x

Biblia Todo Logo
idiomas
BibliaTodo Commentaries





«

Acts 1 - Meyer Heinrich - Critical and Exegetical NT vs Calvin John

×

Acts 1

Act 1:1. Τὸν μὲν πρῶτον λόγον ἐποιησ.] Luke calls his Gospel the first history, inasmuch as he is now about to compose a second. πρῶτος, in the sense of πρότερος. See on Joh 1:15. λόγος, narrative, history, or the like, what is contained in a book. So in Xen. Ages. 10. 3, Anab. iii. 1. 1, and frequently. See also Schweigh. Lex. Herod. II. p. 76; Creuzer Symbol. I. p. 44 ff. As to ποιεῖν used of mental products, comp. Plat. Phaed. p. 61 B: ποιεῖν μύθονς, ἀλλʼ οὐ λόγους. Hence λογοποιός = ἱστορικός. Pearson, ad Moer. p. 244. μέν, without a subsequent δέ. Luke has broken off the construction. Instead of continuing after Act 1:2 somewhat as follows: “but this δεύτερος λόγος is to contain the further course of events after the Ascension,”-which thought he had before his mind in the μέν, Act 1:1,-he allows himself to be led by the mention of the apostles in the protasis to suppress the apodosis, and to pass on at once to the commencement of the history itself. Comp. Winer, p. 535 [E. T. 720]; Buttm. neut. Gr. p. 313 [E. T. 365]; Kühner, ad Xen. Anab. i. 2.1; Baeuml. Partik. p. 163 f.

περὶ πάντων] a popular expression of completeness, and therefore not to be pressed.

ὧν ἤρξατο κ.τ.λ.] ὧν is attracted, equivalent to ἅ; and, setting aside the erroneous assertion that ἤρξατο ποιεῖν is equivalent to ἐποίησε (Grotius, Calovius, Valckenaer, Kuinoel), it is usually explained: “what Jesus began to do and to teach (and continued) until the day,” etc., as if Luke had written: ὧν ἀρξάμενος Ἰησοῦς ἐποίησε κ. ἐδίδαξεν ἄχρι κ.τ.λ. Comp. Act 11:4; Plat. Legg. vii. p. 807 D; Xen. Anab. vi. 4. 1; Lucian, Somm. 15; also Luk 23:5; Luk 24:27; Luk 24:47; Act 1:22; Act 8:35; Act 10:37. So also Winer, p. 577 [E. T. 775]; Buttm. p. 320 [E. T. 374]; Lekebusch, p. 202 f.[96] But Luke has not so written, and it is arbitrary thus to explain his words. Baumgarten, after Olshausen and Schneckenburger, has maintained that ἤρξατο denotes the whole work of Jesus up to His ascension as initial and preparatory, so that this second book is conceived as the continuation of that doing and teaching which was only begun by Jesus up to His ascension; as if Luke had written ἤρξατο ποιῶν τε καὶ διδάσκων (as Xen. Cyr. viii. 8 2 : ἄρξομαι διδάσκων, I shall begin my teaching, Plat. Theaet. p. 187 A, Menex. p. 237 A; comp. Krüger, § 56. 5, A. 1). In point of fact, ἤρξατο is inserted according to the very frequent custom of the Synoptists, by which that which is done or said is in a vivid and graphic manner denoted according to its moment of commencement. It thus here serves to recall to the recollection from the Gospel all the several incidents and events up to the ascension, in which Jesus had appeared as doer and teacher. The reader is supposed mentally to realize from the Gospel all the scenes in which he has seen Jesus come forward as acting and teaching,-a beginning of the Lord, which occurred in the most various instances and varied ways up to the day of His ascent. The emphasis, moreover, lies on ποιεῖν τε καὶ διδάσκειν, which comprehends the contents of the Gospel (comp. Papias in Eus. 3:39). It may, consequently, be paraphrased somewhat thus: “The first narrative I have composed of all that, by which Jesus exhibited His activity in doing and teaching during His earthly life up to His ascension.” ποιεῖν precedes, comp. Luk 24:19, because it was primarily the ἜΡΓΑ of Jesus that demonstrated His Messiahship, Joh 10:38; Act 10:38.

[96] So also in substance Hackett, Commentary on the Original Text of the Acts of the Apostles, Boston, 1858, ed. 2.



Act 1:2. Until the day on which He was taken up, after that He had commissioned by means of the Holy Spirit the apostles whom He had chosen, belonging to ὧν ἤρξατο κ.τ.λ.

ἄχρι ἧς ἡμέρας] a usual attraction, but to be explained as in Act 1:22; Luk 1:20; Luk 17:27; Mat 24:38.

ἐντειλάμενος] refers neither merely to the baptismal command, Matthew 28, nor merely to the injunction in Act 1:4; but is to be left as general: having given them charges, “ut facere solent, qui ab amicis, vel etiam ex hoc mundo discedunt,” Beza.

διὰ πνεύμ. ἁγίου] belongs to ἐντειλ. τοῖς ἀποστ.: by means of the Holy Spirit, of which He was possessor (Luk 4:1; Luk 14:18; Joh 3:34; Joh 20:22), and by virtue of which He worked, as in general, so specially as regards His disciples (9:55). Yet it is not to be explained as: by communication of the Spirit (comp. Bengel), since this is not promised till afterwards; nor yet as: quae agere deberent per Spir. S. (Grot.), which the words cannot bear. Others (Syr. Ar. Aeth. Cyril, Augustine, Beza, Scaliger, Heumann, Kypke, Michaelis, Rosenmüller, Heinrichs, Kuinoel, Olshausen, de Wette) connect διὰ πνεύμ. ἁγ. with οὓς ἐξελέξατο, quos per Sp. S. elegerat. But there thus would result a hyperbaton which, without any certain example in the N. T. (Winer, p. 517 [E. T. 696]; Buttm. neut. Gr. p. 333 [E. T. 388]), would put a strong emphasis, and yet without any warrant in the context, on διὰ πν. ἁγίου (Plat. Apol. p. 19 D, al.; Dissen, ad Dem. de cor. p. 177 f.; and see on Rom 16:27).

οὓς ἐξελέξ.] is added with design and emphasis; it is the significant premiss to ἐντειλάμ, κ.τ.λ. (whom He had chosen to Himself); for the earlier ἐκλογή on the part of Jesus was a necessary preliminary to their receiving the ἐντολὴ διὰ πν. ἁγ.

ἀνελήφθη] Luk 9:51; Luk 24:51 (Elz.).



Act 1:3. Οἷς καί] to whom also. To the foregoing οὓς ἐξελέξ., namely, there is attached a corresponding incident, through which the new intercourse, in which the ἐντειλάμενος κ.τ.λ. took place, is now set forth.

μετὰ τὸ παθεῖν αὐτόν] includes in it the death as the immediate result of the suffering (Act 3:18, Act 17:3, Act 26:23; Heb 13:12).

διʼ ἡμέρ. τεσσαράκ.] He showed Himself to them throughout forty days, not continuously, but from time to time, which is sufficiently indicated as well known by the preceding ἐν πολλ. τεκμηρίοις.

τὰ περὶ τῆς βασ. τ. Θεοῦ] speaking to them that which related to the Messiah’s kingdom (which He would erect). The Catholics have taken occasion hence to assume that Jesus at this stage gave instructions concerning the hierarchy, the seven sacraments, and the like.

As to the variation of the narrative of the forty days from the narrative given in the Gospel, see on Luk 24:50 f. This diversity presupposes that a not inconsiderable interval occurred between the composition of the Gospel and that of Acts, during which the tradition of the forty days was formed or at least acquired currency. The purposely chosen ὀπτανόμενος, conspiciendum se praebens (comp. Tob 12:19; 1Ki 8:8), corresponds to the changed corporeality of the Risen One (comp. the remark subjoined to Luk 24:51), but does not serve in the least degree to remove that discrepancy (in opposition to Baumgarten, p. 12), as if it presupposed that Jesus, on occasion of every appearance, quitted “the sphere of invisibility.” Comp. the ὤφθη in Luk 24:24; 1Co 15:5 ff.; comp. with Joh 20:17; Act 1:21 f., Act 10:41; Luk 24:42 f.



Act 1:4. To the general description of the forty days’ intercourse is now added (by the simple καί, and), in particular, the description of the two last interviews, Act 1:4 f. and Act 1:6 ff., after which the ἀνελήφθη took place, Act 1:9.

συναλιζόμ. παρήγγ. αὐτοῖς] while He ate with them, He commanded them. συναλιζόμ. is thus correctly understood by the VSS. (Vulg.: convescens), Chrysostom (τραπέζης κοινωνῶν), Theophylact, Oecumenius, Jerome, Beda, and others, including Casaubon.

συναλίζεσθαι (properly, to eat salt with one) in the sense of eating together, is found in a Greek translator of Psa 141:4, where συναλισθῶ (LXX.: συνδυάσω) corresponds to the Hebrew אֶלְחַם, also in Clem. Hom. 6, and Maneth. v. 339. As to the thing itself, comp. on Act 10:41. Usually the word is derived from συναλίζειν, to assemble (Herod. v. 15. 102; Xen. Anab. vii. 3. 48; Lucian, Luct. 7). It would then have to be rendered: when He assembled with them.[97] But against this it is decisive that the sense: when He had assembled with them, would be logically necessary, so that Luke must have written συναλισθείς. The conjecture of Hemsterhuis: συναλιζομένοις, is completely unnecessary, although approved by Valckenaer.

τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν τοῦ πατρός] see on Luk 24:49. Jesus means the promise κατʼ ἐξοχήν, given by God through the prophets of the O. T. (comp. Act 2:16), which (i.e. the realization of which) they were to wait for (περιμένειν only here in the N. T., but often in the classics); it referred to the complete effusion of the Holy Spirit, which was to follow only after His exaltation. Comp. Joh 7:39; Joh 15:26; Joh 14:16. Already during their earthly intercourse the πνεῦμα ἃγ. was communicated by Jesus to the disciples partially and provisionally. Luk 9:55; Joh 20:21-22.

ἣν ἠκούσατέ μου] The oblique form of speech is changed, as frequently also in the classics (Stallb. ad Protag. pp. 322 C, 338 B, Kühner, § 850), with the increase of animation into the direct form, Luk 5:39, and elsewhere, particularly with Luke. See Buttm. neut. Gr. p. 330 [E. T. 385]. Bengel, moreover, aptly says: “Atque hic parallelismus ad arctissimum nexum pertinet utriusque libri Lucae,”-but not in so far as ἣν ἠκούσ. μου points back to Luk 24:49 as to an earlier utterance (the usual opinion), but in so far as Jesus here, shortly before His ascension, gives the same intimation which was also given by Him on the ascension day (Luk 24:49), directly before the ascent; although according to the Gospel the day of the resurrection coincides with that of the ascension. Therefore ἣν ἠκούσ. μου is to be considered as a reference to a former promise of the Spirit, not recorded by Luke (comp. Joh 14:16 f., Act 15:26).

On ἀκούειν τί τινος, see Winer, p. 187 [E. T. 249].

[97] Not as Luther (when He had assembled them), Grotius (“in unum recolligens qui dispersi fuerunt”), and most interpreters, including even Kuinoel and Olshausen (not Beza and de Wette), explain it, as if Luke had employed the active. This is grammatically incorrect; it must then have been συναλίζων, or, with logical accuracy (as Luther felt), συναλίσας.



Act 1:5. Reminiscence of the declaration of the Baptist, Luk 3:16; Joh 1:33. “For on you the baptism of the Spirit will now soon take place, which John promised instead of his baptism of water.”

βαπτισθήσεσθε] τὴν ἐπίχυσιν καὶ τὸν πλοῦτον τῆς χορηγίας σημαίνει., Theophyl.; Mat 3:11; Mar 1:8; Luk 3:16; Act 11:16. Moreover, comp. on Joh 1:33.

οὐ μετὰ πολλ. ταύτ. ἡμέρ.] is not a transposition for οὐ πολὺ μετὰ ταύτ. ἡμέρ., but: not after many of these (now and, up to the setting in of the future event, still current) days. Comp. Winer, p. 152 [E. T. 201]. The position of the negative is to be explained from the idea of contrast (not after many, but after few). See Kühner, II. 628. On ταύτας, inserted between πολλ. and ἡμέρ., comp. Xen. Anab. iv. 2. 6, v. 7. 20, vii. 3. 30; Dem. 90. 11; Alc. 1. 14.



Act 1:6. Not qui convenerant (Vulgate, Luther, and others), as if what follows still belonged to the scene introduced in Act 1:4; but, as is evident from συναλιζ., Act 1:4, comp. with Act 1:12, a new scene, at which the ascension occurred (Act 1:9). The word of promise spoken by our Lord as they were eating (Act 1:4-5), occasioned (μὲν οὖν) the apostles to come together, and in common to approach Him with the question, etc. Hence: They, therefore, after they were come together, asked Him. Where this joint asking occurred, is evident from Act 1:12.[98] To the ΜΈΝ corresponds the ΔΈ in Act 1:7.

ἘΝ Τῷ ΧΡΌΝῼ Κ.Τ.Λ.] The disciples, acquainted with the O. T. promise, that in the age of the Messiah the fulness of the Holy Spirit would be poured out (Joe 3:1-2; Act 2:16 ff.), saw in Act 1:5 an indirect intimation of the now impending erection of the Messianic kingdom; comp. also Schneckenburger, p. 169. In order, therefore, to obtain quite certain information concerning this, their nearest and highest concern, they ask: “Lord, if Thou at this time restorest the (fallen) kingdom to the people Israel?” The view of Lightfoot, that the words were spoken in indignation (“itane nunc regum restitues Judaeis illis, qui te cruci affixerunt?”), simply introduces arbitrarily the point alleged.

εἰ] unites the question to the train of thought of the questioner, and thus imparts to it the indirect character. See on Mat 12:10, and on Luk 13:23.

ἘΝ Τῷ ΧΡ. ΤΟΎΤῼ] i.e. at this present time, which they think they might assume from Act 1:4 f.

