An Exegetical Study of `ζέων τῷ πνεύματι` in Acts 18:25
This exegetical study of An Exegetical Study of `ζέων τῷ πνεύματι` in Acts 18:25 is based on a b-greek discussion from July 21, 1999.
The initial inquiry concerned the precise referent of `πνεύματι` within the phrase `ζέων τῷ πνεύματι` in Acts 18:25. Early scholarly interpretations, represented by exegetes such as Fitzmyer, Bruce, and Meyer, posited that Apollos was characterized by excitement, enthusiasm, or profound earnestness, thereby understanding `πνεύματι` as indicative of Apollos’s human spirit. In contrast, Barrett challenged this view, highlighting Luke’s pervasive interest in the ministry of the `πνεῦμα ἅγιον` (Holy Spirit) throughout Acts. The discussion subsequently explored the significance of the definite article `τῷ` accompanying `πνεύματι` in the given verse, noting that all consulted manuscripts include this article.
The main exegetical issue thus revolves around discerning the nature of the “spirit” to which Apollos’s fervor is attributed: whether it refers to his personal, human spirit or to the Holy Spirit as a divine enablement. The presence of the definite article `τῷ` is central to this debate, as its grammatical function and Lukan usage hold interpretive weight in determining the referent.
οὗτος ἦν κατηχημένος τὴν ὁδὸν τοῦ Κυρίου, καὶ ζέων τῷ πνεύματι ἐλάλει καὶ ἐδίδασκεν ἀκριβῶς τὰ περὶ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ, ἐπιστάμενος μόνον τὸ βάπτισμα Ἰωάννου. (Nestle 1904)
Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):
- No significant differences found in Acts 18:25 between the Nestle 1904 edition and the SBLGNT (2010). Both texts read `ζέων τῷ πνεύματι`.
Textual Criticism (NA28) and Lexical Notes (KITTEL, BDAG)
The Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece (NA28), a critical edition that undergirds modern translations, confirms the reading `τῷ πνεύματι` in Acts 18:25 without significant textual variants that would alter the meaning of the phrase under discussion. The presence of the definite article `τῷ` is consistently attested across manuscripts.
Lexical Notes:
- `ζέων` (present active participle of `ζέω`):
- BDAG defines `ζέω` primarily as “to boil, be hot,” but frequently used metaphorically as “to be fervent, enthusiastic.” This participle describes an intense internal state manifesting outwardly.
- KITTEL (TDNT, s.v. `ζέω`) elaborates on the metaphorical use, denoting “glowing zeal” or “fervour for God.” The term suggests an inner spiritual heat or passion. The parallel in Rom 12:11 (`τῷ πνεύματι ζέοντες`) also uses this idiom, though the referent of `πνεύματι` in Romans also invites similar exegetical discussion.
- `πνεύματι` (dative singular of `πνεῦμα`):
- BDAG presents a wide semantic range for `πνεῦμα`, including “wind,” “breath,” “spirit,” “animate life force,” “the seat of emotion, thought, and decision (inner self),” and “divine Spirit, the Holy Spirit.”
- KITTEL (TDNT, s.v. `πνεῦμα`) provides an extensive theological treatment, tracing its meaning from physical breath to the spiritual essence of humanity and, preeminently, the divine `πνεῦμα ἅγιον`. In the dative case, `τῷ πνεύματι` can function as a dative of means (“by means of the spirit”), a dative of sphere or location (“in the spirit”), or a dative of reference/respect (“with respect to the spirit”). The crucial ambiguity lies in whether “the spirit” refers to Apollos’s human spirit or the Holy Spirit.
Translation Variants with Grammatical & Rhetorical Analysis
The phrase `ζέων τῷ πνεύματι` presents a significant challenge for translation due to the ambiguity of `πνεύματι` as either the human spirit or the Holy Spirit, particularly as modified by the definite article `τῷ`.
