Acts 8:27 . Καὶ ἰδού ] And behold (there was) a man . Comp. on Matthew 3:17 . εὐνοῦχος δυνάστης ] is, seeing that δυνάστης is a substantive, most simply taken, not conjointly (a power-wielding eunuch , after the analogy of Herod. ii. 32: ἀνδρῶν δυναστέων παῖδες , comp. Sir 8:1 ),...
Show full excerpt
Acts 8:27 . Καὶ ἰδού ] And behold (there was) a man . Comp. on Matthew 3:17 . εὐνοῦχος δυνάστης ] is, seeing that δυνάστης is a substantive, most simply taken, not conjointly (a power-wielding eunuch , after the analogy of Herod. ii. 32: ἀνδρῶν δυναστέων παῖδες , comp. Sir 8:1 ), but separately: a eunuch, one wielding power , so that there is a double apposition (see Bornemann in loc ). The more precise description, what kind of wielder of power he was, follows (chief treasurer, γαζοφύλαξ , Plut. Mor. p. 823 C; Athen. vi. p. 261 B). The express mention of his sexual character is perhaps connected with the universalism of Luke, in contrast to Deuteronomy 23:1 . In the East, eunuchs were taken not only to be overseers of the harem, but also generally to fill the most important posts of the court and the closet (Pignor. de servis , p. 371 f.; Winer, Realw. s.v. Verschnittene ); hence εὐνοῦχος is often employed generally of court officials, without regard to corporeal mutilation. See de Dieu, in loc. ; Spanheim, ad Julian. Oratt. p. 174. Many therefore (Cornelius a Lapide, de Dieu, Kuinoel, Olshausen) suppose that the Ethiopian was not emasculated, for he is called ἀνήρ and he was not a complete Gentile (as Eusebius and Nicephorus would make him), but, according to Acts 8:30 ff., a Jew, whereas Israelitish citizenship did not belong to emasculated persons ( Deuteronomy 23:1 ; Michaelis, Mos. R. II. § 95, IV. § 185; Ewald, Alterth. p. 218).