Acts 3:21

μὲν : no answering δέ expressed, but the antithesis is found in the ἄχρι χρόνων ἀποκ., “quasi dicat: ubi illud tempus venerit, ex coelo in terras redibit,” Grotius (so Weiss, Blass). ὅν δεῖ οὐρανὸν δέξασθαι : the words have been rendered in three ways: (1) “whom the heaven must receive,” i.e., as the place assigned to Him by God until the Parousia, Philippians 3:20; Colossians 3:4. In this case δεῖ is not used for ἔδει, as if St. Luke were referring to the past historical fact of the Ascension only, but Christ's exaltation to heaven is represented as a fact continually present until His coming again; or (2) the words have been taken as if ὅν were the subject, “who must possess the heaven”. But the former seems the more natural rendering, so in A.V. and R.V., as more in accordance with the use of δέχεσθαι, and κατέχειν would be rather the word in the second rendering (see Wendt's note). Zöckler takes the words to mean “who must receive heaven,” i.e., from the Father. Here St. Peter corrects the popular view that the Messiah should remain on earth, John 12:34, and if we compare the words with the question asked in Acts 1:6, they show how his views had changed of his Master's kingdom (see Hackett's note). ἄχρι χρόνων ἀποκαταστάσεως : the latter noun is not found either in LXX or elsewhere in N.T., but it is used by Polybius, Diodorus, Plutarch. In Josephus, Ant., xi., 3, 8, 9, it is used of the restoration of the Jews to their own land from the captivity, and also in Philo., Decal., 30, of the restoration of inheritances at the Jubilee. The key to its meaning here is found not in the question of the disciples in Acts 1:6, but in our Lord's own saying, Matthew 17:11; Mark 9:12, “Elias truly first cometh, and shall restore all things,” καὶ ἀποκαταστήσει πάντα, and cf. LXX, Malachi 4:6, where the same verb is found (ἀποκυταστήσει). It was the teaching of the Scriptures that Elias should be the forerunner of the Messiah, Malachi 4:5, and Matthew 17:11; Matthew 11:14. But his activity embraced both an external and an internal, i.e., a moral restoration, Sir 48:10. He is said καταστῆσαι φυλὰς Ἰακώβ, to enable those who had been illegally excluded from the congregation to attain their inheritance. But he is eager also for the moral and religious renewal of his people. All disputes would be settled by him at his coming, and chiefly and above all he conducts the people to a great repentance, which will not be accomplished before he comes, Luke 1:16-17 (Malachi 4:6, LXX). This is the inward and moral side of the ἀποκατάστασις, Matthew 17:11; Mark 9:12. But as in Acts 1:6 our Lord had corrected the ideas of the disciples as to an external restoration of the kingdom to Israel, so in the Gospels He had corrected their ideas as to the coming of Elias, and had bidden them see its realisation in the preaching of John the Baptist in turning the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just. And so the ἀποκατάστασις πάντων had already begun, in so far as men's hearts were restored to obedience to God, the beginning of wisdom, to the purity of family affection, to a love of righteousness and a hatred of iniquity. Even when the thoughts of the N.T. writers embrace the renewal of the visible creation, the moral and spiritual elements of restoration were present and prominent; cf. 2 Peter 3:13; Romans 8:19-21; Revelation 21:5. So too the παλινγενεσία, in Matthew 19:28, is joined with the rule which the disciples would share with their Lord, and involved great moral issues. A renewal of all things had no doubt been foretold by the prophets, Isaiah 34:4; Isaiah 51:6; Isaiah 65:17; it was dwelt upon in later Jewish writings, and often referred to by the Rabbis (cf., e.g., Book of Enoch, xlv., 2; lxii., 1; xci., 16, 17; Apocalypse of Baruch, xxxii., and instances in Edersheim, Jesus the Messiah, ii., p. 343); but even amongst pious Israelites there was always a danger lest their hopes for the future should be mainly associated with material prosperity and national glorification. It is perhaps significant thas Josephus uses the two terms ἀποκατάστασις and παλινγενεσία in close conjunction of the restoration of the Jews to their own land after the exile. How this restoration of all things was to be effected, and what was involved in it, St. Peter does not say, but his whole trend of thought shows that it was made dependent upon man's repentance, upon his heart being right with God, see Weber, Jüdische Theologie p. 352 ff. (1897); Edersheim, Jesus the Messiah, ii., pp. 343, 706; Hauck's Real-Encyclopädie, “Apokatastasis,” p. 616 ff. (1896). ὧν refers to χρόνων, so R.V. “whereof,” i.e., of which times. Holtzmann and Wendt on the other hand refer ὧν to πάντων. But the words of our Lord in Matthew 17:11 certainly point to the former reference, and the words are so taken by Weiss, Page, Hackett. In the article from Hauck quoted above, the writer speaks of the reference to χρόνων as the more correct, and points out that if ὧν is the relative to πάντων, the restoration spoken of would no longer be a restoration of all things, but only of those things of which the prophets had spoken. On the prophecies referred to see above. All the words from πάντων to προφητῶν are ascribed by Hilgenfeld to his “author to Theophilus”; the thought of the prophets existing ἀπʼ αἰῶνος (Luke 1:70) belongs in his opinion to the Paulinism of this reviser, just as in Luke's Gospel he carries back the genealogy of Jesus not to Abraham but to Adam. To a similar Pauline tendency on the part of the same reviser, Hilgenfeld refers the introduction in Acts 3:25-26 of the promise made to Abraham embracing all the nations of the earth (Galatians 3:16), and also the introduction of the word πρῶτον (Romans 1:16; Romans 2:9), to show that not only upon the Jews, but also upon the Gentiles had God conferred the blessings of the Christ; cf. Acts 2:39, where the same revising hand is at work. But St. Peter's “universalism” here is in no way inconsistent with that of a pious Jew who would believe that all nations should be blessed through Israel, so far, i.e., as they conformed to the covenant and the law of Israel. Spitta sees no difficulty in referring both the passage before us and Acts 2:39 to the Jewish Diaspora (so too Jüngst). διὰ στόματος τῶν ἁγ. προφ.: cf. Luke 1:70, a periphrasis of which St. Luke is fond (Plummer), cf. Acts 1:16; Acts 3:18; Acts 4:25; Acts 4:30; Acts 15:7, not found in the other Evangelists except once in St. Matthew in a quotation, Acts 4:4. ἀπʼ αἰῶνος : in the singular the phrase is only used by St. Luke in the N.T., Luke 1:70; Acts 3:21; Acts 15:18, but the plural ἀπʼ αἰώνων is used twice, Colossians 1:26; Ephesians 3:9 (Friedrich), cf. in LXX, Genesis 6:4; Isaiah 46:9; Jeremiah 35 (28):8. The phrase here may be taken simply = “of old time,” cf. Tob 4:12.