Acts 17:16

“`html

body { font-family: ‘Palatino Linotype’, Palatino, serif; line-height: 1.6; margin: 2em; max-width: 900px; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; }
h2, h3 { color: #333; }
b { font-weight: bold; }
i { font-style: italic; }
blockquote { border-left: 3px solid #ccc; padding-left: 1em; margin-left: 2em; color: #555; }
ul { list-style-type: disc; margin-left: 2em; }
ul li { margin-bottom: 0.5em; }
p { margin-bottom: 1em; }

An Exegetical Analysis of Acts 17:16: Participles, Indirect Discourse, and Paul’s Emotional Response

This exegetical study of An Exegetical Analysis of Acts 17:16: Participles, Indirect Discourse, and Paul’s Emotional Response is based on a b-greek discussion from Thu Apr 1 22:54:59 2004. The initial inquiry centers on the grammatical classification of the participle οὖσαν in Acts 17:16, specifically questioning its designation as “indirect discourse” by scholars like Wallace (citing Parsons/Culy). The original post seeks clarification on how a participle of perception can convey indirect discourse and what the implied “direct” discourse might have been.

The main exegetical issue at hand involves the complex syntactical relationship of several participial clauses in Acts 17:16 and their precise function in conveying Paul’s emotional state and its cause. Specifically, the discussion revolves around the genitive participles ἐκδεχομένου and θεωροῦντος, and the accusative participle οὖσαν. The core interpretive challenge is to determine the grammatical relationship between θεωροῦντος and the main clause, and how οὖσαν functions as its object, particularly in the context of “indirect discourse” or propositional content following a verb of perception. Another point of discussion relates to the proper referent for the genitive participle θεωροῦντος, whether it refers to the subject of the main verb (τὸ πνεῦμα) or to Paul himself, especially in light of textual variants like θεωροῦντι.

Ἐν δὲ ταῖς Ἀθήναις ἐκδεχομένου αὐτοὺς τοῦ Παύλου παρωξύνετο τὸ πνεῦμα αὐτοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ θεωροῦντος κατείδωλον οὖσαν τὴν πόλιν.

Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):

• The primary Greek text provided in the initial query features ἐκδεξομένου (aorist participle), whereas the SBLGNT (2010) reads ἐκδεχομένου (present participle). This constitutes a minor textual variant, with the present participle being more widely attested in critical editions.
• While not a difference *with* SBLGNT (which reads θεωροῦντος), the discussion notes the variant θεωροῦντι (dative participle) as found in Byzantine texts, representing a significant grammatical and interpretive alternative to the genitive θεωροῦντος.

Textual Criticism (NA28) and Lexical Notes (KITTEL, BDAG)

Textual Criticism (NA28): The Nestle-Aland 28th edition (NA28) for Acts 17:16 aligns with the SBLGNT reading, featuring ἐκδεχομένου (present middle participle, genitive singular). This reading is strongly supported by early and diverse manuscripts (e.g., א A B D E Ψ P 049 0102 Byz Lect), indicating a high degree of certainty for the present participle conveying continuous action. The variant ἐκδεξομένου (aorist middle participle, genitive singular), found in some lesser manuscripts, would imply a completed action prior to the main verb, which is less fitting for the ongoing “waiting” Paul was doing. Regarding the central grammatical debate, NA28, like SBLGNT, reads θεωροῦντος (present active participle, genitive singular), again with robust manuscript support. The Byzantine variant θεωροῦντι (dative participle) is noted as a later development, likely an attempt to simplify or clarify the grammatical relationship, shifting the participle’s agreement to the dative pronoun αὐτῷ instead of the genitive αὐτοῦ or an implied genitive subject (Paul).

Lexical Notes:

• παρωξύνετο (paroxynomai): This verb (imperfect passive/middle) denotes a strong emotional reaction. BDAG defines it as “to be provoked, be exasperated, be aroused to anger, be indignant.” Kittel (TDNT) traces its roots to παρά (beside, by) and ὀξύς (sharp), suggesting a “sharpening” or “goading” of emotions. The imperfect tense indicates a continuous or repeated state of agitation.
• κατείδωλον (kateidōlon): This adjective, found only here in the New Testament, describes the city of Athens. BDAG translates it as “full of idols, wholly given to idolatry.” The prefix κατά- (down, thoroughly) intensifies the meaning of εἴδωλον (idol), emphasizing the pervasive and overwhelming presence of idolatry.
• θεωροῦντος (theōreō): The verb means “to look at, gaze upon, observe, perceive.” BDAG emphasizes the careful, attentive nature of this observation, often implying intellectual perception rather than mere physical sight. In this context, it describes Paul’s active and discerning observation of the city.
• οὖσαν (eimi): The present active participle of “to be.” In this construction (accusative participle with accusative subject), it functions to convey the state of the city as Paul perceives it.

