KJV: And the day following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present.
YLT: and on the morrow Paul was going in with us unto James, all the elders also came,
Darby: And on the morrow Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders came there.
ASV: And the day following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present.
| τῇ | On the |
|
Parse: Article, Dative Feminine Singular Root: ὁ Sense: this, that, these, etc. |
|
| δὲ | now |
|
Parse: Conjunction Root: δέ Sense: but, moreover, and, etc. |
|
| ἐπιούσῃ | following [day] |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Participle Active, Dative Feminine Singular Root: ἔπειμι Sense: to come upon, approach. |
|
| εἰσῄει | went in |
|
Parse: Verb, Imperfect Indicative Active, 3rd Person Singular Root: εἴσειμι Sense: to go into, enter. |
|
| ὁ | - |
|
Parse: Article, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: ὁ Sense: this, that, these, etc. |
|
| Παῦλος | Paul |
|
Parse: Noun, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: Παῦλος Sense: Paul was the most famous of the apostles and wrote a good part of the NT, the 4 Pauline epistles. |
|
| ἡμῖν | us |
|
Parse: Personal / Possessive Pronoun, Dative 1st Person Plural Root: ἐγώ Sense: I, me, my. |
|
| πρὸς | unto |
|
Parse: Preposition Root: πρός Sense: to the advantage of. |
|
| Ἰάκωβον | James |
|
Parse: Noun, Accusative Masculine Singular Root: Ἰάκωβος Sense: son of Zebedee, an apostle and brother of the apostle John, commonly called James the greater or elder, slain by Herod, Acts 2. |
|
| παρεγένοντο | arrived |
|
Parse: Verb, Aorist Indicative Middle, 3rd Person Plural Root: παραγίνομαι Sense: to be present, to come near, approach. |
|
| πρεσβύτεροι | elders |
|
Parse: Adjective, Nominative Masculine Plural Root: πρεσβύτερος Sense: elder, of age,. |
|
Greek Commentary for Acts 21:18
As in Acts 20:15 which see. [source]
Imperfect active of εισειμι eiseimi old classic verb used only four times in the N.T. (Acts 3:3; Acts 21:18, Acts 21:26; Hebrews 9:6), a mark of the literary style rather than the colloquial Koiné{[28928]}š use of εισερχομαι eiserchomai Together with us to James So then Luke is present. The next use of “we” is in Acts 27:1 when they leave Caesarea for Rome, but it is not likely that Luke was away from Paul in Jerusalem and Caesarea. The reports of what was done and said in both places is so full and minute that it seems reasonable that Luke got first hand information here whatever his motive was for so full an account of these legal proceedings to be discussed later. There are many details that read like an eye witness‘s story (Acts 21:30, Acts 21:35, Acts 21:40; Acts 22:2, Acts 22:3; Acts 23:12, etc.). It was probably the house of James And all the elders were present (παντες τε παρεγενοντο οι πρεσβυτεροι pantes te paregenonto hoi presbuteroi). Clearly James is the leading elder and the others are his guests in a formal reception to Paul. It is noticeable that the apostles are not mentioned, though both elders and apostles are named at the Conference in Acts chapter 15. It would seem that the apostles are away on preaching tours. The whole church was not called together probably because of the known prejudice against Paul created by the Judaizers. [source]
Clearly James is the leading elder and the others are his guests in a formal reception to Paul. It is noticeable that the apostles are not mentioned, though both elders and apostles are named at the Conference in Acts chapter 15. It would seem that the apostles are away on preaching tours. The whole church was not called together probably because of the known prejudice against Paul created by the Judaizers. [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for Acts 21:18
The first use of that term for the Christian preachers. In Acts 20:17, Acts 20:28 “elders” and “bishops” are used interchangeably as in Titus 1:5, Titus 1:7. The term probably arose gradually and holds a position in the church similar to the same term in the synagogue. The apostles were apparently absent from Jerusalem at this time and they were no longer concerned with serving tables. In Acts 21:18 Paul presented the later collection also to the elders. Since Peter and James (till his death) were in Jerusalem during the persecution in chapter Acts 12:1 it is probable that the visit of Barnabas and Saul to Jerusalem came really after that persecution for Peter left Jerusalem (Acts 12:17). The elders here mentioned may include the preachers in Judea also outside of Jerusalem (Acts 26:20). [source]
First aorist active participle of ανοιγω anoigō or νυμι ̇numi The whole group rushed out to the courtyard this time to make sure. They were amazed (εχεστησαν exestēsan). The frequent second aorist active (intransitive) indicative of εχιστημι existēmi Acts 12:17 There were probably loud exclamations of astonishment and joy. Beckoning with the hand First aorist active participle of kataseiō old verb to signal or shake down with the hand (instrumental case cheiri). In the N.T. only in Acts 12:17; Acts 13:16; Acts 19:33; Acts 21:40. The speaker indicates by a downward movement of the hand his desire for silence (to hold their peace, sigāin present active infinitive, to keep silent). Peter was anxious for every precaution and he wanted their instant attention. Declared (diēgēsato). First aorist middle of diēgeomai old verb to carry through a narrative, give a full story. See also Acts 9:27 of Barnabas in his defence of Saul. Peter told them the wonderful story. Unto James and the brethren Dative case after apaggeilate (first aorist active imperative). Evidently “James and