Acts 19:4

“`html

An Exegetical Analysis of Acts 19:4 Syntax: The Prepositional Phrase ‘εἰς τὸν ἐρχόμενον μετ’ αὐτόν’

This exegetical study of Acts 19:4 word order is based on a b-greek discussion from Thu Jul 22 14:16:51 EDT 1999. The initial inquiry highlights a syntactic ambiguity in the second half of Acts 19:4, specifically regarding the correct construction of the phrase εἰς τὸν ἐρχόμενον μετ’ αὐτόν. This ambiguity is underscored by a noted disagreement among scholarly commentators regarding its precise syntactic connection.

The main exegetical issue revolves around determining the syntactic relationship of the prepositional phrase εἰς τὸν ἐρχόμενον μετ’ αὐτόν (“into/for the one coming after him”). Two primary interpretive options are presented: either the phrase limits the verb πιστεύσωσιν (“they should believe”) or the verb λέγων (“telling/saying”). The difficulty is compounded by the position of the purpose particle ἵνα (“in order that”) relative to the prepositional phrase, as well as the clarifying parenthetical addition τοῦτ’ ἔστιν εἰς τὸν Ἰησοῦν (“that is, in Jesus”). The debate centers on whether the observed Greek word order is genuinely awkward or if it serves a rhetorical purpose in the context of Lucan (or Pauline) syntax.

Greek text (Nestle 1904)
Εἶπεν δὲ Παῦλος· Ἰωάννης μὲν βάπτισμα μετανοίας ἐβάπτισεν, τῷ λαῷ λέγων εἰς τὸν ἐρχόμενον μετ’ αὐτὸν ἵνα πιστεύσωσιν, τοῦτ’ ἔστιν εἰς τὸν Ἰησοῦν.

Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):

• For Acts 19:4, the Nestle 1904 text is identical to the SBLGNT (2010) and NA28 in the relevant phrases under discussion, showing no significant textual variants affecting the syntactic dilemma.

Textual criticism (NA28), lexical notes (KITTEL, BDAG):

Textual criticism of Acts 19:4, particularly in the critical editions like NA28, confirms the Greek text as presented above, including the phrase τοῦτ’ ἔστιν εἰς τὸν Ἰησοῦν. The discussion does not identify any significant textual variants that would alter the syntactic problem, rather the clarifying phrase is considered an integral, albeit possibly secondary, part of the text intended to resolve ambiguity.

• λέγων (from λέγω, “to say, speak, tell”): BDAG highlights its broad meaning of conveying information through words. In this context, it refers to John’s declaration to the people.
• εἰς (preposition with accusative): BDAG notes its use with verbs of believing (πιστεύω) to indicate the object or direction of faith, translating to “into,” “in,” or “for.” Its recurrence in τοῦτ’ ἔστιν εἰς τὸν Ἰησοῦν reinforces this semantic domain.
• ἐρχόμενον (present active participle of ἔρχομαι, “to come, go”): Functions substantivally here, “the one coming.” Kittel (TDNT) and BDAG confirm its use in messianic contexts to refer to the expected Messiah.
• μετ’ αὐτόν (“after him”): The preposition μετά with the accusative indicates succession in time or sequence, clearly marking the one coming *after* John.
• ἵνα πιστεύσωσιν (“in order that they might believe”): ἵνα with the aorist subjunctive expresses purpose. πιστεύω, as discussed, frequently takes εἰς + accusative to denote the object of faith.
• τοῦτ’ ἔστιν (“that is,” “namely”): A common explanatory phrase, serving to clarify or identify the preceding statement, in this case, the identity of “the one coming after him.”

Translation Variants

The syntactic analysis of Acts 19:4 hinges on the connection of εἰς τὸν ἐρχόμενον μετ’ αὐτόν. Two main interpretations are discussed:

1. Connecting to πιστεύσωσιν: This view, supported by Barrett and the participants in the b-greek discussion, construes εἰς τὸν ἐρχόμενον μετ’ αὐτόν as the object of belief for ἵνα πιστεύσωσιν. Grammatically, this provides a clear object for the act of believing. Rhetorically, it emphasizes that the *object* of John’s preaching was the future belief in the coming one. The challenge lies in the word order, where the prepositional phrase precedes the ἵνα clause, leading to a separation from its governing verb. However, the subsequent explicit clarification, τοῦτ’ ἔστιν εἰς τὸν Ἰησοῦν, strongly supports this connection by reiterating the object of faith. This suggests that despite the “awkwardness,” the author intended to link “the one coming” directly to belief. The fronting of the phrase may serve an emphatic purpose, highlighting the identity of the future Messiah.
2. Connecting to λέγων: Fitzmyer is presented as connecting εἰς τὸν ἐρχόμενον μετ’ αὐτόν with λέγων. Grammatically, this would mean John was “telling people about the one who would come after him.” Rhetorically, it emphasizes the *content* of John’s message as being “about” this coming figure. However, as noted in the discussion, this interpretation might reflect a dynamic English translation rather than a precise Greek syntactic analysis, potentially obscuring the underlying structure. The presence of the ἵνα πιστεύσωσιν clause immediately following renders this connection somewhat redundant if it does not primarily serve as the object of belief. The discussion leans against this interpretation as the primary syntactic linkage.

The consensus in the discussion favors the first interpretation, acknowledging that the word order might be unusual for standard Greek. This “awkwardness” is variously attributed to rhetorical emphasis, the influence of Pauline syntax (as suggested by Alford), or even a less polished compositional style. The clarifying phrase τοῦτ’ ἔστιν εἰς τὸν Ἰησοῦν is seen as crucial, acting as an authorial gloss to ensure the correct understanding of the preceding, somewhat displaced, prepositional phrase.

Conclusions and Translation Suggestions

Based on the grammatical analysis and the insights from the scholarly discussion, the prepositional phrase εἰς τὸν ἐρχόμενον μετ’ αὐτόν is best understood as the object of the verb πιστεύσωσιν, signifying the object of the people’s faith. The atypical word order, with the prepositional phrase preceding the ἵνα clause, likely serves to emphasize the identity of the “one coming after him,” an identity then explicitly confirmed as Ἰησοῦν. The clarifying statement acts as an interpretive anchor, ensuring that the intended meaning is conveyed despite the syntactic arrangement.

Here are three suggested translations, reflecting different approaches to conveying this complex syntax:

1. Paul said, “John baptized with a baptism of repentance, telling the people that they should believe in the one who was coming after him, that is, in Jesus.”
   This translation directly connects the prepositional phrase to “believe,” aiming for a smooth English reading while preserving the intent.
2. Paul stated, “John’s baptism was one of repentance, and he told the people concerning the one coming after him that they should believe, namely, in Jesus.”
   This rendering attempts to reflect the initial placement of the prepositional phrase by using “concerning” to introduce the topic, before the purpose clause, then clarifies with “namely,” highlighting the potential for rhetorical fronting.
3. Paul declared, “John’s baptism was one of repentance, and he proclaimed to the people that it was in the one coming after him that they must place their faith, that is, in Jesus.”
   This translation employs a more dynamic phrasing to underscore the emphatic word order (“it was in… that they must place their faith”) and the hortatory aspect of John’s message, while clearly identifying the object of faith.

“`