KJV: After they were come to Mysia, they assayed to go into Bithynia: but the Spirit suffered them not.
YLT: having gone toward Mysia, they were trying to go on toward Bithynia, and the Spirit did not suffer them,
Darby: having come down to Mysia, they attempted to go to Bithynia, and the Spirit of Jesus did not allow them;
ASV: and when they were come over against Mysia, they assayed to go into Bithynia; and the Spirit of Jesus suffered them not;
| ἐλθόντες | having come |
|
Parse: Verb, Aorist Participle Active, Nominative Masculine Plural Root: ἔρχομαι Sense: to come. |
|
| κατὰ | down to |
|
Parse: Preposition Root: κατά Sense: down from, through out. |
|
| τὴν | - |
|
Parse: Article, Accusative Feminine Singular Root: ὁ Sense: this, that, these, etc. |
|
| Μυσίαν | Mysia |
|
Parse: Noun, Accusative Feminine Singular Root: Μυσία Sense: a province of Asia Minor on the shore of the Aegean Sea, between Lydia and Popontis; it included the cities of Pergamos, Troas, and Assos. |
|
| ἐπείραζον | they were attempting |
|
Parse: Verb, Imperfect Indicative Active, 3rd Person Plural Root: πειράζω Sense: to try whether a thing can be done. |
|
| εἰς | into |
|
Parse: Preposition Root: εἰς Sense: into, unto, to, towards, for, among. |
|
| Βιθυνίαν | Bithynia |
|
Parse: Noun, Accusative Feminine Singular Root: Βιθυνία Sense: a Roman province in Asia Minor, bounded by the Euxine Sea, the Propontis, Mysia, Phrygia, Galatia, Paphlagonia. |
|
| πορευθῆναι | to go |
|
Parse: Verb, Aorist Infinitive Passive Root: πορεύομαι Sense: to lead over, carry over, transfer. |
|
| εἴασεν | did allow |
|
Parse: Verb, Aorist Indicative Active, 3rd Person Singular Root: ἐάω Sense: to allow, permit, let. |
|
| Πνεῦμα | Spirit |
|
Parse: Noun, Nominative Neuter Singular Root: πνεῦμα Sense: a movement of air (a gentle blast. |
|
| Ἰησοῦ | of Jesus |
|
Parse: Noun, Genitive Masculine Singular Root: Ἰησοῦς Sense: Joshua was the famous captain of the Israelites, Moses’ successor. |
|
Greek Commentary for Acts 16:7
This was an ill-defined region rather north and west of Phrygia. The Romans finally absorbed most of it in the Province of Asia. [source]
Conative imperfect of πειραζω peirazō and ingressive aorist passive infinitive of πορευομαι poreuomai Now Bithynia is northeast of Mysia and north of Galatia (province). Clearly Luke means to say that Paul had, when hindered by the Holy Spirit from going west into Asia, gone north so as to come in front of Bithynia. This journey would take him directly through Phrygia and the North Galatian country (the real Gauls or Celts). This is, to my mind, the strongest argument for the North Galatian view in these Acts 16:6, Acts 16:7. The grammar and the topography bring Paul right up to Bithynia (north of the old Galatia). It is Acts 16:6, Acts 16:7 that make me pause before accepting the plausible arguments of Ramsay for the South Galatian theory. In itself the problem is nothing like so important or so determinative as he makes it. But shall we smash Luke‘s grammar to pieces to bolster up a theory of criticism? And the Spirit of Jesus suffered them not (και ουκ ειασεν αυτους το πνευμα Ιησου kai ouk eiasen autous to pneuma Iēsou). The same Spirit who in Acts 16:6 had forbidden going into Asia now closed the door into Bithynia. This expression occurs nowhere else, but we have the spirit of Christ (Romans 8:9) and the Spirit of Jesus Christ (Philemon 1:19). Ειασεν Eiasen is first aorist active indicative of εαω eaō old verb to allow. [source]
The same Spirit who in Acts 16:6 had forbidden going into Asia now closed the door into Bithynia. This expression occurs nowhere else, but we have the spirit of Christ (Romans 8:9) and the Spirit of Jesus Christ (Philemon 1:19). Ειασεν Eiasen is first aorist active indicative of εαω eaō old verb to allow. [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for Acts 16:7
