Acts 10:37

Syntactic Ambiguity in Acts 10:37: The Case of ἀρξάμενος

This exegetical study of Syntactic Ambiguity in Acts 10:37: The Case of ἀρξάμενος is based on a b-greek discussion from May 8th, 2013. The initial discussion presented Acts 10:34-38 in the Greek text, drawing attention to a notable textual variant and a challenging grammatical construction concerning the participle ἀρξάμενος.

The main exegetical issue revolves around the precise grammatical function and referent of the nominative masculine singular participle ἀρξάμενος in Acts 10:37. While some manuscripts present the accusative ἀρξάμενον, the nominative form, prevalent in critical editions, poses a syntactic challenge. The discussion highlights whether this nominative participle can function adverbially, or if it refers to the speaker (Peter), even with the intervening clause “you know the word that occurred throughout all Judea.” This ambiguity necessitates careful textual, lexical, and grammatical analysis to determine the most probable meaning and its implications for translation.

34 Ἀνοίξας δὲ Πέτρος τὸ στόμα εἶπεν· ἐπʼ ἀληθείας καταλαμβάνομαι ὅτι οὐκ ἔστιν προσωπολήμπτης ὁ θεός, 35 ἀλλʼ 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, 37 ὑμεῖς οἴδατε τὸ γενόμενον ῥῆμα καθʼ ὅλης τῆς Ἰουδαίας, ἀρξάμενος ἀπὸ τῆς Γαλιλαίας μετὰ τὸ βάπτισμα ὃ ἐκήρυξεν Ἰωάννης, 38 Ἰησοῦν τὸν ἀπὸ Ναζαρέθ, ὡς ἔχρισεν αὐτὸν ὁ θεὸς πνεύματι ἁγίῳ καὶ δυνάμει, ὃς διῆλθεν εὐεργετῶν καὶ ἰώμενος πάντας τοὺς καταδυναστευομένους ὑπὸ τοῦ διαβόλου, ὅτι ὁ θεὸς ἦν μετʼ αὐτοῦ.
(Nestle 1904)

Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):

• Acts 10:36: The provided text includes [ὃν], indicating textual uncertainty for ὃν. SBLGNT (2010) includes ὃν without brackets, presenting it as part of the established text.

Textual Criticism (NA28):
The primary textual issue in this passage centers on the reading of ἀρξάμενος (nominative masculine singular) in Acts 10:37. While the provided text (Nestle 1904) and SBLGNT (2010) both feature ἀρξάμενος, the textual apparatus of NA28 records the variant ἀρξάμενον (accusative masculine singular) with support from manuscripts such as D, E, Ψ, 0108, 0150, 1739, the Vulgate (vg), and the Syriac (sy). The nominative reading, ἀρξάμενος, is robustly supported by a wider range of early and significant manuscripts including א, A, B, C, H, L, P, and the Byzantine text-type. The variant ἀρξάμενον likely arose as a scribal emendation, a lectio facilior, to alleviate the grammatical difficulty of the nominative participle following an accusative object (τὸ ῥῆμα) and prior to the subject of the clause (ὑμεῖς in οἴδατε), allowing it to agree more smoothly with τὸ ῥῆμα, τὸ βάπτισμα, or Ἰησοῦν. The critical editions’ preference for ἀρξάμενος implies a judgment that the more difficult reading is likely original. Another minor textual note pertains to Acts 10:36, where the provided text includes [ὃν], while NA28 prints ὃν without brackets, noting omission in D*. This bracketed form in the provided text indicates a degree of uncertainty regarding its inclusion, a feature of some critical editions.

Lexical Notes (KITTEL, BDAG):
The crucial term for this exegetical problem is ἀρξάμενος, the aorist middle participle of ἄρχομαι. BDAG (s.v. ἄρχω, II.2.b.δ) notes its use as “a marker of the point of origin in a temporal or spatial series, beginning, starting from… used absolutely, in such a way that the grammatical case varies according to the construction… ὁ λόγος… ἀρξάμενος Ac 10:37.” This entry acknowledges the nominative form in this specific verse, supporting its authenticity despite syntactic challenges. Kittel (TDNT, Vol. I, p. 477ff) discusses the general meaning of ἄρχομαι as “to begin,” which is consistent across interpretations, though it does not directly resolve the syntactic ambiguity of the participle’s subject. Other relevant terms include: προσωπολήμπτης (Acts 10:34), defined by BDAG as “one who shows partiality”; δεκτὸς (Acts 10:35), meaning “acceptable, welcome, pleasing”; εὐαγγελιζόμενος (Acts 10:36), “to proclaim good news”; ῥῆμα (Acts 10:37), “word, saying, matter, thing”; εὐεργετῶν (Acts 10:38), “to do good, benefit”; and καταδυναστευομένους (Acts 10:38), “to oppress, tyrannize.” These terms offer insights into the broader context of Peter’s sermon but do not resolve the specific grammatical difficulty of ἀρξάμενος.

