Acts 16:9

καὶ ὅραμα : used by St. Luke eleven times in Acts elsewhere (in N.T. only once, Matthew 17:19), three times in 1 12., and eight times in 12 28 (see Hawkins, Horæ Synoptiœ, p. 144). But St. Luke never uses ὄναρ; sometimes ὅρ. διὰ νυκτός as here, sometimes ὅρ. alone. It is quite arbitrary on the part of Baur, Zeller, Overbeck to interpret this as a mere symbolical representation by the author of the Acts of the eagerness of the Macedonians for the message of salvation; see as against this view not only Wendt and Zöckler but Spitta, p. 331. Hilgenfeld, Zeitschrift für wissenschaft. Theol., ii., p. 189, 1896, thinks that the “author to Theophilus” here used and partly transcribed an account of one of the oldest members of the Church of Antioch who had written the journey of St. Paul partly as an eye-witness, and see for the question of the “We” sections Introduction. ἀνήρ τις ἦν Μ.: Ramsay, here in agreement with Renan, identifies this man with St. Luke, St. Paul, pp. 202, 203. But it can scarcely be said that anything in the narrative justifies this identification. Ramsay asks: Was Luke already a Christian, or had he come under the influence of Christianity through meeting Paul at Troas? and he himself evidently sympathises entirely with the former view. The probability, however, of previous intercourse between Luke and Paul has given rise to some interesting conjectures possibly they may have met in student days when Luke studied as a medical student in the university (as we may call it) of Tarsus; in the passage before us the succeeding words in Acts 16:10 lead to the natural inference that Luke too was a preacher of the Gospel, and had already done the work of an Evangelist. Ramsay admits that the meeting with Luke at Troas may have been sought by Paul on the ground of the former's professional skill, p. 205. He further maintains that Paul could not have known that the man was a Macedonian unless he had been personally known to him, but surely the man's own words sufficiently implied it (Knabenbauer), even if we do not agree with Blass, in loco, that Paul must have recognised a Macedonian by his dress. At all events it is quite unnecessary with Grotius (so Bede) to suppose that reference is made to the angel of Macedonia, “angelus Macedoniam curans,” Daniel 10:12. On the importance of this verse in the “We” sections see Introduction: Ramsay, p. 200, Blass, Proleg., p. x.