ECT ACTS 10 EXEGETICAL

Arsenios

Arsenios

Well-known member
ACTS 10:22

ACTS 10:22

Well, we just keep chugging along... Almost half way now... This one is a little longer, as the Cornelius party explains their mission to Peter:

BYZ –
οι δε ειπον
They said:

κορνηλιος εκατονταρχης ανηρ δικαιος
Kornelios a centurion a man just

και φοβουμενος τον θεον
and fearing the God

μαρτυρουμενος τε υπο ολου του εθνους των ιουδαιων
being witnessed much upon all of the nations of the Jews

εχρηματισθη υπο αγγελου αγιου
was instructed upon an angel holy

μεταπεμψασθαι σε εις τον οικον αυτου
to send for you unto the house of him

και ακουσαι ρηματα παρα σου
and to hear words alongside of you.

The Greek almost reads like English...

Cornelius the Centurion, a just man and God fearing, being of good report by all the tribes of the Jews, was instructed by a Holy Angel to summon you to his house and to hear your words.

The last phrase, "to hear your words", is worth a look, because its structure forms a base of oral tradition in the preaching of God's Word... "To hear words alongside of you" does not mean merely to hear the words spoken, but to HEED the words spoken, which entails obedience to them after paying careful attention to their utterance and meaning, and this alongside the one speaking... Face to face... The word for Tradition is PARA-DOSIS, and is exactly this that is being prescribed here by the Angel... For it means to 'give alongside', or, literally, "to hand over", which also means to betray...

Arsenios
 
Arsenios

Arsenios

Well-known member
This may spark controversy, but then, maybe not... The question being "What IS exegesis?"... And this, not in terms of ontological exegesis, wherein God can lead a person inwardly into the reality of self and union with God, which is an action not led by words at all, but is an entry into the Light of Christ... Indeed, that entry is what the discipleship of the Church, and indeed all discipleship, is for... Salvation is not in words, you see, but is entry into and through the door, and that entry is not done in words, but is itself in the Word, Christ God... So that if, in Spirit, one is finding words of explanation, and not direct and holy apperception, then one is still at a stage of preparation...

But we here are speaking now of Biblical exegesis, which has to do with written words, and what they necessarily mean, and what they do not necessarily mean, and what they necessarily do NOT mean... All other issues are unnecessary, mind you... :) So that we can, exegetically speaking, state what is unavoidably existing in the written words, and differentiate it from what we think the words MAY mean, and then eliminate meanings that are contradicted...

So that the basics really boil down to a simple textual rendering, which is why I really like a very literal translation. I remember when a gizillion translations were popping up like weeds everywhere, each having its own "target audience", and each seeking to gain relevance for each group so as to save souls... And one of these was the "Biker's Bible" designed for the hairy behemoths on their Harleys, who needed saving too... And it was a total thematic re-write, and sounded like a couple of these guys hashing out an 'old lady' issue, of a fixit issue on a Harley...

So that, say for example, we translate John 1:1... "In the Beginning was the Word..." The Biker's Bible might start it our by saying something like this: "Ya see all this stuff around you now? Well, it all had to start somewhere, and the start was a really long time ago, ya dig? And when it all started, there was this Big Dude Who was God, and His Name back then was Word, see? And this Word was there at the beginning of it all..."

And don't even begin to ask how that all went down in the Pauline Epistles! It was YIKE'S CITY!

But with a simple literal, even working with Young's numbers, one can differentiate between what is actually written and what it means, from what one interprets what is written to mean... All that an exegetical translation gives is the basis from which reasonable folks can have differing views...

Enough for now...

But I must add that arguing the meaning of Scripture by means of differing translations in other languages without knowing the Greek is just crackers... The Christian exegetical Bible is the koine Greek Bible and the LXX Greek Old Testament... Much of the acrimony here on TOL comes from differences in English versions... We need access to the Greek to sort out what underlies the differences...

Arsenios
 
Last edited:
Arsenios

Arsenios

Well-known member
BYZ –
εισκαλεσαμενος ουν αυτους εξενισεν
Having invited in therefore them he lodged.

τη δε επαυριον ο πετρος εξηλθεν συν αυτοις
On the next day the Peter departed with them

και τινες των αδελφων των απο ιοππης συνηλθον αυτω
and some of the brothers the ones from Joppa accompanied him

Just a continuing story... Peter welcomes them into his home and puts them up for the night, and the next day he sets out with them to Cornelius' residence, taking along with him some of the brothers from Joppa.

Therefore having invited them inside, he lodged them.
The next day Peter set out with them,
And some of the brethren from Joppa went with him.

Were I translating this to a final version, rather than strictly exegetical, I would have written:

After he invited them inside, he fed them and put them up for the night. And the next day he set out with them for Cornelius' house, and some of the Christians from Joppa came with him.

And this because the narrative flows better in English. The Greek 'thinks' differently from English narrative... But then IF someone comes along and says: "WAIT a minute! The text does not say Peter FED them!", then I would have to concede their point, and yet point out that giving lodging normally involves giving food and bedding...

