Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| Homily XIX on Acts viii. 26, 27. PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP
Homily XIX.
Acts VIII. 26, 27
“And the Angel of the Lord
spake unto Philip, saying, arise and go toward the south unto the way
that goeth down from Jerusalem unto Gaza, which is desert. And he arose
and went.”
It seems to me, this436
436 So
all the mss. and the Catena: except E. which
having already made Chrys. affirm that Philip was one of the seven,
supra, p. 115, and note 1, gives a different turn to this
passage. “It seems to me, that he received this command while in
Samaria: because from Jerusalem one does not go southward, but to the
north: but from Samaria it is to the south.” An unnecessary
comment; for it would hardly occur to any reader of the Acts to suppose
that Philip had returned to Jerusalem. | (Philip) was one
of the seven; for from Jerusalem he would not have gone southwards, but
to the north; but from Samaria it was “towards the south. The
same is desert:” so that there is no fear of an attack from the
Jews. And he did not ask, Wherefore? but “arose and went. And,
behold,” it says, “a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch of great
authority under Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, who had the charge of
all her treasure, and had come to Jerusalem for to worship, was
returning, and sitting in his chariot read Esaias the prophet.”
(v. 27, 28.) High encomiums for
the man, that he, residing in Ethiopia and beset with so much business,
and when there was no festival going on, and living in that
superstitious city, came “to Jerusalem for to worship.”
Great also is his studiousness, that even “sitting in his chariot
he read.437
437 “Behold, an eunuch (comp. p. 122, note 4), a
barbarian—both circumstances calculated to make him indisposed to
study—add to this, his dignified station and opulence: the very
circumstance of his being on a journey, and riding in a chariot: for to
a person travelling in this way, it is not easy to attend to reading,
but on the contrary very troublesome: yet his strong desire and
earnestness set aside all these hindrances,” etc. Hom. in
Gen. xxxv. §1. Throughout the exposition of the history of the
eunuch there given (t. iv. p. 350–352) he is called a barbarian:
so in the tenth of the “Eleven Homilies,” §5, t. xii.
393, 394, he is called a “barbarian,” and
“alien,” ἀλλόφυλος, but also “a Jew:” ἀλλ᾽
οὐχ ὁ
βάρβαρος
τότε ἐκεῖνος
ταῦτα εἶπε (viz. excuses for delaying baptism) καὶ ταῦτα
᾽Ιουδαῖος ὢν
κ. τ. λ. i.e. as Matthäi
explains in l., “a Jewish proselyte.”—Both
expositions should be compared with this in the text. | And,” it says, “the
Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot. And
Philip ran thither to him, and heard him reading the prophet Esaias,
and said, Understandest thou what thou readest? And he said, How can I,
except some man should guide me?” (v. 29–31.) Observe again his
piety; that though he did not understand, he read, and then after
reading, examines. “And he desired Philip that he would come up
and sit with him. The place of the Scripture which he read was this, He
was led as a sheep to the slaughter; and like a lamb dumb before his
shearer, so opened He not His mouth: in His humiliation His judgment
was taken away: and who shall declare His generation? for His life is
taken from the earth. And the eunuch answered Philip, and said, I pray
thee, of whom speaketh the prophet this? of himself, or of some other
man? Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same Scripture, and
preached unto him Jesus.” (v.
32–35.) Observe how it is Providentially ordered. First he reads
and does not understand; then he reads the very text in which was the
Passion and the Resurrection and the Gift. “And as they went on
their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See,
here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?” (v. 36.) Mark the eager
desire, mark438
438 ἀκρίβειαν. Below, ὁρᾷς
ὅτι τὰ
δόγματα
ἀπηρτισμένα
εἶχε. The 37th verse (Philip’s answer
and the Eunuch’s confession) seems to have been absent from St.
Chrysostom’ copy (unless indeed it is implied in the passage just
cited). It is found in Laud’s Gr. and Lat. copy of the Acts, part
is cited by St. Irenæus, p. 196. and part by St. Cypr. p. 318, but
unknown to the other ancient authorities. | the exact knowledge. “And
he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into
the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him. And when
they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away
Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way
rejoicing.” (v. 38,
39.)
But why did the Spirit of the Lord bear him away? (Hereby) the
occurrence was shown to be more wonderful. Even then, the eunuch did
not know him. Consequently this was done, that Philip might afterwards
be a subject of wonder to him.439
439 ὥστε
οὖν ὕστερον
αὐτὸν
θαυμασθῆναι,
τοῦτο
ἐγένετο:
i.e. as below, the eunuch saw that it was the work of God: it was done
in order that he might not think ὅτι
ἄνθρωπός
ἐστιν
ἁπλῶς.—Edd.
from E. “Why, it may be asked, did the Spirit of the Lord carry
Philip away? Because he was to pass through other cities, and to preach
the Gospel. Consequently this was done, etc. that he might not think
what had happened to him was of man, but of God.” |
“For,” it says, “he went on his way rejoicing. But
Philip was found at Azotus: and passing through he preached in all the
cities, till he came to Cæsarea.” (v. 40.) This (Philip, therefore) was one of the seven; for there
in fact he is afterwards found at Cæsarea. It was well and
expedient therefore that the Spirit caught Philip away; else the eunuch
would have desired to go with him,440
440 συναπελθεῖν
(Œc. συμπαρελθεῖν) αὐτᾷ. As there is
no αὐτὸν, the
meaning seems to be as above expressed, not, “would have desired
Philip to go with him.” | and Philip
would have grieved him by declining to comply with his request, the
time being not yet come. (a) But441
441 What
follows is confused in the mss. and Edd., by
transposition of the portions of text here marked a, b; and
c, d: the order in the mss. being b,
a, d. c, e. | at
the same time here was an encouraging assurance for them that they
shall also prevail over the heathen: for442
442 Καὶ γὰρ τὸ
τῶν
πιστευόντων
ἀξιόπιστον
ἱκανὸν
αὐτοὺς ἆραι·
εἰ δὲ
ἐπέμεινεν (B. ἐπέμενον) ἐκεῖ, ποῖον
τὸ ἔγκλημα; Meaning, perhaps, that the character and station of such
converts as the eunuch would weigh much with their countrymen
(τοὺς
ἀλλοφύλους). Though if the eunuch had stayed behind in Judea, who
could have blamed him?—The modern text:“—sufficient
to persuade the learners to be roused up themselves also to the same
zeal.” |
indeed the high character (τὸ
ἀξιόπιστον) of the (first) believers was enough to move them. If
however the eunuch had stayed there, what fault could have been found?
[But he knew him not]: for this is why it says, “he went on his
way rejoicing:” so that had he known him, he would not have been
(so) delighted.
