34<\/strong>. This verse is omitted in many ancient MSS., and in others the Greek words vary. It may very well be a marginal note placed to explain Act 15:40<\/em><\/span>, where Paul, who did not leave Antioch, is said to have chosen Silas for his companion in his next journey. Silas therefore must have remained in Antioch after Judas was gone, and such an explanation some reader put on the margin of his copy.<\/p>\n Notwithstanding … – <\/B>This whole verse is missing in many mss.; in the Syriac, Arabic, and Coptic versions; and is regarded as spurious by Mill, Griesbach, and by other critics. It was probably introduced by some early transcriber, who judged it necessary to complete the narrative. The Latin Vulgate reads, It seemed good to Silas to remain, but Judas went alone to Jerusalem.<\/P><\/p>\n Verse 34. Notwithstanding it pleased Silas<\/B><\/I>, &c.] This whole verse is wanting in ABEG, a great number besides, with the Syriac,<\/I> Arabic, Coptic, Slavonic, Vulgate<\/I>, and some of the fathers<\/I>. It does not appear to have been originally in the text.<\/P><\/p>\n Though, having performed his message, he was discharged, and might have returned; yet, for the further benefit of that church, he continued at Antioch. <\/P> <\/p>\n 34, 35. it pleased Silas<\/B>Silasdetermined. <\/P> to abide there still<\/B>(Theauthorities against the insertion of this verse are strong. It mayhave been afterwards added to explain Ac15:40<\/span>). Doubtless the attraction to Antioch for Silas was Paul’spresence there, to whom he seems to have now formed that permanentattachment which the sequel of this book and Paul’s Epistles show tohave existed.<\/P><\/p>\n Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still<\/strong>,…. Though he had leave to go, and was actually dismissed with Judas; and doubtless intended to have gone with him, but for some reason or another he changed his mind, and thought fit to continue at Antioch some time longer: and the design of Providence in it seems to have been this; that he might be a companion with the Apostle Paul in his travels among the Gentiles, as he afterwards was, and was very useful to him. This verse is wanting in the Alexandrian copy, and in the Syriac and Arabic versions; the Ethiopic version reads, “and Paul proposed”, or “determined to abide”, as he did some little time longer, as appears from the following verse: the Vulgate Latin version here adds, and “Judas went alone to Jerusalem”; and so it is read in one of Beza’s copies, and in one of Stephens’s.<\/p>\n But it seemed good unto Silas to abide there <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). This verse is not in the Revised Version or in the text of Westcott and Hort, being absent from Aleph A B Vulgate, etc. It is clearly an addition to help explain the fact that Silas is back in Antioch in verse 40<\/span>. But the “some days” of verse 36<\/span> afforded abundant time for him to return from Jerusalem. He and Judas went first to Jerusalem to make a report of their mission. <\/P> <\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n 1) “Notwithstanding it pleased Silas,”<\/strong> (The Revised Version omits this verse), as doubtful in the original texts. Apparently, from the following account, Act 15:36-40<\/span>, Silas chose not to return to Jerusalem with Jude, the brother of James.<\/p>\n 2) “To abide there still.”<\/strong> (Tho omitted from the Revised Version text), as doubtful in the Gk. text, but Act 15:36-40<\/span> of the original text indicates that Silas did remain in Antioch, later accompany Paul on his second missionary journey. This entire verse is omitted from many ancient Gk. manuscripts and varies in the wording of other copies, leaving the general impression that some copyist of scripts added it as a marginal note to explain Act 15:40<\/span>.<\/p>\n 34<\/strong>. <\/strong> Silas to abide<\/strong> This verse is probably not genuine; being added, as Alford suggests, to account for the fact of Silas’ being still present at Antioch, Act 15:40<\/span>.<\/p>\n 34 Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n Ver. 34. To abide there still<\/strong> ] Upon second thoughts, after he had leave to depart, he stayed there a while longer. This Silas is thought to be the same with Sylvanus, as Joshua is the same with Jehoshua, Hag 2:2<\/span> ; Zec 3:1<\/span> .<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Notwithstanding it pleased Silas<\/strong> ] sc.<\/em> Upon better deliberation and more probability of being there serviceable to God and useful to his Church. Martinus decumbens Domine, dixit, si adhuc populo tuo sum necessarius, non recuso laborem.<\/em> (Sever. Epist. 3.) Choice spirits are all for God; they still study his ends more than their own. <\/p>\n Act 15:34<\/span> . Omitted in R.V. text, but not in margin. See critical notes.<\/p>\n This verse is omitted by all the texts. The Revised Version puts it in the margin. <\/p>\n Act 15:34. ) All the editors have this little verse: nor has Mill removed it from the text of Robert Stephens, though he thinks it to be a gloss. The question is left in doubt by the Greek MSS., and by the arguments derived from the context: whence we have marked it in the Apparatus, pp. 625, 626, as equally balanced on both sides, although in the same place, and in the margin, we have prefixed an obelus. [But the case is otherwise in the margin of ed. ii., which is followed by the Vers. Germ. And now it will be of use to compare App. Crit., ed. ii., on this passage.[93]] But now we embrace the opinion derived from the Greek MSS. which contain the verse, especially since the versions, the thiopic and Arabic, quoted in Ludov. de Dieu, contain it, and the Coptic (Memphitic) in the excerpta sent by La Crozius is not opposed to it.[94] In the other authorities, when Luke, who is different both in name and in the derivation of his name, and in reality, from Silas (see Ord. Temp., p. 278; ed. ii., p. 239), had written, – , the leap was made from to , which caused the hiatus in the Codex Alexandrinus and others, and in the Greek commentators, concerning whom in this passage the Anti-Millius of Whitby is silent, and also in the Syriac version. I feel grateful to my very great friend, D. Hauber, who was the cause of my weighing the present passage more carefully. But the same friend thinks that Silas went to Jerusalem with the intention of returning, and that thence there is ascribed to him an abiding at Antioch.<\/p>\n [93] CD Vulg. MS. Vindobonensis alone, Theb. and later Syr. read this verse: Dd Vulg. Vindob. adding . But ABEe Vulg. Amiat. (the best MS.) Syr. Memph. omit the whole verse.-E. and T.<\/p>\n [94] But the best Memph. MSS. omit the verse.-E. and T.<\/p>\n it pleased: Act 11:25, Act 11:26, Act 18:27, 1Co 16:12 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: 1Th 1:1 – Silvanus<\/p>\n Act 15:34. Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still. This verse is wanting in the older MSS., and in many of the chief versions. It is evidently a marginal gloss, originally inserted to explain how Silas, notwithstanding the statement of Act 15:33, was at hand (Act 15:40) conveniently for Paul to choose him as companion in travel.<\/p>\n See notes on verse 32<\/p>\n Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still. 34. This verse is omitted in many ancient MSS., and in others the Greek words vary. It may very well be a marginal note placed to explain Act 15:40, where Paul, who did not leave Antioch, is said to have chosen Silas for his companion in his … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Acts 15:34”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-27435","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27435","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=27435"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27435\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=27435"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=27435"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=27435"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"