Acts 10:36

An Exegetical Analysis of Acts 10:36: Grammatical Ambiguity and Thematic Significance

This exegetical study of An Exegetical Analysis of Acts 10:36: Grammatical Ambiguity and Thematic Significance is based on a b-greek discussion from September 7th, 2013. The initial discussion raised critical questions regarding the grammatical structure and semantic reference within Acts 10:36. Specifically, inquiries were made concerning the accusative case of τὸν λόγον, its backward or forward reference, and the precise referent of the demonstrative pronoun οὗτός, including a proposed personification of τὸν λόγον akin to John 1:1.

The primary exegetical issue centers on the complex syntax of Acts 10:36, which presents an anacoluthon or a highly compressed grammatical structure. The ambiguity stems from the difficulty in syntactically connecting τὸν λόγον to a clear verb and in unequivocally identifying the antecedent of οὗτός. This challenge is further compounded by the textual critical debate surrounding the inclusion or omission of the relative pronoun [ὃν]. Different readings of these elements significantly alter the interpretation of Peter’s crucial statement concerning God’s impartiality and the universal scope of the Gospel, impacting how Acts 10:36 functions within the broader narrative of Cornelius’s conversion.

Acts 10:34-36 (Nestle 1904)

34 Ἀνοίξας δὲ Πέτρος τὸ στόμα εἶπεν, Ἐπ᾽ ἀληθείας καταλαμβάνομαι ὅτι οὐκ ἔστιν προσωπολήμπτης ὁ θεός, 35 ἀλλ᾽ ἐν παντὶ ἔθνει ὁ φοβούμενος αὐτὸν καὶ ἐργαζόμενος δικαιοσύνην δεκτὸς αὐτῷ ἐστιν. 36 τὸν λόγον [ὃν] ἀπέστειλεν τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ εὐαγγελιζόμενος εἰρήνην διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, οὗτός ἐστιν πάντων κύριος.

Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):

• The SBLGNT (2010) includes the relative pronoun ὃν without brackets, reflecting a textual decision that this reading has strong manuscript support and is to be preferred in the critical text.

Textual Criticism (NA28) and Lexical Notes

The textual critical question for Acts 10:36 primarily revolves around the presence of the relative pronoun ὃν. The text provided in the discussion brackets [ὃν], indicating a textual variant. While the NA28 includes ὃν in its main text, its critical apparatus notes significant manuscript support for its omission (e.g., P74, B, C, D, E, Ψ, etc.). The inclusion of ὃν makes τὸν λόγον the object of a relative clause, structurally linking it more explicitly within the sentence. Its omission would result in an asyndetic construction, where τὸν λόγον stands as an accusative without a governing verb, a feature sometimes associated with Semitic syntactical patterns (e.g., *casus pendens*), although some scholars argue against the necessity of postulating a Semitic background for this particular verse.

Lexical notes provide further insight into key terms:

• τὸν λόγον (ho logos): This term (KITTEL, Vol. IV, pp. 69-161; BDAG, “a communication expressing a thought”; “the content of what is said”) broadly means “word,” “message,” or “discourse.” In this context, it refers to the specific divine message or proclamation that Peter is now expounding.
• προσωπολήμπτης (prosopolēmptēs): (BDAG, “one who makes distinctions b.t. persons, a partial person”) refers to someone who shows favoritism or partiality, especially in judgment. Its negation emphasizes God’s impartial nature.
• δεκτός (dektos): (BDAG, “acceptable, welcome”) signifies “acceptable,” “welcome,” or “favorable.” It highlights that those who fear God and work righteousness are pleasing to Him, regardless of their ethnic origin.
• εὐαγγελιζόμενος (euangelizomenos): (BDAG, “to proclaim good news, preach the gospel”) is a participle meaning “proclaiming good news” or “evangelizing,” indicating the nature of the message conveyed.
• κύριος (kyrios): This term (KITTEL, Vol. III, pp. 1039-1094; BDAG, “owner, master”; “the one who has control over persons or things”; “term of address, master, lord, sir”) translates as “lord” or “master.” When used with πάντων (“of all”), it signifies supreme authority and universal sovereignty.

