This book furnishes such an abundant harvest of various readings, as well as of questionable renderings that those pointed out, whether for commendation or for censure, must be regarded rather as samples than a complete review.
Chapter 1 calls for no special notice, though there is laxity in verses 14, 18, 19; correctness in verses 7, 17, 22. Why should πνοἠ in chapter 2:2 be translated “wind,” as in the Authorized Version? The sound out of heaven seemed like the rush of an impetuous blast or blowing. And why should φωνή in verse 6 be confounded with the ἦχος of verse 2, instead of the more natural Septuagintal sense of “report,” adopted in the Authorized Version? The rumor of what had occurred to the disciples might well attract people from all parts to the spot where they were gathered; how could the sound from heaven do so? T. S. Green takes it as “gift of speech,” Bloomfield as the noise of the multitude; but the former seems without example in the LXX, or New Testament, and the loud noise would be when the strangers flocked rather than that which drew them together. Another point by no means clear is the “parted” or “parting asunder” of verse 3, which they alternate in the margin with “parting asunder among them,” or “distributing themselves” —a very different meaning. Alford and the Authorized Version follow Erasmus' dissectae, rather than the Vulgate dispertitae, which Wiclif neglected wholly. But Wiclif was right as to men of Crete, where Tyndale and the Geneva by a strange error gave “Grekes” in chapter 2, and the Authorized Version “Cretes,” not the singular “Cretians,” of Titus 1:1212One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, The Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies. (Titus 1:12). Again, is it desirable in verse 22 to continue “approved” (ἀποδεδειγμένον), seeing that the word is never used now in the sense of “shown plainly forth,” “proved,” “appointed,” but judged worthy or pleasing, which wholly misleads? To this the Vulgate and Beza contributed, giving “approbatum,” rather than Erasmus' “exhibitum,” or “demonstratunt,” or “designatum.” In verse 23 the Revisers very properly give “by the hand of lawless men,” and leave out of verse 30 a clause as unauthorized as it is unnecessary; equally good is their omission of dolaptee in verse 41, an evident insertion from chapter 21:17. Verses 42, 46 are more correctly represented, though the close of verse 47 might be better than “And the Lord added to them, day by day, those that were being saved.” The marginal alternative is not more literally true to the Greek than requisite. “And the Lord kept adding together day by day, those that should be saved.” This formed “the assembly;” and so the words τῆ ἐκκλησια crept in, and drove out ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτό and, which then and there became useless, so as to introduce chapter 3, where they are not wanted. For the true force of τοὺς σ., let me appeal to the respectable Company themselves in their version of Luke 13:2323Then said one unto him, Lord, are there few that be saved? And he said unto them, (Luke 13:23) (not to speak of 1 Cor. 15:22By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. (1 Corinthians 15:2)). Correct accordingly not only Acts 2:4747Praising God, and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved. (Acts 2:47) but 1 Cor. 1:18,18For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. (1 Corinthians 1:18) and 2 Cor. 2:15,15For we are unto God a sweet savor of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish: (2 Corinthians 2:15) τῶν σ. in Rev. 21:2424And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honor into it. (Revelation 21:24) being beyond a doubt spurious. It has been often pointed out that of a. is a technical expression of the LXX for the Jewish remnant destined to salvation out of the ungodly people, and that the present participle is here used (as the indicative no less frequently) apart from time for the class; for the same persons at the same time have predicated of them the aorist and perfect as well as the present. This proves that the present must be used, not historically, but as the description of a class; the present cannot otherwise apply, as well as the two past tenses; abstractedly of the character it might. Compare the use of “sanctified” in Heb. 10:10, 14,10By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. (Hebrews 10:10)
14For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. (Hebrews 10:14) to which the same principle applies.
In chapter 3:13, 26, as in chapter 4:27, 30, the Revisers rightly give, not Son or Child, but “servant,” referring to Isa. 42:11Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles. (Isaiah 42:1); (Matt. 12:1818Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased: I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall show judgment to the Gentiles. (Matthew 12:18)); 52:13; 53:11. Verses 19, 20 are given accurately, “Repent ye, therefore, and turn again, that your sins may be blotted out, that so there may come seasons of refreshing from the presence of the Lord; and that he may send the Christ who hath been appointed for you, even Jesus.”
In chapters 4-6 there are changes requisite, but not perhaps of any great importance.
