Acts 1:6. Not qui convenerant (Vulgate, Luther, and others), as if what follows still belonged to the scene introduced in Acts 1:4; but, as is evident from συναλιζ., Acts 1:4, comp. with Acts 1:12, a new scene, at which the ascension occurred (Acts 1:9). The word of promise spoken by our Lord as they were eating (Acts 1:4-5), occasioned (μὲν οὖν) the apostles to come together, and in common to approach Him with the question, etc. Hence: They, therefore, after they were come together, asked Him. Where this joint asking occurred, is evident from Acts 1:12.[98] To the ΜΈΝ corresponds the ΔΈ in Acts 1:7.

ἘΝ Τῷ ΧΡΌΝῼ Κ.Τ.Λ.] The disciples, acquainted with the O. T. promise, that in the age of the Messiah the fulness of the Holy Spirit would be poured out (Joel 3:1-2; Acts 2:16 ff.), saw in Acts 1:5 an indirect intimation of the now impending erection of the Messianic kingdom; comp. also Schneckenburger, p. 169. In order, therefore, to obtain quite certain information concerning this, their nearest and highest concern, they ask: “Lord, if Thou at this time restorest the (fallen) kingdom to the people Israel?” The view of Lightfoot, that the words were spoken in indignation (“itane nunc regum restitues Judaeis illis, qui te cruci affixerunt?”), simply introduces arbitrarily the point alleged.

εἰ] unites the question to the train of thought of the questioner, and thus imparts to it the indirect character. See on Matthew 12:10, and on Luke 13:23.

ἘΝ Τῷ ΧΡ. ΤΟΎΤῼ] i.e. at this present time, which they think they might assume from Acts 1:4 f.

ἀποκαθιστ.] See on Matthew 17:11. By their Τῷ ἸΣΡΑΉΛ they betray that they have not yet ceased to be entangled in Jewish Messianic hopes, according to which the Messiah was destined for the people of Israel as such; comp. Luke 24:21. An artificial explanation, on the other hand, is given in Hofmann, Schriftbew. II. 2, p. 647.

The circumstance that, by the declaration of Jesus, Acts 1:4 f., their sensuous expectation was excited and drew forth such a rash question, is very easily explained just after the resurrection, and need occasion no surprise before the reception of the Spirit itself; therefore we have not, with Baumgarten, to impute to the disciples the reflection that the communication of the Spirit would be the necessary internal ground for all the shaping of the future, according to which idea their question, deviating from the tenor of the promise, would be precisely a sign of their understanding.

[98] Concerning the time of the question, this expression ἐν τῷ χρόνῳ τούτῳ gives so far information that it must have occurred very soon after that meal mentioned in ver. 4, so that no discussions intervened which would have diverted them from this definite inquiry as to the time. Therefore it was probably on the same day. The τούτῳ is thus explained, which sounds as a fresh echo of that οὐ μετὰ πολλ. ταύτ. ἡμ.

