Acts 26:16

“`html

body { font-family: ‘Palatino Linotype’, ‘Book Antiqua’, Palatino, serif; line-height: 1.6; max-width: 900px; margin: 20px auto; padding: 0 15px; }
h2, h3 { color: #333; }
p { margin-bottom: 1em; }
blockquote { border-left: 4px solid #ccc; margin: 1.5em 10px; padding: 0.5em 10px; font-style: italic; }
ul { list-style-type: disc; margin-left: 20px; }
li { margin-bottom: 0.5em; }
b { font-weight: bold; }
i { font-style: italic; }

An Exegetical Analysis of the Antecedent of the Relative Pronoun in Acts 26:16b-17

This exegetical study of An Exegetical Analysis of the Antecedent of the Relative Pronoun in Acts 26:16b-17 is based on a b-greek discussion from June 9th, 2014, 12:15 am. The initial inquiry focused on the grammatical reasons for identifying the antecedent of the relative pronoun οὕς in Acts 26:16b-17, specifically whether it refers exclusively to τῶν ἐθνῶν or to both τοῦ λαοῦ and τῶν ἐθνῶν.

The main exegetical issue under consideration revolves around the syntactic function of the repeated preposition ἐκ (“from”) within the phrase ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ καὶ ἐκ τῶν ἐθνῶν and its implications for resolving the antecedent of the subsequent relative pronoun εἰς οὓς (“to whom”). The repetition of the preposition often serves to emphasize distinct sources or groups, which can introduce ambiguity regarding a subsequent pronoun’s scope of reference. The discussion also touches upon the concept of constructio ad sensum, where grammatical agreement follows the sense rather than strict formal rules, particularly concerning the gender of the relative pronoun when referring to collective nouns like “people” and “nations.”

Greek text (Nestle 1904, Acts 26:16b-17):

ἀλλὰ ἀνάστηθι καὶ στῆθι ἐπὶ τοὺς πόδας σου· εἰς τοῦτο γὰρ ὤφθην σοι, προχειρίσασθαί σε ὑπηρέτην καὶ μάρτυρα ὧν τε εἶδές με ὧν τε ὀφθήσομαί σοι, ἐξαιρούμενός σε ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ καὶ ἐκ τῶν ἐθνῶν, εἰς οὓς ἐγὼ ἀποστέλλω σε.

Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):

• The text of Acts 26:16b-17 in the SBLGNT (2010) is identical to that found in the Nestle-Aland 28th edition (and by extension, largely congruent with Nestle 1904 in this specific passage). No significant textual variants affect the phrases pertinent to this exegetical discussion.

Textual Criticism and Lexical Notes

From a textual critical perspective (NA28), the passage exhibits no significant variants that alter the phrases ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ, ἐκ τῶν ἐθνῶν, or εἰς οὓς. The integrity of the discussed phrases is well-attested across manuscripts.

Lexically, the following terms are pertinent to the discussion:

• ἐξαιρέω (exaireō): The verb means “to take out, to rescue, to deliver.” In this context, it signifies God’s act of delivering Paul from both Jews and Gentiles, not necessarily separating him entirely from them, but for a specific mission to them. BDAG glosses include “to take out, pull out, remove” and “to rescue, deliver.” KITTEL (TWNT, Vol. II, p. 452) discusses its usage in deliverance contexts, often with a salvific or protective nuance.
• λαός (laos): This term typically refers to “a people” or “a nation,” but in the Septuagint and New Testament, it frequently designates the chosen people of God, Israel, in contrast to the Gentiles. BDAG states “a people, nation, people (esp. of God’s chosen people).” KITTEL (TWNT, Vol. IV, pp. 29-57) comprehensively traces its theological significance as referring to God’s covenant people.
• ἔθνος (ethnos): This noun refers to “a nation” or “a people,” but primarily in the plural, τὰ ἔθνη, it denotes “the Gentiles” or “the non-Israelite nations.” BDAG defines it as “a large group of people with common traits, nation, people” and notes its frequent use “esp. of non-Jews, Gentile.” KITTEL (TWNT, Vol. II, pp. 362-374) highlights its contrast with λαός in biblical usage, distinguishing the Jewish people from the Gentile nations.
• οὓς (hous): This is the accusative masculine plural form of the relative pronoun ὅς. Its grammatical gender (masculine) and number (plural) are key to identifying its antecedent. While λαοῦ is masculine singular and ἐθνῶν is neuter plural, the masculine plural of οὓς is often resolved through constructio ad sensum, referring to the *people* within these groups rather than strictly adhering to the grammatical gender of ἔθνος.