ἀποκαθιστ.] See on Mat 17:11. By their Τῷ ἸΣΡΑΉΛ they betray that they have not yet ceased to be entangled in Jewish Messianic hopes, according to which the Messiah was destined for the people of Israel as such; comp. Luk 24:21. An artificial explanation, on the other hand, is given in Hofmann, Schriftbew. II. 2, p. 647.

The circumstance that, by the declaration of Jesus, Act 1:4 f., their sensuous expectation was excited and drew forth such a rash question, is very easily explained just after the resurrection, and need occasion no surprise before the reception of the Spirit itself; therefore we have not, with Baumgarten, to impute to the disciples the reflection that the communication of the Spirit would be the necessary internal ground for all the shaping of the future, according to which idea their question, deviating from the tenor of the promise, would be precisely a sign of their understanding.

[98] Concerning the time of the question, this expression ἐν τῷ χρόνῳ τούτῳ gives so far information that it must have occurred very soon after that meal mentioned in ver. 4, so that no discussions intervened which would have diverted them from this definite inquiry as to the time. Therefore it was probably on the same day. The τούτῳ is thus explained, which sounds as a fresh echo of that οὐ μετὰ πολλ. ταύτ. ἡμ.



f

Act 1:7 f. Jesus refuses to answer the question of the disciples; not indeed in respect of the matter itself involved, but in respect of the time inquired after, as not beseeming them (observe the emphatic οὐχ ὑμῶν); and on the contrary (ἀλλά) He turns their thoughts, and guides their interest to their future official equipment and destination, which alone they were now to lay to heart. Chrysostom aptly says: διδασκάλου τοῦτό ἐστι μὴ ἃ βούλεται ὁ μαθητὴς, ἀλλʼ ἃ συμΦέρει μαθεῖν, διδάσκειν.

χρόνους ἣ καιρούς] times or, in order to denote the idea still more definitely, seasons. καιρός is not equivalent to χρόνος, but denotes a definite marked off portion of time with the idea of fitness. See Thom. Mag. p. 489 f.; Tittm. Synon. N. T. p. 41. On ἤ, which is not equivalent to καί, comp. here Dem. Ol. 3 : τίνα γὰρ χρόνον ἢ τίνα καιρὸν τοῦ παρόντος βελτίω ζητεῖτε;

ἔθετο ἐν τῇ ἰδίᾳ ἐξουσίᾳ] has established by means of His own plenitude of power. On ἐν, comp. Mat 21:23.

The whole declaration (Act 1:7) is a general proposition, the application of which to the question put by the disciples is left to them; therefore only in respect of this application is an ad hanc rem perficiendam to be mentally supplied with ἔθετο. Bengel, however, well observes: “gravis descriptio reservati divini;” and “ergo res ipsa firma est, alias nullum ejus rei tempus esset.” But this res ipsa was, in the view of Jesus (which, however, we have no right to put into the question of the disciples, in opposition to Hofmann, Schriftbew. II. 2, p. 647), the restoration of the kingdom, not for the natural, but for the spiritual Israel, comprehending also the believing Gentiles (Rom 4:9), for the Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ Θεοῦ (Gal 6:16); see Mat 8:11; Joh 10:16; Joh 10:26; Joh 8:42 ff. al.; and already Mat 3:9.

δύναμιν ἐπελθ. τοῦ ἁγ. πν. ἐφ ̓ ὑμᾶς] power, when the Holy Spirit has (shall have) come upon you, Winer, p. 119 [E. T. 156].

μάρτυρες] namely, of my teaching, actions, and life, what ye all have yourselves heard and seen, Act 5:21 f., Act 10:39 ff.; Luk 24:48; Joh 15:27.

ἔν τε Ἱερουσαλ.… τῆς γῆς] denotes the sphere of the apostles’ work in its commencement and progress, up to its most general diffusion; therefore τῆς γῆς is not to be explained of the land, but of the earth; and, indeed, it is to be observed that Jesus delineates for the apostles their sphere ideally. Comp. Act 13:47; Isa 8:9; Rom 10:18; Col 1:23; Mar 16:15.



Act 1:9. Καὶ νεφέλη] This καί annexes what occurred after the ἐπήρθη (He was taken up, on high, not yet immediately into heaven). The cloud, which received Him (into itself) from before their eyes, is the visible manifestation of the presence of God, who takes to Himself His Son into the glory of heaven. Comp. on Luk 1:35; Mat 17:5. Chrysostom calls this cloud τὸ ὄχημα τὸ βασιλικόν.

Concerning the ascension itself, which was certainly bodily, but the occurrence of which has clothed itself with Luke in the traditionary form of an external visible event (according to Dan 7:13; comp. Mat 24:30; Mat 26:64), see remark subjoined to Luk 24:51. The representation of the scene betrays a more developed tradition than in the Gospel, but not a special design (Schnecken-burger: sanction of the foregoing promise and intimation; Baumgarten: that the exalted Christ was to appear as the acting subject properly speaking in the further course of the Book of Acts). Nothing of this kind is indicated.



Act 1:10-11. Ἀτενίζοντες ἦσαν] expresses continuance: they were in fixed gazing. To this (not to πορευομ. αὐτ.) εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν belongs. Comp. Act 3:4, Act 6:15, Act 7:55, Act 11:6, Act 13:9; 2Co 3:7; 2Co 3:13. τῷ οὐρανῷ might also have stood, Luk 4:20; Luk 22:56; Act 3:12; Act 10:4; Act 13:1. See generally, Valck. Schol. p. 309 ff. Comp. Polyb. 6:11. 7. Strangely erroneous is the view of Lange, Apost. Zeitalt. II. p. 12 : that ὥς is not temporal, but as if: “they wished to fix the blue (?) heaven, which one cannot fix.”

πορευομένου αὐτοῦ] whilst He, enveloped by the cloud, was departing (into heaven).

καὶ ἰδού] as in Luk 7:12, Act 10:17; not as an anacoluthon, but: behold also there! See Nägelsbach, z. Ilias, p. 164, ed. 3.

The men are characterized as inhabitants of the heavenly world, angels,[99] who are therefore clothed in white (see on Joh 20:12).

οἳ καὶ εἶπον] who (not only stood, but) also said: comp. Act 1:3.

τί ἑστήκατε κ.τ.λ.] The meaning is: “Remain now no longer sunk in aimless gazing after Him; for ye are not for ever separated from this Jesus, who will so come even as ye have seen Him go away into heaven.”

οὕτως] i.e. in the same manner come down from heaven in a cloud as He was borne up. Comp. Mat 24:30.

On the emphasis οὕτως, ὃν τρόπον, comp. Act 27:25; 2Ti 3:8.

[99] According to Ewald, we are to think on Moses and Elias, as at the transfiguration. But if the tradition had meant these,-and in that case it would certainly have named them,-Luke would hardly have left them unnamed. Comp. rather Luk 24:4; Act 10:30.



Act 1:12. The ascension took place on the Mount of Olives, which is not only here, but also in Luk 19:29; Luk 21:37, called ἐλαιών (see on Luk 19:29). Its locality is indicated in Luk 24:50, not differently from, but more exactly than in our passage (in opposition to de Wette and others); and accordingly there is no necessity for the undemonstrable hypothesis that the Sabbath-day’s journey is to be reckoned from Bethphage (Wieseler, Synop. p. 435). It is not the distance of the place of the ascension, but of the Mount of Olives, on which it occurred, that is meant. Luke here supposes that more precisely defined locality as already known; but if he had had any particular design in naming the Mount of Olives (Baumgarten, p. 28 f.: that he wished to lead their thoughts to the future, according to Eze 11:23; Zec 14:6), he must have said so, and could least of all presume that Theophilus would understand such a tacit prophetic allusion, especially as the Mount of Olives was already sufficiently known to him from the Gospel, Act 19:29, Act 21:37, without any such latent reference.

σαββάτου ἔχον ὁδόν] having a Sabbath’s way. The way is conceived as something which the mountain has, i.e. which is connected with it in reference to the neighbourhood of Jerusalem. Such is-and not with Wetstein and Kuinoel: ἔχειν pro ἀπέχειν-the correct view also in the analogous passages in Kypke, II. p. 8. The more exact determination of ὅ ἐστιν ἐγγὺς Ἱερουσ. is here given; hence also the explanation of Alberti (ad Luk 24:13) and Kypke, that it expresses the extent of the mountain (Sabbati constans itinere), is contrary to the context, and the use of ἔχειν is to be referred to the general idea conjunctum quid cum quo esse (Herm. ad Vig. p. 753).

A ὁδὸς σαββάτου, a journey permitted on the Sabbath[100] according to the traditionary maxims, was of the length of 2000 cubits. See on Mat 24:20. The different statements in Joseph. Antt. xx. 8. 6 (six stadia), and Bell. Jud. v. 2. 3 (five stadia), are to be considered as different estimates of the small distance. Bethany was fifteen stadia from Jerusalem (Joh 11:16); see also Robinson, II. p. 309 f.; hence the locality of the ascension is to be sought for beyond the ridge of the mountain on its eastern slope.

[100] According to Schneckenburger, in the Stud. u. Krit. 1855, p. 502, this statement presupposes that the ascension occurred on the Sabbath. But the inference is rash, and without any historical trace.



Act 1:13-14. Εἰσῆλθον] not: into their place of meeting, as Beza and others hold, but, in accordance with what immediately precedes: into the city. The simple style of a continued narrative.

τὸ ὑπερῶον] עֲלִיָּה, the room directly under the flat roof, used for praying and for meetings (Hieros. Sotah, f. 24. 2). See Lightfoot, p. 11 f., and Vitringa, Synag. p. 145, and concerning the word generally, which is very common with classical writers and not a compound, see Valckenaer, Schol. p. 317 f.; Lobeck, Elem. I. p. 452 f. It is here to be conceived as in a private house, whose possessor was devoted to the gospel, and not with de Dieu, Lightfoot, Hammond, Schoettgen, and Krebs, as an upper room in the temple (on account of Luk 24:53; see on that passage), because, considering the hatred of the hierarchy, the temple could neither be desired by the followers of Jesus, nor permitted to them as a place for their special closed meetings. Perhaps it was the same room as in Joh 20:19; Joh 20:26.

οὗ ἦσαν καταμ.] where, i.e. in which they were wont to reside, which was the place of their common abode. The following ὅ τε Πέτρος κ.τ.λ. is a supplementary more exact statement of the subject of ἀνέβησαν. According to Acts, it is expressly the Eleven only, who were present at the ascension. In the Gospel, Luk 24:33 comp. Luk 1:36; Luk 1:44; Luk 1:50, the disciples of Emmaus and others are not excluded; but according to Mar 16:14, comp. Act 1:15; Act 1:19-20, it is likewise only the Eleven.

As to the list of the apostles, comp. on Mat 10:2-4; Mar 3:17-18; Luk 6:14-16.

ὁ ζηλωτής] the (formerly) zealot. See on Mat 10:4.

Ἰούδας Ἰακώβου] the relationship is arbitrarily defined as: brother of the (younger) James. It is: son of (an otherwise unknown) James. See on Luk 6:15; Joh 14:22; and Huther on Jude, Introd. § 1. Already the Syriac gives the correct rendering.

ὁμοθυμαδόν] denotes no mere external being-together; but, as Luther correctly renders it: unanimously. Comp. Dem. Phil. 4:147: ὁμοθυμαδὸν ἐκ μιᾶς γνώμης. So throughout in Acts and Rom 15:6.

σὺν γυναιξί] along with women; not: cum uxoribus (as Calvin holds);[101] they are partially known from the Gospels; Mat 26:56; Mat 26:61; Luk 8:2 f., Act 24:10; Mar 15:40 f.

ΚΑῚ ΜΑΡΊᾼ] ΚΑΊ, also, singles out, after the mention in general terms, an individual belonging to the class as worthy of special remark. See Fritzsche, ad Marc. p. 11.

ἀδελφοῖς] The unbelief (Joh 7:5) of the four brothers-german of the Lord (see on Mat 12:46; Mat 13:55; Mar 6:3) was very probably overcome by His resurrection. Comp. on 1Co 15:7. Observe that here, besides the eleven apostles, two other classes are specified as assembled along with them (σὺν … καὶ σύν), namely (a), women, including the mother of Jesus; and (b) the brethren of Jesus. Among the latter, therefore, none of those eleven can be included. This in opposition to Lange, Hengstenberg, and older commentators. Comp. on Joh 7:3.

[101] See also Calovius and others, not uninterested in opposing celibacy.



Act 1:15. Ἐν ταῖς ἡμέρ. ταύτ.] between the ascension and feast of Pentecost.

Πέτρος] even now asserting his position of primacy in the apostolic circle, already apparent in the Gospels, and promised to him by Jesus Himself.

τῶν ἀδελφῶν (see the critical notes) denotes, as very often in the Book of Acts and the Epistles, the Christians according to their brotherly fellowship; hence here (see the following parenthesis) both the apostles and the disciples of Jesus in the wider sense.

ὀνομάτ.] of persons, who are numbered. Comp. Ewald, ad Rev 3:4. The expression is not good Greek, but formed after the Hebrew (Num 1:2; Num 1:18; Num 1:20; Num 3:40; Num 3:43).

There is no contradiction between the number 120 and the 500 brethren in 1Co 15:6 (in opposition to Baur and Zeller, who suppose the number to have been invented in accordance with that of the apostles: 12 × 10), as the appearance of Jesus in 1 Cor. l.c., apart from the fact that it may have taken place in Galilee, was earlier, when many foreign believers, pilgrims to the feast, might have been present in Jerusalem, who had now left. Comp. Wieseler, Synops. p. 434, and see on 1Co 15:6; also Lechler, apost. u. nachapost. Zeitalt. p. 275 f.; Baumgarten, p. 29 f.

ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτό] locally united. Comp. Act 2:1, Act 3:1; Luk 17:35; Mat 22:34; 1Co 7:5; 1Co 11:20; 1Co 14:23; Hist. Susann. 14; often also in the LXX. and in Greek writers. See Raphel, Polyb., and Loesner.



Act 1:16-17. Ἄνδρες ἀδελφοί is more honourable and solemn than the simple familiar ἀδελφοί. See Act 2:29; Act 2:37, Act 7:2, al. Comp. Xen. Anab. i. 6. 6 : ἄνδρες φίλοι. See generally Sturz, Lex. Xen. I. p. 238.

