the ship.
3.NOTE: In our lives, there are things beyond our control. We can’t stop them. All we can do is “let her drive.” I recently had a head cold. There is no cure. You just have to let it run its course.
Acts 27:16
16 And running under the shelter of an island called Claudia, we secured the skiff with difficulty.
1.They now pass by the south side of a small island.
2.The skiff (we would call it a life boat) had to be secured so that it would not be broken and lost. They would need this skiff when they needed to abandon ship.
3.Normally the lifeboat would be hanging on the side of the ship. But the tossing of the ship would cause the boat to be smashed against the side of the ship and be destroyed.
Acts 27:17
17 When they had taken it on board, they used cables to undergird the ship; and fearing lest they should run aground on the Syrtis Sands, they struck sail and so were driven.
1.First they got the skiff off the side of the ship and brought it on deck.
2.Next, using ropes, chains and cables they wrapped the ship with these strong bands. The KJV says, “Helps,” which is a generic term for what ever they could use to gird the ship.
3.The purpose was to take some of the strain off the bolts that held the ship together. These cables would go over one side of the ship, underneath, and up the other side.
4.And they let down the main sail. Without this sail, there was no control of direction.
Acts 27:18
18 And because we were exceedingly tempest tossed, the next day they lightened the ship.
1.The next day, the storm continued.
2.It was time to take the next step. Lighten the ship. This would allow it to ride higher in the water and not take on as much water or be turned over.
3.We are not told was was thrown out. Most believe it was the cargo on board.
Acts 27:19
19 On the third day we threw the ship’s tackle overboard with our own hands.
1.They are now into the third day of this storm. Things are more serious than ever.
2.They are now ready to throw out even the ropes, chains, and other tackle of the ship. The tackle would include the furniture on board and all other unnecessary equipment.
3.We know that they kept the main sail and anchors because they are mentioned in verses 27 and 40.
Acts 27:20
20 Now when neither sun nor stars appeared for many days, and no small tempest beat upon us, all hope that we would be saved was finally given up.
1.They do not know their location. Sun and stars were the primary guide points for ships at sea. The storm has tossed them in every direction. Many days into the storm they have not seen stars at night nor the sun during the day.
2.Again Luke used the “no small” phrase to let us know this was huge. He tells us how huge this was.
1.No hope. People are now preparing to die. They know that there is no hope. The ship can’t take much more. It will break apart and all will die.
2.No rescue. They also knew that there would be no other ships nearby to come to their aid. Even if they jump into the sea, they do not know where they are, and there is no one to save them.
Acts 27:21
21 But after long abstinence from good, then Paul stood in the mids of them and said, “men, you should have listened to me, and not have sailed from Crete and incurred this disaster and loss.
1.About the only thing that was not thrown overboard was some food. But they were not eating. There had been a long period of abstaining from food.
2.It is thought that much of the food was thrown overboard and the small amount that remained needed to be protected and rationed because they don’t know how much longer this will last.
3.Paul says, “I told you so.” Paul reminds them of his warning and that they should have stayed in Crete.
Acts 27:22
22 And now I urge you to take heart, for there will be no loss of life among you, but only of the ship.
1.Then Paul turns to the good news. Take heart. Be of good cheer. There is some good news.
2.There will be no loss of life. Everyone will make it.
3.The ship will be lost, but no loss of life.
Acts 27:23
23 For there stood by me this night an angel of the God to whom I belong and whom I serve,
1.Paul now reveals his source. An angel of God, came to Paul and revealed this information.
2.For the pagans on board Paul says this is the God in whom he believes, belongs and serves.
Acts 27:24
24 saying, “Do not be afraid, Paul; you must be brought before Caesar, and indeed God has granted you all those who sail with you.”
1.This angel tells Paul three important messages.
1.Do not be afraid.
2.Paul will make it to appear before Caesar.
3.God will save the lives of all on board.
Acts 27:25
25 Therefore take heart, men, for I believe God that it will be just as it was told me.
1.Paul now seeks to transfer his faith to others.
2.Paul believes God. God will keep his promise.
3.He then urges all on board to have that same faith.
Acts 27:26
26 However, we must run aground on a certain island.”
1.Now the bad news. We will run aground.
2.But, the good news, it will be at an island.
Acts 27:27
27 Now when the fourteenth night had come, as we were driven up and down in the Adriatic Sea, about midnight, the sailors sensed that they were drawing near some land.
1.They have been in this storm for 2 weeks.
2.They have no idea where they are. They have just be driven up and down the sea by the storm.
3.About midnight some of the sailors sensed they were nearing land.
Acts 27:28
28 And they took soundings and found it to be twenty fathoms; and when they gone a little farther, they took soundings again and found it to be fifteen fathoms.
1.They took soundings – they let down a line with a lead weight on it. They lower it until it hits bottom. They the measure the amount of line.
2.Some suggest that there is a special line with each fathom marked on the line so they know the depth at that point.
3.Plummet – The weight was a piece of steel about 18 pounds. They would often cover this in grease so when it hit bottom, they could tell if it was sand or rock.
4.Fathom – A fathom is the measurement of the span or a man’s outstretched arms. This is about 6 feet. So they measured 20 fathoms – about 120 feet deep. Later, they measured again – 15 fathoms – 90 feet. They now know they are approaching land and shallow water.
Acts 27:29
29 Then, fearing lest we should run aground on the rocks, they dropped four anchors from the stern, and prayed for day to come.
1.The grease on the plummet was not covered in sand. So they are concerned about hitting rocks.
2.They drop four anchors to try to stop the ship from going into shallow water. All four anchors are dropped from the back end of the ship, the stern.
3.All they could do is pray and wait for daylight. In the daylight they might be able to see the land that was nearby and know what to do next.
Acts 27:30
30 And as the sailors were seeking to escape from the ship, when they had let down the skiff into the sea, under pretense of putting out anchors from the prow,
1.Some of the sailors could not seem to wait for daylight. They wanted to get in the lifeboat and abandon ship.
2.They were “pretending” to lower the boat so they could put out anchors from the front end of the ship.
3.They were really just wanting to escape.
Acts 27:31
31 Paul said to the centurion and soldiers, “Unless these men stay in the ship, you cannot be saved.”
1.Paul instructs the centurion that any who leave the ship will die.
2.Paul has no power with the ship owner or helmsman. He does seem to have convinced the centurion to listen to him.
Acts 27:32
32 Then the soldiers cut away the ropes of the skiff and let fall off.
1.The soldiers cut away the ropes of the lifeboat. It falls into the sea and is gone.
2.Notice – the soldiers, not the sailors, cut the ropes. This indicates the faith that the centurion has in the words of Paul.
Acts 27:33-34
33 And as day was about to dawn, Paul implored them all to take food, saying, “Today is the fourteenth day you have waiting and continued with out food, and eaten nothing.
34 Therefore I urge you to take nourishment, for this is your survival, since not a hair will fall from the had of any of you.”
1.It is now close to dawn, still dark, but dawn is coming.
2.All are encouraged to eat food. They have gone without food for several days. It is important that you have some strength to survive.
3.They had gone 14 days without food. They were weak. They were also loosing hope.
4.Today is the day. You will not die. You will not lose a hair on your head. All will survive this ordeal.
5.But, you will need some nourishment to make it.
Acts 27:35
35 And when he had said these things, he took bread and gave thanks to God in the presence of them all; and when he had broken it began to eat.
1.Paul set the example. He took bread and gave thanks.
2.Paul knows that this nourishment will keep them alive, give them the strength to make it to swim to shore.
Acts 27:36
36 Then they were all encouraged, and also took food themselves.
1.Now, they are believers. They take courage.
2.They all join in this meal together.
Acts 27:37
37 And in all we were two hundred and seventy-six persons on the ship.
1.We are now given another bit of information. There are 276 people on board.
2.This is not a small ship. There was room for the soldiers and their prisoners, in addition to the sailors.
Acts 27:38
38 So when they had eaten enough they lightened the ship and thew out the wheat into the sea.
1.When they had eaten they further lightened the ship.
2.This time they throw the wheat (flour for making bread) into the sea.
3.This is a commitment. They are now going to either make it to land or die of starvation.
Acts 27:39
39 When it was day, they did not recognize the land; but they observed a bay with a beach, onto which they planned to run the ship if possible.
1.Now daylight arrives. There is land. None of the sailors knows the land. They still do not have any idea where they are, but there is land.
2.And there is a bay and a beach. During the night they thought it was all rocks. Now they see sand and a place they can go ashore.
3.Perhaps they can run the ship into this beach area and walk ashore.
Acts 27:40
40 And they let go of the anchors and left them in the sea, meanwhile loosing the rudder ropes; and they hoisted the mainsail to the wind and made for shore.
1.They now have a plan. They cut the anchors and drop then into the sea. They release the rudder so they can steer the ship.
2.Now the hoist the main sail and head for the shore of this unknown island.
Acts 27:41
41 But striking a place where two seas met, they ran the ship aground; and the prow stuck fast and remained immovable, but the stern was being broken by the violence of the waves.
1.They come to a place where the sea has washed sand from both sides. This creates an area where the water is very shallow. We would call it a sandbar.
2.The front of the ship rammed into this sandbar and was stuck there.
3.The back of the ship was still in the sea and being beaten and broken by the waves.
Acts 27:42
42 And the soldiers’ plan was to kill the prisoners, lest any of them should swim away and escape.
1.Now the soldiers have a plan. The prisoners can’t swim with their chains on hands and feet.
2.If the chains are removed, they might escape.
3.The only thing to do is kill the prisoners.
Acts 27:43
43 But the centurion, wanting to save Paul, kept then from their purpose, and commanded that those who could swim should jump overboard first and get to land.
1.But the centurion, now on Paul’s side, prevented this slaughter.
2.He ordered all who could swim to jump overboard and get themselves to land.
Acts 27:44
44 and the rest, some on boards and some on parts of the ship. And so it was that they all escaped safely to land.
1.Those who can’t swim, could grab boards or some part of the ship that would serve as a flotation device.
2.Every life was saved. All 276 on board make it to land.
Acts 28:1
1 Now when they had escaped, they then found out that the island was called Malta.
1.Meeting the natives of this island, they now learn where they are.
2.The island is called Malta. Malta is about 60 miles from the coast of Sicily. It is about 20 miles east and west and about 12 miles north and south.
