Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Acts 2
Verse Commentaries:
Chapter Level Commentary:
Act_2:2. καθήμενοι ] Lachm. Tisch. Born. read καθεζόμενοι , according to C D. The Recepta (comp. on Act_20:9) is more usual in the N. T., and was accordingly inserted.
Act_2:3. ὡσεί ] is wanting only in à *.
ἐκάθισεν ] Born., following D* à *, Syr. utr. Arr. Copt. Ath. Did. Cyr., reads ἐκάθισαν . A. correction occasioned by γλῶσσαι .
Act_2:7. After ἐξίσταντο δὲ Elz. has πάντες , which Lachm. Scholz, Tisch. Born. have erased, following B D, min. and several VSS. and Fathers. From Act_2:12.
πρὸς ἀλλήλους ] is wanting in A B C à , 26, Copt. Sahid. Aeth. Vulg. Theodoret. Deleted by Lachm. and Tisch. It was, as self-evident, easily passed over. Its genuineness is supported by the reading πρὸς ἀλλήλους , Act_2:12, instead of ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον , which is found in 4, 14, al., Aeth. Vulg. Chrys. Theophyl., and has manifestly arisen from this passage.
Act_2:12. τί ἂν θέλοι τοῦτο εἶναι ] Lachm. Born. read τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι , following A B C D, min. Chrys.: A has θέλει after τοῦτο . But after λέγειν the direct expression was most familiar to the transcribers (comp. Act_2:7).
Act_2:13. διαχλευάζοντες ] Elz. reads χλευάζοντες , against preponderating testimony.
Act_2:16. ʼΙωήλ ] Tisch. and Born. have deleted this word on too weak authority (it is wanting among the codd. only in D).
Act_2:17. ἐνυπνίοις ] Elz. reads ἐνύπνια , against decisive codd. From LXX. Joe_3:1.
Act_2:22. αὐτοί ] Elz. reads καὶ αὐτοί . But Lachm. and Tisch. have correctly deleted καί , in accordance with A B C* D E à , min. and several VSS. and Fathers. καί , both after καθώς and before αὐτοί , was very familiar to the transcribers.
Act_2:23. After ἔκδοτον Elz. and Scholz read λαβόντες , which is wanting in A B C à *, min. and several VSS. and Fathers. An addition to develope the construction.
Instead of χειρῶν , Lachm. Tisch. Born. have χειρός ; following A B C D à , min. Syr. p. Aeth. Ath. Cyr. And justly, as χειρῶν was evidently inserted for the sake of the following ἀνόμων .
Act_2:24. θανάτου ] D, Syr. Erp. Copt. Vulg. and several Fathers read ᾅδου . So Born. From Act_2:27; Act_2:31.
Act_2:27. ᾅδον ] Lachm. Born. and Tisch. read ᾅδηυ , which was already recommended by Griesb., in accordance with A B C D à , min. Clem. Epiph. Theophyl. As in the LXX. Psa_16:10, the reading is also different, A having ᾅδου and B ᾅδην the text here is to be decided merely by the preponderance of testimonies, which favours ᾅδην .
Act_2:30. Before καθίσαι , Elz. Scholz, Born, read τὸ κατὰ σάρκα ἀναστήσειν τὸν Χριστόν , which is wanting in A B C D** à , min. and most VSS. and several Fathers, has in other witnesses considerable variation, and, as already Mill correctly saw, is a marginal gloss inserted in the text.
Instead of τοῦ θρόνου , Lachm. Born. Tisch. read τὸν θρόνον , according to A B C D à , min. Eus. This important authority, as well as the circumstance that ἐπί with the genitive along with καθίζειν is very usual in the N. T. (comp. Luk_22:20; Act_12:21; Act_25:6; Act_25:17; Mat_19:28; Mat_23:2; Mat_25:31), decides for the accusative.
Act_2:31. κατελείφθη A B C D E à , min. and several Fathers read ἐγκατελείφθη . Recommended by Griesb., and adopted by Lachm. Tisch. Born. From Act_2:27. Therefore not only is ᾅδην (instead of ᾅδου ) read by Tisch., but also after κατελείφθη there is read by Elz. ἡ ψυχὴ αὐτοῦ , for the omission of which the authorities decide.
οὔτε … οὔτε is according to important testimony to be received, with Lachm. Tisch. Born., instead of οὐ … οὐδέ , as the reading given in the text appears likewise to have been formed from Act_2:27.
Act_2:33. ὑμεῖς ] Elz. Scholz have νῦν ὑμεῖς . But, according to A B C* D à , min. and many VSS. and Fathers, Lachm. Born. Tisch. have erased νῦν , which is an addition by way of gloss.
Act_2:37. ποιήσομεν ] ποιήσωμεν is found in A C E à , min. Fathers. But the deliberative subjunctive was the more usual. Comp. on Act_4:16.
Act_2:38. ἔφη ] is, with Lachm. and Tisch., to be erased, as it is entirely wanting in B min. Vulg. ms. Aug., and other witnesses read φησὶν , which they have partly after μετανοήσ . (A C à , 15, al.), partly after αὐτούς (D). A supplementary addition.
Act_2:40. διεμαρτύρατο ] Elz. Scholz read διεμαρτύρετο , against decisive testimony. A form modelled after the following imperfect
Act_2:41. After οὖν , Elz. Scholz read ἀσμένως , which Lachm. and Tisch. have deleted, in accordance with far preponderating testimony. A strengthening addition.
Act_2:42. καὶ , before τῇ κλάσει is rejected by decisive testimony (erased by Lachm. Tisch. Born.).
Act_2:43. ἐγένετο ] Lachm. Tisch. Born. read ἐγίνετο , according to A B C D à , min. Vulg. Copt. Syr. utr. This considerable attestation prevents us from assuming a formation resembling what follows; on the contrary, ἐγένετο has been inserted as the more usual form.
Act_2:47. τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ ] is wanting in A B C à , Copt. Sahid. Aeth. Arm. Vulg. Cyr. Deleted by Lachm., after Mill and Bengel. It was omitted for the sake of conformity to Act_2:41, because ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτό , Act_3:1, was considered as still belonging to Act_2:47, and therefore Act_3:1 began with Πετρὸς δέ (so Lachm.).