ἔδει] It could not but be an especial object with Peter to lay the foundation for his judgment, by urging that the destruction of Judas took place not accidentally, but necessarily according to the counsel of God.

τὴν γραφὴν ταύτην] this which stands written (comp. on Act 8:35) is not, with Wolf and Eckermann, to be referred to Psa 41:10 (Joh 13:18; Joh 18:3), because otherwise that passage must have been adduced; but to the passages contained in Act 1:20, which Peter has already in view, but which he only introduces-after the remarks which the vivid thoughts crowding on him as he names Judas suggest-at Act 1:20 in connection with what was said immediately before.

ὅτι κατηρ.] ὅτι is equivalent to εἰς ἐκεῖνο, ὅτι (Mar 16:14; Joh 2:18; Joh 9:17; 2Co 1:18, al.). If Judas had not possessed the apostolic office, the γραφή referred to, which predicted the very vacating of an apostolic post, would not have been fulfilled in his fate. This fulfilment occurred in his case, inasmuch as he was an apostle.

τὸν κλῆρ. τῆς διακ. ταύτ.] the lot of this (presenting itself in us apostles) ministry, i.e. the apostolic office. Comp. Rom 11:13. ὁ κλῆρος is primarily the lot (Act 1:26), then that which is assigned by lot, and then generally what is assigned, the share; just as in Greek writers. Comp. Act 8:21; Act 26:18; Wis 2:9; Wis 5:5; Sir 25:19. Baumgarten gratuitously would understand it as an antitype of the share of the twelve tribes in the land of Canaan. The genitive is to be taken partitively (share in this ministry), as the idea of apostolic fellowship, in which each κληροῦχος has therefore his partial possession in the service, also occurs in the sequel (see Act 1:22; Act 1:26).

λαγχάνειν here not, as in Luk 1:9, with the partitive genitive, but, as is usual (2Pe 1:1), with the accusative of the object. See Bernhardy, p. 176; Ellendt, Lex. Soph. II. p. 2. The word is the usual term for obtaining by lot, as in Luk 1:9; it next signifies generally to obtain, and is especially used of the receiving of public magistracies (Dem. 1306. 14; Plat. Gorg. p. 473 E). So here in reference to τ. κλῆρ. τ. διακ. ταύτ.; in which case, however, an allusion to a hierarchical constitution (Zeller) is excluded by the generality of the usus loquendi of the expressions, which, besides, might be suggested by the thought of the actual use of the lot which afterwards took place.



Act 1:18. This person now acquired for himself a field for the wages of his iniquity-a rhetorical indication of the fact exactly known to the hearers: for the money which Judas had received for his treason, a place, a piece of land, was purchased (Mat 27:6-8). This rhetorical designation, purposely chosen on account of the covetousness of Judas,[102] clearly proves that Act 1:18 is part of the speech of Peter, and not, as Calvin, Heinrichs, Kuinoel, Olshausen, and others think, a remark inserted by Luke. With regard to the expression of the fact itself, Chrys. correctly remarks: ἠθικὸν ποιεῖ τὸν λόγον καὶ λανθανόντως τὴν αἰτίαν παιδευτικὴν οὖσαν ἀποκαλύπτει. To go further, and to assume-what also the fragment of Papias in Cramer’s Cat. narrates-that the death of Judas took place in the field itself (Hofm. Weissag. u. Erf. II. p. 134; Baumg. p. 31; Lange), is not warranted by any indication in the purposely chosen form of representation. Others, such as Strauss, Zeller, de Wette, Ewald, have been induced by the direct literal tenor of the passage to assume a tradition deviating from Matthew (that Judas himself had actually purchased the field); although it is improbable in itself that Judas, on the days immediately following his treason, and under the pressure of its tragical event, should have made the purchase of a property, and should have chosen for this purchase the locality of Jerusalem, the arena of his shameful deed.

καὶ πρηνὴς γενόμ., etc.] ΚΑΊ is the simple and, annexing to the infamous deed its bloody reward. By πρηνὴς γενόμ.[103] κ.τ.λ., the death of Judas is represented as a violent fall (πρηνής, headlong: the opposite ὕπτιος, Hom. Il. xi. 179, xxiv. 11) and bursting. The particular circumstances are presupposed as well known, but are unknown to us. The usual mode of reconciliation with Matthew-that the rope, with which Judas hanged himself, broke, and that thus what is here related occurred-is an arbitrary attempt at harmonizing. Luke follows another tradition, of which it is not even certain whether it pointed to suicide. The twofold form of the tradition (and in Papias there occurs even a third[104]) does not render a tragical violent end of Judas unhistorical in itself (Strauss, Zeller, and others), but only makes the manner of it uncertain. See, generally, on Mat 27:5.

ἐλάκησε] he cracked, burst in the midst of his body,-a rhetorically strong expression of bursting with a noise. Hom. Il. xiii. 616; Act. Thom. 37.

ἐξεχύθη] Comp. Ael. Anim. iv. 52: τὰ σπλάγχνα ἐξέχεαν.

[102] Beza aptly remarks that the mode of expression affirms “non quid conatus sit Judas, sed consiliorum ipsius eventum.”

[103] Which cannot be rendered suspensus (Vulgate, Erasmus, Luther, Castalio).

[104] See on Mat 27:5, and comp. Introd sec. 1.



Act 1:19. Not even these words are to be considered, with the above-mentioned expositors (also Schleierm. Einl. p. 372), as an inserted remark of Luke, but as part of the speech of Peter. For all that they contain belongs essentially to the complete description of the curse of the action of Judas: ἐγένετο forms with ἐλάκησε and ἐξεχύθη, Act 1:18, one continuously flowing representation, and γνωστὸν … Ἱερουσ. is more suitable to rhetorical language than to that of simple narration. But τῇ ἰδίᾳ διαλέκτῳ αὐτῶν[105] and τοῦτ ̓ ἔστι χωρ. αἵμ. are two explanations inserted by Luke, the distinction between which and Peter’s own words might be trusted to the reader; for it is self-evident (in opposition to Lange and older commentators) that Peter spoke not Greek but Aramaic.

γνωστὸν ἐγέν.] namely, what is stated in Act 1:18.

ὥστε] so that, in consequence of the acquisition of that field and of this bloody death of Judas becoming thus generally known. According to our passage, the name “field of blood” (חֲקַל דְּמָא, comp. Mat 27:8) was occasioned by the fact that Judas, with whose wages of iniquity the field was acquired, perished in a manner so bloody (according to others: on the field itself; see on Act 1:18). The passage in Matthew, l.c., gives another and more probable reason for the name. But it is by no means improbable that the name soon after the death of Judas became assigned, first of all, in popular use, to the field purchased for the public destination of being a ΧΩΡΊΟΝ ἘΝΤΑΦῆΝΑΙ (Aeschin. i. 99; Mat 28:7); hence Peter might even now quote this name in accordance with the design of his speech.

ΔΙΆΛΕΚΤΟς] (in the N. T. only in Acts), a mode of speaking, may express as well the more general idea of language, as the narrower one of dialect.[106] In both senses it is often used by Polybius, Plutarch, etc. In the older Greek it is colloquium (Plat. Symp. p. 203 A, Theaet. p. 146 B), pronuntiatio (Dem. 982. 18), sermo (Arist. Poet. 22). In all the passages of Acts it is dialect, and that, excepting at Act 2:6; Act 2:8, the Aramaic, although it has this meaning not in itself, but from its more precise definition by the context.

[105] αὐτῶν: of the dwellers of Jerusalem (who spoke the Aramaic dialect), spoken from the standpoint of Luke and Theophilus, “quorum alter Graece scriberet alter legeret,” Erasmus.

[106] Valckenaer well observes on the distinction between these two ideas: “Habent omnes dialecti aliquid inter se commune; habent enim omnes eandem linguam matrem, sed dialectum efficit, quod habent singulae peculiare sibi.” The Greeks also employ φωνή in both senses (see also Clem. Al. Strom. i. 21, p. 404, Pott).



Act 1:20. Γάρ] The tragic end of Judas was his withdrawal from the apostolic office, by which a new choice was now necessary. But both that withdrawal and this necessity are, as already indicated in Act 1:16, to be demonstrated not as something accidental, but as divinely ordained.

The first passage is Psa 69:26, freely quoted from memory, and with an intentional change of the plural (LXX. αὐτῶν), because its historical fulfilment is represented κατʼ ἐξοχήν in Judas. The second passage is Psa 109:8, verbatim, after the LXX. Both passages contain curses against enemies of the theocracy, as the antitype of whom Judas here appears.

The ἔπαυλις is not that χωρίον which had become desolate by the death of Judas (Chrysostom, Oecumenius, and others; also Strauss, Hofmann, de Wette, Schneckenburger), but it corresponds to the parallel ἐπισκοπή, and as the χωρίον is not to be considered as belonging to Judas (see on Act 1:18), the meaning is: “Let his farm, i.e. in the antitypical fulfilment of the saying in the Psalm, the apostolic office of Judas, become desolate, forsaken by its possessor, and non-existent, i.e. let him be gone, who has his dwelling therein.”

τὴν ἐπισκοπ.] the oversight (Lucian, D. D. xx. 8, frequently in the LXX. and Apocr.), the superintendence which he had to exercise, פְּקֻּרָּה, in the sense of the πλήρωσις: the apostolic office. Comp. 1Ti 3:1 (of the office of a bishop).



Act 1:21-22. Οὖν] In consequence of these two prophecies, according to which the office of Judas had to be vacated, and its transference to another is necessary.

τῶν συνελθὁντων] dependent on ἕνα, Act 1:22 : one of the men who have gone along with us (Act 9:39, Act 10:23, al.; Hom, Il. x. 224), who have taken part in our wanderings and journeys. Others: who have come together with us, assembled with us (Soph. O. R. 572; Polyb. i. 78. 4). So Vulgate, Beza, de Wette, but never so in the N. T. See on Mar 14:53.

ἐν παντὶ χρόνῳ, ἐν ᾧ] all the time, when.

εἰσῆλθε καὶ ἐξῆλθεν] a current, but not a Greek, designation of constant intercourse. Deu 28:19; Psa 121:8; 1Sa 29:6; 2Ch 1:10. Comp. Joh 10:9; Act 9:28.

ἐφʼ ἡμᾶς a brief expression for ἐισῆλθ. ἐφʼ ἡμᾶς κ. ἐξηλθ. ἀφʼ ἡμῶν. See Valckenaer on the passage, and ad Eurip. Phoen. 536; Winer, p. 580 [E. T. 780]. Comp. also Joh 1:51.

ἀρξάμ.… ʼΙωάννου is a parenthesis, and ἕως τῆς ἡμέρας is to be attached to εἰσῆλθε … ʼΙησοῦς, as Luk 23:5. See on Mat 20:8.

ἕως τ. ἡμ. ἧς κ.τ.λ.] ἧς is not put by attraction for ᾗ,-as the attraction of the dative, very rare even among the Greek writers (see Kühner, ad Xen. Mem. II. 2. 4), is without example in the N. T.,-but is the genitive of the definition of time (Matthiae, § 377. 2; Winer, p. 155 [E. T. 204]). So, too, in Lev 23:15; Bar 1:19. Comp. Tob 10:1; Susann. 15; Hist. Bel and Drag. 3. Hence also the expression having the preposition involved, ἄχρι ἧς ἡμέρας, Act 1:2, comp. Act 24:11.

μάρτυρα τῆς ἀναστ. αὐτοῦ] i.e. apostle, inasmuch as the apostles announce the resurrection of Jesus (1 Corinthians 15), the historical foundation of the gospel, as eye-witnesses, i.e. as persons who had themselves seen and conversed with the risen Jesus (comp. Act 2:32, and see on Act 1:8).

τούτων] is impressively removed to the end, pointing to those to be found among the persons present (of those there), and emphatically comprehending them (Dissen, ad Dem. de cor. p. 225).

Thus Peter indicates, as a requisite of the new apostle,[107] that he must have associated with the apostles (ἡμῖν) during the whole of the ministry of Jesus, from the time when John was still baptizing (ἀπὸ τοῦ βαπτ. Ἰωάνν.) until the ascension. That in this requirement, as Heinrichs and Kuinoel suppose, Peter had in view one of the Seventy disciples, is an arbitrary assumption. But it is evident that for the choice the apostles laid the entire stress on the capacity of historical testimony (comp. Act 10:41), and justly so, in conformity with the positive contents of the faith which was to be preached, and as the element of the new divine life was to be diffused. On the special subject-matter of the testimony (τῆς ἀναστ. αὐτοῦ) Bengel correctly remarks: “qui illud credidere, totam fidem suscepere.” How Peter himself testified, may be seen at 1Pe 1:3. Comp. Act 2:32; Act 3:15; Act 4:33; Act 5:32; Act 10:40.

[107] And Luke relates this as faithfully and dispassionately as he does what is contained in Act 10:41. He would hardly have done so, if he had had the design imputed to him by Baur and his school, as such sayings of Peter did not at all suit the case of Paul.



Act 1:23. Ἔστησαν] The subject is, as in Act 1:24; Act 1:26, all those assembled. They had recognised in these two the conditions required by Act 5:21 f. “Ideo hic demum sors incipit, qua res gravis divinae decisioni committitur et immediata apostoli peragitur vocatio,” Bengel. For this solemn act they are put forward.

Ἰωσήφ τ. καλ. Βαρσαβᾶν] Concerning him nothing further is known. For he is not identical (in opposition to Heinrichs and others, also Ullmann in the Stud. u. Krit. 1828, p. 377 ff.) with Joses Barnabas, Act 4:36, against which opinion that very passage itself testifies; from it have arisen the name Ἰωσήν in B and Βαρνάβαν in D (so Bornemann). See also Mynster in the Stud. u. Krit. 1829, p. 326 f. Barsabas is a patronymic (son of Saba); Justus is a Roman surname (יוסטי), adopted according to the custom then usual, see Schoettgen.

Nor is anything historically certain as to Matthias. Traditional notices in Cave, Antiq. ap. p. 735 ff. According to Eus. 1:12. 1, he was one of the Seventy. Concerning the apocryphal Gospel under his name, already mentioned by Origen, see Fabric. Cod. apocr. N. T. p. 782 ff. apocryphal Acta Andreae et Matthiae may be seen in Tischend. Act. apocr. p. 132 ff.