“And the Angel of the
Lord,” etc. (Recapitulation, v. 26.) (b) See Angels assisting the preaching, and not
themselves preaching, but calling these (to the work). But the
wonderful nature of the occurrence is shown also by this: that what of
old was rare, and hardly done, here takes place with ease,443
443 εὐχερῶς,
ὅρα μεθ᾽ ὅσης
ἀφθονίας. Cat. The mss. omit εὐχερῶς. He means, angelic manifestations. | and see with what frequency! (c)
“An eunuch,” it says, “a man of great authority,
under Candace, queen of the Ethiopians.”444
444 It
is probable that this eunuch was an Ethiopian by birth and a Jewish
proselyte. It was customary for such foreign proselytes, as well as for
Jewish non-residents, to go up to Jerusalem to worship. Others suppose
him to have been a Jew, resident in Ethiopia; but he is designated as
“an Ethiopian.” The fact that those in his condition were
not admitted to full standing in the congregation of Israel
(Deut. xxiii. 1) is not a sufficient reason for the opinion of Meyer that this
man must have been an uncircumcised heathen—a “proselyte of
the gate,” since he could occupy the same relation as native Jews
in his condition. Ethiopia lay to the S. of Egypt and Candace was queen
of Meroë, the northern portion of the country. Eunuchs not only
served as keepers of the harem but sometimes, as here, as royal
treasurers.—G.B.S. |
(v. 27.) For there women bore
rule of old, and this was the law among them. Philip did not yet know
for whose sake he had come into the desert: (d) but445
445 τὶ δὲ
ἐκώλυσεν
πάντα αὐτὸν
ἀκριβῶς
μαθεῖν καὶ ἐν
τῷ ὀχήματι
ὄντα;
καὶ γὰρ
ἔρημος ἦν καὶ
οὐκ ἦν τὸ
πρᾶγμα
ἐπίδειξις. We conjecture the first clause to be meant as the answer
to an objection: How should Philip know all these particulars? It may
indeed relate to the eunuch’s accurate knowledge (ἀκρίβεια) above mentioned, note 1. The latter part, however, seems to
belong to v. 28 to which the Catena
refers the mention of the χαλεπώτατον
καῦμα.—Edd.
(from E. alone), “Pray what hindered, say you, that he should
learn all, even when in the chariot, and especially in the desert?
Because the matter was not one of display. But let us look over again
what has been read. And behold,” etc. | what was there to hinder his learning all
(these particulars) accurately, while in the chariot? “Was
reading the prophet Esaias.” (v. 28.) For the road was desert, and there was no display in the
matter. Observe also at what time: in the most violent heat (of the
day). (e) “And the Spirit said unto him.”
(v. 29.) Not now the Angel446
446 ἁρπάζει: but
this, derived from v.
39 is
not the right word here.—This, with the clause immediately
preceding in the mss., is thus altered by the
innovator (E. Edd.): “So little did P. know (οὕτως οὐκ
ᾔδει Φ.) for whose
sake he was come into the desert: because also (ὅτι
καὶ, F. D. ὅθεν) not now an Angel, but
the Spirit bears him away. But the eunuch sees none of these things,
being as yet not fully initiated (ἀτελὴς,
imperfectus Ben.); or because also these things are not for the
more bodily, but for the more spiritual: nor indeed does he learn the
things which Philip is fully taught (ἐκδιδάσκεται).” | but the Spirit urges him. Why is this?
“Then,” the vision took place, in grosser form, through the
Angel, for this is for them that are more of the body, but the Spirit
is for the more spiritual. And how did He speak to him? Of course,
suggested it to him. Why does not the Angel appear to the other, and
bring him to Philip? Because it is likely he would not have been
persuaded, but rather terrified. Observe the wisdom of Philip: he did
not accuse him, not say, “I know these things exactly:” did
not pay court to him, and say, “Blessed art thou that
readest.” But mark his speech, how far it is from harshness alike
and from adulation; the speech rather of a kind and friendly man.
“Understandest thou what thou readest?” (v. 30.) For it was needful
that he should himself ask, himself have a longing desire. He plainly
intimates, that he knows that the other knew nothing: and says,
“Understandest thou what thou readest?” at the same time he
shows him that great was the treasure that lay therein. It tells well
also, that the eunuch looked not to the outward appearance
(σχἥμα) (of the
man), said not, “Who art thou?” did not chide, not give
himself airs, not say that he did know. On the contrary, he confesses
his ignorance: wherefore also he learns. He shows his hurt to the
physician: sees at a glance, that he both knows the matter, and is
willing to teach. Look447
447 ῎Ιδετε(ἴδε B.) τὸ (τὸν N.) ἄτυφον·
οὐδὲν
λαμπρὸν
ἐπεφέρετο
σχῆμα. Read
τὸ
σχῆμα.—E. D. F.
Edd., Εἶδε and οὐδὲ
γὰρ. Vidit illum esse a
fastu alienum: neque enim splendidum gestabat vestitum. Ben. and
similarly Erasm. as if the meaning were, “the eunuch saw there
was no pride in Philip, for he had no splendid clothing.” But it
is the eunuch in whom this (τὸ ἄτυφον) is praised, (see below, §4 init.) that he did
not disdain Philip for the meanness of his appearance: comp. Hom. in
Gen. xxxv. §2. “For when the Apostle (supra, p.
115, note 1) had said, “Knowest thou,” and came up to him
in mean attire (μετὰ
εὐτελοῦς
σχήματος), the eunuch did not take it amiss, was not indignant, did not
think himself insulted.…but he, the man in great authority, the
barbarian, the man riding in a chariot, besought him, the person of
mean appearance, who might for his dress have easily been despised, to
come up and sit with him,” etc. | how free he is
from haughtiness; the outward appearance announced nothing splendid. So
desirous was he of learning, and gave heed to his words; and that
saying, “He that seeketh, findeth,” (Matt. vii. 8.) was fulfilled
in him. “And,” it says, “he besought Philip, that he
would come up and sit with him.” (v. 31.) Do you mark the eagerness, the longing desire? But should
any say he ought to have waited for Philip (to speak), (the answer is),
he does not know what is the matter: he could not in the least tell
what the other was going to say to him, but supposed merely that he was
about to receive some (lesson of) prophecy. And moreover, this was more
respectful, that he did not draw him into his chariot, but besought
him. “And Philip,” we have read, “ran to him, and
heard him reading;” even the fact of his running, showed448
448
ἐδείκνυ
βουλόμενον
εἰπεῖν. This
seems meant to explain why the eunuch at once besought Philip to come
up into the chariot: his running showed that he wished to say
something.—E. Edd. “was a sign of his wishing to speak, and
the reading (a sign) of his studiousness. For he was reading at a time
when the sun makes the heat more violent.”