3.The name of the island is from a word for honey. Malta is known for the sweet honey produced there.
Acts 28:2
2 And the natives showed us unusual kindness; for they kindled a fire and made us all welcome, because of the rain that was falling and because of the cold.
1.The KJV calls them “barbarians.” This term was a reference to their language. All tribes or groups which did not speak Latin (Roman language) or Greek (common language of the empire) – then they must be barbarians. This word is used in Rom 1:14, where Paul says he is a debtor to the Greeks and barbarians.
2.The storm is not over. It is still raining. It is still cold. And all the men from the ship are weak, hungry, exhausted, and cold. A fire is built to dry their clothes and warm their bodies.
Acts 28:3
3 But when Paul had gathered a bundle of sticks and laid them on the fire, a viper came out because of the heat, and fastened on his hand.
1.Of course this island had been in this storm. It was cold and wet.
2.Paul is helping to find sticks and wood that will burn.
3.Among the sticks is a poisonous snake. It is dormant because of the cold.
4.But when the snake is thrown into the fire, it quickly moves into action. It attaches itself to Paul’s hand.
Acts 28:4
4 So when the natives saw the creature hanging from his hand, they said to one another, “No doubt this man is a murderer, whom, though he has escaped the sea, yet justice does not allow to live.”
1.Everyone saw the snake. The natives are very aware of this snake and the danger it poses.
2.Their first reaction – Justice is served. Here is a murderer getting what he deserves. Even though he survived the storm and shipwreck, he will now die for his crimes.
Acts 28:5
5 But he shook off the creature into the fire and suffered no harm.
1.He shook off the creature. This is the natural reaction to being bitten.
2.The snake is back in the fire – and apparently dies.
3.But Paul seems to suffer no illness or trauma from this snake bite.
4.NOTE: There are many things that “attack” us and are a source of pain. We must learn to “shake off” these things.
1.We must learn to shake off the unwarranted attacks against us.
2.We must learn to shake off the gossip and rumors about us.
3.We must learn to shake off the problems that are beyond our control.
4.We must learn to shake off the doubts that arise in times of crisis.
5.We must learn to shake off moments of fear.
6.We must shake off the anger that arises in our hearts.
Acts 28:6
6 However, they were expecting that he would swell up or suddenly fall down dead. But after they had looked for a long time and saw no harm come to him, they changed their minds and said that he was a god.
1.The natives are not in “wait and see” mode. They know that very quickly the venom from this snake will cause swelling, and death. Any minute now they expect Paul to show the effects of the poison.
2.Enough time passed that Paul should have died, and didn’t. Now, the natives change their minds. They do a 180.
3.To survive this snake bite, he must be a god.
Acts 28:7
7 In that region there was an estate of the leading citizen of the island, whose name was Publius, who received us and entertained us courteously for three days.
1.We are now introduced to Publius. He is a “chief man” on this part of the island. This may refer to his wealth or to a position of power. Many believe he is the governor of this island, or at least this part of the island.
2.It is clear that he has enough room to house many, if not all of the shipwrecked soldiers and prisoners.
Acts 28:8
8 And it happened that the father of Publius lay sick of a fever and dysentery. Paul went in to him and prayed, and he laid hands on him, and healed him.
1.The father of this prominent man is very sick. Luke, the physician, tells us that he has a high fever and dysentery. Adam Clarke suggests that this might be cholera – because of the storm and drinking contaminated water.
2.Paul learned of this very sick man, went to him. He laid hands on him, and healed him
3.”Laying on hands” has four meanings in the New Testament.
1.Laying on hands was used to empower early Christians. The apostles had the power to bestow some spiritual gift by the laying on of hands.
2.Laying on hands was also an act of blessing or wishing well. The brethren laid hands on Paul and Barnabas as they began their first missionary journey.
3.This term is also use of violence. When Paul was in Jerusalem, the Jews laid hands on him. That is, they grabbed him to hold him under arrest.
4.Here the term is used to bestow healing or help.
Acts 28:9
9 So when this was done, the rest of those on the island who had diseases also came and were healed.
1.The word spread quickly. Others heard of this healing of a man that the natives had given up as dead.
2.Think about it. Paul was given up for dead with the snake bite. Now Publius’ father was given up for dead. Both are now alive and well.
3.All with any illness now come to Paul for help and healing.
Acts 28:10
10 They also honored us in many ways; and when we departed, they provided such things as were necessary.
1.All were treated well – the crew of the ship, the Roman soldiers, and the prisoners.
2.When travel was arranged to continue on to Rome, the island people gave them the things necessary for their journey. Food, clothing, and other items that would be needed for the remainder of the trip were given freely.
Acts 28:11
11 After three months we sailed in an Alexandrian ship whose figurehead was the Twin Brothers, which had wintered at the island.
1.They were on Malta for about 3 months. Winter is over and spring is coming.
2.Ships are now sailing again. The sea and the winds are more favorable for travel.
3.Here was another ship from Alexandria, Egypt. The ship that wrecked was also from Alexandria. (Act 27:6)
4.On the front of the ship was usually a carved figure – called the figurehead – that was thought to represent the god or image which would protect the ship. This ship had the figurehead of the twin brothers.
5.Albert Barnes says, “Castor and Pollux – These were two semi-deities. They were reputed to be twin brothers, sons of Jupiter and Leda, the wife of Tyndarus, king of Sparta.”
Acts 28:12
12 And landing at Syracuse, we stayed three days.
1.Syracuse is the capital of the island of Sicily.
2.It was in the direct route from Malta to go up the western side of Italy.
3.It is thought that the three days were spent there to re-supply the ship with food and supplies. While the people of Malta gave them some supplies, this city would be able to provide all that would be needed for the rest of the trip.
Acts 28:13
13 From there we circled round and reached Rhegium. And after one day the south wind blew; and the next day we came to Puteoli,
1.The KJV says they “fetched a compass.” This is not accurate. The word here means one who goes around, a wanderer, one who strolls around, one who makes a circuit. (Thayer)
2.The meaning is that they went around the island of Sicily.
3.They reach the first city of Italy itself.
4.Now, instead of violent storms, they have a favorable wind. A wind from the south makes traveling north very easy.
5.They arrive at Puteoli, a city of wells. A city known for its warm water baths. These baths were sulfur water, with typical “rotten egg” aroma that goes with sulfur. The name of the city comes from the “putrid” smell of the sulfur baths.
Acts 28:14
14 where we found brethren, and were invited to stay with them seven days. So we went toward Rome.
1.There are brethren here. How did a church start here? We do not know. We know that there were Christians in Rome. It is assumed that as others, like Aquila and Prisilla, who left Rome, may have stopped and taught others as they traveled.
2.The entire party of soldiers and prisoners stay for a week. Then they head for Rome.
Acts 28:15
15 And from there, when the brethren heard about us, they came to meet us as far as Appi Forum and Three Inns. When Paul saw them, he thanked God and took courage.
1.When the Christians at Rome heard that Paul was on his way, they came to meet him.
2.Appii Forum and Three Inns are towns about 20 to 25 miles south of Rome.
3.Both of these cities are on a major road called the Appian Way.
Acts 28:16
16 Now when we came to Rome, the centurion delivered the prisoners to the captain of the guard; but Paul was permitted to dwell by himself with the soldier who guarded him.
1.Now, they arrive in Rome. The centurion that has overseen these prisoners from Caesarea – through all the travels, ships, stops, shipwreck, and final arrival is ready to be relieved of his duty.
2.All of the prisoners were secured in Rome.
3.However, Paul is allowed to live under “house arrest” outside the prison.
4.The indication is that a single soldier was guarding the house. Paul was not a flight risk.
Acts 28:17
17 And it came to pass after three days that Paul called the leaders of the Jews together. So when they had come together, he said to them; “Men and brethren, though I have done nothing against our people or the customs of our fathers, yet I was delivered as a prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans,
1.Paul, after three days of rest, is ready to resume his defense.
2.He calls a meeting of local Jews to discuss his situation.
3.Paul explains why he is now in Rome with a appeal to Caesar.
Acts 28:18-20
18 who, when they had examined me, wanted to let me go, because there was no cause for putting me to death.
19 But when the Jews spoke against it, I was compelled to appeal to Caesar, not that I had any thing of which to accuse my nation.
20 For this reason therefore I have called for you, to see you and speak with you, because for the hope of Israel I am bound with this chain.
1.The Romans were ready to let Paul go. There was no charge worthy of death.
2.But they Jews were going to kill Paul, anyway. His only choice was to appeal to Caesar.
Acts 28:21
21 Then they said to him, “We neither received letters from Judea concerning you, nor have any of the brethren who came reported or spoken any evil of you.
1.The Jews respond by saying they have no information, no letters, no communication with Jews from Jerusalem.
2.No one from Jerusalem has come waring them of Paul.
Acts 28:22
22 But we desire to hear from you what you think; for concerning this sect, we know that it is spoken against everywhere.”
1.The Jews are interested in what Paul has to say about the sect to which he belongs.
2.It is identified as the sect that is “spoken against everywhere.” While they do not know Paul or what charges the Jews in Jerusalem have against him, they do know about the church.
Acts 28:23
23 So when they had appointed him a day, many came to him at his lodging, to whom he explained and solemnly testified of the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus from both the Law of Moses and the Prophets, from morning till evening.
1.A hearing was arranged. On the designated day many came to hear Paul speak about the kingdom of God and how he would defend his faith by the Law and Prophets.
2.The Jews were anticipating a coming Messiah. They want to know how this Jesus fulfills the prophecies of the Old Testament.
Acts 28:24
24 And some were persuaded by the things which were spoken, and some disbelieved.
1.Not all will be converted. Some believed. Some were convinced and persuaded by the powerful use of Old Testament Scriptures.
2.Some did not. Nothing new here.
3.NOTE: Jesus did not command us to baptize everyone we teach. We are to teach all men. Then the burden shifts to them to believe and obey. Listen to Mar 16:15-16 – And he said to them, Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. WE must go to all the world. WE must preach the gospel. THEY must believe. THEY must be baptized.
Acts 28:25-27
25 So when they did not agree among themselves, they departed after Paul had said one word: “The Holy Spirit spoke rightly through Isaiah the prophet to our fathers,
26 saying, “Go to this people and say; hearing you will hear, and shall not understand; And seeing you will see, and not perceive;
27 For the hearts of this people have grown dull. Their ears are hard of hearing, and their eyes they have closed, lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, lest they should understand with their hearts and turn so that I should heal them.”