Act 1:24-25. Without doubt it was Peter, who prayed in the name of all present. The προσευξάμ. is contemporaneous with εἶπον: praying they said. See on Eph 1:9.

κύριε] יהוה. Comp. Act 4:29. In opposition to the view of Bengel, Olshausen, and Baumgarten, that the prayer is directed to Jesus,-for which ὃν ἐξελέξω is appealed to, because Christ chooses His own messengers,-Act 15:7 is decisive, where the same Peter says expressly of God: ἐξελέξατο διὰ τοῦ στόματός μου ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἔθνη, etc., and then also calls God καρδιογνώστης (comp. ח̇קֵר לֵב, Jer 17:10). By the decision of the lot the call to the apostleship was to take place, and the call is that of God, Gal 1:15. God is addressed as καρδιογνώστ. because the object was to choose the intrinsically best qualified among the two, and this was a matter depending on the divine knowledge of the heart. The word itself is found neither in Greek writers nor in the LXX.

In λαβεῖν τὸν τόπον (see the critical notes) the ministry is considered as a place, as a post which the person concerned is to receive. Comp. Sir 12:12.

καὶ ἀποστολῆς] designates more definitely the previous διακονίας. There is thus here, among the many instances for the most part erroneously assumed, a real case of an ἓν διὰ δυοῖν. See Fritzsche, ad Matth. p. 856; Nägelsb. z. Ilias, p. 361, ed. 3.

ἀφʼ ἧς παρέβη] away from which Judas has passed over, to go to his own place. A solemn circumstantiality of description. Judas is vividly depicted, as he, forsaking his apostleship (ἀφʼ ἧς), has passed from that position to go to his own place. Comp. Sir 23:18 : παραβαίνων ἀπὸ τῆς κλίνης αὐτοῦ.

πορευθ. εἰς τ. τόπ. τ. ἴδιον] denotes the end destined by God for the unworthy Judas as his own, to which he must come by his withdrawal from the apostolic office. But the meaning of ὁ τόπος ὁ ἴδιος (the expression is purposely chosen as correlative to τὸν τόπον τ. διακ. etc.) is not to be decided from the linguistic use of τόπος, as τόπος may denote any place, but entirely from the context. And this requires us to understand by it Gehenna, which is conceived as the place to which Judas, according to his individuality, belongs. As his treason was so frightful a crime, the hearers could be in no doubt as to the τόπος ἴδιος. This explanation is also required for the completeness and energy of the speech, and is itself confirmed by analogous rabbinical passages; see in Lightfoot, e.g. Baal Turim, on Num 24:25 : “Balaam ivit in locum suum, i.e. in Gehennam.” Hence the explanations are to be rejected which refer τόπ. ἴδιος to the habitation of Judas (Keuchen, Moldenhauer, Krebs, Bolten), or to that χωρίον, where he had perished (Elsner, Zeller, Lange, Baumgarten, and others), or to the “societas, quam cum sacerdotibus ceterisque Jesu adversariis inierat” (Heinrichs). Others (Hammond, Homberg, Heumann, Kypke, comp. already Oecumenius) refer πορευθῆναι … ἴδιον even to the successor of Judas, so that the τόπ. ἴδιος would be the apostleship destined for him. But such a construction would be involved (πορευθ. would require again to be taken as an object of λαβεῖν), and after λαβεῖν … ἀποστολῆς tautological. The reading δίκαιον (instead of ἴδιον) in A hits the correct meaning. The contrast appears in Clem. Cor. I. 5 as to Paul: εἰς τὸν ἅγιον τόπον ἐπορεύθη, and as to Peter: εἰς τὸν ὀφειλόμενον τόπον τῆς δόξης. Comp. Polyc. Phil. 9; Ignat. Magn. 5.



Act 1:26. And they (namely, those assembled) gave for them (αὐτοῖς, see the critical notes) lots-i.e. tablets, which were respectively inscribed with one of the two names of those proposed for election-namely, into the vessel in which the lots were collected, Lev 16:8. The expression ἔδωκαν is opposed to the idea of casting lots; comp. Luk 23:34 and parallels.

ἔπεσεν ὁ κλῆρος] the lot (giving the decision by its falling out) fell (by the shaking of the vessel, πάλλειν; comp. Hom. Il. iii. 316. 324, vii. 181, Od. xi. 206, al.).

ἐπὶ Ματθ.] on Matthias, according to the figurative conception of the lot being shaken over both (Hom. Od. xiv. 209; Psa 22:19, al.). Comp. LXX. Eze 24:6; Joh 1:7.

This decision by the θεία τύχη (Plat. Legg. 6:759 C; comp. Pro 16:33) of the lot is an Old Testament practice (Num 26:52 ff.; Jos 7:14; 1Sa 10:20; 1Ch 24:5; 1Ch 25:8; Pro 16:33; comp. also Luk 1:9), suitable for the time before the effusion of the Spirit, but not recurring afterwards, and therefore not to be justified in the Christian congregational life by our passage.

συγκατεψηφ. μετὰ τ. ἕνδ. ἀπ.] he was numbered along with[108] the eleven apostles, so that, in consequence of that decision by lot, he was declared by those assembled to be the twelfth apostle. Bengel correctly adds the remark: “Non dicuntur manus novo apostolo impositae, erat enim prorsus immediate constitutus.” It is otherwise at Act 6:6.

The view which doubts the historical character of the supplementary election at all (see especially Zeller), and assumes that Matthias was only elected at a later period after the gradual consolidation of the church, rests on presuppositions (it is thought that the event of Pentecost must have found the number of the apostles complete) which break down in presence of the naturalness of the occurrence, and of the artless simplicity of its description.

[108] συγκαταψηφίζεσθαι in this sense, thus equivalent to συμψηφίζεσθαι (Act 19:19), is not elsewhere found; D actually has συνεψηφίσθη as the result of a correct explanation. The word is, altogether, very rare; in Plut. Them. 21 it signifies to condemn with. Frequently, and quite in the sense of συγκαταψηφ. here, συγκαταριθμεῖσθαι is found. א* has only κατεψηφίσθη. So also Constitt. ap. vi.12.1.




×

Acts 1

That he may pass over unto those things which followed the ascension of Christ, he briefly gathereth the sum of all those which before he had handled in the former book, that he may annex this thereunto. And he briefly setteth down this description of the history of the gospel, that it is a narration of those things which Christ did and said so long as he was conversant upon earth. Furthermore, whereas they interpret this commonly, that there was first in Christ purity of life, before such time as he began to preach, it maketh nothing unto Luke’s mind. Truth it is, that the manners of a good and godly teacher ought so to be framed, that he speak first with his life, then with his tongue, otherwise he should differ nothing from a stage-player. But Luke hath respect rather unto that which he had said about the end of his gospel, (Luk 24:19,) namely, that Christ was a prophet mighty in deed and word, that is, such a one as did excel no less in deeds than in words; although there be but small difference betwixt these two places. For the mightiness of works which is commended there doth belong unto his miracles, but this, to do, doth reach further in my opinion, namely, that under the same are comprehended all the famous acts which were proper unto his ministry, wherein his death and resurrection are the chiefest. For the office of the Messias did not only consist in doctrine, but it was also behoveful that he should make peace between God and man, that he should be a Redeemer of the people, a restorer of the kingdom, and an author of everlasting felicity. All these things, I say, as they were promised of the Messias, so were they looked for at his hands.

Now we see that the sum of the gospel consisteth of these two parts, namely, of the doctrine of Christ, and of his acts; forasmuch as he did not only bring unto men that embassage which was given him in charge of his Father, but also performed all things that could be required of the Messias. He began his kingdom, he pacified God with his sacrifice, he purged man’s sins with his own precious blood, he subdued death and the devil, he restored us unto true liberty, he purchased righteousness and life for us. And to the end that whatsoever he either did or said might be certain, he proved himself by miracles to be the Son of God. So that this word, to do, is extended unto his miracles also; but it must not be restrained only unto the same. Here must we note, that those which have only the bare knowledge of the history have not the gospel; unless the knowledge of the doctrine which maketh manifest the fruits of the acts of Christ be adjoined thereunto. For this is a holy knot which no man may dissolve. Therefore, whensoever mention is made of the doctrine of Christ, let us learn to adjoin thereunto his works, as seals whereby the truth thereof is established and confirmed, and the effect declared. Furthermore, that we may reap commodity by his death and resurrection, and also that miracles may have their use, we must always have respect unto him that speaketh. For this is the true rule of Christianity.

1.Of all things which he began I do not greatly mislike the interpretation which some give of this place that Luke said rather of all than all; because it is possible in some measure to intreat of the works and doctrine of Christ, but to set down the whole course, that the narration may be perfect, were a matter of great (18) weight. Like as John doth declare that the world could not contain the books, (Joh 21:25.) That is also to be noted that Luke saith, that he began his history at the beginning of the works of Christ. But so soon as he hath declared the nativity of Christ, he passeth over unto the twelfth year of his age (Luk 2:42;) and after he had briefly spoken of his disputation had in the temple with the doctors, passing over eighteen years without speaking any thing of them, he entereth [on] the just narration of the works of Christ. It is, therefore, manifest that those works and sayings only which make any thing unto the sum of our salvation are noted in this place. For, after that Christ came abroad into the world clothed with our flesh, he lived privately at home until he was thirty years of age, at which time his Father put upon him another manner of person. God would have him to lead the former part of his life obscurely, to this end, that the knowledge of these things might be more excellent which do edify our faith.

The former speech. It seemed good to me to translate this on this wise, because λογον ποιεισθὰι, is the same with the Grecians, which verba facere, or to speak, is with the Latins, as Budaeus doth note. And we must understand the contrariety of the second part, which he taketh in hand, that we may know that the evangelist determined with himself afresh to write, having new matter whereupon to write.



(18) “Nimiae,” too great.



2. Even until that day. Therefore, the ascension of Christ is the end of the history of the gospel. For he hath ascended, saith Paul, that he might fulfill all things, (Eph 4:10.) Our faith gathereth other fruit thereby; but it shall be sufficient to note in this place, that our redemption was fully complete and finished then when Christ did ascend unto his Father; and, therefore, that Luke did fully perform his duty in this narration, as touching the doctrine and works of Christ. And he is said to be taken up, that we may know that he is truly departed out of this world, lest we should consent unto their dotings who think that in his ascension there was no alteration of place made.

Commandment by the Holy Ghost Luke showeth in these words, that Christ did not so depart out of the world that he did no longer care for us; for in that he hath ordained a perpetual government in his Church, he thereby declareth that he had a care to provide for our salvation; yea, he hath promised that he will be present with his to the end, (Mat 28:20,) like as, indeed, he is always present by his ministers. Luke, therefore, doth show unto us, that Christ did no sooner depart hence, but straightway he provided for the government of his Church; whence we may gather that he is careful for our salvation. And this his providence hath Paul plainly noted in the place lately cited, when he saith, That he hath fulfilled all things, making some apostles, some evangelists, some pastors, etc. But these commandments, which the evangelist saith Christ gave unto his disciples, do I interpret of the preaching of the gospel; like as ambassadors use to be instructed with certain precepts before they go of their embassage, lest they should rashly attempt any thing contrary to his will and mind that sendeth them. And all this is spoken in commendation of that doctrine which the apostles taught. The which that it may appear more manifestly, every thing is to be marked in order as it lieth. First of all, he saith they were elect and chosen of Christ, that we may be certain of their calling unto that function. Neither doth he in this place set God’s election against man’s merits, but only affirmeth that they were raised up by God, and that they did not rashly take upon them this function. That is true, indeed, that they were freely chosen; but now have we to inquire what is Luke’s drift in this place. I say that he hath respect unto nothing else, but that we may be certain of the calling of the apostles, that we may learn not to have respect unto men, but unto the Son of God, the author thereof, because this must always be a maxim in the Church, that no man usurp any honor. Secondly, he saith, that they were instructed of Christ what they should do. As if he should say, that they uttered not their own inventions, but they delivered that sincerely and faithfully which was enjoined them by their heavenly Master. And to the end that that which Christ taught them might be the more reverenced, he addeth this, that this was done by the direction of the Holy Ghost. Not because the Son of God had any need to be guided by any other, who is eternal wisdom, but because he was also man, lest any man should think that he did deliver those things unto his disciples which he delivered by man’s wit and reason, he calleth us back expressly unto the divine authority. Like as the Lord himself doth so often affirm, that he taught nothing but that which he had received of his Father; and therefore he saith, that his doctrine was not his own. Therefore, he signifieth that in the preaching of the gospel there is nothing which issueth from man’s brain, but that it is the divine ordinance of the Spirit, whereunto the whole world must be subject.



3. Unto whom, etc He addeth this, that he might make the resurrection to be believed, as a thing most necessary to be known, and without the which the whole gospel falleth fiat to the ground, neither remaineth there any more faith. And that I may omit to speak of other discommodities that come by being ignorant of the resurrection of Christ, the gospel loseth his whole authority, unless we know and be also fully persuaded that Christ being alive, speaketh unto us from the heavens. Whereunto Luke hath chiefest respect in this place. Therefore, that the truth hereof might not be called in question, he saith that it was proved by many signs and tokens. Those which Erasmus, following an old interpreter, doth call arguments, I have translated proofs. For Aristotle doth call that τεκμηριον, in the first book of his Rhetorics, which is necessary in signs. This is, therefore, that which I said before, that Christ did make manifest his resurrection unto his apostles by evident tokens, which did serve instead of necessary proofs, lest they should doubt of the same. Furthermore, he doth not reckon up those tokens and signs, saving only that he saith, that Christ did appear unto them about the space of a month and one-half oftentimes. If he had but once appeared unto them, it might have been somewhat suspicious, but in showing himself so often unto them, he dissolveth all doubts which might arise in their minds, and by this means, also, he putteth away the reproach of the ignorance which he said was in the apostles, lest it discredit their preaching.