1
The rendering of ἡ δὲ
περιοχὴ τῆς
γραφῆς given in
the text (A.V.) is also that of the R.V. Another interpretation is
preferred by many scholars: “the content of the Scripture”
(γραφὴ being used
in the limited sense of the particular passage in question). This view
harmonizes with the derivation of περιοχή (περὶ-ἔχειν) meaning an enclosure, or that which is enclosed.
Γραφή is also used in
the limited sense in v.
35 (So, Meyer, Hackett, and Thayer’s Lex.) | that he wished to say (something).
“And the place,” it says, “of the Scripture which he
read was this: As a sheep He was led to the slaughter.”449
449 The
rendering of ἡ δὲ
περιοχὴ τῆς
γραφῆς given in
the text (A.V.) is also that of the R.V. Another interpretation is
preferred by many scholars: “the content of the Scripture”
(γραφὴ being used
in the limited sense of the particular passage in question). This view
harmonizes with the derivation of περιοχή (περὶ-ἔχειν) meaning an enclosure, or that which is enclosed.
Γραφή is also used in
the limited sense in v.
35 (So, Meyer, Hackett, and Thayer’s Lex.) | (v.
32.)
And this circumstance, also, is a token of his elevated mind,
(φιλοσοφίας) that he had in hand this prophet, who is more sublime
than all others. Philip does not relate matters to him just as it might
happen, but quietly: nay, does not say anything until he is questioned.
Both in the former instance he prayed him, and so he does now, saying,
“I pray thee of whom speaketh the prophet this?” That450
450 ῍Η (N. om. Cat. τὸ) ὅλως
εἰδέναι ὅτι
ἄλλως καὶ (om. C.) περὶ ἄλλων
λέγουσιν οἱ
προφῆται, ἢ
ὅτι κ. τ. λ. A.
B. C. Cat. We read, τὸ
ὅλως εἰδέναι
ἢ.…But the modern text: “It
seems to me that he knew not that the prophets speak of other persons:
or if not this, he was ignorant that they discourse concerning
themselves in another person;” omitting the last clause,
σφόδρα
ἐπεσκεμμένου
(Cat. περιεσκεμμένη) ἡ ἐρώτησις.—In the next sentence B. has retained the true
reading, ἐκτομίαν, for which the rest have ταμίαν.
N. ταμιεῖαν. | he should at all know either that the
Prophets speak in different ways about different persons, or that they
speak of themselves in another person—the question betokens a
very thoughtful mind.451 Let us be put to
shame, both poor and rich, by this eunuch. Then, it says, “they
came to a certain water, and he said, Lo, here is water.”
(v. 36.) Again, of his own
accord he requests, saying, “What doth hinder me to be
baptized?” And see again his modesty: he does not say, Baptize
me, neither does he hold his peace; but he utters somewhat midway
betwixt strong desire and reverent fear, saying, “What doth
hinder me?” Do you observe that he has the doctrines (of faith)
perfect? For indeed the Prophet had the whole, Incarnation, Passion,
Resurrection, Ascension, Judgment to come. And if he shows exceeding
earnestness of desire, do not marvel. Be ashamed, all ye as many as are
unbaptized. “And,” it says, “he commanded the chariot
to stand still.” (v.
38.)
He spoke, and gave the order at the same moment, before hearing
(Philip’s answer). “And when they were come up out of the
water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip;” (v. 39) in order that the
occurrence might be shown to be of God; that he might not consider it
to be merely man. “And he went,” it says, “on his way
rejoicing.” (P. 121, note 2.) This hints, that he would have been
grieved had he known: for the greatness of his joy, having had the
Spirit also vouchsafed to him, he did not even see things
present—“But Philip was found at Azotus.”
(v. 40.) Great was the gain to
Philip also:—that which he heard concerning the Prophets,
concerning Habakkuk, concerning Ezekiel, and the rest, he saw done in
his own person. (Bel. & Dr. v. 36; Ez. iii. 12.) Thence it
appears that he went a long distance, seeing he “was found at
Azotus.” (The Spirit) set him there, where he was thenceforth to
preach: “And passing through, he preached in all the cities,
until he came to Cæsarea.”
“And Saul, yet breathing
out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went
unto the high priest, and desired of him letters to Damascus to the
synagogues, that if he found any of this way, whether they were men or
women, he might bring them bound unto Jerusalem.” (ch. ix. 1, 2.) He fitly mentions
Paul’s zeal, and shows that in the very midst of his zeal he is
drawn. “Yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter,” and
not yet sated with the murder of Stephen, he was not yet glutted with
the persecution of the Church, and the dispersion. Lo, this was
fulfilled which was spoken by Christ, that “they which kill you
shall think they offer worship to God.” (John xvi. 2.) He then in this
wise did it, not as the Jews: God forbid! For that he did it through
zeal, is manifest from his going abroad even to strange cities: whereas
they would not have cared even for those in Jerusalem; they were for
one thing only, to enjoy honor. But why went he to Damascus? It was a
great city, a royal city: he was afraid lest that should be
preoccupied. And observe his strong desire and ardor (and), how
strictly according to the Law he went to work: he goes not to the
governor, but “to the priest. That if he found any of this
way:” for so the believers were called, probably because of their
taking the direct way that leads to heaven. And why did he not receive
authority to have them punished there, but brings them to Jerusalem! He
did these things here with more authority. And mark on what a peril he
casts himself. He452
452 Edd.
“on what danger casting himself, still even so he is afraid lest
he should suffer some harm. This is the reason why he takes others with
him, probably to rid himself of his fear: or also, because they were
many against whom he was going, he takes many, in order that the more
boldly, whomsoever he should find, both men and women,” etc. Just
the opposite to C.’s meaning: viz. “It is not to be
supposed, because he took many with him, that he had any fears for
himself: he was above all such regards. The fact is, he wished to show
them all (both the Jews at Jerusalem, and the companions of his
journey), how they ought to act:” διὰ τῆς ὁδοῦ
πᾶσιν αὐτοις
δεῖξαι
ἐβούλετο. C. however has πᾶσιν
αὐτοῦ, N.
πᾶσιν
αὐτοὺς,
meaning: “by means of his journey, he wished to show them (the
Christians bound) to all.” Perhaps the true reading is
αὐτοῦ
τὴν
προθυμίαν, or the like. E. D. F. Edd. “Especially as by means
of the journey he wished to show them all (πᾶσιν
αὐτοῖς), that
all depended on him (αὐτοῦ τὸ πᾶν
ὄν).” | was not afraid lest
he should take any harm, but (yet) he took others also with him,
“that if,” it says, “he found any of this way,
whether they were men or women”—Oh, the
ruthlessness!—“he might bring them bound.” By this
journey of his, he wished to show them all (how he would act): so far
were they from being earnest in this matter. Observe him also casting
(people) into prison before this. The others therefore did not prevail:
but this man did prevail, by reason of his ardent mind. “And as
he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round
about him a light from heaven: and he fell to the earth, and heard a
voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou Me?”