1.The disagreement is now between those who accept and those who reject.
2.Paul quotes from the prophet Isaiah. (Isa 6:9-10)
3.What is the message? Paul is saying that Isaiah said that some would hear and not receive the message. Some will hear but not understand. They will see but not perceive.
Acts 28:28
28 “Therefore let it be known to you that salvation of God has been sent to the Gentiles, and they will hear it.”
1.Since many of the Jews will reject the message, God has sent Paul to the Gentiles. The Greek word here is for the word “nations” in the plural. It simply means all non-Jews. There were Jews and everyone else is Gentile.
2.Why go to the Gentiles? Because they will listen; they will believe; they will obey.
Acts 28:29
29 And when he had said these words, the Jews departed and had a great dispute among themselves.
1.There was now more discussion than before.
2.Paul certainly peaked their interest and opened up some discussion.
Acts 28:30
30 Then Paul dwelt two whole years in his own rented house, and received all who came to him,
1.Paul spent two years in Caesarea and now we are told he spent two more years in his own rented home in Rome.
2.He was not free to travel, but he was free to have friends come and visit him. He was able to see all who came to see him.
Acts 28:31
31 preaching the kingdom of God and teaching the things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ with all confidence, no one forbidding him.
1.Paul was also free to teach and preach.
2.The kingdom of God – The kingdom and church are two terms for the same thing. Jesus said he would build his church and that Peter would be given the keys to the kingdom. (Mat 16:18-19)
3.Lord Jesus Christ – Paul also taught all things about Jesus, his life, death, resurrection, teachings, example, and presence with His people.
Questions by E.M. Zerr For The Book of Acts
TRUE – FALSE TEST
Review of Acts
NOTE-Be careful not to be confused by negative form of some of the tests.
1. The author had written a book previously.
2. John baptized wtih the Holy Ghost.
3. The appointment of Matthias was unlawful.
4. The H.S. fell on the apostles only on Pentecost.
5. The H.S. filled all the house.
6. Peter was spokesman for the other apostles.
7. The unsaved were not added to the church.
8. The lame man had been recently crippled.
9. His recovery was gradual.
10. Peter and John were offered credit for it.
11. There is no salvation except in name of Christ.
12. James and John were timid in their preaching.
13. Persecution caused the disciples to rejoice.
14. Ananias and wife kept back part of the land.
15. The community of goods was commanded by the lord.
16. It was discontinued after the affair of Ananias.
17. Gamaliel showed friendliness toward the apostles.
18. The Grecians complained of being overworked.
19. The seven appointed were to act as deacons.
20. This prevented them from doing any teaching.
21. Stephen rehearsed the history of the Jews.
22. His application of it was agreeable to his hearers.
23. His dying prayer was on behalf of his murderers.
24. Saul was a friend to Stephen.
25. His journey to Damascus was against the church.
26. He was made a Christian near the city.
27. He was told to arise since his sins were forgiven.
28. The disciples at Jerusalem were afraid of him.
29. Cornelius was a good man.
30. He was not a saved man when the angel appeared.
31. He was converted same way as Saul of Tarsus.
32. The Holy Ghost fell on the Gentiles.
33. Herod was destroyed account of vain glory.
34. Jews were the first to be offered the Gospel.
35. Paul and Barnabas were offered sacrifices.
36. Elders were ordained in every church.
37. There was a Church Council at Jerusalem.
38. Christians are commanded to abstain from blood.
39. Paul started the church at Philippi.
40. There is no evidence that Lydia had infants now.
41. The jailer was taken out to be baptized.
42. Citizens of Athens were religious.
43. They worshiped the God of Paul.
44. Paul observed some feasts of the Jewish law.
45. The Elders of Ephesus called Paul unto them.
46. He warned them against themselves.
47. The nativity and training of Paul were honorable.
48. He became a Christian through hatred of the Jews.
49. His persecution of Christians was malicious.
50. He appealed to Caesar for a new trial.
51. Paul was a Jew, Roman and Christian all at same time.
52. His preaching caused Felix to weep like a child.
53. He persuaded Agrippa to become a Christian.
54. Pauls three accounts of his conversion agree.
55. His hope was according to the prophets.
56. The voyage to Rome was pleasant to all.
57. Paul received support from worldlings.
58. He was placed in solitary confinement.
59. Hearers came to him.
60. He preached the Gospel and was not hindered.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Act 20:28. Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers. So be watchful, Paul went on to say. My part is done. For the future the grave responsibility of guiding this precious flock will be yours, elders of the Church of Ephesusyours the care of providing that it be kept from error; and first I press home to you to take heed to your own lives, to the example you set, to the influence you exert. The Greek word rendered here overseers () is usually rendered bishops, as, for instance, the same word in the singular in 1Pe 2:25, Shepherd and Bishop of your souls. The Holy Ghostas in Act 13:2, when the same Holy Spirit directed the prophets and teachers of Antioch to choose Barnabas and Saul for the mission work in Gentile countrieshad probably guided Paul in the first instance in his selection of these pastors. In this reference to the work of the Holy Ghost also the inward call is referred to, that secret impulse which first drew the man to the holy work and office of an ordained minister in the Church.
To feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. In this most important doctrinal statement a grave variation in the reading in the original Greek of the most ancient authorities exists. For the Church of God, some MSS. of great weight read the Church of the Lord. This would water down the immense importance of the doctrinal assertion here. But later research has now decidedly inclined the balance in favour of the reading of the received text, the Church of God.
The words of Dr. Scrivener, the most distinguished living English critic, on this point are most weighty. The reading of the received text, he says, though different from that of the majority of copies, is pretty sure to be correct. It is upheld by the Sinaitic and Vatican MSS., Codices and B, by all the known MSS. and editions of the Vulgate (except the Complutensian). Patristic testimony also slightly inclines to the same reading, the Church of God. Foremost among these come the words of Ignatius (A.D. 107), who speaks in his Epistle to the Ephesians, chap, 1, of the blood of God.
The same Ignatius (Epistle to Romans , 6) also uses the expression, the Passion of my God. In Clement of Alexandria, too, we have the very phrase, Blood of God. Tertullian (Ad Uxorem, Act 2:3) also uses these same words.
We therefore unhesitatingly adopt the words of our English Authorised Version as the correct translation of the original Greek words, and possess in these words a distinct expression of the belief of the Apostolic Church in the absolute Divinity of the Son and of the nature of His work as Redeemer; in other words, Paul authoritatively taught here that, As for the Church of God, God purchased it with His own blood.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
The blessed apostle having, in the former part of his farewell sermon to the elders of Ephesus, vindicated his own sincerity among them, both as to his doctrine and practice, and cleared himself by close addresses and smart appeals to their consciences; he now urges them in a rousing and heart-melting exhortation to the utmost care and dilgence in the exercise of their pastoral charge; and to take heed to themselves and the flock, to the whole flock which Christ had purchased with his blood, and the Holy Ghost had committed to his care, ver. 28. Take heed to yourselves, and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers.
Here observe, A two-fold duty, and a three-fold motive to enforce that duty: the first duty is to take to themselves: the second is to take heed to all the flock.
The first part of a minister’s duty is to take heed to himself: Committe animam diligentibus suam, says St. Bernard: He that neglects his own soul, will never take a faithful care of the souls of others.
We must first look to ourselves, that our judgments be sound, our hearts holy, and our lives exemplary: we must take heed to ourselves, that we be fit for the employment which we undertake. This is not a burthen for a child’s shoulder; he that is himself a babe in knowledge, is altogether unfit to teach men the mysteries of salvation.
Take we heed that our example doth not contradict our doctrine, that our practice doth not give our profession the lie; that we do as well as teach; not preach angelical sermons, and lead diabolical lives; but securing that grace to ourselves which we offer unto others, and shunning that sin ourselves which we condemn in others; and this, because we have a depraved nature and vicious inclinations in us, as well as others, because we have a heaven to win, and a soul to save, as well as others; yea, when others have only their own souls to account for, we have not only our own, but others’ too; in a word because our sins do more dishonour God, discredit religion, more gratify the devil, more harden sinners, and have more of wilfulness in them, more perfidiousness in them, and more hypocrisy in them, than other men’s; and we shall certainly be adjudged by God to a double damnation for them.
Well, therefore might the apostle say to the Ephesian elders, take heed unto yourselves; next he adds, and to all the flock. That is, with a constant care and laborious diligence acquaint them with their duty, inform them of their danger, show them where their happiness lies, and the way and means for attaining of it; and, in order to this, all the flock must be known, that it may be heeded, and we must labour to be acquainted with the state of all our people as fully as we can; we must, as the apostles before us did, visit our people from house to house, that we may know their persons, know their inclinations, and know the manner of conversation; what sins they are most in danger of, what temptations they are most liable to, and what duties they neglect, either for the matter or manner of them; and give them the best encouragement, directions, and assistance, we are able.
This is the sum of the apostle’s exhortation to the elders of Ephesus; Take heed unto yourselves, and unto all the flock. The motives to enforce the duty follow; and they are,
1. Drawn from their office; they are overseers of the flock, that is, officers appointed by solemn ordination to teach, to guide, to govern the church’s committed to their care, and under their charge.
2. From the authority and excellency of him that called them to their office, the Holy Ghost. We read of some that were nominated by the special and immediate instinct of the Holy Ghost, as Act 1:24 and Act 13:2.
Others were ordained by the apostles, who were guided by the Holy Ghost then: and whoever is set apart to that office now, according to the rule of God’s word, may truly be said to be made an overseer by the Holy Ghost; Almighty God concurring to own and bless his own institution.
3. From the dear purchase which Christ paid for, and the tender regard he bears to, this his flock. Feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his blood.
Where observe, The divinity of Christ asserted; he is expressly called God, in opposition to the Arians, and their unhappy spawn, the Socinians, who will allow him to be only man; but then his blood could never have purchased the church, which it is here said to do, being God and Man in one person: Man, that he might have blood to shed; and God, that his blood might be of infinite value,and inestimable preciousness when shed.