In chapter 7:38 is perpetuated the old error of “church” in the wilderness, with “congregation” in the margin, the converse of Heb. 2:12,12Saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee. (Hebrews 2:12) where “congregation” appears in the text, “church” in the margin. There is a good deal of uncertainty in the treatment of verse 53, the law “as it was ordained by angels,” or “as the ordinance of angels,” Greek “unto ordinances of angels.” Undoubtedly εἰς διαταγὰς ἀγγ. is not an easy phrase, but moans at injunctions or ordering of angels. (Cf. Matt. 12:4141The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here. (Matthew 12:41); Gal. 3:1919Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator. (Galatians 3:19).) In verse 59 if words must be intercalated, they are more right in saying “the Lord” than the Authorized Version, which detracts from His glory by inserting “God;” better leave out either and give, “invoking and saying, Lord Jesus,” &c.
In chapter viii. verse 37 is with good reason expunged. Still stronger is all textual authority against the interpolated clauses in chapter 9:5, 6, from “persecuted” to “Arise,” or rather, “But arise;” for in error the conjunction has been omitted. This is a notable instance of Erasmus' temerity, misled by the Vulgate, the source of the corruption, founding the words in part on chapter 22:10; 26:14. The Complutensian text is right, διώκεις ἀλλὰ ἀνάστηθε κ. τ. λ., and so all modern critics, and of course the Revisers. But the Complutensian is as wrong as. Erasmus, and the rest who follow the inferior MSS in giving “Christ” rather than Jesus (à A B C E, fifteen cursives; Vulg., Syrr., Sah., Memph., Theb., Armen., Aeth. &c.) which the Revisers follow, as also “church” rather than “churches” in verse 31, the Compluten. giving the plural form in Greek, the singular in Latin.
In chapter 10 the most remarkable change seems the omission of “and fasting” in verse 30, the most ancient MSS and Versions omitting the words, the mass sustaining them.
In chapter 11:12 is a very questionable adoption, “making no distinction” μηδὲν διακρίναντα which rests on àcorr. A B and half-a-dozen cursives. The primary reading of the Sinait. with Laud's and a few cursives is μ. διακρίνοντα, but the bulk of MSS with all the versions support μ. διακρινόμενος, as in chapter 10:20 where the MSS are not at all at variance. D and Syrp. omit the words, as Griesbach thought probable and Alford and Green certain. But the rendering is right in verse 17, as is the reading “Ελληνας, Greeks, (not Ἑλληνιστάς, Grecians,) in verse 20, as many have pointed out long ago. There would have been no great moment in, mentioning the gospel going out to Hellenists, for there was no question from the first about Greek-speaking Jews. The grand point is the free action in the Spirit of these scattered brethren in preaching to the Gentiles, besides and apart from the formal mission of Peter to Cornelius; and that the Lord's hand was with them.
There is nothing to detain us in chapter 12, but chapter 13 presents many matters of question and interest. Would it not be better to have distinguished between “sent” in verses 3 and 4? The first is only let go, the second is really “sent forth,” which when not distinguished might lead to false inferences in clerical minds. Still stranger is the adoption with Tregelles of ἐτροποφόρησεν which is the vulgar or Stephano-Elzevirian text and has high authority (à B &c.) with the great mass of cursives and other witnesses. Ἐτροφ. has not only A C p.m. E and some cursives and almost all the ancient versions save the Vulgate, but Deut. 1:3131And in the wilderness, where thou hast seen how that the Lord thy God bare thee, as a man doth bear his son, in all the way that ye went, until ye came into this place. (Deuteronomy 1:31) in Hebrew and the LXX (save a few copies of the latter), the intrinsic sense being in my judgment beyond comparison in its favor: and so Alford, Bloomfield, Griesbach, Green, Lachmann, Mill, Scholz, Tischendorf, Wells, and Wordsworth. Bengel too even thinks that the other word means the same thing, an alternative only in form, the context pointing to the sense of Deut. 1 and Num. 12, especially as Jehovah, whatever His grace, chastised their manners in the wilderness as is written for our admonition. Again, though the critical reading of verses 19, 20, is that of the Revisers, they involve themselves in an ungrammatical rendering of ώς ἔτεσιν κ.τ.λ. as if it were ὡς ἔτη “for about four hundred and fifty years,” instead of “in about four hundred and fifty years.” The distinctive use of the dative and accusative in questions of time should not be overlooked in the version, as it is not in the context. On the other hand they rightly drop “again” in verse 33, as the participle cannot mean “up” and “again,” though it may mean either; which is expressly distinguished in verse 34. In verse 34 they draw no attention to the peculiarity of ὄσιος for “holy” or the preceding ὅσια.