(v. 3, 4.) Why not in Jerusalem?
why not in Damascus? That there might be no opening for different
persons to relate the occurrence in different ways, but that he alone
should be the authentic narrator (ἀξιόπιστος), he that453
453 ὁ διὰ τοῦτο
ἀπιών: i.e. who
would have a right to be believed, because it was known that he left
Jerusalem for the purpose of persecuting. Had it taken place in
Jerusalem or in Damascus, some would have given one account of the
matter, some another—as, in the case of our Lord, when the voice
came to Him from heaven at Jerusalem, “some said it thundered,
some that an Angel spake to Him,” (so Chrys. explains below, p.
125)—but, happening in the way it did, the person most interested
in it, and who by this very thing was caused to take so momentous a
step, was the authentic narrator; i.e. the story was to come from him,
as the only competent authority: ἀλλ᾽
αὐτὸς
ἀξιόπιστος
ἦν
διηγούμενος
(so Cat.; C., ἦν
διηγήσασθαι: the other mss. ᾖδιηγούμενος) ὁ διὰ
τοῦτο
ἀπιών· Infra, p. 125, οὗτος δὲ
ἀξιόπιστος
ἦν
ἀπαγγέλλων
μᾶλλον τὰ
ἑαυτοῦ.—In the next sentence, Τοῦτο γοῦν
λέγει, καὶ
πρὸς
᾽Αγρίππαν
ἀπολογούμενος, something seems wanting before καὶ, as supplied in
the translation: but also both before and after these words: e.g. For
the men which were with him, heard not the voice, and were amazed and
overpowered. In fact, he says this in his oration on the stairs,
“They heard not the voice of Him that spake to me,” and
when pleading before Agrippa, he says, “And when we were all
fallen to the ground, I heard a voice.” etc. | went for this
purpose. In fact, he says this [both in his oration on the stairs], and
when pleading before Agrippa. “Fell to the earth”:
(ch. xxii, 6; xxvi.
12)
for excess of light is wont to shock, because the eyes have their
measure: it is said also that excess of sound makes people deaf and
stunned (as in a fit) (ἀποπλἥγας). But454
454 ᾽Αλλὰ
τοῦτον μόνον
ἐπήρωσε:
may be rendered, They all saw the light, but it blinded only
Paul:—or, Him however it only blinded, did not cast him into
insensibility, but left him otherwise in possession of his
faculties. | him it only
blinded, and extinguished his passion by fear, so that he should hear
what was spoken. “Saul, Saul,” saith He, “why
persecutest thou me?” And He tells him nothing: does not say,
Believe, nor anything whatever of the kind: but expostulates with him,
all but saying, What wrong, great or small, hast thou suffered from Me,
that thou doest these things? “And he said, Who art Thou
Lord?” (v. 5) thus in the first
place confessing himself His servant. “And the Lord said, I am
Jesus, whom thou persecutest:” think not thy warring is with
men.455
455 The remainder of the verse and the
first part of v. 6
to πρὸς
αὐτὸν, were absent
from Chrysostom’s copy (and Cat. Œc. Theoph.) as from Codd.
A. B. C. (of New Test.) and Laud’s Gr. and Lat. of Acts: but the
last have the clause, σκληρόν σοι
π. κ. λ. after διώκεις, v. 4. St. Hil. omits the
clause durum est, etc. but has, tremens et pavens,
etc.—“The voice of Paul:” Didymus in Cat. gives this
as Chrysostom’s solution of the seeming contradiction between
this statement and that of St. Paul in xxii. 9. “In the first
narrative, they heard Paul’s voice, saying, Who art thou, Lord?
But saw no man save Paul: in the second, they saw the light, but did
not hear the voice of the Lord.” | And they which were with him heard the voice
of Paul, but saw no person to whom he answered—for (the Lord)
suffered them to be hearers of what was less important. Had they heard
the other Voice, they would not have believed; but perceiving Paul
answering (some person), they marvelled. “But arise, and go into
the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do.”
(v. 6.) Observe, how He does
not immediately add all, but first softens his mind. In the same way He
called the disciples also a second time.456
456 οὕτω καὶ
τοὺς μαθητὰς
ἐκάλεσεν ἐκ
δευτέρου (Cat. and Sav. marg. join ἐκ δ. to the next sentence). The meaning is: As here, there is
an interval between the conversion of Saul, and Christ’s
announcement of the purpose for which he was called (which in
Acts xxvi. 15, 16 are put together as if all was said at the same time), so in the
case of the disciples, Andrew, John, and Simon, there was a first call,
related in John i.; then after a while, Christ called them a second time,
(see Hom. in Matt. xiv. §2) namely, to be fishers of
men, Matt. iv. In both cases there was an interval, during which he and
they were prepared for the further revelation of His will concerning
them. The mod. t. (E. Edd.) omits this clause, and substitutes,
καὶ δἰ
ὡν
παρακελεύεται
αὐτὸν ποιεῖν
παραχρῆμα κ. τ.
λ. “And by what He bids him do,
straightway gives him.” etc. |
“It shall be told thee,” etc.: He gives him good hopes, and
(intimates) that he shall recover his sight also. “And the men
which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing
no man. And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened,
he saw no man: but they led him by the hand, and brought him into
Damascus” (v. 7,
8):—the spoils of the devil (τὰ σκεύη
αὐτοὕ), “his
goods” (Matt. xiii. 29), as from some city,
yea, some metropolis which has been taken. And the wonder of it is, the
enemies and foes themselves brought him in, in the sight of all!
“And for three days he neither did eat nor drink, being
blinded.” (v.
9.)
