Acts 13:48 (Periphrastic Construction)

Post by **_Paidion** » Sun May 04, 2008 4:45 pm

Here is a translation which uses "disposed":

And they of the nations, hearing this, began to rejoice, and to be glorifying God, and they believed––as many as had become disposed for life age–abiding. 1902 Rotherham Bible

Post by **_darin-houston** » Sun May 04, 2008 8:52 pm

I thought this was interesting.

http://www.biblicalanswers.com/ wrote: It is hard to read Acts 13: 48 as a verse for predestination in the context of the thirteenth chapter. Luke is describing the dramatic events at Antioch which center around the rejection of the gospel by the Jews (45) and the acceptance of it by the Gentiles ( 46-48 ), The point of the passage is to castigate the Jews for rejecting Christ and praise Gentiles for accepting Him.

For Luke to slip a predestinarian commentary in on this scene would work against the mood he is trying to create. “Oh, that’s why the Jews rejected the gospel and the Gentiles accepted it. They were predestined to do so. It really wasn’t their fault.” That’s the kind of conclusion we could make from this kind of interpretation. But Luke is trying to fault the Jews. This would work against his purpose for writing about this event.

We read in Acts 13:48, “And as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.” The phrase, “had been appointed,” is the Greek periphrastic pluperfect (hsan tetagmevnoi). This can be either middle or passive in meaning since perfect participles only have one form to express the passive and the middle (reflexive) meaning. I think it has a middle meaning here.

When we see the word used in the aorist, which has different forms for the middle and passive, its normal use seems to be in the middle. Acts 28:23 looks as though it would be active when you read the New King James translation, but when we look at the Greek, it’s a middle. Also, in 1 Co 16:15, the word is active in the Greek, but the meaning of the thought is definitely middle. If we took the meaning of the clause in 1 Co 16:15 and used it in Acts 13:48, we would have, “As many as had devoted themselves unto eternal life, believed.”

This verb, tavssw, can have a number of meanings. Bauer’s second American edition and Moulton and Milligan give the following meanings: to classify, place or station something in a fixed spot, appoint to or establish in an office, to put someone in charge, assign, be classed among those possessing, devote, order, fix, determine, allot, pay, tell, arrange, or agree. I think dispose fits just fine in the ideas related by all these words.

What word fits in the context of Acts thirteen without forcing anything? We find from Acts 13:46 that the Jews judged themselves unworthy of eternal life. This is a reflexive middle idea. The statement we’re dealing with is the corresponding statement about the believers. They had devoted themselves, disposed themselves, arranged themselves, or classified themselves unto eternal life. Certainly, ordained, of the King James Version, is too strong.

There is no reason to consider this a passive with the context of the previous middle (reflexive) concept of verse 46. Therefore, this portion should be translated, “As many as had disposed themselves to eternal life, believed.”

Post by **__id_2666** » Mon May 05, 2008 1:22 pm

A further clarification concerning Bob Anderson can be found here.

Post by **_darin-houston** » Mon May 05, 2008 1:48 pm

jwhipps wrote:A further clarification concerning Bob Anderson can be found here.

Ok, even when he's posting a "correction" he has to slam those at this site. Interestingly, he didn't post his credentials or associations - they must have been credible. I am interested if anyone should find out where this text originated and more about Mr. Anderson and his academic "cred".

Post by **_bshow** » Mon May 05, 2008 2:16 pm

darin-houston wrote:
jwhipps wrote:A further clarification concerning Bob Anderson can be found here.

Ok, even when he's posting a "correction" he has to slam those at this site. Interestingly, he didn't post his credentials or associations - they must have been credible. I am interested if anyone should find out where this text originated and more about Mr. Anderson and his academic "cred".

Where's the slam? Homer posted the quote with no attribution and incorrectly claimed Anderson was associated with the University of Maryland. Homer should apologize for the error and correct the record with a proper citation of the work Anderson's quote is taken from. I'm sure he will do so soon.

Cheers,
Bob

Post by **_darin-houston** » Mon May 05, 2008 5:28 pm

bshow wrote:Where's the slam? Homer posted the quote with no attribution and incorrectly claimed Anderson was associated with the University of Maryland. Homer should apologize for the error and correct the record with a proper citation of the work Anderson's quote is taken from. I'm sure he will do so soon.

What error needs apologies ? There's a big difference between being wrong and being misleading.

Homer said he didn't know where the quote was taken from and was going to try and find out more about Anderson. Do you never quote something without attribution? It's not like he purposefully misrepresented Anderson's background or something -- good grief, that's what I call uptight.

Dr. White was right to update the information, but pointing out Homer's need to apologize is a bit of a slam and could be seen as suggesting Homer did something with ill intent or something.

Post by **_Homer** » Mon May 05, 2008 9:42 pm

Bob,

You wrote:

Where's the slam? Homer posted the quote with no attribution and incorrectly claimed Anderson was associated with the University of Maryland. Homer should apologize for the error and correct the record with a proper citation of the work Anderson's quote is taken from. I'm sure he will do so soon.

I will certainly apologize if I have offended or harmed anyone. What I pasted was from another quote on a Free-Will Baptist site in England, as in my reply to JWhipps. The person who posted Anderson's critique of James White mistakenly stated that Anderson was at the University of Maryland and has since informed me that he thinks Anderson is a professor at a small university in Baltimore, Maryland. I too am puzzled why, if this is important, James White does not now inform us of Anderson's credentials.

Getting back on topic, what I would like to know, and have previously asked you, is where in the text of Acts 13 we are informed of when the gentiles became ordained/disposed (take your pick) to eternal life? I say when they heard the gospel preached the previous Sabbath. Please demonstrate from the text where I am wrong.

Post by **_darin-houston** » Mon May 05, 2008 9:49 pm

Homer wrote:...where in the text of Acts 13 we are informed of when the gentiles became ordained/disposed (take your pick) to eternal life? I say when they heard the gospel preached the previous Sabbath. Please demonstrate from the text where I am wrong.

And I'm also curious why it even needs to be days prior ... is there a grammatical reason why it couldn't have been moments or hours prior?

When I say "I had decided to leave the house before I opened the door" do I need to have done the "deciding" on a prior occasion? Or just prior to actually opening the door?

Post by **_Homer** » Mon May 05, 2008 10:42 pm

Darin,

I agree, but the action of the gentiles as described in Acts 13 makes me think something was at work in their hearts a few days before:

Acts 13:42-43 (New King James Version)

42. So when the Jews went out of the synagogue, the Gentiles begged that these words might be preached to them the next Sabbath. 43. Now when the congregation had broken up, many of the Jews and devout proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas, who, speaking to them, persuaded them to continue in the grace of God.

As you pointed out, I do not think it really makes much difference how long before, but I was thinking it most likely occured at Paul's previous preaching:

Romans 1:16 (New King James Version)

16. For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek.

By the way, I'm glad you folks in Texas got together with Steve down there. I have had the privilege several times up here.

God bless, Homer

Post by **_darin-houston** » Tue May 06, 2008 1:26 pm

Homer wrote:By the way, I'm glad you folks in Texas got together with Steve down there. I have had the privilege several times up here.

It was quite a blessing. The discussions were good, but the most amazing part was the fact that we had a household full of otherwise strangers who were united in their love for Christ and His body. It was like a family reunion and I hope we do it again before too very long.