Observe also the force of the apostle’s argument: ” If the church be thus dear to Christ, the chief Shepherd, she ought to be very dear to all under-shepherds; if Christ judged her salvation worth his blood, well may his ministers judge it worth their sweat.”
4.From the danger which the church is in by seducers and false teachers, ver. 20. Grievous wolves will enter, not sparing the flock; and even from among yourselves shall arise heretics, who will vent their unsound doctrines to debauch men, first in their principles, and then in their practices: therefore take heed to all the flock.
Now, from the whole, note, 1. The church is Christ’s flock, consisting of sheep and lambs: Christ himself is the great and good Shepherd: his ministers, under-shepherds and overseers: bloody persecutors, heretical seducers, and false teachers, are wolves which worry and divide the flock.
Note, 2. That every flock should have its own pastor, and every pastor his own flock.
Note, 3. That the flock should be no greater ordinarily, than the overseers are capable of taking heed of.
Note, 4. That every overseer of Christ’s flock ought to take great heed, both to himself and to the whole flock, in all the parts of his pastoral work, particularly public preaching and private inspection.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Paul’s Charge to the Ephesian Elders
Because he did not anticipate seeing them again, the apostle charged those elders, who had been selected on the basis of the qualifications listed by the Holy Spirit, to watch out for their own spiritual well being. Further, they were commanded by the apostle to watch out for every sheep in God’s flock at Ephesus. This was specifically the case because they had been given oversight, or made bishops, over the flock purchased with Jesus’ blood. Such a watchful state was necessary because false teachers, even from within the eldership, would draw away disciples. Particularly, Paul urged the elders to remember his own watchful service of three years. He had warned them day and night, even with crying.
Paul recommended that the shepherds trust God and his word, which would help them grow stronger and inherit eternal life. He reminded them that he worked with his own hands to support himself and did not covet anyone’s money. He urged them to labor to support themselves and help the weak, while reminding them that Jesus said, “It is more blessed to give than to receive.” After kneeling with them in prayer, Paul tearfully departed ( Act 20:28-38 ).
Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books
Act 20:28. Take heed therefore I now devolve my care upon you; first, to yourselves That you thoroughly understand all the doctrines, experience all the graces, enjoy all the blessing, and practise all the duties of genuine Christianity; and that you fully understand and faithfully execute every part of your important office. And to all the flock That they may possess the same Christian knowledge and experience, may enjoy the same blessings, and perform the same duties; may be wise unto salvation, holy and useful; not living unto themselves, but unto him that died for them and rose again. Over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers Greek, , bishops, or inspectors. It seems evident from every part of the New Testament, that there was no distinction, when the Acts and the Epistles were written, between elders, or presbyters, and bishops in the Christian Church. All the elders were bishops, inspectors, or overseers. Thus, (1Pe 5:1-2,) The elders which are among you I exhort, feed the flock of God, taking the oversight thereof, Greek, , acting the part of bishops, or inspectors. It is probable, however, that when, in any city or district, the elders became numerous, it was found expedient to appoint some to take the oversight of the rest, and see that they did their duty. The apostles expression here, The Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, implies that no man, or number of men, can constitute an overseer, bishop, or any Christian minister. To do this is the peculiar work of the Holy Ghost; to feed the church of God That is, the believing, loving, obedient, holy children of God, only such being true members of the church of Christ; which he hath purchased with his own blood How precious is it then in his sight! Here the blood of Christ, the only begotten of the Father, is termed the blood of God; for it is the blood of the WORD, who was in the beginning with God, and was God, Joh 1:1.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
28-35. Having thus eloquently expressed himself in reference to his past fidelity and his present devotion, he gives them a prophetic warning in reference to trials which yet awaited them, and places his own example minutely before them for imitation. (28) “Take heed, therefore, to yourselves, and to all the flock in which the Holy Spirit has placed you as overseers, to be shepherds to the Church of the Lord, which he has purchased through his own blood. (29) For I know this, that after my departure, fierce wolves will enter in among you, sparing the flock. (30) Also from among yourselves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. (31) Therefore, watch; remembering that by night and by day, for three years, I ceased not to warn each one with tears. (32) And now, brethren, I commend you to God and to the word of his favor, which is able to build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all the sanctified. (33) I have coveted no man’s gold, or silver, or apparel. (34) You yourselves know that these hands have ministered to my necessities, and to those who were with me. (35) In all things I have shown you, that so laboring, you should support the weak, and should remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that he himself said, It is more blessed to give than to receive.” It was a fearful responsibility which rested on the shoulders of these men, to watch as shepherds for the flock, and realize that only by fidelity like that of Paul, could they be free from the blood of them all. In leaving them to this work, he directs their thoughts to the only power sufficient to strengthen them to perform it, by commending them to God and to his Word, assuring them that the Word was able to build them up, and give them inheritance among the sanctified. This is another among many proofs which we have seen of the confidence of the apostles in the sufficiency and power of the word of God.
The closing admonition has reference to relief of the needy, and to the discharge of their duty, even if it were necessary for them to struggle hard to make their own bread and meat, remembering that it is more blessed to give than to receive. In this, also, he could appeal to his own example, saying, “You yourselves know that these hands,” holding them out to them, “have ministered to my necessities, and to those who were with me.” Thus he warns and admonishes these elders, in a speech of inimitable pathos, which is recorded by Luke that it might bear the same lesson to elders of Churches everywhere, teaching that no less than apostolic zeal and self-sacrifice are expected of them.
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
28. Therefore take heed to yourselves and to the whole flock over whom the Holy Ghost has appointed you bishops, to feed the church of God, which he purchased through his own blood. The word bishop here occurs in the Greek, episcopos from epi over, and skopeoo, see. Hence it means persons charged with the spiritual oversight of the Lords people. Nothing but Gods truth revealed in the Bible is soul pabulum. Consequently, millions this day are starving to death for the bread of life. The precious Word is bread, meat, milk, honey and all the luscious fruits of Canaan. The little sermonettes preached by the popular pastors have scarcely a scintillation of substantial gospel truth. Sick people nauseate food, and the dead have no use for it. The masses of popular churches consist of the dead, i. e., unsaved, and the sick, i. e., weak believers, who have never cut their spiritual teeth so as to eat solid food. Hence the preacher provides aromatics for the dead and sweet milk for the babies, having nobody on hand competent to eat the fatted calf, the bread and the delicious fruits of Canaan. In all this the preacher sustains an awful responsibility for not bringing to the dead the resurrection power and to the sick the healing efficacy of the infallible panacea, i. e., the Saviors blood. I awfully fear Judas has a vast ministerial following gathering about him in the regions of woe.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
Act 20:28-30. Duties of the Elders: Coming Dangers.They are to be as free from blame as he is. The Holy Ghost has made them episcopoi of the flock, lit. overseers; if we remember what the word means we may translate bishops; they are the same persons as the elders (Act 20:17). The office is local in early Church life; Paul mentions it only in Php 1:1; he generally speaks of those who are over you and admonish you; see Rom 12:8, 1Th 5:12. The earliest bishops have to do with the stores and the hospitality of a Church (see 1 Timothy 3, 1Ti 5:17-20, Tit 1:5-9, Didach xv.); those spoken of here have to do with teaching (cf. 1Pe 5:2).
Act 20:28. The end is strange. WH propose to read the blood of His own son.
Act 20:29 f. Who the adversaries are, is hard to tell; there are predictions all through the NT of persecutions without and of strange doctrines arising within (1Jn 2:19, Rev 2:14). The mention of bishops and the forecast of heresies are probably both marks of a somewhat later time for the redaction of this speech.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
Verse 28
Overseers. In Acts 20:17, they are called elders; here, overseers, which is, in the original, the same as the word rendered sometimes bishops. There have been endless disputes among different churchmen whether the terms elder and bishop, as used in the New Testament, denote the same office, or whether the one was of higher rank than the other. But on an impartial examination of the subject, it will appear that these terms, and the many other similar ones, such as pastor, teacher, angel of the church, were often used interchangeably, and without any idea of technical precision and strictness in their applications; and this shows that they were employed, like ordinary words of discourse, as general terms of designation,–not as the technical titles of office. To attempt to make out from these primitive institutions any nice system, which shall be adapted to modern wants, and conformed to modern ideas, is to mistake altogether the nature of all primitive institutions, which are essentially provisional, extemporaneous, informal, and changeable.–Of God. In all the most ancient copies of the New Testament, and those most to be relied upon for correctness, it reads, “The church of the Lord, which,” &c.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to {g} feed the church of God, which {h} he hath purchased with {i} his own blood.
(g) To keep it, to feed and govern it.
(h) A notable sentence for Christ’s Godhead: which shows plainly in his person, how that by reason of the joining together of the two natures in his own person, that which is proper to one is spoken of the other, being taken as deriving from one another, and not in the original: which in old time the godly fathers termed a communicating or fellowship of properties or attributes, that is to say, a making common of that to two, which belongs but to one.
(i) The words “his own” show forth the excellency of that blood.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Paul concluded his address with a challenge because of the Ephesian elders’ future responsibilities (Act 20:28-31). The elders were to guard their own lives from the attacks of the adversary and then the lives of those under their care (cf. Eze 34:12-16; 1Pe 5:1-4). Paul used Jesus’ familiar figure of a flock of sheep to describe His followers (Joh 10:27; Joh 21:15; et al.).
The term "elder" (Act 20:17) came from Judaism and emphasized the dignity of the leader of God’s people. "Overseer" is Greek in origin and describes the responsibility of this person. "Shepherd" was both Jewish and Greek and focuses on his function. Putting them together we conclude that these men were older, more mature men in the faith who were responsible for the spiritual welfare of the church. They fulfilled their responsibility by pastoring (i.e., leading, feeding, guiding, and guarding) the church (cf. 1Pe 5:1-4).
"There was in apostolic times no distinction between elders (presbyters) and bishops such as we find from the second century onwards: the leaders of the Ephesian church are indiscriminately described as elders, bishops (i.e., superintendents), and shepherds (or pastors)." [Note: Bruce, Commentary on . . ., p. 415.]
The Holy Spirit appointed these men in the sense that He led the apostles or others to select them as elders.
A better translation of the last part of this verse would be, "He [God the Father] purchased with the blood of His own [Son]" (cf. Rom 3:25; Rom 5:9; Eph 1:7; Eph 2:13; Col 1:20). It is important for church leaders to remember that the church belongs to God, not them. This helps balance the tendency to take too little or too much responsibility on oneself. "The church [Gr. ekklesia] of God" is a phrase we find elsewhere in the New Testament only in Paul’s epistles.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Chapter 16
ST. PAUL AND THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY.