He intreateth of the kingdom of God He telleth us again that the apostles themselves were well taught (19) before such time as they took upon them to teach others; therefore, whatsoever things they uttered and brought to light, either by word or by writing, touching the kingdom of God, they are those speeches which Christ himself uttered. And hereby doth he briefly set down the end of the doctrine of the gospel; namely, that God may reign in us. Regeneration is the beginning of this kingdom, and the end thereof is blessed immortality; the middle proceedings are in a more ample going forward and increase of regeneration. But that this thing may appear more evidently, we must first note, that we are born, and that we live aliens and strangers from the kingdom of God, until such time as God doth fashion us again unto a new life. Therefore, we may properly set the world, the flesh, and whatsoever is in man’s nature against the kingdom of God, as contrary to it. For the natural man is wholly occupied about the things of this world, and he seeketh felicity here; (20) in the mean season, we are as it were banished from God, and he likewise from us; but Christ, by the preaching of the gospel, doth lift us up unto the meditation of the life to come. And to the end he may the better bring this to pass, he reformeth all our earthly affections, and so having striped us out of the vices of our flesh, he separateth us from the world. And, like as eternal death is prepared for all those which live after the flesh, so in as much as the inward man is renewed in us, that we may go forward in the spiritual life, we draw nearer unto the perfection of the kingdom of God; which is the society of the glory of God. Therefore, God will reign in and amongst us now, that he may at length make us partakers of his kingdom. Hereby we gather that Christ did principally intreat of the corruption of mankind; of the tyranny of sin, whose bond-slaves we are; of the curse and guiltiness of eternal death, whereunto we all are subject, and also of the means to obtain salvation; of the remission of sins; of the denying of the flesh; of spiritual righteousness; of hope of eternal life, and of like such things. And if we will be rightly instructed in Christianity, we must apply our studies to these things.



(19) “Ab unico magistro,” by the only master, omitted.

(20) “Et ultimum bonum,” and it is his final good, omitted.



4. Gathering them together, he commanded, etc They had before done the duty of Apostles; but that lasted but a while; and, secondly, so far forth that they might with their preaching awake the Jews to hear their Master. And so that commandment to teach, which Christ had given them, (Mat 10:7,) whilst he lived with them upon earth, was, as it were, a certain entrance into their apostleship which was to come, for which they were not yet ripe. Therefore, their ordinary function was not laid upon them, until such time as Christ was risen again; but they stirred up their nation (as I have said) like criers, that they might give ear to Christ. And then at length, after the resurrection, they were made Apostles, to publish abroad throughout the whole world that doctrine which was committed to them. And whereas after they were made Apostles, Christ commandeth them as yet to abstain from their office, that is done not without just cause; yea, many causes may be alleged why it should be so. That filthy forsaking of their Master was yet fresh; many notes and tokens of unbelief were yet fresh. Whereas, they had been so thoroughly taught, and had so suddenly forgotten all, they showed a manifest token of their great dullness of wit. Neither were they free from sluggishness, which could not otherwise fitly be purged, than by deferring the promised grace, that he might the more sharpen their desire. But this cause is chiefly to be noted, that the Lord did appoint a certain time for the sending of the Spirit, that the miracle might be the more apparent. Again, he suffered them to rest a while, that he might the better set forth the greatness of that business which he was about to commit unto them. And thereby is the truth of the gospel confirmed, because the Apostles were forbidden to address themselves to preach the same, until they should be well prepared in succession of time.

And they were commanded to stay together, because they should all have one spirit given them. If they had been dispersed, the unity should not have been so well known. Though they were scattered abroad afterwards in divers places, yet because they brought that which they had from one and the same fountain, it was all one, as if they always had had all one mouth. Furthermore, it was expedient that they should begin to preach the gospel at Jerusalem, that the prophecy might be fulfilled,

“There shall a law go out of Zion,

and the word of the Lord out of Jerusalem,” (Isa 2:3.)

Although the participle συναλιζομενος, may be diversely translated, yet Erasmus his translation did please me best, because the signification of gathering together will agree better with the text, [context.]

They should wait for the promise It was meet that these should be accustomed to obey first, who should shortly after lay Christ’s yoke upon the neck of the world. And surely they have taught us by their example, that we must work and rest at the Lord’s pleasure alone. For if, during our life, we go on warfare under his banner and conduct, surely he ought to have no less authority over us than any earthly captain hath in his army. Therefore, as warlike discipline requireth this, that no man wage unless he be commanded by the captain, so it is not lawful for us either to go out, or to attempt any thing, until the Lord give the watchword; and so soon as he bloweth the retreat, we must stay, [halt.] Moreover, we are taught that we are made partakers of the gifts of God through hope. But we must mark the nature of hope as it is described in this place. For that is not hope which every man feigneth to himself unadvisedly, but that which is grounded on the promise of God. Therefore Christ cloth not suffer his apostles to look for whatsoever they will, but he addeth expressly the promise of the Father. Furthermore, he maketh himself a witness thereof; because we ought to be so sure and certain, that although all the engines of hell gainstand us, yet this may remain surely fixed in our minds, that we have believed God. I know, saith Paul, whom I have believed, (Tit 1:12.) And here he putteth them in mind of those things which are written in Joh 14:15,

“I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may continue with you; I say the Spirit of truth,” etc.

Again,

“I have spoken these things unto you while I am with you.” “And the Spirit, whom my Father shall send in my name, shall teach you all things,” (Joh 14:25,) etc.

And again,

“When the Spirit of truth shall come, whom I will send from my Father, he shall bear witness of me,” (Joh 15:26.)

And again,

“If I shall go hence, I will send you the Comforter, who shall reprove the world,” (Joh 16:7.)

And he had said long before,

“He which believeth in me, out of his belly

shall flow rivers of living water,”

(Joh 7:38.)



5. Because John truly Christ repeateth this unto his apostles out of John’s own words. For some part of them had heard that at John’s mouth, which the Evangelists report, “I truly baptize you with water, but he that cometh after me shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire.” Now Christ pronounceth that they shall well perceive that that is true indeed which he said. Furthermore, this serveth greatly to confirm the sentence next going before, for it is an argument drawn from the office of Christ. And that thus: John was sent to baptize with water, he fulfilled his function as it became the servant of God. The Son of God is sent to baptize with the Holy Ghost; it remained, therefore, that he do his duty. Neither can it be otherwise but he must do that which his Father hath commanded him to do, and for which also he came down into the earth. But it seemeth a very absurd thing to restrain that unto the visible sending of the Holy Ghost, which was spoken universally of regeneration. (21) I answer, that Christ did not then only baptize with the Holy Ghost, when as he sent him under the form of fiery tongues; for he had baptized his apostles before this; and he baptizeth all the elect thus daily. But because the sending of the Holy Ghost after so glorious a sort was a token of the hidden grace wherewith he doth daily inspire his elect, he doth fitly apply thereunto the testimony of John. And truly this was as though it had been the common baptism of the Church. For besides that the apostles did not receive the Spirit for themselves only, but for the use of all the faithful, there was also declared the universal favor of Christ towards his Church, while that he poured out thereupon the gifts of his Spirit in great abundance.

Although, therefore, he doth daily baptize the elect of his Father, yet was this no let why he might not show forth this token to be remembered above all others, that the apostles might know that they were only entered by John; and that not in vain, seeing their perfection was hard at hand. And that is frivolous which some gather out of this place most commonly, (22) namely, that the baptism of John and the baptism of Christ were diverse. For here doth not he dispute in this place of baptism, but maketh only a comparison betwixt the person of John and the person of Christ. When as John did say that he did baptize with water only, he did not reason of what sort his baptism was; but what he himself was; lest he should arrogate that unto himself which was proper to Christ. As also, the ministers in these days ought not to speak otherwise of themselves; but they must acknowledge Christ to be the author of all those things which they do prefigure in the outward baptism, and leave nothing to themselves save only the outward administration. For when as these titles are attributed unto baptism, namely, that it is the laver of regeneration, (Tit 3:5,) a washing away of sins, the fellowship of death, and burying with Christ, (Rom 6:4,) and a grafting into the body of Christ, it is not declared what man, being the minister of the outward sign, doth; but rather what Christ doth, who only giveth force and efficacy unto the signs. We must always hold fast this distinction, lest, whilst we deck man too much, we take from Christ. (23)

But here may a question be moved, why he doth rather name John here than any other; first, It is manifest enough that John did profess himself to be the minister of the outward sign, namely, of water, and that Christ was the author of the spiritual baptism; secondly, Because it was meet that John should decrease and Christ increase; and, thirdly, Because the apostles did so much esteem of John, (Joh 3:30,) it might have been that thereby the glory of Christ might have been obscured. Therefore, Christ, to the end he might reclaim them to himself, telleth them that John did only minister unto them the external baptism; notwithstanding, he confirmeth them also, lest they should doubt of the promise; for they did attribute very much unto John, and therefore were they persuaded that the baptism which they had received by him was not in vain. Now, if that the verity and force thereof must be looked for at Christ’s hands, then ought the apostles to hope that that shall surely be fulfilled which John prefigured.

So must we, in like manner, think that we are not in vain baptized with water by men, because Christ, who commanded the same to be done, will fulfill his office, and baptize us with the Spirit. So faith draweth a consequent from the outward sign unto the inward effect; yet doth it not attribute any more than is meet, either to the sign or to the minister thereof, because in the sign it only looketh unto the promise, which is Christ’s, and doth acknowledge him to be the only author of grace. Let us, therefore, use such a mean that we do in no part diminish Christ’s honor; and yet, nevertheless, let us hope for that fruit by our baptism which is noted in this place. By assigning so short a time our Savior maketh them more joyful to hope well. Whereupon it followeth, that that death was not to be lamented which brought with it presently so precious fruit. And let us note this also, that this word baptism is used improperly in this place, that the contrariety may be full. After the same sort, Paul, in his Epistle unto the Romans, (Rom 3:26,) after he hath set down the law of works, to the end that the contrary may answer on the other side, he useth the law of faith for faith itself.

(21) “Generaliter de gratia regenerationis,” generally of the grace of regeneration.

(22) “Ex hoc loco et similibus vulgo colligunt,” commonly gather out of this and similar passages.

(23) “Christum spoliemus,” we rob Christ.



6. He showeth that the apostles were gathered together when as this question was moved, that we may know that it came not of the foolishness of one or two that it was moved, but it was moved by the common consent of them all; but marvelous is their rudeness, that when as they had been diligently instructed by the space of three whole years, they betray no less ignorance than if they had heard never a word. There are as many errors in this question as words. They ask him as concerning a kingdom; but they dream of an earthly kingdom, which should flow with riches, with dainties, with external peace, and with such like good things; and while they assign the present time to the restoring of the same. they desire to triumph before the battle; for before such time as they begin to work they will have their wages. They are also greatly deceived herein, in that they restrain Christ’s kingdom unto the carnal Israel, which was to be spread abroad, even unto the uttermost parts of the world. Furthermore, there is this fault in all their whole question, namely, that they desire to know those things which are not meet for them to know. No doubt they were not ignorant what the prophets did prophesy concerning the restoring of David’s kingdom, they had oftentimes heard their Master preach concerning this matter. Lastly, It was a saying common in every man’s mouth, that, in the most miserable captivity of the people, they should all be comforted, with the expectation of the kingdom that should be. Now, they hoped for the restoring hereof at the coming of the Messias, and hereupon was it that so soon as the apostles saw their Master Christ risen from the dead, they straightway began to think thereupon; but, in the meantime, they declared thereby how bad scholars they were under so good a Master. Therefore doth Christ briefly comprehend (24) in this short answer all the errors whereinto they fell in this their question, as I shall straightway declare. To restore, in this place, doth signify to set up again that which was fallen, and through many ruins grown out of fashion; for out of the dry stock of Isai [Jesse] should spring a Branch, and the tabernacle of David, which was laid waste, (25) should be erected and set on foot again.



(24) “Perstringit,” reprimand.

(25) “Misere dissipatum,” miserably laid waste.



7. It is not for you to know, etc. This is a general reprehension of the whole question. For it was too curious for them to desire to know that whereof their Master would have them ignorant; but this is the true means to become wise, namely, to go as far forward in learning as our Master Christ goeth in teaching, anal willingly to be ignorant of those things which he doth conceal from us. But forasmuch as there is naturally engendered in us a certain foolish and vain curiosity, and also a certain rash kind of boldness, we must diligently observe this admonition of Christ, whereby he correcteth both these vices. But to the end we may know what his meaning is hereby, we must mark the two members which he joineth together. “It is not for you” (saith he) “to know those things which the Father hath placed in his own power.” He speaketh, indeed, of the times and seasons; but seeing there is the like reason in other things, we must think this to be a universal precept, That being contented with the revelation of God, we think it an heinous crime to inquire any further. This is the true mean between the two extremes. The Papists, that they may have somewhat wherewith to cloak their gross ignorance, say for themselves, that they omit the hidden mysteries of God, as though our whole faith and religion did consist upon any thing else than upon the hidden mysteries of God; then may we take our leave of Christ and his gospel, if we must abstain utterly from the hidden mysteries of God. But we must keep, as I said before a mean herein; for we must be desirous to learn so far as our heavenly Master doth teach us; but as for such things as he will have us ignorant of, let mine be so bold as to inquire after them that we may be wise with sobriety. Therefore, so often as we are vexed with this foolish desire of knowing more than we ought, let us call to mind this saying of Christ, “It is not for you to know.” For unless we will burst in against his will and commandment, this shall have force and strength enough to restrain the outrageousness of our wits.

Now, as touching the foreknowledge of times, Christ condemneth only the searching out thereof which reacheth beyond the measure of God’s revelation; and that is to be noted out of the second member, as before I have said, “which the Father hath placed in his own power.” Truth it is, that God hath in his own power winter and summer, and the rest of the seasons of the year, cold and heat, fair weather and foul. But because he hath testified that the course of the years shall be perpetual, (Gen 1:14,) he is said not to have placed that in his own power which he hath revealed unto men. What thing soever the philosophers or husbandmen do comprehend or understand by art, by learning, by judgment, or experience, all that doth God not retain unto himself, because he hath after a certain sort revealed it unto them, (Gen 8:22.) The same opinion must we have of the prophets; for it was their office to know those things which God did reveal. But we must be ignorant of the secret events of things, as touching the time to come; for there is nothing which may make us more slack in doing our duties, than too careful an inquisition herein, for we will always take counsel according to the future event of things; but the Lord, by hiding the same from us, doth prescribe unto us what we ought to do. Here ariseth a conflict, because we will not willingly suffer God to have that which is his own, namely, the sole government and direction of things which are to come; but we cast ourselves into a strange and inordinate carefulness. To conclude, Christ forbiddeth us to apply those things unto ourselves, which God doth challenge as proper to himself alone. Of this sort is the foreknowledge of those things which God hath taken to himself to govern and direct, according to his own pleasure, far contrary to our opinion, and otherwise than we could invent. (26)



(26) “Supra ingenii nostri captum,” beyond the reach of our minds.