What could equal this? To compensate the discouragement in the matter
of Stephen, here is encouragement, in the bringing in of Paul: though
that sadness had its consolation in the fact of Stephen’s making
such an end, yet it also received this further consolation: moreover,
the bringing in of the villages of the Samaritans afforded very great
comfort.—But why did this take place not at the very first, but
after these things? That it might be shown that Christ was indeed
risen. This furious assailant of Christ, the man who would not believe
in His death and resurrection, the persecutor of His disciples, how
should this man have become a believer, had not the power of His
resurrection been great indeed? Be it so, that the other Apostles
favored (His pretensions457
457 ῎Εστω
ἐκεῖνοι αὐτῷ
ἐχαρίζοντο. Hom. in illud, Saulus adhuc spirans, etc. §5,
t. iii. p. 105. “But shameless objectors may say (of Peter), that
because he was Christ’s disciple, because he had been partaker at
His table, had been with Him three years, had been under His teaching,
had been deluded and cajoled by Him (ἐκολακεύθη
ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ
ἀπατηθεὶς), therefore it is that he preaches His resurrection: but
when thou seest Paul, a man who knew Him not, had never heard Him, had
never been under His teaching: a man, who even after His crucifixion
makes war upon Him, puts to death them that believe in Him, throws all
into confusion and disorder, when thou seest him suddenly converted,
and in his toils for the Gospel outstripping the friends of Christ:
what plea canst thou then have for thine effrontery, in disbelieving
the word of the Resurrection?” | ): what say you to
this man? Why then not immediately after His resurrection? That his
hostility might be more clearly shown as open war. The man who is so
frantic as even to shed blood and cast men into prisons, all at once
believes! It was not enough that he had never been in Christ’s
company: the believers must be warred upon by him with vehement
hostility: he left to none the possibility of going beyond him in fury:
none of them all could be so violent. But when he was blinded,458
458 ᾽Επειδὴ δὲ
ἐπληρώθη (ἐπληροφορήθη, A. om., Cat. ἐπηρώθη, E.
D. F. Edd.) τῆς
δεσποτείας
αὐτοῦ τὰ
τεκμήρια καὶ
τῆς
φιλανθρωπίας
τότε
ἀποκρίνεται
(for τ.
ἀ. E. D. F. Edd. γνωρίζει, Cat. εἶδεν)· ἵνα (γὰρ add B.) μή τις
εἵπῃ ὃτι
ὑπεκρίνετο, ὁ
καὶ αἱμάτων
ἐπιθυμῶν κ. τ.
λ. (ἢ καὶ
ἵνα μή τις…ὑπεκρ.
Πῶς γὰρ ὁ καὶ
αἱμ. ἐπ. κ. τ. λ. E. D. F. Edd.) We read ᾽Επειδὴ δὲ
ἐπηρώθη,…τῆς
φ. εἶδε. Τότε
ἀπ. Κύριε, κ. τ. λ.
ἵνα λὴ κ. τ. λ. | then he saw the proofs of His sovereignty
and loving kindness: then he answers, “Lord, what wilt Thou have
me to do?” that none may say that he played the hypocrite, he
that was even eager for blood, and went to the priests, and flung
himself upon such dangers, in persecuting and bringing to punishment
even them that were in foreign parts—under these circumstances he
now acknowledges His sovereignty. And why was he shone upon by that
light not within the city, but before it? The many would not have
believed, since even there (at Jerusalem when the people heard the
voice which came from above, they said that “it thundered”
(John xii. 29, supra, note 2, p. 123); but this man was authority enough
in reporting what was his own affair. And bound he was brought in,
though not with bonds upon him: and they drew him, who had expected to
draw the others. “And he eat not, neither drank:” he
condemned himself for the past, he confessed, prayed, besought God. But
should any say, This was the effect of compulsion: (we answer) The same
thing happened to Elymas: then how came it that he was not changed?
(ch. xiii. de Laud. Pauli Hom. iv. §1, t. ii. p. 491.) What
(evidence) could be more compulsory than the earthquake at the
Resurrection, the report of the soldiers, the other miracles, the
seeing Himself risen? But these things do not compel (belief) they are
calculated to teach (it) (οὐκ
ἀναγκαστικὰ
ἀλλὰ
διδακτικά). Why did not the Jews believe when they were told of these
things? That he spoke truth was manifest: for he would not have been
changed, had this not happened; so that all were bound to believe. He
was not inferior to them that preached the Resurrection, and was more
credible, by being all at once converted. He had no intercourse with
any of the believers; it was at Damascus that he was converted, or
rather before he came to Damascus that this happened to him. I ask the
Jew: Say, by what was Paul converted? He saw so many signs, and was not
converted: his teacher (Gamaliel, supra, p. 87, note 1) was
converted, and he remained unconverted. Who convinced him—and not
only convinced, but all at once inspired him with such ardent zeal?
Wherefore was it, that he wished even to go into hell itself459
459 Διά τι καὶ
εἰς γεένναν
ηὔξατο
ἀπελθεῖν
ὑπὲρ τοῦ
Χριστοῦ;
The modern text substitutes, “that he wished even to be accursed
(Rom. ix. 2.) for Christ,” See Hom. xvi, ad Rom. in 1. But Chrys.
elsewhere uses as strong expressions as he does here. Hom. ii. in 2
Thess. §4 οὐδὲ τὴν
πεῖραν τῆς
γεέννης
ἡγεῖτό τι
εἶναι διὰ τὸν
τοῦ Χριστοῦ
πόθον. And,
διὰ τὸν
τοῦ Χ. πόθον,
καταδέχεται
καὶ εἰς
γεένναν
ἐμπεσεῖν καὶ
τῆς
βασιλείας
ἐκπεσεῖν, (cited in the Ecloga de Laud. Paul. t. xii. p. 659,
E.) | for Christ’s sake? The truth of the
facts is manifest.