So that even in a good literal translation, there is some stretch room into one's English rendering... It is just that when a person is using the stretch to prove some doctrinal point that the "stretch" needs to be recalled, and the literal reaffirmed...

Arsenios
 
Last edited:
OCTOBER23

OCTOBER23

New member
INTERESTING

What point are you trying to make ?

Hospitality is required for saints.
--------------------------------------

Romans 12:13 Distributing to the necessity of saints; given to hospitality.

1 Timothy 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant,

sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; {of good*…*: or, modest }

Titus 1:8 But a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men,

sober, just, holy, temperate; {men: or, things }

1 Peter 4:9 Use hospitality one to another without grudging.
 
Arsenios

Arsenios

Well-known member
OCTOBER23 said:
INTERESTING

What point are you trying to make ?

Hospitality is required for saints.
--------------------------------------

Romans 12:13 Distributing to the necessity of saints; given to hospitality.

1 Timothy 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant,

sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; {of good*…*: or, modest }

Titus 1:8 But a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men,

sober, just, holy, temperate; {men: or, things }

1 Peter 4:9 Use hospitality one to another without grudging.
Click to expand...

Saints do not extend hospitality because it is a requirement of their sainthood...

They do so out of the abundance of their hearts...

Arsenios
 
Arsenios

Arsenios

Well-known member
musterion said:
The Word of God.
Click to expand...

Actually, the lampoon was of the person who might have that particular carnal understanding of a spiritual event such as that recorded in the Acts narrative...

Forgive me if it came out offensively to you...

I can be a little reckless in my postings...

Arsenios
 
musterion

musterion

Well-known member
Arsenios said:
Actually, the lampoon was of the person who might have that particular carnal understanding of a spiritual event such as that recorded in the Acts narrative...

Forgive me if it came out offensively to you...

I can be a little reckless in my postings...

Arsenios
Click to expand...

Liar. You are far too careful and skilled a writer for that. You meant exactly what you wrote, that Peter hallucinated the vision out of hunger.
 
Arsenios

Arsenios

Well-known member
musterion said:
Liar.

You meant exactly what you wrote...

that Peter hallucinated the vision out of hunger.
Click to expand...

Your words are not true...

If what I wrote came across that way, I will happily re-write it...

I mean, Peter did NOT hallucinate the vision out of hunger...

At all...

And I still really like your avatar...

Arsenios
 
Last edited:
Arsenios

Arsenios

Well-known member
ACTS 10:24

ACTS 10:24

BYZ –
και τη επαυριον εισηλθον εις την καισαρειαν
And on the next day they arrived in Kaisareia

ο δε κορνηλιος ην προσδοκων αυτους
Kornelios was awaiting them

συγκαλεσαμενος τους συγγενεις αυτου
having called together the kinsmen of him

και τους αναγκαιους φιλους
and the needed friends

The narrative continues. Of interest is the last phrase: "and the needed friends." What we can lose in reading it is the solid Greek meaning that "carries over" from the previous phrase... Dr. Warren, my Greek prof at SDSU, said some Greek words "distribute" both to what is before and to what is after, so that they need to be understood in both directions... So that here, the autou, or "of him" needs to be understood as modifying both "the kinsmen" and "the needed friends"... BOTH sets of the assembly he called together to meet with Peter are his, you see...

Nor are we told WHY his friends so necessary, and not his kinsmen... Quakers might want to think that Friends are needed, and kinsmen are given... Nor would I disagree! :) Maybe it will be explained more later... And maybe not... Perhaps it is that he deemed that his friends needed to be there for themselves to be instructed, and not for some other reason... It just kind of hangs there for me in the narrative account... Why "needed" ??

They arrived in Cesaria the next day.
Cornelius was awaiting them,
having assembled his kinsmen
and his needed friends.

Arsenios
 
Arsenios

Arsenios

Well-known member
ACTS 10:25

ACTS 10:25

BYZ –
ως δε εγενετο του εισελθειν τον πετρον συναντησας αυτω
As it came to be of the to enter the Peter having met with him

ο κορνηλιος πεσων επι τους ποδας προσεκυνησεν
the Kornelius falling upon the feet prostrated.

This text was hard for me...

"As came to be of the to enter Peter" means
"As it became time for Peter to enter"...
Or : "When Peter entered"...
Greeks talk like that... Sorry... They are visual thinkers... I am sure they need corrections...

Then "Having met with him" means WHEN he met with Peter...

Then "Cornelius prostrated, falling down upon his feet."

So to make it flow in English, we can perhaps say:

When Peter entered and met him
Cornelius made a prostration
that fell upon Peter's feet.

For the Orthodox, who know what a prostration IS, this is easy to visualize... For the KJV folks, they translated "worshiped"... And it sorta-kinda IS worshiped, but the word worship is not in the text... But the "fell upon the feet" IS a modifier of made a prostration, or prostrated... So that the "that" is justified fully, even if "that" is not a word in the text...