Acts 1:6. οἱ μὲν οὖν: the combination μὲν οὖν is very frequent in Acts in all parts, occurring no less than twenty-seven times; cf. Luke 3:18. Like the simple μέν it is sometimes used without δέ in the apodosis. Here, if δέ is omitted in Acts 1:7 after εἶπεν, there is still a contrast between the question of the Apostles and the answer of Jesus. See especially Rendall, Acts of the Apostles, Appendix on μὲν οὖν, p. 160 ff.; cf. Weiss in loco.—συνελθόντες: the question has often been raised as to whether this word and μὲν οὖν refer back to Acts 1:4, or whether a later meeting of the disciples is here introduced. For the former Hilgenfeld contends (as against Weiss) and sees no reference to any fresh meeting: the disciples referred to in the αὐτοῖς of Acts 1:4 and the ὑμεῖς of Acts 1:5 had already come together. According to Holtzmann there is a reference in the words to a common meal of the Lord with His disciples already mentioned in Acts 1:4, and after this final meal the question of Acts 1:6 is asked on the way to Bethany (Luke 24:50). The words οἱ μὲν οὖν συνελθ. are referred by Felten to the final meeting which formed the conclusion of the constant intercourse of Acts 1:3, a meeting thus specially emphasised, although in reality only one out of many, and the question which follows in Acts 1:6 was asked, as Felten also supposes (see too Rendall on Acts 1:7-8), on the way to Bethany. But there is no need to suppose that this was the case (as Jüngst so far correctly objects against Holtzmann), and whilst we may take συνελθ. as referring to the final meeting before the Ascension, we may place that meeting not in Jerusalem but on the Mount of Olives. Blass sees in the word συνελθ. an assembly of all the Apostles, cf. Acts 1:13 and 1 Corinthians 15:7, and adds: “Aliunde supplendus locus ubi hoc factum, Acts 1:12, Luke 24:50”.—ἐπηρώτων: imperfect, denoting that the act of questioning is always imperfect until an answer is given (Blass, cf. Acts 3:3), and here perhaps indicating that the same question was put by one inquirer after another (see on the force of the tense, as noted here and elsewhere by Blass, Hermathena, xxi., pp. 228, 229).—εἰ: this use of εἰ in direct questions is frequent in Luke, Blass, Grammatik des N. G., p. 254; cf. Acts 7:1, Acts 19:2 (in Vulgate si); it is adopted in the LXX, and a parallel may also be found in the interrogative ה in Hebrew (so Blass and Viteau).—ἐν τῷ χρόνῳ τούτῳ: such a promise as that made in Acts 1:5, the fulfilment of which, according to Joel 2:28, would mark the salvation of Messianic times, might lead the disciples to ask about the restoration of the kingdom to Israel which the same prophet had foretold, to be realised by the annihilation of the enemies of God and victory and happiness for the good. As in the days of old the yoke of Pharaoh had been broken and Israel redeemed from captivity, so would the Messiah accomplish the final redemption, cf. Luke 24:21, and set up again, after the destruction of the world-powers, the kingdom in Jerusalem; Weber, Jüdische Theologie, pp. 360, 361 (1897). No doubt the thoughts of the disciples still moved within the narrow circle of Jewish national hopes: “totidem in hac interrogatione sunt errores quot verba,” writes Calvin. But still we must remember that with these thoughts of the redemption of Israel there mingled higher thoughts of the need of repentance and righteousness for the Messianic kingdom (Psalms of Solomon, 17, 18; ed. Ryle and James, p. lviii.), and that the disciples may well have shared, even if imperfectly, in the hopes of a Zacharias or a Simeon. Dr. Edersheim notes “with what wonderful sobriety” the disciples put this question to our Lord (ubi supra, i., p. 79); at the same time the question before us is plainly too primitive in character to have been invented by a later generation (McGiffert, Apostolic Age, p. 41).—ἀποκαθιστάνεις: ἀποκαθιστάνω, a form of ἀποκαθίστημι which is found in classical Greek and is used of the restoration of dominion as here in 1Ma 15:3; see also below on Acts 3:21 and Malachi LXX Acts 4:5. On the form of the verb see W.H[101], ii., 162, and on its force see further Dalman, u. s., p. 109. “Dost thou at this time restore …?” R.V.; the present tense marking their expectation that the kingdom, as they conceived it, would immediately appear—an expectation enhanced by the promise of the previous verse, in which they saw the foretaste of the Messianic kingdom.

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

6. wilt thou … restore] Literally, dost thou restore (or art thou restoring), but the English future gives the sense.

the kingdom to Israel] The question was asked when all the Apostles were gathered together, so that the enquiry was not dictated by the mistaken notion of some single member. It shews, as do many other remarks and questions (cp. Luke 24:21, &c.), how far the Apostles were even yet from comprehending the spirituality and universality of the work to which Christ was sending them. A temporal kingdom confined to Israel is what they still contemplate. The change from the spirit which dictated the question in this verse, to that in which St Peter (Acts 2:38-39) preached repentance and forgiveness to all whom the Lord should call, is one of the greatest evidences of the miracle of Pentecost. Such changes can only come from above.

Acts 1:6. Συνελθόντες, having come together) They thought that they would more easily obtain a reply when asking jointly.—τούτῳ) at this interval (period), viz. that which was coming after not many days.—τὴν βασιλείαν, the kingdom) the seat of which is Jerusalem, Acts 1:4, but the full extent of it most comprehensive, Acts 1:8, and the nature and inward character of it more divine than the construction which the interrogators were at the time putting on the words of the Lord; Acts 1:3 at the end. Luke 22:16, “I will not anymore eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God.”—τῷ Ἰσραὴλ, to Israel) The dative bears the emphasis. The apostles, taking the fact for granted, were asking concerning the time: and in a like manner the reply, which follows immediately after, is framed.

Verse 6. - They therefore, when for when they therefore, A.V.; him for of him, A.V.; dost thou for wilt thou, A.V.; restore for restore again, A.V. Dost thou at this time, etc.? It appears from Luke 19:11 and Luke 24:21, as well as from other passages, that the apostles expected the kingdom of Christ to come immediately. It was most natural, therefore, that, after the temporary extinction of this hope by the Crucifixion, it should revive with new force when they saw the Lord alive after his passion. They had doubtless too been thinking over the promise of the baptism of the Holy Spirit "not many days hence." Restore. (Comp. restitution, Acts 3:21; and see Matthew 17:11.) Acts 1:6Asked (ἐπηρώτων)

The imperfect, denoting the repetition and urging of the question.

Acts 1:6 Interlinear
Acts 1:6 Parallel Texts


Acts 1:6 NIV
Acts 1:6 NLT
Acts 1:6 ESV
Acts 1:6 NASB
Acts 1:6 KJV

Acts 1:6 Bible Apps
Acts 1:6 Parallel
Acts 1:6 Biblia Paralela
Acts 1:6 Chinese Bible
Acts 1:6 French Bible
Acts 1:6 German Bible

Bible Hub