Acts 3:13

ὁ Θεὸς Ἀβραὰμ κ. τ. λ.: the words were wisely chosen, not only to gain attention and to show that the speaker identified himself with the nation and hope of Israel, but also because in Jesus St. Peter saw the fulfilment of the promise made to Abraham. ἐδόξασε, John 8:54; John 11:4. Again we mark the same sharp contrast as in St. Peter's former address God hath glorified … but you put to an open shame. The objections of Weiss, who traces a reviser's hand in the double mention of the glorification of Jesus in Acts 3:13 and in 15, fail to secure the approval of Spitta, Feine, Jüngst, who all hold that ἐδόξασε refers to the power of the Risen Jesus, shown in the healing of the lame man, which Peter thus expressly emphasises. But the glorification was not, of course, confined to this miracle: “auxit gloria hoc quoque miraculo” (Blass). τὸν παῖδα : “his Servant,” R.V. (margin, “Child”). Vulgate has filium, which all other English versions (except A.V., “Child”) seem to have followed. But the rendering “Servant” is undoubtedly most appropriate, cf. Acts 3:26, and Acts 4:27; Acts 4:30 (employed in the Messianic sense of Isaiah 42:1; Isaiah 52:13; Isaiah 53:11), where the LXX has παῖς, Hebrew עֶבֶד. In Matthew 12:18 the Evangelist sees the fulfilment of the first passage in Jesus as the Christ, the Servant of Jehovah. Wendt rightly emphasises the fact that no Apostle ever bears the name παῖς θεοῦ, but δοῦλος; cf. Acts 4:29. In the LXX Moses is called both παῖς and δοῦλος. The rendering of R.V. is generally adopted, and by critics of very varying schools, e.g., Overbeck, Nösgen, Holtzmann, Felten, Hilgenfeld. Zöckler, whilst he adopts the rendering “Servant,” still maintains that Luther's translation, Kind Gottes, cannot be regarded as incorrect (cf. the double meaning of the word in classical literature). Certainly he seems justified in maintaining that in the numerous parallels in the sub-apostolic writings the conception of the Servant by no means always excludes that of the Son, e.g., Epist. ad Diogn., viii., 11 and 9, where of God's great scheme it is said ἀνεκοινώσατο μόνῳ τῷ παιδί (to His Son alone), called in 11 τοῦ ἀγαπητοῦ παιδός; cf. Martyr. Polyc., xiv., 3, where the same phrase occurs, reminding us of Matthew 3:17 (Colossians 1:13; Ephesians 1:6) and Acts 14:1, where God is spoken of as ὁ πατήρ of the well-beloved Son παιδός. In Clem. Rom., Cor [141] 59:2 4, the word is used three times of Jesus Christ, and twice with τοῦ ἠγαπημένου (παιδός), and if there is nothing in the context to determine the exact sense of the word, in the previous chapter St. Clement had written ζῇ γὰρ ὁ Θεὸς καὶ ζῇ ὁ Κυριος Ἰῃσοῦς Χριστὸς καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον κ. τ. λ.; cf. also Barnabas, Epist. (3, 6), 6, 1; Apost. Const., viii., 5, 14, 39, 40, 41; and Didache 1, ix., 2, 3; x., 2, 3, where, however, at the first introduction of the word, David and Jesus are both called by it in the same sentence. In the Didache 1 the title is found altogether five times, once as above, and four times as applied to Jesus alone. But these passages all occur in the Euctiaristic Prayers of the Didache 1 (placed by Resch as early as 80 90 A.D.), and in them we find not only the title “Lord” used absolutely of Jesus, Acts 9:5, but He is associated with the Father in glory and power, Acts 9:4. Knowledge, faith, and immortality are made known by Him, spiritual food and drink, and eternal life are imparted by Him, Acts 10:2-3. Zöckler, Apostelgeschichte, in loco; Lock, Expositor, p. 183 ff. (1891), “Christology of the Earlier Chapter s of the Acts”; Schmid, Biblische Theologie, p. 405. But further: if we bear in mind all that the “Servant of the Lord” must have meant for a Jew, and for a Jew so well versed in the O.T. Prophets as St. Peter, it becomes a marvellous fact that he should have seen in Jesus of Nazareth the realisation of a character and of a work so unique (cf. Isaiah 42:1 ff., Isaiah 49:1-3; Isaiah 49:5; Isaiah 49:8; Isaiah 50:4-9; Isaiah 52:13 to Isaiah 53:12). For if we admit that the word “Servant” may be used, and is sometimes used, of the nation of Israel (cf. Isaiah 41:8; Isaiah 45:4), and if we admit that some of the traits in the portrait of Jehovah's “Servant” may have been suggested by the sufferings of individuals, and were applicable to individual sufferers, yet the portrait as a whole was one which transcended all experience, and the figure of the ideal Servant anticipated a work and a mission more enduring and comprehensive than that of Israel, and a holiness and innocency of life which the best of her sons had never attained (Driver, Isaiah, pp. 175 180). But not only in His miraculous working, but in His Resurrection and Ascension St. Peter recognised how God had glorified His Servant Jesus; and whilst it was natural that the word “Servant” should rise to his lips, as he recalls the submission to betrayal and death, whilst he never forgets the example of lowliness and obedience which Christ had given, and commends to poor Christian slaves the patience and humility of Him Who was “the first Servant in the world” (1 Peter 2:18-25), he sees what prophets and wise men had failed to see, how the suffering “Servant” is also “the Prince of Life,” cf. chap. Acts 5:15, and Acts 5:31. ὑμεῖς μὲν : there is no regular answering δὲ in the text (cf. Acts 1:1), but the words in Acts 3:15 ὁ θεὸς ἤγειρεν express the antithesis (Blass, Wendt, Holtzmann). In dwelling upon the action of Pilate and the guilt of the Jews, the Apostle loses the direct grammatical construction; he emphasises the denial (ἠρνήσασθε twice) and its baseness; but nothing in reality was more natural, more like St. Peter's impetuosity. κατὰ πρόσωπον, coram, cf. Luke 2:31; 2 Corinthians 10:1 the expression need not be explained as a Hebraism, it is found several times in Polybius; see Dalman, Die Worte Jesu, p. 23. In the LXX it is frequent in various senses, and sometimes simply in the sense of before, in the presence of, a person, 1Sa 17:8, 1 Kings 1:23; 1 Chronicles 17:25, Sir 45:3, Jeremiah 52:12; Jeremiah 52:33, Jdt 10:23; Jdt 11:5, etc. Rendall takes the words as usually denoting open encounter with an opposite party face to face, cf. Acts 25:16; Galatians 2:11, and so here; the Jews met Pilate's proposal to free the prisoner with a point-blank denial. 13 b is referred by Hilgenfeld to the revising hand of “the author to Theophilus,” and he sees in its introduction a proof of the anti-Judaism of the reviser, whilst Jüngst prefers to regard the first part of Acts 3:14 as an insertion, but this Hilgenfeld will not accept, as thus the antithesis in Acts 3:15 is not marked. κρίναντος : “when he had determined,” R.V., not a purpose only, but a decision, Luke 23:16. ἐκείνου, not αὐτοῦ, emphasising the antithesis between what Pilate had determined and what they had done: ὑμεῖς ἐκείνου θελήσαντος οὐκ ἠθελήσατε (Chrys.).

[141] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.