We could also say: "Cornelius made a prostration at Peter's feet." That would be the simplest in English... And is what the text is saying, except perhaps more dramatically with UPON the feet [with "of Peter" implied]... Feet in those days were dirty and smelly... No sanitation along the roads... Animal dung everywhere... THE FEET is ostensively offensive... Indicating, for a Roman Officer with many men under him, great humility...

So a more final version:

When Peter entered and met with him,
Cornelius made a prostration at his feet.

Arsenios
 
Arsenios

Arsenios

Well-known member
ACTS 10:26

ACTS 10:26

BYZ –
ο δε πετρος αυτον ηγειρεν λεγων
But Peter him lifted up saying

αναστηθι
Arise

καγω αυτος ανθρωπος ειμι
I also myself a human being am

This is almost English in the Greek, and the surprise is, which I had missed in previous reads, that Peter LIFTS UP Cornelius, telling him to arise - He actually got down on the ground with him and lifted him... And he does not say: "I too am a man", meaning an aneros, a 'manly man', but an anthropos, which also means man but generic, and so to give it in English requires that we add a "merely" to it...

But Peter lifted him up saying "Arise!
I also myself am merely a man."

Arsenios
 
Arsenios

Arsenios

Well-known member
ACTS 10:27

ACTS 10:27

BYZ –
και συνομιλων αυτω εισηλθεν
and homilizing together with them he entered

και ευρισκει συνεληλυθοτας πολλους
and he is finding gathered together many

I have to admit, I did not know the first verb, and was shamed when I saw that it is the term we not use for homilitics and homilies, which are the original sermons of Christianity... I was looking for, mistakenly, mind you, in synomilon, a nomos, or Law, meaning of some kind... Oh well...

So the narrative is in the dramatic present, beginning with the present participle "together-speaking" - syn plus homilon, and this means more than just chatting, but a serious discussion, begun immediately outside the house and DURING the conversaion, they ENTERED the house, slipping back into normal historical narrative... Then back to dramatic present with the present indicative: "He is happening upon, or finding..." and then in classic Greek style, it slips into the plu-perfect verb BEFORE the noun or pronoun which it modifies: "those already gathered together", or the "had been come together", followed at last by the accusative object of what he is happening upon, which is MANY...

So we can stretch it a bit and fit it into pretty good literal English:

"And while he is speaking together with them, he entered [the house],
and he is happening upon many gathered together."

English narrative sets the present tenses into past tenses in describing such an action... So we would say:

"And as he entered the house speaking with them,
he came upon a large group gathered together."

Still literal in spirit, but a little deviant from the Greek grammatical construction...

Arsenios
 
Arsenios

Arsenios

Well-known member
ACTS 10:28

ACTS 10:28

BYZ –
εφη τε προς αυτους
Now declared he toward them:

υμεις επιστασθε ως αθεμιτον εστιν
You understand how unlawful it is

ανδρι ιουδαιω κολλασθα η προσερχεσθαι αλλοφυλω
to a man, a Jew, to be joined or to to draw near to a foreigner

και εμοι ο θεος εδειξεν
and to me God showed

μηδενα κοινον η ακαθαρτον λεγειν ανθρωπον
no one common or unclean to be calling a man

This sentence begins with an emphatic te introducing Peter's words to the Cornelius party and the assembly... I am not sure why, but he spoke towards them emphatically, beginning with what they already know, which is that Jews are to keep themselves separated from foreigners who are not of the Jewish faith. They cannot be joined with them, nor even approach them, but are to keep themselves separate, being a separate ane holy people... That is the Judaic teaching of the Levitical Law, and all are familiar with it, and the followers of Christ regarded Christ's teaching as well within the practice of the Jewish Faith... Christ was, after all, a Jew...

Most translations at this point interject a "but" or a "yet" for the next clause, when the word is "and"... I don't understand why it is not a "but", but it is not... So he goes on to explain that God showed him clearly to NOT call ANY man common or unclean...

So Peter is arguing Paul's understanding... eg That the Law is no longer the "gold standard" that it used to be... That God is instituting a shift from the Law to Christ - The new Covenant of the Body and Blood of Christ is supplanting the Mosaic Law of the Jews...

So he spoke to them:
"You understand how unlawful it is to a Jewish man
to be united with or to draw near a foreigner.
And God showed me to be calling
Not even one man common or unclean."

Arsenios
 
Arsenios

Arsenios

Well-known member
Acts 10:29

Acts 10:29

BYZ –
διο και αναντιρρητως ηλθον μεταπεμφθεις

Wherefore also I came without contradiction being summoned

πυνθανομαι ουν τινι λογω μετεπεμψασθε με

I am asking, accordingly, to what word have you sent for me?

This is one of those where one just get the gist to get the Greek, and he is simply saying that because of the vision, he did not contradict the summons of Cornelius, and now wants to know why Cornelius sent for him...

So having been summoned...
I came unquestioningly,
Wherefore I am asking:
For what cause
Have you sent for me?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top