8. You shall receive power. Our Savior Christ doth here call them back as well unto the promise of God as also unto his commandment, which was the readiest way to bridle their curiosity. Curiosity doth rise almost always either of idleness or else of distrust; distrust is cured by meditating upon the promises of God. And his commandments do tell us how we ought to occupy ourselves and employ our studies. Therefore, he commandeth his disciples to wait for the promise of God, and to be diligent in executing their office whereunto God had called them. And in the mean season he noteth (27) their great hastiness, in that they did preposterously catch at those gifts which were proper unto the Holy Spirit, when as they were not as yet endued with the same. Neither did they take the right way herein, in that being called to go on warfare, they desire (omitting their labor) to lake their ease in their inn. (28) Therefore, when he saith, you shall receive power, he admonisheth them of their imbecility, lest they follow before the time those things whereunto they cannot attain. It may be read very well either way, You shall receive the power of the Spirit; or, The Spirit coming upon you; yet the latter way seemeth to be the better, because it doth more fully declare their defect trod want, until such time as the Spirit should come upon them.

You shall be my witnesses He correcteth two errors of theirs in this one sentence. For, first, he showeth that they must fight before they can triumph; and, secondly, that the nature of Christ’s kingdom was of another sort than they judged it to have been. Therefore, saith he, You shall be my witnesses; that is, the husbandman must first work before he can reap his fruits. Hence, nay we learn that we must first study how we may come unto the kingdom of God, before we begin to dispute (29) about the state of the life to come. Many there be which do curiously inquire what manner [of] blessedness that shall be which they shall enjoy after they shall be received into the everlasting kingdom of heaven, not having any care how they may come to enjoy the same. (30) They reason concerning the quality of the life to come, which they shall have with Christ; but they never think that they must be partakers of his death, that they may live together with him, (2. i 2:11.) Let every man, therefore, apply himself in his work which he hath in hand; let us fight stoutly under Christ’s banner; let us go forward manfully and courageously (31) in our vocation, and God will give fruit in due time (and tide.) There followeth another correction, when he saith, that they must be his witnesses. For hereby he meant to drive out of his disciples’ minds that fond and false imagination which they had conceived of the terrestrial kingdom, because he showeth unto them briefly, that his kingdom consisteth in the preaching of the gospel. There was no cause, therefore, why they should dream of riches, (32) of external principality, or any other earthly thing, whilst they heard that Christ did then reign when as he subdueth unto himself (all the whole) world by the preaching of the gospel. Whereupon it followeth that he doth reign spiritually, and not after any worldly manner. And that which the apostles had conceived of the carnal kingdom proceeded from the common error of their nation; neither was it marvel if they were deceived herein. (33) For when we measure the same with our understanding, what else can we conceive but that which is gross and terrestrial? Hereupon it cometh, that, like brute beasts, we only desire that which is commodious for our flesh, and therefore we rather catch that which is present. Wherefore, we see that those which held opinion, that Christ should reign as a king in this world a thousand years (34) fell into the like folly. Hereupon, also, they applied all such prophecies as did describe the kingdom of Christ figuratively by the similitude of earthly kingdoms unto the commodity of their flesh; whereas, notwithstanding, it was God’s purpose to lift up their minds higher. As for us, let us learn to apply our minds to hear the gospel preached, lest we be entangled in like errors, which prepareth a place in our hearts for the kingdom of Christ. (35)

In all Judea Here he showeth, first, that they must not work for the space of one day only, while that he assigneth the whole world unto them, in which they must publish the doctrine of the gospel. Furthermore, he refuteth (36) the opinion which they had conceived of Israel. They supposed those to be Israelites only which were of the seed of Abraham according to the flesh. Christ testifieth that they must gather thereunto all Samaria; which, although they were nigh in situation, yet were they far distant in mind and heart. He showeth that all other regions far distant, and also profane, must be united unto the holy people, that they may be all partakers of one and the same grace. It is evident (Joh 4:9) how greatly the Jews did detest the Samaritans. Christ commanded that (the wall of separation being broken down) they be both made one body, (Eph 2:14,) that his kingdom may be erected everywhere. By naming Judea and Jerusalem, which the apostles had tried (37) to be full of most deadly enemies, he foretelleth them of the great business and trouble which was prepared for them, that he may cause them to cease to think upon this triumph which they hoped to have been so nigh at hand. (38) Neither could they be a little afraid to come before so cruel enemies, more to inflame their rage and fury. And here we see how he giveth the former place unto the Jews, because they are, as it were, the first-begotten, (Exo 4:22.) Notwithstanding, he calleth those Gentiles one with another, which were before strangers from the hope of salvation, (Eph 2:11.) Hereby we learn, that the gospel was preached everywhere by the manifest commandment of Christ, that it might also come unto us.

(27) “Perstringit,” reprimandeth.

(28) “Molliter quiescere,” to take soft repose.

(29) “Subtiliter philosophemur,” we subtlely philosophize.

(30) “Atqui in primis renunciandum erat mundo,” but they ought, in the first instance, to renounce the world, omitted.

(31) “Indefessis animis,” with unwearied minds, indefatigably.

(32) “Delicias,” dainties.

(33) “Hac in parte omnes fuisse hallucinatos,” that they all labored under this hallucination.

(34) “Chiliastas,” the Chiliasts.

(35) Transpose thus: As for us, lest we be entangled in like errors, let us learn to apply our minds to hear the gospel preached, (a preached gospel,) which prepareth a place in our heart for the kingdom of Christ.

(36) “Oblique refutat,” indirectly refuteth.

(37) “Experti sunt,” experienced.

(38) “Ut de propinquo triumpho cogitare desinant,” that they may cease to think of a near triumph.



9. The readers may learn out of our Institutions what profit we reap by the ascension of Christ. Notwithstanding, because it is one of the chiefest points of our faith, therefore doth Luke endeavor more diligently to prove the same; yea, rather, the Lord himself meant to put the same out of all doubt, when as he hath ascended so manifestly, and hath confirmed the certainty of the same by other circumstances. For, if so be it he had vanished away secretly, then might the disciples have doubted what was become of him; (39) but now, sith that they, being in so plain a place, (40) saw him taken up with whom they had been conversant, whom also they heard speak even now, whom they beheld with their eyes, whom also they see taken out of their sight by a cloud, there is no cause why they should doubt whither he was gone. Furthermore, the angels are there also to bear witness of the same. And it was needful that the history should have been set down so diligently for our cause, that we may know assuredly, that although the Son of God appear nowhere upon earth, yet doth he live in the heavens. And this seemeth to be the reason why the cloud did overshadow him, before such time as he did enter into his celestial glory; that his disciples being content with their measure (41) might cease to inquire any further. And we are taught by them that our mind is not able to ascend so high as to take a full view of the glory of Christ; therefore, let this cloud be a mean to restrain our boldness, as was the smoke which was continually before the door of the tabernacle in the time of the law.



(39) “Haesissent attoniti,” might have stood astonished.

(40) “Quam in edito et undique experto ac patente loco et constituti,” when they were standing on an elevated spot, open on all sides, with nothing to interrupt the view.

(41) “Modulo,” little measure.



10. Two men He calleth them so by reason of their form. For although it might be that they had the bodies of men in deed, concerning which thing I will not greatly stand in defense of either part, yet certain it is they were not men; but because this metonymia is commonly used in the Scriptures, especially in the First Book of Moses, I will not greatly stand thereupon. Their white garments were a token of rare and excellent dignity. For God meant by this, as by an evident token to distinguish them from the common sort of people, that the disciples might give better ear unto them; (42) and that at this day we also may know that this vision was showed them of God.



(42) “Ad eorum dicta attentiores,” might be more attentive to what they said.



11. Ye men of Galilee, etc. I am not of their opinion who think that this name was given the apostles after an opprobrious sort, as if the angels meant to reprehend the slowness and dullness of the apostles. In my opinion, it was rather to make them more attentive, in that men, whom they did never see before, did name them as though they had perfectly known them. But they seem to reprehend without cause, for looking up into heaven. For where should they rather seek for Christ than in heaven? Doth not the Scriptures also oftentimes exhort us thereunto? I answer, that they were not reprehended because they looked up towards heaven; but because they coveted to see Christ, when as the cloud which was put between them and him did keep them from seeing him with their bodily senses: Secondly, because they hoped that he would return again straightway, that they might enjoy the sight of him again, when as lie did ascend to stay in the heavens until such time as he should come (43) to judge the world. Wherefore, let us first learn out of this place that we must not seek Christ either in heaven, either upon earth, otherwise than by faith; and also, that we must not desire to have him present with us bodily in the world; for he that doth (44) either of those two shall oftentimes go farther from him. So this their admiration is reprehended, not simply, but inasmuch as they were astonied by the strangeness of this matter; like as we are oftentimes carried unadvisedly into a wonderful great wondering at God’s works; but we never apply ourselves to consider for what end and purpose they were done.

Jesus, which is taken up into heaven There are two members in this one sentence. The first is, that Christ was taken up into heaven, that they may not henceforth foolishly desire to have him any longer conversant with them upon earth. The other is straightway added as a consolation concerning his second coming. Out of these two jointly, and also severally, is gathered a firm, stable, and strong argument, to refute the Papists, and all other which imagine that Christ is really present in the signs of bread and wine. For when it is said that Christ is taken up into heaven; here is plainly noted the distance of place. I grant that this word heaven is interpreted divers ways, sometimes for the air, sometimes for the whole connection (45) of the spheres, sometimes for the glorious kingdom of God, where the majesty of God hath his [its] proper scat, howsoever it doth fill the whole world. After which sort Paul doth place Christ above all heavens, (Eph 1:22,) because he is above all the world, and hath the chiefest room in that place of blessed immortality, because he is more excellent than all the angels, (Eph 4:15.) But this is no let why he may not be absent from us bodily, and that by this word heavens, there may not be signified a separation from the world. Let them cavil as much as they will, it is evident that the heaven whereinto Christ was received is opposite to the frame of the world; therefore it doth necessarily follow, that if he be in heaven, he is without [beyond] the world.

But, first, we must mark what the purpose of the angels was, for thereby we shall more perfectly know what the words mean. The angels’ intent was to call back the apostles from desiring the carnal presence of Christ. For this purpose was it that they said that he should not come again until he came to judge the world. And to this end serveth the assigning of the time, that they might not look for him in vain before that same time. Who seeth not that in these words is manifestly showed that he was bodily absent out of the world? Who seeth not that we are forbidden to desire to have him upon the earth? But, they think they escape safe with that crafty answer, when as they say that then he shall come visibly; but he cometh now invisibly daily. But we are not here to dispute of his form; only the apostles are taught that Christ must abide in heaven until such time as he appear at the latter day. For the desiring of his corporeal presence is here condemned as absurd and perverse. The Papists deny that he is present in the sacrament carnally, while that his glorious body is present with us after a supernatural sort, and by a miracle; but we may well enough reject their inventions concerning his glorious body, as childish and frivolous toys. They feign unto themselves a miracle not confirmed with any testimony of Scripture. The body of Christ was then glorious, when as he was conversant with his disciples after his resurrection. This was done by the extraordinary and secret power of God; yet, notwithstanding, the angels do forbid to desire him afterward after that sort, and they say that he shall not come unto men in that sort (before the latter day.) Therefore, according to their commandment, let us not go about to pull him out of the heavens with our own inventions; neither let us think that we call handle him with our hands, or perceive him with our other senses, more than we can see him with our eyes. I speak always of his body. For in that they say it is infinite, as it is all absurd dream, so is it safely to be rejected. Nevertheless, I willingly confess that Christ is ascended that he may fulfill [fill] all things; but I say that he is spread abroad everywhere by the power of his Spirit, not by the substance of his flesh. I grant, furthermore, that he is present With us both in his word and in the sacraments. Neither is it to be doubted, but that all those which do with faith receive the signs of his flesh and blood, are made truly partakers of his flesh and blood. But this partaking doth nothing agree with the dotings of the Papists; for they feign that Christ is present in such sort upon the altar as Numa Pompilius did call down his Jupiter Elicitus, or as those witches did fetch down the moon from heaven with their enchantments. But Christ, by reaching us the bread in his Supper, doth will us to lift up our hearts into heaven, that we may have life by his flesh and blood. So that we do not eat his flesh grossly, that we may live thereby, but he poureth into us, by the secret power of his Spirit, his force and strength.

He shall so come I have said before, that by this consolation all sorrow which we might conceive, because of Christ’s absence, is mitigated, yea, utterly taken away, when as we hear that lie shall return again. And also the end for which he shall come again is to be noted; namely, that he shall come as a Redeemer, and shall gather us with him into blessed immortality. For as lie doth not now sit idle in heaven, (as Homer signifieth, that his gods be busied only about their bellies;) so shall not he appear again without profit. Therefore, the only looking for Christ’s coming must both restrain the importunate desires of our flesh, and support our patience in all our adversities; and, lastly, it must refresh our weariness. But it worketh this only in the faithful, which believe that Christ is their Redeemer; for it bringeth unto the wicked nothing but dread, horror, and great fearfulness. And howsoever they do now scoff’ and jest when as they hear of his coming, yet shall they be compelled to behold him sitting upon his tribunal-seat, whom now they will not vouchsafe to hear speak. Furthermore, it were but frivolous to move any question about his apparel wherewith he was then clothed, whether he shall come again being clothed with the same or no. Neither am I now determined to refute that which Augustine, in his Epistle unto Consentius, doth touch, (August. ad Con. Epist. 146;) notwithstanding, it is better for me to omit that thing which I cannot unfold.