But, as I said, for the present
let us take shame to ourselves (when we think of) the eunuch, both in
his baptism and his reading. Do ye mark how he was in a station of
great authority, how he was in possession of wealth, and even on his
journey allowed himself no rest? What must he have been at home, in his
leisure hours, this man who rested not even on his travels? What must
he have been at night? Ye that are in stations of dignity, hear:
imitate his freedom from pride,460
460 τὸ ἄτυφον, above, p. 122, 2. Comp. x. §5. of the Eleven
Homilies, t. xii. p. 393. “Admire how this man, barbarian as he
was, and alien, and liable to be puffed up with his great authority,
demeaned himself towards a man, poor, beggarly, unknown, whom until
then he had never set eyes on.…If our rulers now, believers
though they be, and taught to be humble-minded, and with nothing of the
barbarian about them, meeting in the public place, I do not say an
unknown stranger, but one whom they know, would be in no great hurry to
give him a seat beside him (in their carriage), how came this man to
condescend so much to a perfect stranger—for I will not cease to
insist upon this—a stranger, I say, one whom he had never seen, a
mean-looking person, apt to be despised for his appearance, as to bid
him mount and sit beside him? Yet this he did, and to his tongue
committed his salvation, and endured to put himself in the position of
a learner: yea, beseeches, intreats, supplicates, saying, ‘I pray
thee, of whom saith the Prophet this?’ and receives with profound
attention what he says. And not only so, but having received, he was
not remiss, did not put off, did not say, ‘Let me get back to my
own country, let me see my friends, my family, my
kinsfolk’—which is what many Christians say now-a-days when
called to baptism: ‘let me get to my country, let me see my wife,
let me see my children with my other kinsfolk: with them present, and
making holiday with me, so will I enjoy the benefit of baptism, so
partake of the Grace.’ But not these words spake he, the
barbarian: Jew as he was, and trained to make strict account of places,
especially with (the Law) ever sounding in his ears the duty of
observing the Place, insomuch that he had gone a long journey to
Jerusalem, on purpose that he might worship in the place which God
commanded: and behold, all at once casting away all that he had been
used to in this regard, and relinquishing this strict observance of
place, no sooner is the discourse finished, and he sees a fountain by
the roadside, than he says, ‘See, here is water, what doth hinder
me to be baptized?’” | (de Lazaro,
Conc. iii. §3, t. i. p. 748. c) his piety. Though about to
return home, he did not say to himself: “I am going back to my
country, there let me receive baptism;” those cold words which
most men use! No need had he of signs, no need of miracles: from the
Prophet merely, he believed. (b) But461
461 The
letters (a) (b) denote the order of the two parts in
mss. and Edd. | why
is it (so ordered) that he sees (Philip) not before he goes to
Jerusalem, but after he has been there? It was not meet that he should
see the Apostles under persecution. Because462
462 διὰ τὸ
ἀσθενὲς
ἔτι: Edd, give this to the
preceding sentence, and then: Οὐδὲ
πρότερον
οὕτως ἠν
εὔκολον, ὡς
ὅτε ὁ
προφήτης
αὐτὸν
κατήχησεν: “nor was it so easy before, as (it was) when the
Prophet had catechized him:” which is irrelevant to the question:
for Philip might have found him engaged in the same study then as
afterwards. The old text has: οὐκ ἦν
εὔκολος, ὁ
προφήτης γὰρ
αὐτὸν
κατήχησεν, but A. rightly omits γὰρ. Something is wanting;
e.g. either, “until Philip catechized him,” or rather,
“but yet the prophet catechized him.” What follows is much
confused in the mss. By “the prophecy
itself” Chrys. probably means more than the two verses given in the Acts,
viz. Isai. liii. 7–; 12.—“It is
likely he had heard that He had been crucified,” so C. D. F.
(i.e. as appears further on, the eunuch when at Jerusalem had heard of
the Crucifixion, had seen the rent in the rocks, etc., another reason
why it was fit that he should have first visited Jerusalem:) but B.,
“Perhaps he had not heard:” and E. Edd., “Hence he
learnt.” After “taken from the earth,” C. alone
has, καὶ
τὰ ἄλλα ὅσ᾽
(sic) ἁμαρτίαν οὐκ
ἐποίησεν, the others, ὅτι
ἁμ. οὐκ ἐπ. after which Savile alone adds, “nor was guile found in His
mouth.” After ἐσταυρώθη something is wanting, e.g. νῦν δὲ
ἔμαθεν or
κατηχήθη. In καὶ
τὰ ἄλλα there
seems to be a reference to the sequel in “the prophecy
itself,” viz. “and the rest which may be read in Isaiah, as
that He did no sin,” etc.—A., as usual, omits the whole
passage: E. refashions it thus; “Hence He learnt that He was
crucified, that His life is taken away from the earth, that He did no
sin, that He prevailed to save others also, that His generation is not
to be declared, that the rocks were rent, that the veil was torn, that
dead men were raised from the tombs: or rather, all these things Philip
told him.” etc. so Edd. | he
was yet weak, the Prophet was not easy; (but yet the Prophet)
catechized him. For even now, if any of you would apply himself to the
study of the Prophets, he would need no miracles. And, if you please,
let us take in hand the prophecy itself. “He was led as a sheep
to the slaughter; and like a lamb dumb before his shearer, so opened He
not His mouth: in His humiliation His judgment was taken away: and who
shall declare His generation? for His life is taken from the earth.463
463 In
the quotation the N.T. follows the LXX. (Is. liii. 7, 8),
which but imperfectly renders the original. The meaning is obscure in
Hebrew, but the best rendering is probably that of the R.V. which
renders v. 8 thus: “By oppression and judgment he was taken away; and as
for his generation, who among them considered that he was cut
off out of the land of the living?” for which the LXX. and N.T.
have: “In his humiliation his judgment was taken away: His
generation who shall declare, for his life is taken from the
earth.” It is almost useless to inquire what the LXX. translators
could have meant by this rendering. Concerning the meaning of the first
clause, there are four theories: (1) The judgment announced by His
enemies was taken away, i.e., annulled by God (Bengel, Lechler). (2)
His judicial power was taken away during his humiliation, i.e., he did
not appear as men’s judge (Humphrey). (3) His judgment
(punishment) was taken away, i.e., ended—by death (Meyer,
Robinson). (4) The judgment due him—the rights of
justice—was withheld by his enemies (Gloag, Hackett).
The latter part of the
LXX. trans.: “who shall declare,” etc., has been understood
in the following ways: (1) Who shall declare his divine
Sonship?—the reference being to the “eternal
generation” of the Son (the Patristic view). (2) Who shall
declare the number of his spiritual seed, i.e., predict the extent of
his kingdom? (the Reformers). (3) Who shall declare the wickedness of
his contemporaries, for he was put to death (Meyer, De Wette, Lechler,
Alford, Gloag). This interp. assigns to the word
“generation,” the same meaning which the R.V. gives to it
in the original passage and is the preferable view. It should be
admitted that this is a probable theory of what the LXX. ought to have
meant by the words which they used; that they did consciously mean this
is far less certain.—G.B.S. | (v.
22, 23.) It is likely he had heard that He was crucified, [and now he
learns], that “His life is taken away from the earth,” and
the rest that “He did no sin, nor deceit in His mouth:”
that He prevailed to save others also: [and] who He is, Whose
generation is unutterable. It is likely he had seen the riven rocks
there (on the spot), and (had heard) how the veil was rent, and how
there was darkness, and so forth: and all these things Philip
mentioned, merely taking his text from the Prophet. It is a great
thing, this reading of the Scriptures! That was fulfilled which was
spoken by Moses, “Sitting, lying down, rising up, and walking,
remember the Lord thy God.” (Deut. vi. 7.) For the roads,
especially when they are lonely, give us opportunity for reflection,
there being none to disturb us. Both this man is on the road and Paul
on the road: howbeit the latter no man draws, but Christ alone. This
was too great a work for the Apostles: and, greater still, in that, the
Apostles being at Jerusalem, and no person of authority at Damascus, he
nevertheless returned thence converted: yet those at Damascus knew that
he did not come from Jerusalem converted, for he brought letters, that
he might put the believers in bonds. Like a consummate Physician, when
the fever was at its height, Christ brought help to him: for it was
needful that he should be quelled in the midst of his frenzy. For then
most of all would he be brought down, and condemn himself as one guilty
of dreadful audacity. (a) For these things Paul deplores
himself, saying, “Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that
in me first Jesus Christ might show all His long suffering.”