It is a mistake to define this word as only solicitation to evil. It means trial of any kind, without reference to its moral quality. Thus, John 6:6); Paul and Timothy assayed to go to Bithynia (Acts 16:7); “Examine yourselves” (2 Corinthians 13:5). Here, generally of all situations and circumstances which furnish an occasion for sin. We cannot pray God not to tempt us to sin, “for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man” (James 1:13). [source]
This is probably the correct text with one article and apparently describes one “Region” or District in The Province of Galatia which was also Phrygian (the old-ethnographic name with which compare the use of Lycaonia in Acts 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 Acts 14:1-5; 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 Acts 18:23, it is still possible for Paul in Galatians 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 Acts 18:23 adds the term “of Galatia” 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 (Acts 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 κωλυτεντες kōluthentes (“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 κωλυω kōluō 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 κωλυτεντες kōluthentes 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 Acts 16:7 throws further light on the point. [source]
Conative imperfect of πειραζω peirazō and ingressive aorist passive infinitive of πορευομαι poreuomai Now Bithynia is northeast of Mysia and north of Galatia (province). Clearly Luke means to say that Paul had, when hindered by the Holy Spirit from going west into Asia, gone north so as to come in front of Bithynia. This journey would take him directly through Phrygia and the North Galatian country (the real Gauls or Celts). This is, to my mind, the strongest argument for the North Galatian view in these Acts 16:6, Acts 16:7. The grammar and the topography bring Paul right up to Bithynia (north of the old Galatia). It is Acts 16:6, Acts 16:7 that make me pause before accepting the plausible arguments of Ramsay for the South Galatian theory. In itself the problem is nothing like so important or so determinative as he makes it. But shall we smash Luke‘s grammar to pieces to bolster up a theory of criticism? And the Spirit of Jesus suffered them not (και ουκ ειασεν αυτους το πνευμα Ιησου kai ouk eiasen autous to pneuma Iēsou). The same Spirit who in Acts 16:6 had forbidden going into Asia now closed the door into Bithynia. This expression occurs nowhere else, but we have the spirit of Christ (Romans 8:9) and the Spirit of Jesus Christ (Philemon 1:19). Ειασεν Eiasen is first aorist active indicative of εαω eaō old verb to allow. [source]
Also condition of first class with μη mē instead of ου ou Προσερχομαι Proserchomai (old verb, to come to, to approach, with dative) is common enough in N.T. (Hebrews 4:16; Hebrews 7:25, etc.), but in the metaphorical sense of coming to one‘s ideas, assenting to, here only in N.T., but is so used in Philo and Irenaeus (Ellicott). Sound words (υγιαινουσιν λογοις hugiainousin logois). See note on 1 Timothy 1:10 for υγιαινω hugiainō The words of our Lord Jesus Christ Either subjective genitive (the words from the Lord Jesus, a collection of his sayings in Lock‘s opinion like 1 Timothy 5:18; Acts 20:35, at least in the Spirit of Jesus as Acts 16:7; 1 Corinthians 11:23) or objective genitive about Jesus like 2 Timothy 1:8; 1 Corinthians 1:18. According to godliness (κατα ευσεβειαν kata eusebeian). Promoting (designed for) godliness as in Titus 1:1. [source]
Either subjective genitive (the words from the Lord Jesus, a collection of his sayings in Lock‘s opinion like 1 Timothy 5:18; Acts 20:35, at least in the Spirit of Jesus as Acts 16:7; 1 Corinthians 11:23) or objective genitive about Jesus like 2 Timothy 1:8; 1 Corinthians 1:18. According to godliness (κατα ευσεβειαν kata eusebeian). Promoting (designed for) godliness as in Titus 1:1. [source]