(43) “Secundo,” a second time, omitted.

(44) “Haerebit,” shall cling to.

(45) “Complexa,” system.



12. That he may pass over unto another history, he showeth that the disciples being returned unto Jerusalem, dwelt together in one parlor. For it was the upper part of the house, which used to be let out unto those which did hire houses; (46) for the most commodious places were reserved unto them that were masters of the house, (for their own use.) Wherefore, by this word Luke doth signify that they were driven into a strait room; (47) and yet, notwithstanding, though this commodity were great, yet they did not part asunder. They might have been more commodiously asunder, yet might they not part company before they had received the Spirit. In that he noteth here the distance of place, it bringeth credit unto the history. Unless, peradventure, he meant hereby to declare that they were not terrified with any fear of danger, but that they did all return and kept company together in one house, which was not so large, but that the company being greater than the place could well contain, it might breed some rumor (or noise.) A Sabbath-day’s journey was two miles, and that account doth well agree with the place of Joh 11:18, where he saith, “that Jerusalem was distant from Bethany almost fifteen furlongs;” which containeth about a thousand and nine hundred paces. And the mount Olivet was at the side of Bethany. There was no Sabbath-day’s journey prescribed in the law; for the Lord doth command them simply to rest upon the Sabbath-day in the law. (48) But because the Jews could not easily be ruled, but that they would run abroad about their business upon the Sabbath-day, (as the Lord himself doth complain, “that they did bear burdens out at the gates,”) (Jer 17:24,) therefore, it is to be thought that it was determined by the priests, (49) (to the end they might restrain such enormities,) that no man should travel upon the Sabbath-day above two miles. Although Jerome, in his Answers unto Algasia, doth say that this tradition did come from two Rabbins, namely, from Atriba, and from Simon Heli.



(46) “Inquilinis,” tenants or lodgers.

(47) “In angustum locum fuisse constrictos,” were confined to a narrow space.

(48) More properly, For the Lord doth in the law command, etc.

(49) “Communi sacerdotum concilio,” by the common council of the priests, the Sanhedrim.



13. Where they abode Some translate it, where they did abide; as though they did use to dwell there. But I am of that opinion, that they did then first of all use that hired room to dwell together in, until such time as the Holy Spirit was come upon them. Too, too ridiculous are the Papists, which go about to prove Peter his supremacy (50) hereby, because he is reckoned up first of all the apostles. Although we do grant that he was the chiefest of the apostles, yet it doth not follow hereupon that he was the chiefest ruler of all the world. But if he be, therefore, the chief of all the apostles, because his name is first in the catalogue of the apostles’ names, I will again conclude, that the mother of Christ was inferior unto all the rest of the women, because she is [here] reckoned the last; which they will in no case admit, as indeed it were a thing too absurd. Wherefore, unless they will set their Papacy to be laughed at of all men, as hitherto they have done, they must leave off to adorn it with such foolish toys. But what is their intent? Forsooth, they will prove out of the Scriptures that there was a secondary head of the Church, inferior to Christ; whereas there is no syllable in the Scripture which is consenting unto this their foolish invention. No marvel is it, therefore, if they do snatch here and there certain places, which, although no man smite them out of their hands, they will let fall of their own accord. But omitting them, let us mark what is Luke’s purpose in this place. Because the disciples had fallen away, and filthily fled from their Master Christ, every man whither fear did drive him, (Mat 26:56,) they did deserve, like forsakers of their masters, or run-agates, to be deprived of honor. Therefore, that we may know that by the appointment of the Lord they were gathered together again, and restored to their former degree, Luke reckoneth up all their names.



(50) “Primatum,” primacy.



14. With their wives Some translate it women; and they think that he speaketh of those which accompanied Christ. As I will not contend with any man concerning this matter, so have I not doubted to prefer that which I thought was more probable. I grant that the word which Luke useth may be interpreted both ways. But this is my reason, why I do think that he speaketh rather of wives, because, seeing that they used afterward to carry their wives about with them, as Paul doth testify, (1. o 9:5,) it is not likely that they were then asunder. For they might more easily rest together in one place, than by wandering to and fro oftentimes to change their abiding; and, secondly, seeing that they did look for the coming of the Holy Ghost, which was even then at hand, what reason was there why they should deprive their wives of so great goodness? Peter’s wife was about to be a helper unto him shortly after, which we must also think of the rest of the wives. These women had need of heroical fortitude and constancy, lest they should faint. Who would, therefore, think that they were excluded from their husbands whilst they look for the coming of the Spirit? But if they will stick to the general word, it standeth with reason that there were married women in the company. Howsoever it be, it is Luke’s mind to tell us by the way how greatly they had changed their minds. (51) For whereas before the men, being afraid, had fled away, the women are gathered together with them now, neither do they fear any danger. He doth reckon up the mother of Jesus with the other women, whom, notwithstanding, John is said to have kept at his own house. But, as I have said before, they met altogether now only for a short season; for it is not to be doubted but that they departed one from another afterwards. It is well known that amongst the Hebrews all kinsfolk are comprehended under this word brethren.

All these did continue. Here he showeth that they did diligently look for the coming of the Holy Spirit.; For this was the cause of their prayer, that Christ would send his Spirit, as he had promised. Whereupon we may gather that this is the true faith which stirreth us up to call upon God. For the security of faith doth much differ from sluggishness. Neither doth God, therefore, assure us of this grace, that our minds may straightway become careless, but that he may rather sharpen our desire to pray. Neither is prayer any sign of doubting, but rather a testimony of our (sure hope and) confidence, because we ask those things at the Lord’s hands which we know he hath promised. So it becometh us also (after their example) to be instant in prayer, (52) and to beg at God’s hands that he will increase in us his Holy Spirit: (53) increase, (I say,) because before we can conceive any prayer we must needs have the first-fruits of the Spirit. For as much as he is the only Master which teacheth us to pray aright, who doth not only give us utterance, (Rom 2:25,) but also governs our inward affections.

Furthermore, Luke doth express two things which are proper to true prayer, namely, that they did persist, and that they were all of one mind. This was art exercise of their patience, in that Christ did make them stay a while, (54) when as he could straightway have sent the Holy Spirit; so God doth oftentimes drive off, (55) and, as it were, suffer us to languish, that he may accustom us to persevere. The hastiness of our petitions is a corrupt, yea a hurtful plague; wherefore it is no marvel if God do sometimes correct the same. In the mean season (as I have said) he doth exercise us to be constant in prayer. Therefore, if we will not pray in vain, let us not be wearied with the delay of time. As touching the unity of their minds, it is set against that scattering abroad, which fear had caused before. Yet, notwithstanding, we may easily gather, even by this, how needful a thing it is to pray generally, in that Christ commandeth every one to pray for the whole body, and generally for all men, as it were, in the person of all men: Our Father, Give us this day, etc., (Mat 6:9.) Whence cometh this unity of their tongues but from one Spirit? Wherefore, when Paul would prescribe unto the Jews and Gentiles a right form of prayer, he removeth far away all division and dissension. That we may, (saith he,) being all of one mind, with one mouth glorify God, (Rom 15:6.) And truly it is needful that we be brethren, and agree together like brethren, that we rightly call God Father.

(51) “In melius,” for the better.

(52) “Ut precibus nostris concedat,” that he would grant our prayers.

(53) “Ut quotidiana Spiritus augmenta impetremus,” that we may obtain daily increase of the Spirit.

(54) “Suspensos tenuit,” kept them in suspense.

(55) “Differt,” defer or delay.



15. It was meet that Matthias should be chosen into the place of Judas, lest, through the treachery of one man, all that might seem to have been made of none effect which Christ had once appointed. He did not unadvisedly choose the twelve in the beginning, as principal preachers of his gospel. For when he said that they should be judges of twelve tribes of Israel, Luk 6:13, Joh 6:70; he showeth here that it was done of set purpose, that they might gather together the tribes of Israel unto one faith. But after that the Jews had refused the grace offered unto them, it was behoveful that the Israel of God should be gathered together out of all countries.

This, therefore, was, as it were, a holy number, which, if it should have been diminished through the wickedness of Judas, then should the preaching of the gospel both have had, and also have, less credit at this day, if the beginning thereof had been imperfect. (56) Although, therefore, Judas would (as much as in him lay) have disappointed the purpose of Christ, yet nevertheless it stood firm and stable. He perished as he was worthy, yet did the order of the apostles remain whole and sound.

The company of names It is uncertain whether he meaneth the men who only have the name properly, seeing the women are comprehended under the name of the men; or whether he taketh names simply for all the heads, as the Hebrews call them souls. This may also be called in question, whether they were wont daily to frequent that parlor in which the apostles did dwell, or they did continually dwell there with them. For the place was scarce able to contain so great a multitude, to serve them for all necessary uses. Surely it seemeth to me a thing more like to be true, that Luke doth in this place express the number of them, that we may know that they were all gathered together when Peter made this sermon. Whereby we may guess that they were not always present there. Although I dare not affirm any certain thing concerning this matter, yet being moved with a probable conjecture, I do rather lean unto this part, that the church was gathered together them because they had to intreat of a serious matter, and to this end also tendeth this word rising, [standing up.]



(56) “Ut ita loquar claudicaret,” had been, so to speak, lame, defective.



16. It was meet that the Scripture should be fulfilled. Because Peter doth speak in this their assembly, therefore the Papists will have him to be the head of the church. (57) As though no man might speak in any assembly of the godly but he should straightway be Pope. We do grant, that as in every assembly there must be some which must be chief, so in this assembly the apostles did ascribe this honor unto Peter. But what maketh this unto (the proving of) their Papacy? Wherefore, bidding them adieu, (58) let us consider what the Spirit doth speak by the month of Peter. He saith That the Scripture must needs have been fulfilled, lest any man’s mind should be troubled with that horrible fall of Judas. For it seemed a strange thing that he which was chosen by Christ unto so excellent a function, should so filthily fall in the beginning of his course. Peter removeth this stone of stumbling, when he saith that it was foretold by the Scripture. Whence we may gather an admonition very necessary for daily practice; namely, that we ought to attribute this honor unto the prophecies of the Scriptures, that they are able to appease all such fear as we conceive of the sudden event of things. For there is nothing which doth more trouble us than when we stay still in our own sense and understanding, and procure unto ourselves lets and doubts, (59) which the Lord would be ready to cure, if so be that we would hold fast this one thing, that nothing is absurd which he hath foreseen, appointed, and foretold, that he might make us more strong. Neither was Judas therefore excusable, because that which befell him was foretold, seeing that he fell away, not being compelled by the prophecy, but only by the malice of his own heart. The oration of Peter hath two parts. For, in the first place, he putteth away the offense which godly minds might have conceived by reason of the fall of Judas; whence also he gathereth an exhortation that the rest may learn to fear God. Secondly, he telleth them that it remaineth that they choose another into his place, both which he proveth by testimony of Scripture.

Which the Holy Ghost foretold Such manner of speeches bring greater reverence to the Scriptures, whilst we are taught by them that David and all the rest of the prophets did speak only as they were directed by the Holy Ghost; so that they themselves were not the authors of their prophecies, but the Spirit which used their tongues as an instrument. Wherefore, seeing that our dullness is so great, that we ascribe less authority unto the Scriptures than we ought, we must diligently note such manner of speeches, and acquaint ourselves with them, that we may oftentimes remember the authority of God to confirm our faith withal.



(57) “Universae Ecclesiae,” the Universal Church.

(58) “Illis valere jussis,” omitting these things.

(59) “Offendicula,” small scandals.



17. Adopted. It is word for word reckoned. And he saith that he was one of the number, that he might signify unto them that it was needful that the empty place should be filled, to the end that the number might continue whole. And to this propose serveth that which followeth, that he had obtained a part in the ministry. For thereupon it doth follow that the body should be, as it were, lame, if that part should be wanting. Surely it was a thing which might make them greatly amazed, that he whom Christ had extolled unto so high dignity should fall headlong into such destruction. Which circumstance doth increase the cruelty of the fact, (60) and teacheth the rest to take heed unto themselves. (61) Neither is it to be doubted but that the disciples did remember Judas with great grief and sorrow. But Peter doth here express by name the excellency of his function, that he might make them more attentive and more careful to provide a remedy.



(60) “Atrocitatem sceleris,” the atrocity of the crime.

(61) “Ut sibi caveant et metuani,” to be cautious and fear.



18. And he truly It seemeth unto me a thing like to be true, that this narration of the death of Judas was put in by Luke; therefore, it seemeth good to me to include it within a parenthesis, that it may be separated from Peter’s sermon. For to what end should Peter here reckon up unto the disciples those things which they already knew well enough?

Secondly, it should have been an absurd thing to have spoken after this among them, that the field which was bought with the money that was given to betray Christ was called of the Hebrews, in their own mother tongue, Aceldama. But whereas some do answer, that Peter spoke this unto the Galileans, whose speech did disagree with the Jewish tongue, it is but vain and frivolous. In very deed they did somewhat disagree in pronunciation; yet not so much but that they did well understand one another; like as do these of Paris and the men of Rouen.

Furthermore, how could this be a fit word for Jerusalem, where Peter made his sermon? To what end should he interpret in Greek among the Hebrews their own mother tongue? Therefore doth Luke of himself put in this sentence concerning the death of Judas, lest Peter’s words might seem strange (62) through ignorance of that history.

He possessed a field This word hath a double signification, which, in my opinion, doth rather signify in this place to possess than to get; yet because it skilleth little whether way we read it, I leave it indifferent. And he speaketh after this sort, not because Judas had the use of the field, or that he himself did buy it, seeing it was bought after his death. But Luke’s meaning was, that his burial was the perpetual note of ignominy; was the reward which he had for his falsehood and wicked act. Neither did he so much sell Christ for thirty pieces as his apostleship. He enjoyed not the money; (63) he only possessed the field. Furthermore, it came to pass through the marvelous providence of God, that the very common name of the field should be a note of infamy for the priests, which had bought (the) innocent blood of [from] the traitor. He saith that the Hebrews did call it by that name in their tongue, because he himself was a Grecian born; and he calleth that the Hebrew tongue which the Jews did use after the captivity of Babylon, namely, such as was mixed of the Assyrian tongue and of the Chaldean tongue.