In chapter 14 there is scarcely anything to change; in chapter 15 verse 34 is not now read by any critics of note, as not appearing in à A B E H L P, some sixty cursives, &c.
In chapter 16:7 they rightly give “the Spirit of Jesus;” but why in verse 12 “a city of Macedonia, the first of the district,” when “a principal city of the district of Macedonia” strictly represents the Greek text? Amphipolis had been for some time the capital of the district, and Neapolis was first in geographical order for one arriving from the East like the apostle. It is known however that a Greek city might be designated πρωτή without being the metropolis of the region, as for instance, Smyrna and Pergamos were so styled, though Ephesus was the capital of the province. And reasons were not wanting quite sufficient for such a claim on the part of Philippi, especially as Augustus had shown himself ready to show it uncommon favor.
Again in chapter 17:1 why should ὡς δ. be translated “somewhat superstitious"? Very religious, devoted to higher powers, or given up to demon worship, seems rather the force of the word here. They rightly change “the Lord” into “God” in verse 27; but τὸ θεῖον, the divine, or what is divine, in verse 29, should not be confounded with θειότης or still less θεότης.
In chapter 23:5 they correctly substitute “by the word” for “by the Spirit,” whilst Alford would render it “earnestly occupied in preaching,” and T. S. Green similarly.
In chapter 19:16 it is “both of them,” not the seven, but two of them, easily made into all, but not the converse.
In chapter 20:7 it is correctly “when we came together to break bread, Paul discoursed with them,” &c., and in verse 30 “the disciples.”
In chapter 21:15 “our baggage” or “effects” is right instead of “carriages.”
Chapter 22 affords little to remark on, but chapter 23:9 ends correctly with “and if a spirit hath spoken to him, or an angel?” So à A B C E and other good authorities, though the addition of the common text is not without numerous attestations. In verse 27 σὺν τῶ στρ. is not “with an army,” but with the soldiery, or my soldiers.
In chapter 24:14 the Revisers rightly say “a sect,” or faction or parties, as they should have said, not heresies but sects or factions in 1 Cor. 11:19,19For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you. (1 Corinthians 11:19) and in Gal. 5:20,20Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, (Galatians 5:20) as Titus 3:1010A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject; (Titus 3:10) should be factions rather than “heretical.”
The only thing one would now notice in chapter 25 is in verse 5, where the Authorized Version deserts Erasmus and Stephens for the Complutensian and Beza (at least in his later editions, for up to that of 1565 he too omitted ἄτοπον). Only the modern critics (Alford, Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles) exclude τούτω “this” as well as adopt δυνατοί, “amiss.” It may be added that δυνατοί here does not refer to ability, as in the Authorized Version, following Erasmus and Beza, but to power, influence, or authority, as in the Vulgate potentes, not qui.... possunt.
In chapter 26:17 ἐξαιρ. does not seem to mean deliverance or rescue, but taking Paul out from the people, and from the Gentiles. Verses 28, 29 are given correctly in the main. “In a little thou art persuading me to become a Christian. And Paul, I would to God, both in a little and in much, that not thou only but also,” &c.
Chapter 27 stands singularly ill in the ordinary Authorized Version. Verse 9 is “the voyage,” not sailing or navigation; and down south-west or down north-west (verse 12) means the opposite point of the wind, i.e. looking north-east and south-east. In verse 17, χαλ. τὸ σκεῦος is not “strake sail,” but “lowered the gear,” and so scudded (οὔτως ἐφ.). In verse 80 the sense is to lay or carry out, not to “cast out,” anchors; nor does verse 40 mean “taking up” but casting off the anchors; nor committing themselves but letting the anchor go into the sea; as also by τὸν ἀρτ. is meant the foresail, not the “mainsail.” The revision in all this seems quite correct.
In chapter 28 the doubtful authority of the central part of verse 16 is acknowledged, and the whole of verse 29, the best witnesses being adverse, not only in MSS but in the ancient versions.