Acts 7:15

The frequent mention of Egypt may perhaps indicate that Stephen meant to emphasise the fact that there, far away from the land of promise, God's Presence was with the chosen race (who were now all in a strange land) and His worship was observed. μετετέθησαν : only here in this sense in N.T. Some have supposed that only οἱ πατέρες and not αὐτός is the subject; this would no doubt avoid the first difficulty of the verse, viz., that Jacob was buried in Shechem, whereas according to Genesis 50:13 he was laid to rest in the cave of Machpelah. But a further difficulty must be met. Joseph is the only son of the Patriarch who is expressly stated to have been buried in Shechem, Joshua 24:32, and of the removal of the bodies from Egypt nothing is said. But the silence as to the latter fact need not trouble us, as whether we accept the tradition mentioned by Josephus or by St. Jerome, they both presuppose the removal of the bodies of the Patriarchs to the promised land, cf. the discussion on Exodus 13:19. Mechilta (Lumby, p. 164), Wetstein, in loco, and see also the tradition in the Book of Jubilees, chap. xlvi., that the children carried up the bones of the sons of Jacob, and buried them in Machpelah, except those of Joseph. But another tradition is implied in Sot. 7 b. According to Josephus, who probably repeats a local tradition, Ant., ii., 8, 2, they were buried at Hebron. But according to St. Jerome their tombs were shown at Shechem, and the Rabbinical tradition mentioned by Wetstein and Lightfoot places their burial there, a statement supported by a Samaritan tradition existing to this day (Palestine Exploration Fund, December, 1877, see Felten and Plumptre, in loco). When we consider the prominent position of Shechem as compared with Hebron in the time of Joshua, there is nothing strange in the fact that the former place rather than Machpelah should have been chosen as the resting-place not only of Joseph but also of his brethren. Plumptre has ingeniously contended that St. Stephen might have followed the Samaritan tradition, cf. Acts 6:5, and see Expositor, vol. vii., first series: “The Samaritan element in the Gospels and Acts,” p. 21 ff., although we need not suppose that in this reference to the hated Samaritans Stephen proposed to show that not even they had been rejected by God. There is certainly no difficulty in supposing that here and elsewhere Stephen might easily have adopted some popular tradition, and at all events the fact that the mistake, if it is one, is left unnoticed by the historian is a plain proof of the truthfulness of the record. But a further difficulty. Abraham purchases the cave of Machpelah, but from Ephron the Hittite, Genesis 23:16. The sons of Hamor sell a field, but to Jacob a field at Shechem, Genesis 33:19; Joshua 24:32. How can we explain this with reference to the statement in the text? Shechem was the earliest settlement of Abraham when he entered Canaan, and there he built an altar, Genesis 12:6-7. But no devout Hebrew worshipper, with all his reverence for holy places, would be content to see the altar so consecrated belonging to others, and so exposed to desecration; the purchase of the ground on which an altar stood would therefore seem to follow as a kind of corollary from the erection of an altar on that ground. This is at all events a more satisfactory solution than omitting the word Ἀβραάμ or exchanging it for Ἰακώβ (see Hackett). Of course the reading of R.V., W.H [200] (as above), prevents a further difficulty as to the rendering of τοῦ Συχέμ if the reading τοῦ Συχέμ is retained, cf. Wendt, critical note, p. 157 (edition 1899), who follows A.V. in supporting “the father of Sichem,” so Hackett, but see on the other hand Plumptre, Acts, in loco, and Felten, in loco. For the way in which the two purchases and the two burials may have been confused in popular tradition, see Zöckler, Apostelgeschichte, p. 302, 2nd edit. (cf. Bengel, Stier, Nösgen).

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