Translation Variants with Grammatical & Rhetorical Analysis

The verse presents a complex interplay of participles modifying the main clause, παρωξύνετο τὸ πνεῦμα αὐτοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ (“his spirit was provoked within him”).

The phrase ἐν δὲ ταῖς Ἀθήναις ἐκδεχομένου αὐτοὺς τοῦ Παύλου functions as a genitive absolute, providing circumstantial information (likely temporal and/or causal) that sets the scene. The presence of τοῦ Παύλου explicitly identifies the implied subject of this absolute construction. This structure serves to introduce Paul’s location and activity before delving into his internal state. Rhetorically, it establishes the context for Paul’s subsequent emotional response.

The core exegetical challenge lies in θεωροῦντος κατείδωλον οὖσαν τὴν πόλιν. The genitive participle θεωροῦντος is not part of the initial genitive absolute, as its subject (implied Paul, referring back to αὐτοῦ in the main clause) is the same as the main clause’s implied agent. Instead, it functions as a circumstantial participle, most likely expressing cause or means for Paul’s spiritual agitation. The shift in subject from τοῦ Παύλου (in the genitive absolute) to τὸ πνεῦμα αὐτοῦ (subject of the main verb) makes the genitive θεωροῦντος grammatically ambiguous in isolation. However, the most natural reading is that θεωροῦντος refers to Paul himself (implied from αὐτοῦ), indicating that *he* was observing. Parsons and Culy’s identification of οὖσαν as “indirect discourse” points to the fact that verbs of perception (like θεωροῦντος) can take a participial clause (accusative subject + participle) as their object, which presents the content of the perception as a proposition. Thus, Paul “perceived that the city was idolatrous.” τὴν πόλιν is the accusative subject of οὖσαν, and κατείδωλον is the predicate adjective. Rhetorically, this construction vividly portrays Paul’s internal experience: his observation (θεωροῦντος) of the city’s profound idolatry (κατείδωλον οὖσαν τὴν πόλιν) directly *caused* his spirit to be provoked. The layered structure effectively builds tension, showing Paul’s initial waiting, followed by his deep distress, and finally revealing the immediate catalyst for that distress.

Conclusions and Translation Suggestions

In conclusion, Acts 17:16 presents a sophisticated grammatical structure that effectively conveys Paul’s deep emotional distress. The genitive absolute ἐκδεχομένου αὐτοὺς τοῦ Παύλου sets the temporal and circumstantial context. The main clause describes Paul’s internal agitation, παρωξύνετο τὸ πνεῦμα αὐτοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ. Crucially, the subsequent circumstantial participle θεωροῦντος, implicitly referring to Paul, explains the cause of this agitation. It takes an indirect discourse construction, κατείδωλον οὖσαν τὴν πόλιν, as its object, precisely delineating the content of Paul’s perception: he observed *that* the city was utterly given over to idolatry. The combination underscores the profound impact of this observation on Paul’s spirit, initiating his famous discourse on Mars Hill.

Here are three translation suggestions that capture different nuances of the original Greek:

1. As Paul was waiting for them in Athens, his spirit was greatly provoked within him when he observed that the city was thoroughly given to idolatry.

   This translation emphasizes the temporal and causal relationship, using “as” and “when” to link the participial clauses to the main verb, and “observed that” to highlight the propositional nature of Paul’s perception.

2. While in Athens, as Paul waited for his companions, his spirit became exasperated within him because he saw the city to be full of idols.

   This rendition simplifies the opening genitive absolute and employs “because he saw” to explicitly state the causal link, treating the participial object as an infinitive clause (“to be full of idols”) common in English indirect speech constructions.

3. But in Athens, as Paul continued to await them, his spirit was stirred to indignation within him, seeing the city utterly devoted to idols.

   This version maintains a more participial feel, using “seeing” to directly connect Paul’s observation to his emotional state, and strengthens “provoked” to “stirred to indignation” to capture the depth of his spiritual distress conveyed by παρωξύνετο and κατείδωλον.

“`
εστ