Word Pictures in the New Testament - David Cox

Word Pictures in the New Testament - David Cox Word Pictures in the New Testament - David Cox

davidcox.com.mx
from davidcox.com.mx More from this publisher
06.05.2013 Views

Word Pictures in the NT [Acts: Chapter 11] [Table of Contents] [Previous] [Next] 11:1 {In Judea} (\kata t•n Ioudaian\). Throughout Judea (probably all Palestine), distributive use of \kata\. The news from Casearea spread like wildfire among the Jewish Christians. The case of the Samaritans was different, for they were half Jews, though disliked. But here were real Romans even if with Jewish affinities. {Had received} (\edexanto\). First aorist middle indicative. The English idiom requires "had" received, the Greek has simply "received." 11:2 {They that were of the circumcision} (\hoi ek peritom•s\). Literally, those of circumcision (on the side of circumcision, of the circumcision party). The phrase in 10:46 is confined to the six brethren with Peter in Caesarea (11:12). That can hardly be the meaning here for it would mean that they were the ones who brought the charge against Peter though Hort takes this view. All the disciples in Jerusalem were Jews so that it can hardly mean the whole body. In Ga 2:12 the phrase has the narrower sense of the Judaizing or Pharisaic wing of the disciples (Ac 15:5) who made circumcision necessary for all Gentile converts. Probably here by anticipation Luke so describes the beginning of that great controversy. The objectors probably did not know of Peter's vision at Joppa, but only of the revolutionary conduct of Peter in Caesarea. These extremists who spoke probably had abundant sympathy in their protest. The apostles are mentioned in verse 1, but are not referred to in verse 2. Apparently they are in contrast with the circumcision party in the church. {Contended} (\diekrinonto\). Imperfect middle of the common verb \diakrin•\, to {separate}. Here to separate oneself apart (\dia\), to take sides against, to make a cleavage (\dia\, two, in two) as in Jude 1:9. So Peter is at once put on the defensive as the contention went on. It is plain that Peter was not regarded as any kind of pope or overlord. 11:3 {Thou wentest in} (\eis•lthes\). Direct form, but Westcott and Hort have it \eis•lthen\ (he went in), indirect form. So with \sunephages\ (didst eat) and \sunephagen\ (did eat). The direct is more vivid. {Men uncircumcised} (\andras akrobustian echontas\). "Men having uncircumcision." It is a contemptuous http://www.ccel.org/r/robertson_at/wordpictures/htm/AC11.RWP.html (1 of 10) [28/08/2004 09:06:43 a.m.] Word Pictures in the New Testament (Acts: Chapter 11)

Word Pictures in the NT [Acts: Chapter 11] expression. They did not object to Peter's preaching to the Gentiles, but to his going into the house of Cornelius and eating with them, violating his supposed obligations as a Jew (Hackett). It was the same complaint in principle that the Pharisees had made against Jesus when he ate with publicans and sinners (Lu 15:12). The Jews had not merely the Mosaic regulations about clean and unclean food, but also the fact that at a Gentile table some of the meat may have been an idol sacrifice. And Peter himself had similar scruples when the vision came to him at Joppa and when he entered the house of Cornelius in Caesarea 10:28). Peter had been led beyond the circumcision party. 11:4 {Began} (\arxamenos\). Not pleonastic here, but graphically showing how Peter began at the beginning and gave the full story of God's dealings with him in Joppa and Caesarea. {Expounded} (\exetitheto\). Imperfect middle of \ektith•mi\, to set forth, old verb, but in the N.T. only in Acts (7:21; 11:4; 18:26; 28:23), a deliberate and detailed narrative "in order" (\kathex•s\). Old word for in succession. In the N.T. only in Lu 1:2; 8:1; Ac 3:24; 11:14; 18:23. Luke evidently considered this defence of Peter important and he preserves the marks of authenticity. It came originally from Peter himself (verses 5,6,15,16). "The case of Cornelius was a test case of primary importance" (Page), "the first great difficulty of the early Church." Part of the story Luke gives three times (10:3-6,30-32; 11:13f.). See the discussion chapter 10 for details given here. 11:5 {Let down} (\kathiemen•n\). Here agreeing with the "sheet" (\othon•n\, feminine), not with "vessel" (\skeuos\, neuter) as in 10:11. {Even unto me} (\achri emou\). Vivid detail added here by Peter. 11:6 {When I had fastened my eyes} (\atenisas\). This personal touch Peter adds from his own experience. See on Lu 4:20; Ac 3:4,12 for this striking verb \ateniz•\, to stretch the eyes towards, first aorist active participle here. {I considered} (\katanoe•\). Imperfect active of \kataneo•\ to put the mind down on, to ponder, I was pondering. {And saw} (\kai eidon\). Second aorist active indicative, saw in a flash. 11:7 {A voice saying} (\ph•n•s legous•s\). Genitive case after \•kousa\ (cf. 9:7 and accusative 9:4 which see for discussion). Participle \legous•s\ (present active of \leg•\) agreeing with \ph•n•s\, a kind of indirect discourse use of the http://www.ccel.org/r/robertson_at/wordpictures/htm/AC11.RWP.html (2 of 10) [28/08/2004 09:06:43 a.m.]