Translation Variants with Grammatical & Rhetorical Analysis

The core of the grammatical debate lies in the interpretation of the phrase ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ καὶ ἐκ τῶν ἐθνῶν, εἰς οὓς ἐγὼ ἀποστέλλω σε. Two main interpretations arise concerning the antecedent of οὓς:

Case 1: The Antecedent of οὓς is only τῶν ἐθνῶν.

This interpretation suggests that the repeated preposition ἐκ (ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ καὶ ἐκ τῶν ἐθνῶν) creates two distinct and somewhat independent clauses or phrases of origin. Following this logic, the relative pronoun οὓς (“whom”), which is immediately preceded by ἐκ τῶν ἐθνῶν, would refer exclusively to the “Gentiles.” Grammatically, this is problematic for two reasons:

1. The relative pronoun οὓς is masculine plural. While ἔθνος is neuter, constructio ad sensum can allow masculine agreement when referring to the *people* within nations. However, if the antecedent were *only* τῶν ἐθνῶν, one might expect a neuter plural pronoun (ἃ) if strictly adhering to grammatical gender.
2. Rhetorically, it would imply Paul is saved from Jews and Gentiles, but only sent *to* Gentiles, which contradicts Paul’s explicit mission to both (cf. Rom 1:16, Acts 9:15).

Case 2: The Antecedent of οὓς is both τοῦ λαοῦ and τῶν ἐθνῶν.

This interpretation understands the phrase ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ καὶ ἐκ τῶν ἐθνῶν as a single coordinated expression denoting two sources from which Paul is delivered, but collectively forming the target of his mission. The repetition of ἐκ here serves to emphasize the *distinct origins* (Jewish and Gentile) from which Paul is rescued by God for his mission. It does not necessarily imply a separation of these groups as targets of the mission.

1. The use of the masculine plural οὓς supports this view. As mentioned, λαοῦ is masculine singular, and ἔθνος is neuter plural. When referring to a mixed group of people (Jews and Gentiles), the masculine plural is the default and most natural choice in Greek for a relative pronoun operating under constructio ad sensum, aligning with the idea of “people” as human beings.
2. Rhetorically and theologically, this interpretation aligns perfectly with Paul’s divinely appointed mission to both “the Jew first and also to the Greek” (Rom 1:16). Paul is delivered from these groups *in order to be sent to them*, highlighting the paradoxical nature of his calling.

The phrase structure (Type 1: ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ καὶ ἐκ τῶν ἐθνῶν vs. Type 2: ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ καὶ τῶν ἐθνῶν without repeated ἐκ) was a point of discussion. While Type 2 would make the collective antecedent clearer, Type 1 does not inherently exclude it. The repetition of the preposition often indicates two distinct *members* of a coordinated group, but the relative pronoun following such a coordination can still encompass both. The overall context of Acts and Paul’s ministry strongly favors a dual referent.

Conclusions and Translation Suggestions

Based on the grammatical analysis, rhetorical context, and the theological implications of Paul’s mission, the most robust conclusion is that the relative pronoun οὓς refers to both τοῦ λαοῦ (the Jewish people) and τῶν ἐθνῶν (the Gentile nations).

Here are three possible translation suggestions:

1. …delivering you from the people, both Jews and Gentiles, to whom I am sending you.

   This translation emphasizes Paul’s deliverance from two distinct groups who collectively become the recipients of his mission. It uses “both…and” to clarify the scope of the mission.

2. …rescuing you from the Jewish people and from the Gentiles, into whose midst I am sending you.

   This option maintains the distinction of origin (from the Jewish people and from the Gentiles) while clearly indicating that Paul’s mission extends to both. “Into whose midst” highlights the immersive nature of his apostolic calling.

3. …I will rescue you from the Jewish people and the Gentiles, to whom I send you.

   This more direct translation concisely conveys the deliverance and the dual target of the mission, relying on context to clarify that “the people” and “the Gentiles” are the composite antecedent.

“`