Acts 5:15

ὥστε καὶ εἰς, “insomuch that they even,” R.V. κατὰ, T.R., so Alford, Meyer, “all down the streets,” as if the streets were entirely beset with sick folk (see Holtzmann, in loco). πλατείας, feminine of the adjective πλατύς, sc., ὁδός, a broad way, so here, the open streets, in classical Greek, and frequently in LXX, chiefly for Hebrew, רְחֹב, Tob 13:17, Jdt 1:14; Jdt 7:14; Jdt 7:22, 1Ma 1:55; Malachi 2:9; Malachi 2:9 3Ma 1:18, used by St. Luke three times in his Gospel, Acts 10:10; Acts 13:26; Acts 14:21, but only here in Acts, see below on Acts 9:11. For κλινῶν read κλιναρίων, which is found only here in N.T., not at all in LXX, and very rarely in other Greek authors, Aristoph., Frag., 33, d, and Arrian, Epict. Diss., iii., 5, 13, where it is used for the couch of a sick person; Artem., Oneir., ii., 57. As Dr. Hobart points out, St. Luke employs no less than four different words for the beds of the sick, two in common with the other Evangelists, viz., κλίνη (not in John), and κράβαττος (not in Matthew). But two are peculiar to him, viz., κλινίδιον (Luke 5:19; Luke 5:24), and κλινάριον only here. Neither word is found in the LXX, but κλινίδιον, although rare elsewhere, is used in Artem., also in Plutarch, and Dion. Hal. (Antiq. Rom., vii. 68), for a litter for carrying the sick, Hobart, Medical Language, etc., pp. 116, 117. Dr. Kennedy sees in κλινίδιον an instance of rare words used by the comic poets, especially Aristophanes, found also in the N.T., and almost nowhere else, and hence a proof of the “colloquial” language of the N.T. writers (Sources of N. T. Greek, pp. 76 79). But the fact remains that the word in question is found only in St. Luke, and that both it and κλινάριον were employed for the couch of a sick person. ἐρχομένου Πέτρου, genitive absolute, “as Peter came by,” R.V. (very frequent in Luke), it does not mean, as Felten admits, that none of the other Apostles possessed such powers. κἄν = καὶ ἐάν even if it were only his shadow, “at the least his shadow,” R.V., cf. Mark 5:28; Mark 6:56; 2 Corinthians 11:16; the usage is not unclassical, Soph., Elect., 1483; Simcox, Language of the N. T., p. 170; Viteau, Le Grec du N. T., p. 118 (1893). ἐπισκιάση with dative, Luke 1:35; Mark 9:7; [171] so W.H [172], future indicative σει, a construction common with ὅπως in classical Greek (Page); for other examples of the future indicative with ἵνα see Viteau, Le Grec du N. T., p. 81 (1893), of which several are found in the N.T., although not in classical Greek; cf. Luke 14:10; Luke 20:10 1 Corinthians 9:18, 1 Peter 3:1; Acts 21:24, W.H [173]; John 7:3; Galatians 2:4, etc.; Burton, u. s., p. 86. Undoubtedly this action of the people showed the lively power of their faith (Chrys., Theod., Aug [174]), but the further question arises in spite of the severe strictures of Zeller, Overbeck, Holtzmann, as to how far the narrative indicates that the shadow of Peter actually produced the healing effects. Acts 5:16 shows that the sick folk were all healed, but Zöckler maintains that there is nothing to show that St. Luke endorses the enthusiastic superstition of the people (so J. Lightfoot, Nösgen, Lechler, Rendall). On the other hand we may compare Matthew 9:20; Mark 6:56; John 9:5; Acts 19:12; and Baumgarten's comment should be considered that, although it is not actually said that a miraculous power went forth from Peter's shadow, it is a question why, if no such power is implied, the words should be introduced at all into a narrative which evidently purports to note the extraordinary powers of the Apostles. The parallels just instanced from the Gospels could, of course, have no weight with critics who can only see in such comparisons a proof that the Acts cannot rise above the superstitious level of the Gospels, or who start like Renan with “an absolute rule of criticism,” viz., the denial of a place in history to all miraculous narratives. [175] adds ἀπηλλάσσοντο γὰρ κ. τ. λ.: but even here, as Blass says, Luke does not distinctly assert that cures were wrought by the shadow of Peter, although there is no reason to deny that the Evangelist had this in mind, since he does not hesitate to refer the same miraculous powers to St. Paul. Hilgenfeld refers Acts 5:14-16 to his “author to Theophilus,” and sees in the expressions used in Acts 5:16 a reminiscence of Luke 6:17.

[171] Codex Vaticanus (sæc. iv.), published in photographic facsimile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi.

[172] Westcott and Hort's The New Testament in Greek: Critical Text and Notes.

[173] Westcott and Hort's The New Testament in Greek: Critical Text and Notes.

[174] Augustine.

[175] R(omana), in Blass, a first rough copy of St. Luke.