(1 Tim. i. 13–16.) Verily one has reason
to admire this eunuch. He did not see Christ, he saw no miracle: he
beheld Jerusalem standing yet entire (συνεστὥτα): he believed Philip. How came he to behave thus? His soul
was earnest (μεμεριμνημένη). Yet the thief (on the cross) had seen miracles: the wise
men had seen a star; but this man, nothing of the kind. So great a
thing is the careful reading of the Scriptures! What of Paul then! did
he not study the law? But he, it seems to me, was specially reserved,
for the purpose which I have already mentioned by anticipation, because
Christ would fain draw to Himself the Jews by inducements from every
quarter. For had they been in their right mind, nothing was so likely
to do them good as this; for this, more than miracles and all else, was
calculated to attract them: as,464
464 ὥσπερ οὖν
οὐδὲν οὕτω
σκανδαλίζειν
εἴωθε τοὺς
παχυτέρους: i.e. Saul’s conversion would have weighed with the
Jews εἰ
νοῦν εἶχον, but it was a great stumbling-block to them as παχύτεροι: “as indeed nothing is so apt to prove a
stumbling-block to men of duller minds,” as this is—viz.
the sudden conversion of one of their own party to the opposite
side. | on the other hand,
nothing is so apt to prove a stumbling block to men of duller minds.
See then how, after the Apostle, we have God also doing miracles. They
accused the Apostles after these [miracles of theirs]; they cast them
into prison: see thereupon God doing the miracles. For instance, the
bringing them out of prison, was His miracle: the bringing Philip, His
miracle: the bringing Paul over, was His.—Observe in what way
Paul is honored, in what way the eunuch. There, Christ appears,
probably because of his hardness, and because Ananias465
465 καὶ ὅτι οὐκ
ἂν ἐπείσθη
᾽Ανανίας, A. B. C. But Edd. omit Ananias: “because he (Paul) would
not otherwise have been persuaded.” In the next sentence, C. F.
have ᾽Εντρεφόμενοι, “nurtured:” B. ἐντρυφῶντες, “luxuriating:” A. E. D. Edd. ἐνστρεφόμενοι. | would not (else) have been persuaded.
Conversant with these wonders, let us show ourselves worthy. But many
in these times, even when they come to church, do not know what is
read; whereas the eunuch, even in public (ἐπ᾽
ἀγορἅς) and
riding in his chariot, applied himself to the reading of the
Scriptures. Not so you: none takes the Bible in hand: nay, everything
rather than the Bible.
Say, what are the Scriptures
for? For as much as in you lies, it is all undone. What is the Church
for? Tie up466
466 δῆσον.
i.e. tie them up, and keep them shut. E. Edd. κατάχωσον, “Bury.” Below, for καὶ μὴ
ἀκούοι
αὐτῶν, we
read ἵνα μὴ. C.
however has ἀκούει, which may imply that the sentence should be joined to the
preceding one, οὐ
τοιαύτη
κόλασις, εἴ
τις
καταχώσειεν
αὐτὰ ἐν
κόπρῳ, καὶ εἰ
μὴ ἀκούει
αὐτῶν: “not
such the punishment, were one to bury, etc., as it is if he refuse to
hear them.” | the Bibles: perhaps the judgment
would not be such, not such the punishment: if one were to bury them in
dung, that he might not hear them, he would not so insult them as you
do now. For say, what is the insult there? That the man has buried
them. And what here? That we do not hear them. Say, when is a person
most insulted—when he is silent, and one makes no answer, or,
when he does speak (and is unheeded)? So that the insult is greater in
the present case, when He does speak and thou wilt not hear: greater
the contempt. “Speak not to us” (Is. xxx. 10), we read, they
said of old to the Prophets: but ye do worse, saying, Speak:467
467 All
the mss. and Edd. Μὴ
λαλεῖτε,
“Speak not.” But the context plainly requires the sense.
“Speak on, if you will: we will not do what you bid us:”
though it should rather be, Οὐκ
ἀκούομεν. | we will not do. For there they turned
them away that they should not even speak, as feeling that from the
voice itself they got some sort of awe and obligation; whereas you, in
the excess of your contempt, do not even this. Believe me, if you
stopped our468
468 E. ὑμῖν, “your
mouths,” so Edd. except Sav. and below, ὁ ἀκούων καὶ
μὴ
πειθόμενος
μειζόνως
καταφρονεῖ, where the old text has, ὁ ἀκούων μειζ.
κατ. καὶ διὰ
τούτου
κωλύων,
“by this,” viz. by putting his hand on the speaker’s
mouth. | mouths by putting your hands over
them, the insult would not be so great as it is now. For say, whether
shows greater contempt, he that hears, even when hindering by this
action, or, he that will not even hear? Say—if we shall look at
it as a case of an insult offered—suppose one person to check the
party insulting him, and to stop his mouth, as being hurt by the
insults, and another person to show no concern, but pretend not even to
hear them: whether will show most contempt? Would you not say the
latter? For the former shows that he feels himself hit: the latter all
but stops the mouth of God. Did ye shudder at what was said? Why, the
mouth by which God speaks, is the mouth of God. Just as our mouth is
the mouth of our soul, though the soul has no mouth, so the mouth of
the Prophets is the mouth of God. Hear, and shudder. There, common (to
the whole congregation) stands the deacon crying aloud, and saying,
“Let us attend to the reading.” It is the common voice of
the whole Church, the voice which he utters, and yet none does attend.
After him begins the Reader, “The Prophecy of Esaias,” and
still none attends, although Prophecy has nothing of man in it. Then
after this, he says, “Thus saith the Lord,”469
469 When
the Deacon had ordered silence by proclaiming, if need were, several
times, Προσέχωμεν! the Reader commenced
the Lesson, if from the Old Testament or the Gospels, with the
formula, Τάδε
λέγει
Κύριος,
“Thus saith the Lord:” (for the Epistles, with,
“Dearly beloved Brethren.”) See Hom. in 2 Thess.
iii. §4. p. 527. D. | and still none attends. Then after this
punishments and vengeances, and still even then none attends. But what
is the common excuse? “It is always the same things over
again.” This it is most of all, that ruins you. Suppose you knew
the things, even so you certainly ought not to turn away: since in the
theatres also, is it not always the same things acted over again, and
still you take no disgust? How dare you talk about “the same
things,” you who know not so much as the names of the Prophets?
Are you not ashamed to say, that this is why you do not listen, because
it is “the same things over again,” while you do not know
the names of those who are read, and this, though always hearing the
same things? You have yourself confessed that the same things are said.
