An Exegetical Analysis of Acts 15:20: Grammatical Structure and the Nature of Prohibitions
This exegetical study of An Exegetical Analysis of Acts 15:20: Grammatical Structure and the Nature of Prohibitions is based on a b-greek discussion from July 9th, 2014.
The initial query posits that the four prohibitions in Acts 15:20 might stem from rabbinic insistence on gentile abstinence from specific impurities for association with Jews, suggesting they are practical compromises for co-existence rather than purely moral dictates. Scholarly works like Keener’s commentary on Acts and Hard Sayings of the Bible are cited as potential sources for such an interpretation, particularly emphasizing the idea that these are necessary compromises for mixed congregations to celebrate the Lord’s Supper together.
The core exegetical issue centers on the precise grammatical relationship of the four prohibited items in Acts 15:20—namely, “things polluted by idols,” “sexual immorality,” “what has been strangled,” and “blood”—to the preceding phrase τῶν ἀλισγημάτων (defilements/pollutions). Specifically, the question is whether all four genitive phrases are dependent on τῶν ἀλισγημάτων (implying four types of defilement), or if τῶν ἀλισγημάτων τῶν εἰδώλων constitutes one category, with the subsequent three items acting as distinct, coordinate prohibitions. This grammatical ambiguity impacts the interpretation of the Jerusalem Council’s decree, particularly regarding the nature of πορνείας (sexual immorality) as either ritualistic or purely moral, and how these injunctions facilitated Jewish-Gentile fellowship in early Christian communities.
ἀλλὰ ἐπιστεῖλαι αὐτοῖς τοῦ ἀπέχεσθαι ἀπὸ τῶν ἀλισγημάτων τῶν εἰδώλων καὶ τῆς πορνείας καὶ τοῦ πνικτοῦ καὶ τοῦ αἵματος.
Greek text (Nestle 1904)
Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):
- The SBLGNT (2010) text for Acts 15:20 omits the preposition ἀπὸ before τῶν ἀλισγημάτων, reading: ἀλλὰ ἐπιστεῖλαι αὐτοῖς τοῦ ἀπέχεσθαι τῶν ἀλισγημάτων τῶν εἰδώλων καὶ τῆς πορνείας καὶ τοῦ πνικτοῦ καὶ τοῦ αἵματος.
Textual Criticism (NA28): The Nestle-Aland 28th edition (NA28) *critical editions generally follow* the absence of the preposition ἀπὸ, aligning with the SBLGNT. This textual variant is significant because the presence or absence of ἀπὸ could influence the grammatical parsing of the subsequent genitive phrases. If ἀπὸ is present (as in some Byzantine texts, and implied by the initial discussion), it explicitly governs all four genitive objects, making each a direct object of the verb ἀπέχεσθαι (‘to abstain from’). Its absence, however, might allow for an interpretation where the genitive τῶν ἀλισγημάτων τῶν εἰδώλων is the primary object, with the following three genitives either dependent on it or co-ordinate objects governed solely by the infinitive ἀπέχεσθαι.
Lexical Notes:
- ἀλισγημάτων (alisgēmatōn, gen. pl. from ἀλίσγημα): BDAG defines this as “that which has been polluted or defiled.” In this context, it refers to the defilement associated with idol worship, particularly food offered to idols.
- εἰδώλων (eidōlōn, gen. pl. from εἴδωλον): BDAG translates this as “an image representing a god, idol.” The phrase τῶν ἀλισγημάτων τῶν εἰδώλων specifically denotes defilement stemming from idols or idol offerings.
- πορνείας (porneias, gen. sg. from πορνεία): BDAG broadly defines this as “sexual immorality of every kind.” The discussion highlights a debate on whether in Acts 15:20 it refers to general moral transgression or specifically to ritual prostitution/impurity. KITTEL (TDNT, Vol. VI, p. 579) emphasizes the comprehensive nature of πορνεία in the New Testament to encompass all illicit sexual intercourse, including adultery and prostitution, generally framing it as a moral transgression against God’s law.
- πνικτοῦ (pniktou, gen. sg. from πνικτός): BDAG means “that which has been strangled.” This refers to meat from animals killed by strangulation, which would not have been properly bled according to Jewish dietary laws (Leviticus 17:10-14).
- αἵματος (haimatos, gen. sg. from αἷμα): BDAG defines this as “blood.” The prohibition against consuming blood is a foundational Jewish dietary law (Genesis 9:4; Leviticus 17:10-14), deeply rooted in the belief that the life is in the blood.
Translation Variants
The primary grammatical question in Acts 15:20 revolves around the relationship between τῶν ἀλισγημάτων τῶν εἰδώλων and the subsequent genitive phrases: καὶ τῆς πορνείας καὶ τοῦ πνικτοῦ καὶ τοῦ αἵματος.