Translation Variants

The grammatical and rhetorical analysis of Acts 10:36 reveals several interpretative possibilities:

• Connection of τὸν λόγον to καταλαμβάνομαι (v. 34): One interpretation proposes that τὸν λόγον ὃν ἀπέστειλεν τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ should be joined with καταλαμβάνομαι (“I perceive/understand”) in verse 34. This would require interpreting τὸν λόγον as a second object of Peter’s perception, perhaps in apposition to the preceding ὅτι clause (ὅτι οὐκ ἔστιν προσωπολήμπτης ὁ θεός, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν παντὶ ἔθνει ὁ φοβούμενος αὐτὸν καὶ ἐργαζόμενος δικαιοσύνην δεκτὸς αὐτῷ ἐστιν). However, this creates considerable syntactic distance and semantic strain, as Peter’s primary realization is God’s impartiality, not directly the content of a specific message sent to Israel at this precise point.
• Connection of τὸν λόγον as a proleptic object to οἴδατε (v. 37): Another view treats verse 36 as a long, run-on pre-posed object for the verb οἴδατε (“you know”) in verse 37 (ὑμεῖς οἴδατε τὸ γενόμενον ῥῆμα καθ᾽ ὅλης τῆς Ἰουδαίας…). This would make Peter’s statement in v. 36 the *content* that his audience already “knows.” However, this creates semantic difficulties, as “the thing that happened” (τὸ γενόμενον ῥῆμα) in v. 37 seems to refer to the events of Jesus’ ministry, distinct from the specific “message” (τὸν λόγον) God sent. Furthermore, this option forces οὗτός ἐστιν πάντων κύριος into a parenthetical remark, diminishing its emphatic theological weight.
• τὸν λόγον as an accusative of reference/respect: This interpretation understands τὸν λόγον as an accusative of general reference, meaning “concerning the message” or “with respect to the message.” This allows verse 36 to function as a thematic introduction or an explanatory statement, introducing the substance of Peter’s message without needing a direct verbal object. Rhetorically, this highlights the message itself as the central theme, pivoting from Peter’s realization of God’s impartiality to the specific content of the good news.
• Referent of οὗτός as Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ: Grammatically, the demonstrative pronoun οὗτός most naturally refers to the closest preceding masculine singular noun, which is Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. This is a common interpretation in many translations, where οὗτός is often rendered as a relative pronoun (“who is Lord of all”). Rhetorically, this emphasizes Jesus’ universal dominion, a fitting theological point for the inclusion of Gentiles.
• Referent of οὗτός as ὁ θεός (v. 34) or the understood subject of ἀπέστειλεν: Alternatively, οὗτός could refer to ὁ θεός from v. 34 or the understood subject (God) of ἀπέστειλεν (“He sent”). This interpretation shifts the emphasis of “Lord of all” from Jesus to God, aligning with the traditional Jewish understanding of God’s universal sovereignty. In this reading, Peter’s new understanding is that God, who is Lord of all, extends His acceptance not only to Jews but to all nations, thereby taking Gentiles “under His wings.”
• τὸν λόγον and εἰρήνην in apposition: One proposed reading suggests that εἰρήνην διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ (“peace through Jesus Christ”) is in apposition to τὸν λόγον ὃν ἀπέστειλεν τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ. This construal would explicitly identify the “word/message” with the “peace” proclaimed through Christ. Rhetorically, it would clearly define the content of the divine message as salvific peace.

These various analyses underscore the complexity of Acts 10:36, reflecting either a condensed Lukan style or a deliberate grammatical looseness intended to convey a profound theological shift in Peter’s understanding of God’s plan for humanity.

Conclusions and Translation Suggestions

The exegetical challenges of Acts 10:36 lie in its dense syntax and the anacoluthon, which allows for multiple interpretations concerning the grammatical function of τὸν λόγον and the referent of οὗτός. While textual criticism supports the inclusion of ὃν, the construction remains grammatically complex. The most compelling interpretations often balance grammatical likelihood with the broader theological context of Peter’s expanding understanding of God’s universal acceptance. The shift from Jewish exclusivity to Gentile inclusion hinges significantly on Peter’s realization that God is impartial and that His message of peace through Jesus Christ is for all. Given the context, the phrase οὗτός ἐστιν πάντων κύριος serves as a pivotal theological statement, regardless of whether it refers to God or Jesus, as both are intricately linked in the proclamation of the Gospel to the Gentiles.

Based on the preceding analysis, here are three translation suggestions, each highlighting a distinct interpretative emphasis:

1. “The word which He sent to the sons of Israel, proclaiming peace through Jesus Christ—this one (Jesus) is Lord of all.”

   This translation adopts the inclusion of ὃν, takes τὸν λόγον as the object of ‘sent’, and interprets οὗτός as referring to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, emphasizing Jesus’ universal authority as the culmination of the message.

2. “Concerning the word which He sent to the sons of Israel, proclaiming peace through Jesus Christ—He (God) is Lord of all.”

   This translation treats τὸν λόγον as an accusative of reference (“concerning the word”), allowing the verse to function as a thematic statement. It then interprets οὗτός as referring to God, highlighting God’s universal sovereignty as Peter’s profound new realization.

3. “He sent the message to the sons of Israel, namely, proclaiming peace through Jesus Christ—this one (Jesus) is Lord of all.”

   This option construes εἰρήνην as being in apposition to τὸν λόγον, clarifying the content of the message as “peace through Jesus Christ.” It then follows the more common interpretation of οὗτός referring to Jesus, underscoring his lordship.