Were I to say this as a reason for finding fault with you, you would
need to have recourse to quite a different excuse, instead of this
which is the very thing you find fault with.—Do not you exhort
your son? Now if he should say, “Always the same things!”
would not you count it an insult? It would be time enough to talk of
“the same things,” when we both knew the things, and
exhibited them in our practice. Or rather, even then, the reading of
them would not be superfluous. What equal to Timothy? tell me that: and
yet to him says Paul, “Give attention to reading, to exhortation.
(1 Tim. iv. 13.) For it is not possible, I say not possible, ever to
exhaust the mind of the Scriptures. It is a well which has no bottom.
“I said,” saith the Preacher, “I am become wise:470
470 Εἶπον,
ἐσοφίσθην,
φησί, καὶ
τότε ἀπέστη
ἀπ᾽ ἐμοῦ. Ben. rendering the passage with Erasmus, “Deceptus sum,
et tunc recessit a me,” remarks. “I do not see how this
agrees with what precedes.” The Paris Editor, “Novi.
inquiunt. et tum mihi effluxit,” as if it were a proverb. In
the LXX, it is, Εἶπα,
σοφισθήσομαι,
καὶ αὕτη
ἐμακρύνθη
ἀπ᾽ ἐμοῦ. E.V. “I said I will be wise, but it was far from
me.” | and then it departed from
me.”—(Eccles. vii. 24.) Shall I show you that
the things are not “the same?” How many persons, do you
suppose, have spoken upon the Gospels? And yet all have spoken in a way
which was new and fresh. For the more one dwells on them, the more
insight does he get, the more does he behold the pure light. Look, what
a number of things I am going to speak of:—say, what is
narrative? what is prophecy? what is parable? what is type? what is
allegory? what is symbol? what are Gospels? Answer me only to this one
point, which is plain: why are they called Gospels, “good
tidings?” And yet ye have often heard that good news ought to
have nothing sad in it: yet this “good news” has abundance
of sadness in it. “Their fire,” it saith, “shall
never be quenched: their worm shall not die:” (Mark ix. 44.)
“Shall appoint his portion,” it saith, “with the
hypocrites,” with them that are “cut asunder: then shall He
say, I know you not: Depart from Me, ye that work iniquity.”
(Matt.
xxiv. 51; vii. 23.) Surely,471
471 ῏Αρα
μὴ ἀπατῶμεν
ἑαυτοὺς,
νομίζοντες
ταῦτα
ἑλληνιστι
ὑμῖν
λέγειν; mss. and Edd., ἄρα
μὴ without the interrogation. Ben.
“Igitur ne decipiamus nosmetipsos hæc Græco more
dici.” The meaning seems to be, “When we tell you these
things as εὐαγγέλια, do we deceive ourselves in thinking that we are speaking
Greek—that we are using the term aright?—Yes to judge from
your looks, one may see that they are anything but εὐαγγέλια
to you. ῾Υμεῖς
κατηφεῖτε,
ὑμεῖς
κεκώφωσθε·
ἀποπληκτοι
τυγχάνετε
κάτω
κύπτοντες.” The innovator (E. Edd.) quite alters the meaning,
as if it were, “You look as indifferent as if it were no concern
of yours;” viz. “Or, have you nothing to do with these
things? But you are struck deaf (κεκώφωσθε), and as if you were in a fit, hang down your
heads.”—Below, for καὶ πάλιν
ἕτερα ἐρῶ,
οἷον, the same
have, οἱαπέρ ἐστι
καὶ τὰ
τοιαῦτα,
“such as are also these.” | we do not deceive
ourselves, when we imagine that we tell you in your own mother-tongue
(῾Ελληνιστί) these good tidings? You look downcast; you are stunned;
you are struck all of a heap, unable to hold up your heads. “Good
news” should have nothing in it of a duty to be done, but rather
should counsel what is good: whereas these “Gospels” have
endless duties to be done. And again, to mention other things, as for
instance, Except a man hate father and mother, he is not worthy of
Me” (Luke xiv. 26): and “I am not come to bring peace upon earth, but a
sword” (Matt. x. 34; Luke xii. 51): and “In the
world ye shall have tribulation—(John xvi. 33.) excellent472
472 Edd. Καλά
γε· οὐ γὰρ
ταῦτα
εὐαγγέλια: read Καλάγε (οὐγάρ;)
ταῦτα
εὐαγγέλια. In the next sentence, Τί μοι τῶν
εὐαγγελίων; Ben. “Quid mihi est
evangeliorum.” | good tidings these, are they not! For
good news is such as this—“You shall have this and that
good thing:” as in common life men say one to another,
“What shall I have for my good news? Your father is coming, or,
your mother:” he does not say, “You must do this or
that.”—Again, tell me, how do the Gospels differ from the
Prophets? Why are not the Prophecies also called Gospels, good tidings?
For they tell the same things: for instance, “The lame shall leap
as an hart.” (Is. xxxv. 6.) “The Lord
shall give the word to them that preach the Gospel” (Ps. lxviii. 11):
and, “A new heaven and a new earth.” (Is. lxv. 17.) Why are not
those also called Gospels? But if, while you do not so much as know
what “Gospels” mean, you so despise the reading of the
Scriptures, what shall I say to you?—Let me speak of something
else. Why four Gospels? why not, ten? why not twenty? If “many
have taken in hand to set forth a narrative” (Luke i. 1), why not one
person? Why they that were disciples (i.e. Apostles)? why they that
were not disciples? But why any Scriptures at all? And yet, on the
contrary, the Old Testament says, “I will give you a New
Testament.” (Jer. xxxi. 31.) Where are they
that say, “Always the same things?” If ye knew these, that,
though a man should live thousands of years, they are not “the
same things,” ye would not say this. Believe me, I will not tell
you the answers to any of these questions; not in private, not in
public: only, if any find them out, I will nod assent. For this is the
way we have made you good-for-nothing, by always telling you the things
ready to your hands, and not refusing when we ought. Look, you have
questions enough: consider them, tell me the reasons. Why Gospels? Why
not Prophecies? Why duties, to be done, in the Gospels? If one is at a
loss, let another seek the answer, and contribute each to the others
from what he has: but now we will hold our peace. For if what has been
spoken has done you no good, much less would it, should we add more. We
only pour water into a vessel full of holes. And the punishment too is
all the greater for you. Therefore, we will hold our peace. Which that
we may not have to do, it rests with yourselves. For if we shall see
your diligence, perhaps we will again speak, that both ye may be more
approved, and we may rejoice over you, in all things giving glory to
the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ: to Him be glory and
dominion now and ever, and world without end. Amen.E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|