Act 20:1; Act 20:7; Act 20:17-19; Act 20:28
THE period of St. Pauls career at which we have now arrived was full of life, vigour, activity. He was in the very height of his powers, was surrounded with responsibilities, was pressed with cares and anxieties; and yet the character of the sacred narrative is very peculiar. From the passover of the year 57, soon after which the Apostle had to leave Ephesus, till the passover of the next year, we learn but very little of St. Pauls work from the narrative of St. Luke. The five verses with which the twentieth chapter begins tell us all that St. Luke apparently knew about the Apostles actions during that time. He gives us the story of a mere outsider, who knew next to nothing of the work St. Paul was doing. The Apostle left Ephesus and went into Macedonia, whence he departed into Greece. Three months were occupied in teaching at Corinth, and then, intending to sail from Cenchreae to Ephesus, he suddenly changed his mind upon the discovery of a Jewish plot, altered his route, disappointed his foes, and paid a second visit to Macedonia. In this narrative, which is all St. Luke gives, we have the account, brief and concise, of one who was acquainted merely with the bare outlines of the Apostles work, and knew nothing of his inner life and trials. St. Luke, in fact, was so much taken up with his own duties at Philippi, where he had been labouring for the previous five years, that he had no time to think of what was going on elsewhere. At any rate his friend and pupil Theophilus had simply asked him for a narrative so far as he knew it of the progress of the gospel. He had no idea that he was writing anything more than a story for the private use of Theophilus, and he therefore put down what he knew and had experienced, without troubling himself concerning other matters. I have read criticisms of the Acts-proceeding principally, I must confess, from German sources-which seem to proceed on the supposition that St. Luke was consciously writing an ecclesiastical history of the whole early Church which he knew and felt was destined to serve for ages. But this was evidently not the case. St. Luke was consciously writing a story merely for a friends study, and dreamt not of the wider fame and use destined for his. book. This accounts in a simple and natural way, not only for what St. Luke inserts, but also for what he leaves out, and he manifestly left out a great deal. We may take this passage at which we have now arrived as an illustration of his methods of writing sacred history. This period of ten months, from the time St. Paul left Ephesus till he returned to Philippi at the following Easter season, was filled with most important labours which have borne fruit unto all ages of the Church, yet St. Luke dismisses them in a few words. Just let us realise what happened in these eventful months. St. Paul wrote First Corinthians in April A.D. 57. In May he passed to Troas, where, as we learn from Second Corinthians, he laboured for a short time with much success. He then passed into Macedonia, urged on by his restless anxiety concerning the Corinthian Church. In Macedonia. he laboured during the following five or six months. How intense and absorbing must have been his work during that time! It was then that he preached the gospel with signs and wonders round about even unto Illyricum, as he notes in Rom 16:19, an epistle written this very year from Corinth. The last time that he had been in Macedonia he was a hunted fugitive fleeing from place to place. Now he seems to have lived in comparative peace, so far at least as the Jewish synagogues were concerned. He penetrated, therefore, into the mountainous districts west of Beroea, bearing the gospel tidings into cities and villages which had as yet heard nothing of them. But preaching was not his only work in Macedonia. He had written his first Epistle to Corinth from Ephesus a few months before. In Macedonia he received from Titus, his messenger, an account of the manner in which that epistle had been received, and so from Macedonia he despatched his second Corinthian Epistle, which must be carefully studied if we desire to get an adequate idea of the labours and anxieties amid which the Apostle was then immersed. {see 2Co 2:13, and 2Co 7:5-6} And then he passed into Greece, where he spent three months at Corinth, settling the affairs of that very celebrated but very disorderly Christian community. The three months spent there must have been a period of overwhelming business. Let us recount the subjects which must have taken up every moment of St. Pauls time. First there were the affairs of the Corinthian Church itself. He had to reprove, comfort, direct, set in order. The whole moral, spiritual, social, intellectual conceptions of Corinth had gone wrong. There was not a question, from the most elementary topic of morals and the social considerations connected with female dress and activities, to the most solemn points of doctrine and worship, the Resurrection and the Holy Communion, concerning which difficulties, disorders, and dissensions had not been raised. All these had to be investigated and decided by the Apostle. Then, again, the Jewish controversy, anti the oppositions to himself personally which the Judaising party had excited, demanded his careful attention. This controversy was a troublesome one in Corinth just then, but it was a still more troublesome one in Galatia, and was fast raising its head in Rome. The affairs of both these great and important churches, the one in the East, the other in the West, were pressing upon St. Paul at this very time. While he was immersed in all the local troubles of Corinth, he had to find time at Corinth to write the Epistle to the Galatians and the Epistle to the Romans. How hard it must have been for the Apostle to concentrate his attention on the affairs of Corinth when his heart and brain were torn with anxieties about the schisms, divisions, and false doctrines which were flourishing among his Galatian converts, or threatening to invade the Church at Rome, where as yet he had not been able to set forth his own conception of gospel truth, and thus fortify the disciples against the attacks of those subtle foes of Christ who were doing their best to turn the Catholic Church into a mere narrow Jewish sect, devoid of all spiritual power and life.
But this was not all, or nearly all. St. Paul was at the same time engaged in organising a great collection throughout all the churches where he had ministered on behalf of the poor Christians at Jerusalem, and he was compelled to walk most warily and carefully in this matter. Every step he took was watched by foes ready to interpret it unfavourably; every appointment he made, every arrangement, no matter how wise or prudent, was the subject of keenest scrutiny and criticism. With all these various matters accumulating upon him it is no wonder that St. Paul should have written of himself at this very period in words which vividly describe his distractions: “Beside those things that are without, there is that which presseth upon me daily, the care of all the churches.” And yet St. Paul gives us a glimpse of the greatness of his soul as we read the epistles which were the outcome of this period of intense but fruitful labour. He carried a mighty load, but yet he carried it lightly. His present anxieties were numerous, but they did not shut out all thoughts upon other topics. The busiest man then was just the same as the busiest man still. He was the man who had the most time and leisure to bestow thought upon the future. The anxieties and worries of the present were numerous and exacting, but St. Paul did not allow his mind to be so swallowed up in them as to shut out all care about other questions equally important. While he was engaged in the manifold cares which present controversies brought, he was all the while meditating a mission to Rome, and contemplating a journey still farther to Spain and Gaul and the bounds of the Western ocean. And then, finally, there was the care of St. Pauls own soul, the sustenance and development of his spirit by prayer and meditation and worship and reading, which he never neglected under any circumstances. All these things combined must have rendered this period of close upon twelve months one of the Apostles busiest and in-tensest times, and yet St. Luke disposes of it in a few brief verses of this twentieth chapter.
After St. Pauls stay at Corinth, he determined to proceed to Jerusalem according to his predetermined plan, bringing with him the proceeds of the collection which he had made. He wished to go by sea, as he had done some three years before, sailing from Cenchreae direct to Syria. The Jews of Corinth, however, were as hostile as ever, and so they hatched a plot to murder him before his embarkation. St. Paul, however, having learned their designs, suddenly changed his route, and took his journey by land through Macedonia, visiting once more his former converts and tarrying to keep the passover at Philippi with the little company of Christian Jews who there resided. This circumstance throws light upon verses 4 and 5 of this twentieth chapter, which run thus: “There accompanied him as far as Asia Sopater of Beroea, the son of Pyrrhus; and of the Thessalonians, Aristarchus and Secundus; and Gaius of Derbe, and Timothy; and of Asia, Tychicus and Trophimus. But these had gone before, and were waiting for us at Troas.” St. Paul came to Philippi, found St. Luke there, celebrated the passover, and then sailed away with St. Luke to join the company who had gone before. And they had gone before for a very good reason. They were all, except Timothy, Gentile Christians, persons therefore who, unlike St. Paul, had nothing to do with the national rites and customs of born Jews, and who might be much more profitably exercised in working among the Gentile converts at Troas, free from any danger of either giving or taking offence in connection with the passover, a lively instance of which danger Trophimus, one of their number, subsequently afforded in Jerusalem, when his presence alone in St. Pauls company caused the spread of a rumour which raised the riot so fatal to St. Pauls liberty: “For they had seen with him in the city. Trophimus the Ephesian, whom they supposed that Paul had brought into the temple.” {Act 21:29} This incident, together with St. Pauls conduct at Jerusalem, as told in the twenty-sixth verse of the twenty-first chapter, illustrates vividly St. Pauls view of the Jewish law and Jewish rites and ceremonies. They were for Jews national ceremonies. They had a meaning for them. They commemorated certain national deliverances, and as such might be lawfully used. St. Paul himself could eat the passover and cherish the feelings of a Jew, heartily thankful to God for the deliverance from Egypt wrought out through Moses centuries ago for his ancestors, and his mind could then go on and rejoice over a greater deliverance still wrought out at this same paschal season by a greater than Moses. St. Paul openly proclaimed the, lawfulness of the Jewish rites for Jews, but opposed their imposition upon the Gentiles. He regarded them as tolerabiles ineptiae, and therefore observed them to please his weaker brethren; but sent his Gentile converts on before, lest perhaps the sight of his own example might weaken their faith and lead them to a compliance with that Judaising party who were ever ready to avail themselves of any opportunity to weaken St. Pauls teaching and authority. St. Paul always strove to unite wisdom and prudence with faithfulness to principle lest by any means his labour should be in vain.