One interpretation posits that τῶν εἰδώλων is dependent on τῶν ἀλισγημάτων, forming the phrase “defilements of idols.” The subsequent three genitives, introduced by καὶ and their own definite articles, are then understood as discrete, co-ordinate objects of the infinitive τοῦ ἀπέχεσθαι (‘to abstain from’). This reading views the Jerusalem decree as enjoining abstention from four distinct categories: idol-polluted things, sexual immorality, strangled meat, and blood.
A second grammatical option considers all four genitives—τῶν εἰδώλων, τῆς πορνείας, τοῦ πνικτοῦ, and τοῦ αἵματος—as dependent upon τῶν ἀλισγημάτων. In this case, the phrase would be understood as “the pollutions of idols, of sexual immorality, of strangled animals, and of blood.” This implies that all four items are specific manifestations or categories of “defilement” or “pollution.” The repetition of the definite article (τῆς, τοῦ, τοῦ) before the latter three items is often seen as a strong indicator that they are grammatically distinct yet coordinate with the first item, rather than strictly dependent on τῶν ἀλισγημάτων. However, the discussion points to examples (1 Chr 24:6, 1 Chr 24:31, 1 Chr 28:13, Ezra 8:29) where multiple genitive phrases, each with an article, modify a preceding genitive phrase, though these examples involve closely related items like “priests and Levites.”
The textual variant concerning the presence or absence of ἀπὸ further complicates the grammatical analysis. If ἀπὸ is present (as in some textual traditions), it clearly functions as a preposition governing all four phrases, explicitly delineating them as objects of abstention. If absent (as in NA28 and SBLGNT), the infinitive ἀπέχεσθαι itself governs the genitives. Even without ἀπὸ, the conjunction καὶ with repeated articles tends to signal distinct items. Suggested alternative phrasing in the discussion to explicitly denote four discrete defilements (e.g., adding [τεσσάρων] and [ὄντων]) or to clarify them as independent prohibitions (e.g., using οὐ μόνον…ἀλλὰ καὶ) indicates the perceived ambiguity of the original Greek.
Rhetorically, the decree aims to foster fellowship between Jewish and Gentile believers. The debate regarding πορνείας (sexual immorality) highlights whether the prohibitions are primarily moral, ritual, or a blend of both. Some scholars suggest these four items represent rabbinic categories of impurity that Gentiles would need to avoid to associate with Jews, implying a ritual dimension for practical co-existence. Others argue that πορνεία is fundamentally a moral transgression (citing Matthew 5:32 and general NT usage), while the other three (idol offerings, blood, strangled animals) have clear ritual/dietary implications rooted in Jewish law. One article mentioned in the discussion proposes that πορνεία itself might relate to ritual impurity in a very early Christian context, though this is challenged as “strange” given the typical moral understanding of the term.
Conclusions and Translation Suggestions
The grammatical evidence, particularly the repetition of the definite article before each item following τῶν ἀλισγημάτων τῶν εἰδώλων, strongly suggests that the four prohibitions are distinct and coordinate, rather than the latter three being subordinate categories of “defilements.” While “defilements of idols” constitutes the first category, the subsequent items (sexual immorality, strangled meat, blood) are presented as equally distinct objects of abstention. This interpretation aligns with the general consensus in commentaries and English translations, which treat them as four separate injunctions.
The debate concerning the nature of πορνείας (ritual vs. moral) reveals the nuanced challenges in interpreting early Christian compromises. While the proscriptions against idol meat, blood, and strangled animals clearly address Jewish ritual and dietary sensitivities, πορνεία is overwhelmingly understood as a moral transgression in the New Testament. Its inclusion alongside ritual matters might serve to emphasize foundational moral purity necessary for communal fellowship, or it could be a deliberate grouping of practices common among Gentiles that were particularly offensive to Jewish sensibilities, blurring the lines between ritual and moral purity in the context of inter-communal peace.
The textual variant of ἀπὸ, while grammatically interesting, does not fundamentally alter the conclusion that four distinct items are intended for abstention, as the use of καὶ with separate articles typically achieves this effect.
Suggested Translations:
- “but to write to them to abstain from things polluted by idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what has been strangled, and from blood.”
This translation reflects the view that all four are distinct and co-ordinate prohibitions, directly dependent on “abstain from.” This is the most common interpretation in English Bibles. - “but to write to them that they keep themselves from the defilements of idols, from sexual immorality, from strangled animals, and from blood.”
This rendering slightly emphasizes “defilements” as the overarching concept but still treats the following items as separate categories of things to be avoided, each introduced by an implicit “from.” - “but to send word to them that they avoid defilements caused by idols, and also fornication, and meat from animals that have been strangled, and the consumption of blood.”
This translation clarifies the practical implications of each injunction, using more explanatory phrasing while maintaining the distinctness of the four items.