Translation Variants

The grammatical and rhetorical analysis of ἀρξάμενος in Acts 10:37 yields several interpretive possibilities, each with distinct implications:

1. Referring to Peter (the speaker) with a loose anacoluthon:

This interpretation suggests that the nominative participle ἀρξάμενος refers to Peter, the one speaking. Grammatically, this presents a challenge because the immediate subject of the main verb οἴδατε (you all know) is ὑμεῖς, and the direct object is τὸ γενόμενον ῥῆμα (the word/thing that occurred). For ἀρξάμενος to refer to Peter, it would require a syntactic break or anacoluthon, a construction noted as “unexpected transference of the case and gender into that of the prime agent” by Henry Alford, who found it “surprising in St. Luke” (Alford, *Greek Testament*, vol. 2, 119). Rhetorically, it imbues the statement with Peter’s personal witness and authority, implying “You know… *as I, Peter, am beginning* to speak about this, which started from Galilee.” This makes the passage a personal declaration of knowledge and experience.

2. Referring to the “word” or “events” impersonally, as an anacoluthon or loose apposition:

Despite the nominative case, some interpret ἀρξάμενος as referring to the subject of the narration—the “word” (τὸ ῥῆμα) or the entire sequence of events—even though ῥῆμα is accusative and ἀρξάμενος is nominative. This requires understanding the nominative participle as a stylistic anacoluthon, where the speaker shifts grammatical construction mid-sentence. Alternatively, it could be seen as an example of a “nominative absolute,” where the participle functions quasi-adverbially to describe the general situation, much like an introductory clause, despite the usual expectation for the accusative (ἀρξάμενον) in such contexts. The meaning would be something like, “You know the word… the beginning of which was from Galilee…” or “With the beginning from Galilee…” This smooths the semantic flow, focusing on the origin of the message, but strains the direct grammatical agreement.

3. Adopting the variant Ἀρξάμενον:

If the textual variant ἀρξάμενον (accusative) were adopted, the grammatical difficulty would be largely resolved. The participle would then easily agree with τὸ γενόμενον ῥῆμα (the word that occurred) or even implicitly with Ἰησοῦν (Jesus) mentioned later in v.38, describing the initiation of his ministry. Rhetorically, this makes the passage very clear: “You know the word that occurred throughout all Judea, the word beginning from Galilee…” This interpretation prioritizes grammatical smoothness but means favoring a reading less attested in the earliest and most significant manuscripts, suggesting it might be a scribal correction rather than the original.

Conclusions and Translation Suggestions

The consistent retention of ἀρξάμενος in critical editions like Nestle 1904 and SBLGNT 2010 suggests that the grammatically challenging nominative form is most likely original. The syntactic difficulty indicates a certain looseness in Luke’s Greek, or perhaps a rhetorical device that prioritizes meaning over strict grammatical agreement. Given the context, Peter is narrating events he is intimately familiar with, suggesting that the “beginning” (ἀρξάμενος) can implicitly relate to his perspective or to the overall narrative of Jesus’ ministry, which he is summarizing. The most compelling interpretation, supported by scholars like Alford, is that it is an anacoluthon, with the participle referring to the “prime agent” (Peter) or to the content of the “word” being described, but with a less strict grammatical agreement than expected.

Here are three translation suggestions, reflecting these nuanced interpretations:

1. “You yourselves know the word that came throughout all Judea, I am speaking of its beginning from Galilee after the baptism that John proclaimed, that is, Jesus of Nazareth…”
   This translation attempts to capture the sense of Peter bringing up the origin of the events as part of his address, implicitly linking the nominative participle to his act of speaking or narrating.
2. “You are aware of the message that went forth through all Judea, a message that had its origin in Galilee after the baptism which John proclaimed, concerning Jesus of Nazareth…”
   This option treats the nominative ἀρξάμενος as a loose apposition or a descriptive nominative, referring to the “word” (τὸ ῥῆμα) and the events it encompasses, effectively rephrasing the grammatical difficulty into a clearer English structure.
3. “You know the events that took place throughout Judea, beginning as they did from Galilee after the baptism that John preached, those concerning Jesus of Nazareth…”
   This translation rephrases the participle to indicate the general commencement of the “events” or “message” that the audience already knows, accepting the nominative as an idiomatically acceptable, if grammatically loose, way to introduce the geographical and temporal starting point.