St. Luke now joined St. Paul at Philippi, and henceforth gives his own account of what happened on this eventful journey. From Philippi they crossed to Troas. It was the spring-time, and the weather was more boisterous than later in the year, and so the voyage took five days to accomplish, while two days had sufficed on a previous occasion. They came to Troas, and there remained for a week, owing doubtless to the exigencies of the ship and its cargo. On the first day of the week St. Paul assembled the Church for worship. The meeting was held on what we should call Saturday evening; but we must remember that the Jewish first day began from sundown on Saturday or the Sabbath. This is the first notice in the Acts of the observance of the Lords Day as the time of special Christian worship. We have, however, earlier notices of the-first day in connection with Christian observances. The apostles, for instance, met together on the first day, as we are told in Joh 20:19, and again eight days after, as the twenty-sixth verse of the same chapter tells. St. Pauls first Epistle to Corinth was written twelve months earlier than this visit to Troas, and it expressly mentions {1Co 16:2} the first day of the week as the time ordered by St. Paul for the setting apart of the Galatian contribution to the collection for the poor saints at Jerusalem; and so here again at Troas we see that the Asiastic Christians observed the same solemn time for worship and the celebration of the Eucharist. Such glimpses-chance notices, we might call them, were there not a higher Providence watching over the unconscious writer-show us how little we can conclude from mere silence about the ritual, worship, and government of the Apostolic Church, and illustrate the vast importance of studying carefully the extant records of the Christian Church in the second century if we wish to gain fresh light upon the history and customs of the apostolic age. If three or four brief texts were blotted out of the New Testament, it would be quite possible to argue from Silence merely that the apostles and their immediate followers did not observe the Lords Day in any way whatsoever, and that the custom of stated worship and solemn eucharistic celebrations on that day were a corruption introduced in post-apostolic times. The best interpreters of the New Testament are, as John Wesley long ago well pointed out in his preface to his celebrated but now almost unknown Christian Library, the apostolic fathers and the writers of the age next following the apostles. We may take it for a certain rule of interpretation that, whenever we find a widely established practice or custom mentioned in the writings of a Christian author of the second century, it originated in apostolic times. It was only natural that this should have been the case. We are all inclined to venerate the past, and to cry it up as the golden age. Now this tendency must have been intensified tenfold in the case of the Christians of the second century. The first century was the time of our Lord and the age of the apostles. Sacred memories clustered thick round it, and every ceremony and rite which came from that time must have been profoundly reverenced, while every new ceremony or custom must have been rudely challenged, and its author keenly scrutinised as one who presumptuously thought he could improve upon the wisdom of men respired by the Holy Ghost and miraculously gifted by God. It is for this reason we regard the second-century doctors and apologists as the best commentary upon the sacred writers, because in them we see the Church of the apostolic age living, acting, displaying itself amid the circumstances and scenes of actual life.
Just let us take as an illustration the case of this observance of the first day of the week. The Acts of the Apostles tells us but very little about it, simply because there is but little occasion to mention what must have seemed to St. Luke one of the commonest and best-known facts. But Justin Martyr some eighty years later was describing Christianity for the Roman Emperor. He was defending it against the outrageous and immoral charges brought against it, and depicting the purity, the innocency, and simplicity of its sacred rites. Among other subjects dealt with, he touches upon the time when Christians offered up formal and stated worship. It was absolutely necessary therefore for him to treat of the subject of the Lords Day. In the sixty-seventh chapter of Justins First “Apology,” we find him describing the Christian weekly festival in words which throw back an interesting light upon the language of St. Luke touching the Lords Day which St. Paul passed at Troas. Justin writes thus on this topic: “Upon the day called Sunday all who live in cities or in the country gather together unto one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons. And those who are well to do and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited with the president, who succours the orphans and widows, and those who through sickness or any other cause are in want, and those who are in bonds, and the strangers sojourning among us, and in a word takes care of all who are in need. But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Saviour on the same day rose from the dead.” This passage gives us a full account of Christian customs in the first half of the second century, when thousands must have been still alive who remembered the times of the apostles, enabling us to realise what must have been the character of the assembly and of the worship in which St. Paul played a leading part at Troas.
There was, however, a difference between the celebration at Troas and the celebrations of which Justin Martyr speaks, though we learn not of this difference from Justin himself, but from Plinys letter to Trajan, concerning which we have often spoken. St. Paul met the Christians of Troas in the evening, and celebrated the Holy Communion with them about midnight. It was the first day of the week according to Jewish computation, though it was what we should call Saturday evening. The ship in which the apostolic company was travelling was about to sail on the morrow, and so St. Paul gladly joined the local church in its weekly breaking of bread. It was exactly the same here at Troas as reported by St. Luke, as it was at Corinth, where the evening celebrations were turned into occasions of gluttony and ostentation, as St. Paul tells us in the eleventh of First Corinthians. The Christians evidently met at this time in the evening to celebrate the Lords Supper. It has been often thought that St. Paul, having referred just twelve months before in the First Corinthian Epistle to the gross abuses connected with the evening celebrations at Corinth, and having promised to set the abuses of Corinth in order when he visited that church, did actually change the time of the celebration of Holy Communion from the evening to the morning, when he spent the three months there of which this chapter speaks. Perhaps he did make the change, but we have no information on the point; and if he did make the change for Corinth, it is evident that he did not intend to impose it as a rule upon the whole Christian Church, when a few weeks after leaving Corinth he celebrated the Lords Supper at Troas in the evening. By the second century, however, the change had been made. Justin Martyr indeed does not give a hint as to the time when Holy Communion was administered in the passages to which we have referred. He tells us that none but baptised persons were-admitted to partake of it, but gives us no minor details. Pliny, however, writing of the state of affairs in Bithynia, -and it bordered upon the province where Troas was situated, -tells us from the confession extracted out of apostate Christians that “the whole of their fault lay in this, that they were wont to meet together on a stated day, before it was light, and sing among themselves alternately a hymn to Christ as God, and to bind themselves by a sacrament (or oath) not to the commission of any wickedness, but not to be guilty of theft or robbery or adultery.” After this early service they then separated, and assembled again in the evening to partake of a common meal. The Agape or Love-Feast was united with the Holy Communion in St. Pauls day. Experience, however, showed that Such a union must lead to grave abuses, and so in that final consolidation which the Church received during the last quarter of the first century, when the Lords Second Coming was seen to be not so immediate as some at first expected, the two institutions were divided; the Holy Communion being appointed as the early morning service of the Lords Day, while the Agape was left in its original position as an evening meal. And so have matters continued ever since. The Agape indeed has almost died out. A trace of it perhaps remains in the blessed bread distributed in Roman Catholic Churches on the Continent; while again the love feasts instituted by John Wesley and continued among his followers were an avowed imitation of this primitive institution. The Agape continued indeed in vigorous existence for centuries, but it was almost always found associated with grave abuses. It might have been innocent and useful so long as Christian love continued to burn with the fervour of apostolic days, though even then, as Corinth showed, there were lurking dangers in it; but when we reach the fourth and fifth centuries we find council after council denouncing the evils of the Agape, and restricting its celebration with such effect that during the Middle Ages it ceased to exist as a distinctive Christian ordinance. The change of the Holy Communion to the earlier portion of the day took almost Universal effect, and that from the earliest times. Tertullian (“De Corona,” 3.) testifies that in his time the Eucharist was received before daybreak, though Christ had instituted it at a mealtime. Cyprian witnesses to the same usage in his sixty-third Epistle, where he speaks of Christ as instituting the Sacrament in the evening, that “the very hour of the sacrifice might intimate the evening of the world,” but then describes himself as “celebrating the resurrection of the Lord in the morning.” St. Augustine, as quoted above, writing about 400, speaks of fasting communion as the general rule; so general, indeed, that he regards it as having come down from apostolic appointment. At the same time St. Augustine recognises the time of its original institution, and mentions the custom of the African Church which once a year had an evening communion on Thursday before Easter in remembrance of the Last Supper and of our Lords action in connection with it. My own feeling on the matter is, that early fasting communion, when there are health and strength, is far the most edifying. There is an element of self-denial about it, and the more real self-denial there is about our worship the more blessed will that worship be. A worship that costs nothing in mind, body, or estate is but a very poor thing to offer unto the Lord of the universe. But there is no ground either in Holy Scripture or the history of the primitive Church justifying an attempt to put a yoke on the neck of the disciples which they cannot bear and to teach that fasting communion is binding upon all Christians. St. Augustine speaks most strongly in a passage we have already referred to (Epist. 118., “Ad Januar.”) about the benefit of fasting communion; but he admits the lawfulness of non-fasting participation, as does also that great Greek divine St. Chrysostom, who quotes the examples of St. Paul and of our Lord Himself in justification of such a course.
The celebration of the Eucharist was not the only subject which engaged St. Pauls attention at Troas. He preached unto the people as well; and following his example we find from Justin Martyrs narrative that preaching was an essential part of the communion office in the days immediately following the apostles age; and then, descending to lower times still, we know that preaching is an equally essential portion of the eucharistic service in the Western Church, the only formal provision for a sermon according to the English liturgy being the rubric in the service for the Holy Communion, which lays down that after the Nicene Creed, “Then shall follow the sermon or one of the Homilies already set forth, or hereafter to be set forth, by authority.” St. Pauls discourse was no mere mechanical homily, however. He was not what man regarded as a powerful, but he was a ready speaker, and one who carried his hearers away by the rapt, intense earnestness of his manner. His whole soul was full of his subject. He was convinced that this was his last visit to the churches of Asia. He foresaw, too, a thousand dangers to which they would be exposed after his departure, and he therefore prolonged his sermon far into the night, so far indeed that human nature asserted its claims upon a young man named Eutychus, who sat in a window of a room Where they were assembled. Human nature indeed was never for a moment absent from these primitive Church assemblies. If it was absent in one shape, it was present in another, just as really as in our modern congregations, and so Eutychus fell fast asleep under the heart-searching exhortations of an inspired apostle, even as men fall asleep. under less powerful sermons of smaller men; and as the natural result, sitting in a window left open for the sake of ventilation, he fell down into the courtyard, and was taken up apparently lifeless. St. Paul was not put out, however. He took interruptions in his work as the Master took them. He was not upset by them, but he seized them, utilised them, and then, having extracted the sweetness and blessedness which they brought with them, he returned from them back to his interrupted work. St. Paul descended to Eutychus, found him in a lifeless state, and then restored him. Men have disputed whether the Apostle worked a miracle on this occasion, or merely perceived that the young man was in a temporary faint. I do not see that it makes any matter which opinion we form. St. Pauls supernatural and miraculous powers stand on quite an independent ground, no matter what way we decide this particular case. It seems to me indeed from the language of St. Paul-“Make ye no ado; for his life is in him”-that the young man had merely fainted, and that St. Paul recognised this fact as soon as he touched him. But if any one has strong opinions on the opposite side I should be sorry to spend time disputing a question which has absolutely no evidential bearing. The great point is, that Eutychus was restored, that St. Pauls long sermon was attended by no fatal consequences, and that the Apostle has left us a striking example showing how that, with pastors and people alike, intense enthusiasm, high-strung interest in the affairs of the spiritual world, can enable human nature to rise superior to all human wants, and prove itself master even of the conquering powers of sleep: “And when he was gone up, and had broken the bread, and eaten, and had talked with them a tong while, even till break of day, so he departed.”