Grammatical Analysis:
The dative case `τῷ πνεύματι` indicates either the instrument, sphere, or respect for Apollos’s fervor. The definite article `τῷ` typically points to a specific, known entity. If interpreted as the Holy Spirit, the article would refer to *the* divine Spirit. However, Greek usage also allows the definite article to function as a possessive pronoun where context makes the ownership clear, implying “his spirit.” One scholarly observation noted that Luke often uses `πνεῦμα` without the article for the Holy Spirit, but almost always with `ἅγιον` when the article is present for the Holy Spirit. Conversely, references to a human spirit often include the article to distinguish it as a particular spirit. This suggests that `τῷ πνεύματι` without `ἅγιον` could plausibly refer to the human spirit in Lukan usage, though it is not a definitive rule.
Rhetorical Analysis:
- Interpretation as Apollos’s Human Spirit:
This interpretation emphasizes Apollos’s personal zeal, passion, and eloquence. The participle `ζέων` (fervent) directly describes Apollos’s characteristic. Linking `τῷ πνεύματι` to his human spirit highlights his intrinsic disposition and commitment. This aligns with the subsequent clause that Apollos “knew only the baptism of John,” implying an incomplete understanding of Christian doctrine, particularly regarding the full outpouring and baptism of the Holy Spirit as distinct from John’s preparatory message. It is argued that Apollos could not be “fervent in the Holy Spirit” if he had not yet received the Holy Spirit in the specific Lukan sense (i.e., post-Pentecost spiritual baptism).
- Interpretation as the Holy Spirit:
This view suggests that Apollos’s fervor was divinely enabled by the Holy Spirit. Luke’s consistent portrayal of the Holy Spirit as the source of power for witness and proclamation (Acts 1:8) could support this. However, this interpretation creates tension with Apollos’s described theological deficiency. If he possessed the Holy Spirit, his knowledge of “only the baptism of John” seems contradictory to the transformative power Luke typically associates with the Spirit. Proponents of this view might argue that the Spirit can work even with partial understanding, or they might point to arguments from silence regarding Apollos’s lack of the Spirit. The comparison to Acts 19:1-7, where disciples explicitly lacked the Holy Spirit and were re-baptized, is relevant. Barrett, for example, implied Apollos might have already received the Holy Spirit but was simply confused about baptismal rites, distinguishing him from the disciples in Acts 19. This relies on an argument from silence, which is often considered tenuous.
The rhetorical implications differ significantly. The human spirit interpretation underscores Apollos’s remarkable natural gifts and fervent disposition, making his subsequent instruction by Priscilla and Aquila (Acts 18:26) all the more significant. The Holy Spirit interpretation foregrounds divine enablement from the outset, even amidst theological gaps.
Conclusions and Translation Suggestions
The exegetical inquiry into `ζέων τῷ πνεύματι` in Acts 18:25 reveals a nuanced choice between attributing Apollos’s fervor to his human spirit or to the Holy Spirit. While Luke’s broader theological emphasis on the Holy Spirit is undeniable, the immediate context of Apollos’s limited theological understanding (knowing “only the baptism of John”) and the grammatical flexibility of `τῷ πνεύματι` to denote a specific *human* spirit, especially when modifying a personal characteristic like `ζέων`, strongly suggest the former interpretation. The argument that Apollos could not be fervent *in* the Holy Spirit if he had not yet fully received it, while an argument from silence on specific reception, aligns well with the narrative of his incomplete knowledge. Thus, the evidence leans toward understanding Apollos’s fervor as a characteristic of his own spirit, albeit one undoubtedly open and responsive to divine truth.
Based on this analysis, the following translation suggestions for `ζέων τῷ πνεύματι` are offered:
- “fervent in his spirit”
This translation emphasizes Apollos’s personal, internal zeal and passionate disposition, aligning with his characterization as a gifted and eager teacher. - “burning with enthusiasm of spirit”
This option accentuates the intense inner drive and ardor that characterized Apollos’s proclamation, focusing on the quality of his internal state. - “fervent in the Spirit”
While less probable given the immediate context, this translation allows for an interpretation where the Holy Spirit is the ultimate source of his fervor, even if Apollos’s theological understanding of this was not yet complete. This would align with a broader understanding of divine inspiration preceding full doctrinal knowledge.