<strong>Word</strong> <strong>Pictures</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> NT [Acts: Chapter 11]<br />

[Table of Contents]<br />

[Previous] [Next]<br />

11:1 {In Judea} (\kata t•n Ioudaian\). Throughout Judea (probably<br />

all Palest<strong>in</strong>e), distributive use of \kata\. The news from<br />

Casearea spread like wildfire among <strong>the</strong> Jewish Christians. The<br />

case of <strong>the</strong> Samaritans was different, for <strong>the</strong>y were half Jews,<br />

though disliked. But here were real Romans even if with Jewish<br />

aff<strong>in</strong>ities. {Had received} (\edexanto\). First aorist middle<br />

<strong>in</strong>dicative. The English idiom requires "had" received, <strong>the</strong> Greek<br />

has simply "received."<br />

11:2 {They that were of <strong>the</strong> circumcision} (\hoi ek peritom•s\).<br />

Literally, those of circumcision (on <strong>the</strong> side of circumcision, of<br />

<strong>the</strong> circumcision party). The phrase <strong>in</strong> 10:46 is conf<strong>in</strong>ed to <strong>the</strong><br />

six brethren with Peter <strong>in</strong> Caesarea (11:12). That can hardly be<br />

<strong>the</strong> mean<strong>in</strong>g here for it would mean that <strong>the</strong>y were <strong>the</strong> ones who<br />

brought <strong>the</strong> charge aga<strong>in</strong>st Peter though Hort takes this view. All<br />

<strong>the</strong> disciples <strong>in</strong> Jerusalem were Jews so that it can hardly mean<br />

<strong>the</strong> whole body. In Ga 2:12 <strong>the</strong> phrase has <strong>the</strong> narrower sense of<br />

<strong>the</strong> Judaiz<strong>in</strong>g or Pharisaic w<strong>in</strong>g of <strong>the</strong> disciples (Ac 15:5) who<br />

made circumcision necessary for all Gentile converts. Probably<br />

here by anticipation Luke so describes <strong>the</strong> beg<strong>in</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g of that<br />

great controversy. The objectors probably did not know of Peter's<br />

vision at Joppa, but only of <strong>the</strong> revolutionary conduct of Peter<br />

<strong>in</strong> Caesarea. These extremists who spoke probably had abundant<br />

sympathy <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir protest. The apostles are mentioned <strong>in</strong> verse<br />

1, but are not referred to <strong>in</strong> verse 2. Apparently <strong>the</strong>y are <strong>in</strong><br />

contrast with <strong>the</strong> circumcision party <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> church. {Contended}<br />

(\diekr<strong>in</strong>onto\). Imperfect middle of <strong>the</strong> common verb \diakr<strong>in</strong>•\,<br />

to {separate}. Here to separate oneself apart (\dia\), to take<br />

sides aga<strong>in</strong>st, to make a cleavage (\dia\, two, <strong>in</strong> two) as <strong>in</strong><br />

Jude 1:9. So Peter is at once put on <strong>the</strong> defensive as <strong>the</strong><br />

contention went on. It is pla<strong>in</strong> that Peter was not regarded as<br />

any k<strong>in</strong>d of pope or overlord.<br />

11:3 {Thou wentest <strong>in</strong>} (\eis•l<strong>the</strong>s\). Direct form, but Westcott<br />

and Hort have it \eis•l<strong>the</strong>n\ (he went <strong>in</strong>), <strong>in</strong>direct form. So with<br />

\sunephages\ (didst eat) and \sunephagen\ (did eat). The direct<br />

is more vivid. {Men uncircumcised} (\andras akrobustian<br />

echontas\). "Men hav<strong>in</strong>g uncircumcision." It is a contemptuous<br />

http://www.ccel.org/r/robertson_at/wordpictures/htm/AC11.RWP.html (1 of 10) [28/08/2004 09:06:43 a.m.]<br />

<strong>Word</strong> <strong>Pictures</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>New</strong> <strong>Testament</strong><br />

(Acts: Chapter 11)

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!