We know nothing of what the particular topics were which engaged St. Pauls attention at Troas, but we may guess them from the subject-matter of the address to the elders of Ephesus, which takes up the latter half of this twentieth chapter. Troas and Ephesus, in fact, were so near and so similarly circumstanced that the dangers and trials of both must have been much alike. He next passed from Troas to Miletus. This is a considerable journey along the western shore of Asia Minor. St. Paul was eagerly striving to get to Jerusalem by Pentecost, or by Whitsuntide, as we should say. He had left Philippi after Easter, and now there had elapsed more than a fortnight of the seven weeks which remained available for the journey to Jerusalem. How often St. Paul must have chafed against the manifold delays of the trading vessel in which he sailed; how frequently he must have counted the days to see if sufficient time remained to execute his purpose! St. Paul, however, was a rigid economist of time. He saved every fragment of it as carefully as possible. It was thus with him at Troas. The ship in which he was travelling left Troas early in the morning. It had to round a promontory in its way to the port of Assos, which could be reached direct by St. Paul in half the time. The Apostle therefore took the shorter route, while St. Luke and his companions embarked on board the vessel. St. Paul evidently chose the land route because it gave him a time of solitary communion with God and with himself. He felt, in fact, that the perpetual strain upon his spiritual nature demanded special spiritual support and refreshment, which could only be obtained in the case of one who led such a busy life by seizing upon every such occasion as then offered for meditation and prayer. St. Paul left Troas some time on Sunday morning. He joined the ship at Assos, and after three days coasting voyage landed at Miletus on Wednesday, whence he despatched a messenger summoning the elders of the Church of Ephesus to meet him. The ship was evidently to make a delay of several days at Miletus. We conclude this from the following reason. Miletus is a town separated by a distance of thirty miles from Ephesus. A space therefore of at least two days would be required in order to secure the presence of the Ephesian elders. If a messenger-St. Luke, for instance-started immediately on St. Pauls arrival at Miletus, no matter how quickly he travelled, he could not arrive at Miletus sooner than Thursday at midday. The work of collecting the elders and making known to them the apostolic summons would take up the afternoon at least, and then the journey to Ephesus, either by land or water, must have occupied the whole of Friday. It is very possible that the sermon recorded in this twentieth of Acts was delivered, on the Sabbath, which, as we have noted above, was as yet kept sacred by Christians as well as by Jews, or else upon the Lords Day, when, as upon that day week at Troas, the elders of Ephesus had assembled with the Christians of Miletus in order to commemorate the Lords resurrection.
We have already pointed out that we know not the subject of St. Pauls sermon at Troas, but we do know the topics upon which he enlarged at Miletus, and we may conclude that, considering the circumstances of the time, they must have been much the same as those upon which he dwelt at Troas. Some critics have found fault with St. Pauls sermon as being quite too much taken up with himself and his own vindication. But they forget the peculiar position in which St. Paul was placed, and the manner in which the truth of the gospel was then associated in the closest manner with St. Pauls own personal character and teaching. The Apostle was just then assailed all over the Christian world wherever he had laboured, and even sometimes where he was only known by name, with the most frightful charges; ambition, pride, covetousness, deceit, lying, all these things and much more were imputed to him by his opponents, who wished to seduce the Gentiles from that simplicity and liberty in Christ into which he had led them. Corinth had been desolated by such teachers; Galatia had succumbed to them; Asia was in great peril. St. Paul therefore, foreseeing future dangers, warned the shepherds of the flock at Ephesus against the machinations of his enemies, who always began their preliminary operations by making attacks upon St. Pauls character. This sufficiently explains the apologetic tone of St. Pauls address, of which we have doubtless merely a brief and condensed abstract indicating the subjects of a prolonged conversation with the elders of Ephesus, Miletus, and such neighbouring churches as could be gathered together. We conclude that St. Pauls conference on this occasion must have been a long one for this reason. If St. Paul could find matter sufficient to engage his attention for a whole night, from sundown till sunrise, in a place like Troas, where he had laboured but a very short time, how much more must he have found to say to the presbyters of the numerous congregations which must have been flourishing at Ephesus, where he had laboured for years with such success as to make Christianity a prominent feature in the social and religious life of that idolatrous city!
Let us now notice some of the topics of this address. It may be divided into four portions. The first part is retrospective, and autobiographical; the second is prospective, and sets forth his conception of his future course; the third is hortatory, expounding the dangers threatening the Ephesian Church; and the fourth is valedictory.
I We have the biographical portion. He begins his discourse by recalling to the minds of his hearers his own manner of life, -“Ye yourselves know, from the first day that I set foot in Asia, after what manner I was with you all the time, serving the Lord with all lowliness of mind, and with tears, and with trials which befell me by the plots of the Jews”; words which show us that from the earliest portion of his ministry at Ephesus, and as soon as they realised the meaning of his message, the Jews had become as hostile to the Apostle at Ephesus as they had repeatedly shown themselves at Corinth, again and again making attempts upon his life. The foundations indeed of the Ephesian Church were laid in the synagogue during the first three months of his work, as we are expressly told in Act 19:8; but the Ephesian Church must have been predominantly Gentile in its composition, or else the language of Demetrius must have been exaggerated and the riot raised by him meaningless. How could Demetrius have said, “Ye see that at Ephesus this Paul hath persuaded and turned away much people, saying that they be no gods which are made with hands,” unless the vast majority of his converts were drawn from the ranks of those pagans who worshipped Diana? These words also show us that during his extended ministry at Ephesus he was left at peace by the heathen. St. Paul here makes no mention of trials experienced from pagan plots. He speaks of the Jews alone as making assaults upon his work or his person, incidentally confirming the statement of Act 19:23, that it was only when he was purposing to retire from Ephesus, and during the celebration of the Artemisian games which marked his last days there, that the opposition of the pagans developed itself in a violent shape.
St. Paul begins his address by fixing upon Jewish opposition outside the Church as his great trial at Ephesus, just as the same kind of opposition inside the Church had been his great trial at Corinth, and was yet destined to be a source of trial to him in the Ephesian Church itself, as we can see from the Pastoral Epistles. He then proceeds to speak of the doctrines he had taught and how he had taught them; reminding them “how that I shrank not from declaring unto you anything that was profitable, and teaching you publicly, and from house to house, testifying both to Jews and Greeks repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.” St. Paul sets forth his manner of teaching. He taught publicly, and public teaching was most effective in his case, because he came armed with a double power, the powers of spiritual and of intellectual preparation. St. Paul was not a man who thought that prayer and spiritual life could dispense with thought and mental culture. Or again, he would be the last to tolerate the idea that diligent visitation from house to house would make up for the neglect of that public teaching which he so constantly and so profitably practised. Public preaching and teaching, pastoral visitation and work, are two distinct branches of labour, which at various periods of the Churchs history have been regarded in very different lights. St. Paul evidently viewed them as equally important; the tendency in the present age is, however, to decry and neglect preaching and to exalt pastoral work-including under that head Church services-out of its due position. This is, indeed, a great and lamentable mistake. The “teaching publicly” to which St. Paul refers is the only opportunity which the majority of men possess of hearing the authorised ministers of religion, and if the latter neglect the office of public preaching, and think the fag end of a week devoted to external and secular labours and devoid of any mental study and preparation stirring the soul and refreshing the spirit, to be quite sufficient for pulpit preparation, they cannot be surprised if men come to despise the religion that is presented in such a miserable light and by such inefficient ambassadors.
St. Paul insists in this passage on the publicity and boldness of his teaching. There was no secrecy about him, no hypocrisy; he did not come pretending one view or one line of doctrine, and then, having stolen in secretly, teaching a distinct system. In this passage, which may seem laudatory of his own methods, St. Paul is, in fact, warning against the underhand and hypocritical methods adopted by the Judaising party, whether at Antioch, Galatia, or Corinth. In this division of his sermon St. Paul then sets forth the doctrines which were the sum and substance of the teaching which he had given both publicly and from house to house. They were repentance towards God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ, and that not only in the case of the Jews, but also of the Greeks. Now here we shall miss the implied reference of St. Paul unless we emphasise the words “I shrank not from declaring unto you anything that was profitable.” His Judaising opponents thought there were many other things profitable for men besides these two points round which St. Pauls teaching turned. They regarded circumcision and Jewish festivals, washings and sacrifices, as very necessary and very profitable for the Gentiles; while, as far as the Jews were concerned, they thought that the doctrines on which St. Paul insisted might possibly be profitable, but were not at all necessary. St. Paul impresses by his words the great characteristic differences between the Ebionite view of Christ and of Christianity and that catholic view which has regenerated society and become a source of life and light to the human race.
II. We have, then, the prospective portion of his discourse. St. Paul announces his journey to Jerusalem, and professes his ignorance of his fate there. He was warned merely by the testimony of the Holy Spirit that bonds and afflictions were his portion in every city. He was prepared for them, however, and for death itself, so that he might accomplish the ministry with which the Lord Jesus Christ had put him in trust. He concluded this part of his address by expressing his belief that he would never see them again. His work among them was done, and he called them to witness that he was pure from the blood of all men, seeing that he had declared unto them the whole counsel of God. This passage has given rise to much debate, because of St. Pauls statement that he knew that he should never see them again, while the Epistles to Timothy and that to Titus prove that after St. Pauls first imprisonment, with the notice of which this book of the Acts ends, he laboured for several years in the neighbourhood of Asia Minor, and paid lengthened visits to Ephesus.