It is written in the book of Psalms He taketh away, by authority of Scriptures, all offense which might have happened by reason of the falling away of Judas. Yet might this place seem to be greatly wrested: First, in that David did not wish that these things might befall any particular person, but (in the plural number) he wisheth them unto his enemies. Secondly, it seemeth that Peter doth apply these things amiss unto Judas, which were spoken of the enemies of David. I answer, that David doth there speak after this [afterwards] of himself, that he may describe the condition and state of Christ’s kingdom.

In that Psalm (I say) is contained the common image of the whole Church, which is the body of the Son of God. Therefore, the things which are there set down must needs have been fulfilled in the head, which are indeed fulfilled, as the evangelists do testify, know, if any man object that those things which there were spoken against the enemies of David do not fitly agree unto Judas, we may easily gather that they do so much the rather agree with him, because David doth not respect himself as being separated from the body of the Church; but rather as he was one of the members of Christ, and so taking upon him his image, he steppeth forth in his name.

Whosoever shall mark that this singular person was attributed to David, that he should be a figure of Christ, will not marvel if all these things be applied unto him which were prefigured in David. Although, therefore, he doth comprehend the whole Church, yet he beginneth at the head thereof, and doth especially describe what things Christ should suffer by the hands of the wicked. For we learn out of Paul’s doctrine, that whatsoever afflictions the godly suffer, they are part of the afflictions of Christ, and serve to the fulfilling of the same, (Col 1:14.) This order and connection did David observe, or rather the Spirit of God, who meant by the mouth of David to instruct the whole Church. But as touching the persecutors of Christ, all that which is commonly spoken of them is by good right referred unto their standard-bearer; whose impiety and wickedness, as it is most famous, so his punishment ought to be made known unto all men. If any man do object again, that that which is recited in the Psalm is only certain cursings, and not prophecies; and that, therefore, Peter doth gather improperly that it was of necessity that it should be fulfilled, it is soon answered. For David was not moved with any perverse or corrupt affection of the flesh to crave vengeance; but he had the Holy Spirit to be his guide and director. Therefore, what things soever he prayed for there, being inspired with the Holy Ghost, they have the same strength which prophecies have, because the Spirit doth require no other thing than that which God hath determined with himself to perform, and will also promise unto us. But whereas Peter doth cite out of the Scriptures two diverse testimonies; by the first is meant, that Judas, together with his name and family, should quite be extinguished, that his place might be empty; the other, which he fetcheth out of the 109. h Psalm, tendeth to this end, that there should be another chosen to supply his place. These seem at first to be contrary; namely, a waste habitation and succession. Yet, because the Spirit saith only, in the former place, that the adversaries of the Church should be taken away, that their place might be empty, and without one to dwell therein, in respect of themselves, this is no let why another may not afterward supply their empty place. Yea, this doth also augment their punishment, in that the honor, after it was taken from him that was unworthy thereof, is given to another.

And his bishopric The Hebrew word could not be translated more fitly. For פכודה (pecudah) doth signify a jurisdiction or government, so called of the overseeing and beholding of things. For as for those which interpret it wife, the text (64) refuteth them; for it followeth in the next verse, of his wife, that she may be made a widow. Therefore, after that he had wished that the wicked may be deprived of his life, he addeth, moreover, that he may be spoiled of his honor; neither doth he stay here, but also he desireth that another may succeed him, whereby, as I have said before, his punishment is doubled. In the meanwhile, he noteth by the way, (65) that this false, treacherous, and wicked person, whereof he speaketh, should not be some one of the common sort, but such an one as should be indued with honor and dignity; from which, nevertheless, he shall fall. And out of this place must we learn, that the wicked shall not escape scott free, which have persecuted the Church of God; for this miserable and wretched end is prepared for them all.



(62) “Lectoribus obscura essent,” might be obscure to his readers.

(63) “Argento potitus non est,” he did not obtain the money.

(64) “Contextus,” context.

(65) “Oblique,” indirectly.



21. We must therefore. This which he bringeth in might seem, at the first sight, to be far set [fetched.] For if so be it David did speak of transposing (66) Judas’s bishopric, it did not thereupon straightway follow that the disciples should choose another to be his successor; yet, because they knew that they had this charge given them to order the Church, so soon as Peter had told them that it did please the Lord that it should be so, he gathereth thereupon that they ought to do it. For whensoever God will use as means, (67) to maintain the government of his Church, so soon as we know what his will is, we must not linger, but stoutly perform whatsoever is required in our ministry (and function.) That was, without all controversy, what was the duty of the Church; like as, at this day, when we hear that those must be put from their office which behave themselves ungodly and wickedly, and that others must be chosen in their rooms, the Church must take this charge in hand. Wherefore, it was superfluous to move any question about a thing that was not to be doubted of. Therefore, let us always remember to consider what we have to do, that we may be ready to obey the Lord. Furthermore, when as he intreateth of the making of an apostle, he saith, He must be a witness of the resurrection; which signifieth that the apostleship is not without the preaching of the gospel. Whence it may appear how vain and frivolous the Popish bishops are, which having on only dumb visors, brag that they are the successors of the apostles; but wherein are they like unto them? I grant that Peter doth here require such a witness as saw the Lord after his resurrection, of which sort John professeth himself to be one, when he saith, “He which saw it beareth witness,” (Joh 19:35.) For this did serve for the confirmation of faith; yet, nevertheless, Peter maketh it a thing necessary in him and the rest of his fellows in office, that they should teach, whilst he maketh them and himself preachers or witnesses of the resurrection.

He nameth the resurrection, not because they must bear witness thereof alone; but because, first, under this is comprehended the preaching of the death of Christ; secondly, because we have the end of our redemption therein, and the accomplishment thereof, and also it bringeth with it the celestial government of Christ, and the power of the Spirit in defending his, in establishing justice and equity, in restoring order, in abolishing the tyranny of sin, and in putting to flight all the enemies of the Church. Let us know, therefore, that those things are not excluded by this word which are necessarily knit together. Nevertheless, let us note that the resurrection is here named before other things, as being the chief point of the gospel, as also Paul teacheth, (1. o 15:17.)

But were the apostles alone witnesses of the resurrection? Was not this also common to the rest of the disciples? For Peter seemeth to challenge this as proper only to the apostles. I answer, that this title is therefore attributed unto them, because they were chosen peculiarly unto that function, and because they had the chief room amongst those which did bring this embassage; therefore, though they were the chief of those which were assigned, yet were not they only appointed thereunto.

All that time. He beginneth at that time when Jesus began to show himself unto the world, which is diligently to be observed, as before I have said; for he lived privately until such time as he was almost thirty years of age. For he would not make himself known further than was needful for our salvation. Therefore, when the time was come wherein he must go about that business which his Father had appointed him, he came abroad like a new man, and one that was but lately born. Every man may easily perceive what great force this hath to bridle our curiosity. The whole life of Christ might have been a mirror most marvelous, (68) of more than absolute perfection; and yet, notwithstanding, that he might keep us occupied in the study and meditation of those things which were most needful to be known, he would lead the better part of his life obscurely and in secret. (69) Who dare now wander without Christ, seeing that he doth apply the knowledge of himself to the edifying of faith?

The Hebrews take this, to go in and out, for to be conversant and to lead the life among men. In which sense, citizens are said to go in and out by the gates of their city; so Joh 10:9,

“If any man enter in by me, he shall go in and out,

and shall find pasture.”

Although, in the Second Book of the Chronicles, the first chapter, and tenth verse, it seemeth to be a token of rule and government.

(66) “Transferendo,” transferring.

(67) “Quum opera nostra uti velit Deus,” since God is pleased to use our agency.

(68) “Admirable speculum,” an admirable mirror.

(69) “Quasi sepultam,” as it were buried.



23. They were to choose one only into the room of Judas; they present two. Here may a question be asked, Why they were not contented with one only? Was it because they were so like, that they could not discern whether was more fit? This truly had been no sufficient reason why they should suffer it to be decided by lots. And also it seemeth that Joseph was of greater estimation otherwise; or was it because they were diversely affectioned? But this seemeth scarce probable, neither is this to be admitted as true, because of that most excellent testimony which Luke did give a little before of their unity and agreement. Lastly, It had been very absurd for them to have polluted the election of the apostle with such strife and contention. (70) But for this cause did they use the casting of lots, that it might be known that Matthias was not only chosen by the voices of men, but also that he was made by the determination and judgment of God.

For there was this difference between the apostles and the pastors, that the pastors were chosen simply by the Church, the apostles were called of God. In which respect Paul, in the preface of his Epistle to the Galatians, (Gal 1:2,) doth profess himself to be an apostle, “neither of men, neither made by man.” Therefore, like as the dignity of this function was excellent, so was it meet that in the choosing of Matthias, the chief judgment should be left unto God, howsoever men did their duty. Christ by his own mouth did appoint the rest; therefore, if Matthias had been chosen only by man to be one of them, he should have had less authority than they. This was very orderly done, (71) that the disciples should present unto God those whom they thought to be the best; and he should choose to himself whom he knew to be most fit, so that God, by the fall of the lot, doth pronounce that he did allow of the apostleship of Matthias. But the apostles might seem to have dealt very rashly and disorderly, which laid so great and weighty a matter upon a lot; for what certainty could they gather thereby? I answer, that they did it only as they were moved thereunto by the Holy Spirit; for although Luke doth not express this, yet, because he will not accuse the disciples of rashness, but rather doth show that this election was lawful and approved of God; I say, therefore, that they went this way to work, being moved by the Spirit, like as they were directed in all the action by the same Spirit. But why do they not pray that God would choose whom he would out of the whole multitude? Why do they restrain his judgment unto two? Is not this to rob God of his liberty, when as they tie him, and, as it were, make him subject unto their voices and consents? (72) But whosoever shall quietly ponder the matter shall plainly perceive, by the drift of Luke, that the disciples durst do nothing but that which they knew was their duty to do, and was commanded them by the Lord. As for the contentious, let them go shake their ears. (73)



(70) “Tali dissidio,” with such dissension.

(71) “Medium fuit temperamentum.” a middle course was adopted.

(72) “Suis suffragiis,” their suffrages.

(73) “Valere sinamus,” let us leave them alone, bid them good day.



24. In praying, they said. Word for word it is, Having prayed, they said; but there is no obscurity in the sense, because his meaning was to speak as followeth, that they prayed; and yet he doth not reckon up all the words, being content briefly to show the sum. Therefore, although they were both of honest conversation, yea, although they did excel in holiness and other virtues, yet because the integrity of the heart, whereof God is the alone knower and judge, is the chief, the disciples pray that God would bring that to light which was hidden from men. The same ought to be required even at this day in choosing pastors; for howsoever we are not to appoint two for one, yet because we may oftentimes be deceived, and the discerning of spirits cometh of the Lord, we must always pray unto God, that he will show unto us what men he will have to be ministers, that he may direct and govern our purposes. Here we may also gather what great regard we must have of integrity and innocency in choosing pastors, without which both learning and eloquence, and what excellency soever can be invented, are as nothing. (74)



(74) “In fumum abeunt,” go to smoke.



25.(75) Of the ministry and apostleship. Because the word ministry was base, he addeth apostleship, wherein there is greater dignity; although the sense shall be more plain if you expound it, “the ministry of the apostleship.” For the figure hypallage is common in the Scriptures. Assuredly Luke meant to join with the burden the excellency of the office, that it might have the greater reverence and authority; and yet this was his intent also, to declare that the apostles are called unto a painful function.



(75) There is here a transposition in the translation. The 26th verse precedes the 25th.



26. They gave in their lots We will not, in this place, make any long disputation about lots. Those men who think it to be wickedness to cast lots at all, offend partly through ignorance, and partly they understand not the force of this word. There is nothing which men do not corrupt with their boldness and vanity, whereby it is come to pass that they have brought lots into great abuse and superstition. For that divination or conjecture which is made by lots is altogether devilish. But when magistrates divide provinces among them, and brethren their inheritance, it is a thing lawful. Which thing Solomon doth plainly testify, when he maketh God the governor of the event.

“The lots (saith he) are cast into the bosom, and the judgment of them cometh forth from the Lord,” (Pro 16:33.)

This ordinance or custom is no more corrupt and depraved by corruption, than the corrupt vanity of the Chaldeans doth corrupt true and natural astrology. Whilst the Chaldeans go about, with the name of astrology, to cloak and color their wicked curiosity, they defame a science both profitable and praiseworthy. The same do those which tell men their destinies (as they call them) by casting lots; but it is our duty to discern the lawful use from the corruption. He saith the lots were given, that being put into a pot, or one of their laps, they might afterwards be drawn out. And here we must also note that this word lot is diversely taken in this place; for when he said before that Judas had obtained a lot of the ministry, his meaning was, (according to the common custom of the Scripture,) that he had a portion given him of the Lord. He speaketh afterwards properly, and without any figure of a lot, yet is it likely, forasmuch as the word גראל, (goral) is commonly used by the Hebrews for both things, that Peter meant to allude unto that which they were about to do, and that Luke had respect unto the self-same thing.

The lot fell upon Matthias. It came to pass as no man would have looked for; for we may gather by that which goeth before, that there was not so great account made of Matthias as of the other; for, besides that Luke gave him the former place, the two sirnames which Barsabas had do show that he was in great estimation. He was called Barsabas, (that is, the son of an oath, or of rest,) of the thing itself, as if he were some mirror, either of faithfulness and innocency, or of a quiet and modest nature. The other sirname did import singular honesty. This man, therefore, in men’s judgment, was the former, [superior;] but God did prefer Matthias before him. Whereby we are taught that we must not glory if we be extolled unto the skies in the opinion of men, and if by their voices and consents (76) we be judged to be most excellent men; but we must rather have regard of this, to approve ourselves unto God, who alone is the most lawful and just judge, by whose sentence and judgment we stand or fall. And we may oftentimes mark this also, that God passeth over him which is the chiefest in the sight of men, that he may throw down all pride which is in man. In that he addeth, that he was reckoned amongst the rest, he wipeth away all sinister note of rashness from the casting of lots, because the Church did embrace him as chosen by God on whom the lot fell.

(76) “Eorum suffragiis,” by their suffrages.




»

Follow us:



Advertisements