Word Pictures in the New Testament - David Cox

Word Pictures in the NT [Acts: Chapter 16]
name with which compare the use of Lycaonia in 14:6). Strictly
speaking Derbe and Lystra, though in the Province of Galatia,
were not Phrygian, and so Luke would here be not resumptive of
the record in verses 1-5; but a reference to the country around
Iconium and Antioch in Pisidia in North Galatia is not included.
This verse is hotly disputed at every point by the advocates of
the North Galatian theory as represented by Chase and the South
Galatian theory by Ramsay. Whatever is true in regard to the
language of Luke here and in 18:23, it is still possible for
Paul in Ga 1:2 to use the term Galatia of the whole province of
that name which could, in fact, apply to either South or North
Galatia or to both. He could, of course, use it also in the
ethnographic sense of the real Gauls or Celts who dwelt in North
Galatia. Certainly the first tour of Paul and Barnabas was in the
Province of Galatia though touching only the Regions of Pisidia,
Phrygia, and Lycaonia, which province included besides the Gauls
to the north. In this second tour Lycaonia has been already
touched (Derbe and Lystra) and now Phrygia. The question arises
why Luke here and in 18:23 adds the term "of Galatia"
(\Galatik•n\) though not in 13:14 (Pisidian Antioch) nor in
14:6 (cities of Lycaonia). Does Luke mean to use "of Galatia"
in the same ethnographic sense as "of Phrygia" or does he here
add the province (Galatia) to the name of the Region (Phrygia)?
In itself either view is possible and it really matters very
little except that the question is raised whether Paul went into
the North Galatian Region on this occasion or later (18:23). He
could have done so and the Epistle be addressed to the churches
of South Galatia, North Galatia, or the province as a whole. But
the Greek participle \k•luthentes\ ("having been forbidden")
plays a part in the argument that cannot be overlooked whether
Luke means to say that Paul went north or not. This aorist
passive participle of \k•lu•\, to hinder, can only express
simultaneous or antecedent action, not subsequent action as
Ramsay argues. No example of the so-called subsequent use of the
aorist participle has ever been found in Greek as all Greek
grammarians agree (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 860-63, 1112-14).
The only natural meaning of \k•luthentes\ is that Paul with Silas
and Timothy "passed through the region of Phrygia and Galatia"
because they were hindered by the Holy Spirit from speaking the
word in Asia (the Province of Asia of which Ephesus was the chief
city and west of Derbe and Lystra). This construction implies
that the country called "the region of Phrygia and Galatia" is
not in the direct line west toward Ephesus. What follows in verse
http://www.ccel.org/r/robertson_at/wordpictures/htm/AC16.RWP.html (3 of 19) [28/08/2004 09:07:01 a.m.]