We cannot now bestow space in proving this point, which will be found fully discussed in the various Lives of St. Paul which we have so often quoted: as, for instance, in Lewin, vol. 2; Pg 94, and in Conybeare and Howson, vol. 2. P. 547. We shall now merely indicate the line of proof for this. In the Epistle to Phm 1:22, written during his first Roman imprisonment, and therefore years subsequent to this address, he indicates his expectation of a speedy deliverance from his bonds, and his determination to travel eastward to Colossae, where Philemon lived. {cf. Php 1:25; Php 2:24} He then visited Ephesus, where he left Timothy, who had been his companion in the latter portion of his Roman imprisonment, {cf. Phm 1:1 and 1Ti 1:3} expecting soon to return to him in the same city; {1Ti 3:14} while again in 2Ti 1:18 he speaks of Onesiphorus having ministered to himself in Ephesus, and then in the same Epistle, {Eph 4:26} written during his second Roman imprisonment, he speaks of having just left Trophimus at Miletus sick. This brief outline, which can be followed up in the volumes to which we have referred, and especially in Appendix II in Conybeare and Howson on the date of the Pastoral Epistles, must suffice to prove that St. Paul was expressing a mere human expectation when he told the Ephesian elders that he should see their faces no more. St. Luke, in fact, thus shows us that St. Paul was not omniscient in his knowledge, and that the inspiration which he possessed did not remove him, as some persons think, out of the category of ordinary men or free him from their infirmities. The Apostle was, in fact, supernaturally inspired upon occasions. The Holy Ghost now and again illuminated the darkness of the future when such illumination was necessary for the Churchs guidance; but on other occasions St; Paul and his brother apostles were left to the guidance of their own understandings and to the conclusions and expectations of common sense, else why did not St. Peter and St. John read the character of Ananias and Sapphira or of Simon Magus before their sins were committed? why did St. Peter know nothing of his deliverance from Herods prison-house before the angel appeared, when his undissembled surprise is sufficient evidence that he had no expectation of any such rescue? These instances, which might be multiplied abundantly out of St. Pauls career and writings, show us that St. Pauls confident statement in this passage was a mere human anticipation which was disappointed by the course of events. The supernatural knowledge of the apostles ran on precisely the same lines as their supernatural power. God bestowed them both for use according as He saw fit and beneficial, but not for common ordinary everyday purposes, else why did St. Paul leave Trophimus at Miletus sick, or endure the tortures of his own ophthalmia, or exhort Timothy to take a little wine on account of his bodily weakness, if he could have healed them all by his miraculous power? Before we leave this point we may notice that here we have an incidental proof of the early date of the composition of the Acts. St. Luke, as we have often maintained, wrote this book about the close of St. Pauls first imprisonment. Assuredly if he had written it at a later period, and above all, if he wrote it twenty years later, he would have either modified the words of his synopsis of St. Pauls speech, or else given us a hint that subsequent events had shown that the Apostle was mistaken in his expectations, a thing which he could easily have done, because he cherished none of these extreme notions about St. Pauls office and dignity which have led some to assume that it was impossible for him ever to make a mistake about the smallest matters.
III. This discourse, again, is hortatory, and its exhortations contain very important doctrinal statements. St. Paul begins this third division with an exhortation like that which our Lord gave to His Apostles under the same circumstances, “Take heed unto yourselves.” The Apostle never forgot that an effective ministry of souls must be based on deep personal knowledge of the things of God. He knew, too, from his own experience that it is very easy to be so completely taken up with the care of other mens souls and the external work of the Church, as to forget that inner life which can only be kept alive by close communion with God. Then, having based his exhortations on their own spiritual life, he exhorts the elders to diligence in the pastoral office: “Take heed unto yourselves, and to all the flock, in which the Holy Ghost hath made you bishops, to feed the Church of God, which He purchased with His own blood.” St. Paul in these words shows us his estimate of the ministerial office. The elders of Ephesus had been all ordained by St. Paul himself with the imposition of hands, a rite that has ever been esteemed essential to ordination. It was derived from the Jewish Church, and was perpetuated into the Christian Church by that same spirit of conservatism, that law of continuity which in every department of life enacts that everything shall continue as it was unless there be some circumstance to cause an alteration. Now there was no cause for alteration in this case; nay, rather, there was every reason to bring about a continuance of this custom, because imposition of hands indicates for the people the persons ordained, and assures the ordained themselves that they have been individually chosen and set apart. But St.. Paul by these words teaches us a higher and nobler view of the ministry. He teaches us that he was himself but the instrument of a higher power, and that the imposition of hands was the sign and symbol to the ordained that the Holy Ghost had chosen them and appointed them to feed the flock of God. St. Paul here shows that in ordination, as in the sacraments, we should by faith look away beyond and behind the human instrument, and view the actions of the Church of Christ as the very operations and manifestations in the world of time and sense of the Holy Ghost Himself, the Lord and Giver of life. He teaches the Ephesian elders, in fact, exactly what he taught the Corinthian Church some few months earlier, “We have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the exceeding greatness of the power may be of God, and not from ourselves”; {2Co 4:7} the treasure and the power were everything, the only things, in fact, worth naming, the earthen vessels which contained them for a little time were nothing at all. How awful, solemn, heart-searching a view of the ministerial office this was! How sustaining a view when its holders are called upon to discharge functions for which they feel themselves all inadequate in their natural strength! Is it any wonder that the Church, taking the same view as St. Paul did, has ever held and taught that the ministerial office thus conferred by supernatural power is no mere human function to be taken up or laid down at mans pleasure, but is a life-long office to be discharged at the holders peril, -a savour of life unto life for the worthy recipient, a savour of death unto death for the unworthy and the careless.
In connection with this statement made by St. Paul concerning the source of the ministry we find a title given to the Ephesian presbyters round which much controversy has centred. St. Paul says, “Take heed unto the flock, over which the Holy Ghost has made you Bishops.” I do not, however, propose to spend much time over this topic, as all parties are now agreed that in the New Testament the term presbyter and bishop are interchangeable and applied to the same persons. The question to be decided is not about a name, but an office, whether, in fact, any persons succeeded in apostolic times to the office of rule and government exercised by St. Paul and the rest of the apostles, as Well as by Timothy, Titus, and the other delegates of the Apostle, and whether the term bishop, as used in the second century, was applied to such successors of the apostles. This, however, is not a question which comes directly within the purview of an expositor of the Acts of the Apostles, as the appointment of Timothy and Titus to manage the affairs of the Church in Ephesus and in Crete lies beyond the period covered by the text of the Acts, and properly belongs to the commentary on the Pastoral Epistles. St. Pauls words in this connection have, however, an important bearing on fundamental doctrinal questions connected with the person of the Lord Jesus Christ. St. Paul speaks of the presbyters as called “to feed the Church of God, which He hath purchased with His own blood.” These words are very strong, so strong indeed that various readings have been put forward to mitigate their force. Some have read “Lord” instead of “God,” others have substituted Christ for it; but the Revised Version, following the text of Westcott and Hort, have accepted the strongest form of the verse on purely critical ground, and translates it as “the Church of God, which He hath purchased with His own blood.” This passage, then, is decisive as to the Christological views of St. Luke and the Pauline circle generally. They believed so strongly in the deity of Jesus Christ and His essential unity with the Father that they hesitated not to speak of His sacrifice on Calvary as a shedding of the blood of God, an expression which some fifty years afterwards we find in the Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians, where St. Ignatius speaks of them as “kindled into living fire by the blood of God,” and a hundred years later still, in Tertullian, “Ad Uxor.,” 2:3. This passage has been used in scientific theology as the basis of a principle or theory called the “Communicatio Idiomatum,” a theory which finds an illustration in two other notable passages of Scripture, Joh 3:13 and 1Co 2:8. In the former passage our Lord says of Himself, “No man hath ascended into heaven, but He that descended out of heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven,” where the Son of man is spoken of as in heaven as well as upon earth at the same time, though the Son of man, according to His humanity, could only be in one place at a time. In the second passage St. Paul says, “Which none of the rulers of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of Glory,” where crucifixion is attributed to the Lord of Glory, a title derived from His Divine nature. Now the term “Communicatio Idiomature,” or “transference of peculiar properties,” is given to this usage because in all these texts the properties of the nature pertaining either to God or to man are spoken of as if they belonged to the other; or, to put it far better in the stately language of Hooker, 5, 53., where he speaks of “those cross and circulatory speeches wherein there are attributed to God such things as belong to manhood, and to man such as properly concern the deity of Jesus Christ, the cause whereof is the association of natures in one subject. A kind of mutual commutation there is, whereby those concrete names, God and man, when we speak of Christ, do take interchangeably one anothers room, so that for truth of speech it skilleth not whether we say that the Son of God hath created the world and the Son of man by His death hath saved it, or else that the Son of man did create and the Son of God did die to save the world.” This is a subject of profound speculative and doctrinal interest, not only in connection with the apostolic view of our Lords Person, but also in reference to the whole round of methodised and scientific theology. We cannot, however, afford further space for this subject. We must be content to have pointed it out as an interesting topic of inquiry, and, merely referring the reader to Hooker and to Liddons Bampton Lectures (Lect. 5.) for more information, must hurry on to a conclusion. St. Paul terminates this part of his discourse with expressing his belief in the rapid development of false doctrines and false guides as soon as his repressive influence shall have been removed; a belief which the devout student of the New Testament will find to have been realised when 1Ti 1:20, in 2Ti 1:15, and 2Ti 2:17-18 he finds the Apostle warning the youthful Bishop of Ephesus against Phygelus and Hermogenes, who had turned all Asia away from St. Paul, and against Hymenaeus, Philetus, and Alexander, who had imbibed the Gnostic error concerning matter, which had already led the Corinthians to deny the future character of the Resurrection. St. Paul then terminates his discourse with a solemn commendation of the Ephesian elders to that Divine grace which is as necessary for an apostle as for the humblest Christian. He exhorts them to self-sacrifice and self-denial, reminding them of his own example, having supported himself and his companions by his labour as a tentmaker at Ephesus, and above all of the words of the Lord Jesus, which they apparently knew from some source which has not come down to us, “It is more blessed to give than to receive.”
When the Apostle had thus terminated his address, which doubtless was a very lengthened one, he knelt down, probably on the shore, as we shall find him kneeling in the next chapter {Act 21:5-6} on the shore at Tyre. He then commended them in solemn prayer to God, and they all parted in deep sorrow on account of the final separation which St. Pauls words indicated as imminent; for though the primitive Christians believed in the reality of the next life with an intensity of faith of which we have no conception, and longed for its peace and rest, yet they gave free scope to those natural affections which bind men one to another according to the flesh and were sanctified by the Master Himself when He wept by the grave of Lazarus. Christianity is not a religion of stoical apathy, but of sanctified human affections.