Acts 3:22-24. Connection: What has just been said: “By the mouth of His holy prophets from the beginning,” is now set forth more particularly in two divisions,—namely: (1) Moses, with whom all O. T. prophecy begins (comp. Romans 10:19), has announced to the people the advent of the Messiah, and the necessity of obedience to Him, Acts 3:22-23. Thus has he made a beginning in speaking of the ἀποκατάστασις πάντων, which in fact can only be brought about by obedience to all which the Messiah has spoken. (2) But also the collective body of prophets from Samuel onwards (that is, the prophets in the stricter sense), etc., Acts 3:24.
΄ωυσῆς] The passage is Deuteronomy 18:15 f., 19,(149) which, applying according to its historical sense to the prophetic order generally which presents itself to the seer collectively as in one person, has received its highest fulfilment in Christ as the realized ideal of all the Old Testament interpreters of God, consequently as the ἀληθινὸς προφήτης.(150) Comp. Acts 7:37.
ὡς ἐ΄έ] as He has raised up me by His preparation, calling, commission, and effectual communion. Bengel well remarks regarding the Messianic fulfilment: “Similitudo non officit excellentiae.”
ἔσται δέ] see on Acts 2:17.
ἐξολοθρ. ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ] In the LXX. it runs after the original text: ἐγὼ ἐκδικήσω ἐξ αὐτοῦ. Peter, in order to express this threat according to its more special import, and thereby in a manner more deterrent and more incentive to the obedience required,(151) substitutes for it the formula which often occurs in the Pentateuch after Genesis 17:14 : נִכְרְתָה הַנֶּפֶשּׁ הַהִיא מֵעַמֶּיהָ, which is the appointment of the punishment of death excluding forgiveness; see Gesen. Thes. II. p. 718; Ewald, Alterth. p. 419. The apostle, according to his insight into the Messianic reference and significance of the whole passage, understands by it exclusion from the Messianic life and ejection to Gehenna, consequently the punishment of eternal death, which will set in at the judgment. On ἐξολοθρεύω, funditus perdo, frequent in the LXX., the Apocrypha, and in the Test. XII. Patr., also in Clem. Rom. (who has only the form ἐξολεθρ.), only known to later Greek, see Kypke, II. p. 27; Sturz, Dial. Mac. p. 166 f.
καὶ … δέ] i.e. Moses on the one hand, and all the prophets on the other. Thus over against Moses, the beginner, who was introduced by ΄έν, there is placed as similar in kind the collective body. See as to καὶ … δέ, on John 6:51, and observe that δέ is attached to the emphasized idea appended ( πάντες); comp. Baeuml. Partik. p. 149.
All the prophets from Samuel and those that follow, as many as have spoken, have also, etc.,—evidently an inaccurate form of expression in which two constructions are mixed up,—namely: (1) All the prophets from Samuel onward, as many of them as have spoken, have also, etc.; and (2) All the prophets, Samuel and those who follow, as many of them as have spoken, have also, etc. Winer, p. 588 [E. T. 789]. The usual construction since Casaubon, adopted also by Valckenaer and Kuinoel, is that of the Vulgate: “et omnes prophetae a Samuel, et deinceps qui locuti sunt,” so that it is construed καὶ ὅσοι τῶν καθεξῆς ἐλάλ.; it yields a tautology, as those who follow after are already contained in πάντες οἱ προφῆται ἀπὸ σ. Van Hengel’s (Adnotatt. in loca nonnulla N. T. p. 101 ff.) expedient, that after τῶν καθεξῆς there is to be supplied ἕως ʼιωάννου, and after προφῆται, ἀρξάμενοι, is simply arbitrary in both cases.
After Moses Samuel opens the series of prophets in the stricter sense. He is called in the Talmud also (see Wetstein) magister prophetarum. For a prophecy from 2 Sam., see Hebrews 1:5. Comp. Hengstenberg, Christol. I. p. 143 ff.
κ. τῶν καθεξῆς] “longa temporum successione, uno tamen consensu,” Calvin.
τὰς ἡ΄έρας ταύτας] i.e. those days, of which Moses has spoken what has just been quoted, namely, the χρόνοι ἀποκαταστ. πάντ., which necessarily follows from ὧν ἐλάλησεν ὁ θεὸς κ. τ. λ., Acts 3:21. Hence we are not to understand, with Schneckenburger, Weiss, Hofmann (Schriftbew. II. 1, p. 140), the time of the present as referred to; in which view Hofmann would change the entire connection, so as to make Acts 3:22-24 serve as a reason for the call to repentance in Acts 3:19 whereas it is evident that ὧν ἐλάλησεν κ. τ. λ., Acts 3:21, must be the element determining the following appeals to Moses and the prophets.
Copyright © 2013 by Douglas E. Cox
All Rights Reserved.