the brethren” were not at this meeting, probably meeting elsewhere. There was no place where all the thousands of disciples in Jerusalem could meet. This gathering in the house of Mary may have been of women only or a meeting of the Hellenists. It is plain that this James the Lord‘s brother, is now the leading presbyter or elder in Jerusalem though there were a number (Acts 11:30; Acts 21:18). Paul even terms him apostle (Galatians 1:19), though certainly not one of the twelve. The twelve apostles probably were engaged elsewhere in mission work save James now dead (Acts 12:2) and Peter. The leadership of James is here recognized by Peter and is due, partly to the absence of the twelve, but mainly to his own force of character. He will preside over the Jerusalem Conference (Acts 15:13). To another place (eis heteron topon). Probably Luke did not know the place and certainly it was prudent for Peter to conceal it from Herod Agrippa. Probably Peter left the city. He is back in Jerusalem at the Conference a few years later (Acts 15:7) and after the death of Herod Agrippa. Whether Peter went to Rome during these years we do not know. He was recognized later as the apostle to the circumcision (Galatians 2:7; 1 Peter 1:1) and apparently was in Rome with John Mark when he wrote the First Epistle (1 Peter 5:13), unless it is the real Babylon. But, even if Peter went to Rome during this early period, there is no evidence that he founded the church there. If he had done so, in the light of 2 Corinthians 10:16 it would be strange that Paul had not mentioned it in writing to Rome, for he was anxious not to build on another man‘s foundation (Romans 15:20). Paul felt sure that he himself had a work to do in Rome. Unfortunately Luke has not followed the ministry of Peter after this period as he does Paul (appearing again only in chapter Acts 15). If Peter really left Jerusalem at this time instead of hiding in the city, he probably did some mission work as Paul says that he did (1 Corinthians 9:5). [source]
First aorist active participle of kataseiō old verb to signal or shake down with the hand (instrumental case cheiri). In the N.T. only in Acts 12:17; Acts 13:16; Acts 19:33; Acts 21:40. The speaker indicates by a downward movement of the hand his desire for silence (to hold their peace, sigāin present active infinitive, to keep silent). Peter was anxious for every precaution and he wanted their instant attention. Declared (diēgēsato). First aorist middle of diēgeomai old verb to carry through a narrative, give a full story. See also Acts 9:27 of Barnabas in his defence of Saul. Peter told them the wonderful story. Unto James and the brethren Dative case after apaggeilate (first aorist active imperative). Evidently “James and the brethren” were not at this meeting, probably meeting elsewhere. There was no place where all the thousands of disciples in Jerusalem could meet. This gathering in the house of Mary may have been of women only or a meeting of the Hellenists. It is plain that this James the Lord‘s brother, is now the leading presbyter or elder in Jerusalem though there were a number (Acts 11:30; Acts 21:18). Paul even terms him apostle (Galatians 1:19), though certainly not one of the twelve. The twelve apostles probably were engaged elsewhere in mission work save James now dead (Acts 12:2) and Peter. The leadership of James is here recognized by Peter and is due, partly to the absence of the twelve, but mainly to his own force of character. He will preside over the Jerusalem Conference (Acts 15:13). To another place (eis heteron topon). Probably Luke did not know the place and certainly it was prudent for Peter to conceal it from Herod Agrippa. Probably Peter left the city. He is back in Jerusalem at the Conference a few years later (Acts 15:7) and after the death of Herod Agrippa. Whether Peter went to Rome during these years we do not know. He was recognized later as the apostle to the circumcision (Galatians 2:7; 1 Peter 1:1) and apparently was in Rome with John Mark when he wrote the First Epistle (1 Peter 5:13), unless it is the real Babylon. But, even if Peter went to Rome during this early period, there is no evidence that he founded the church there. If he had done so, in the light of 2 Corinthians 10:16 it would be strange that Paul had not mentioned it in writing to Rome, for he was anxious not to build on another man‘s foundation (Romans 15:20). Paul felt sure that he himself had a work to do in Rome. Unfortunately Luke has not followed the ministry of Peter after this period as he does Paul (appearing again only in chapter Acts 15). If Peter really left Jerusalem at this time instead of hiding in the city, he probably did some mission work as Paul says that he did (1 Corinthians 9:5). [source]
Locative case of time with εις Νεαν Πολιν hēmerāi (day) to be supplied (Acts 7:26; Acts 20:15; Acts 21:18; Acts 23:11). With adverse winds it took five days to make the run of 125 miles (Acts 20:6). To Neapolis (eis Nean Polin). To New Town (Newton, Naples, Neapolis). The port of Philippi ten miles distant, Thracian, but reckoned as Macedonian after Vespasian. [source]
Dative case after apaggeilate (first aorist active imperative). Evidently “James and the brethren” were not at this meeting, probably meeting elsewhere. There was no place where all the thousands of disciples in Jerusalem could meet. This gathering in the house of Mary may have been of women only or a meeting of the Hellenists. It is plain that this James the Lord‘s brother, is now the leading presbyter or elder in Jerusalem though there were a number (Acts 11:30; Acts 21:18). Paul even terms him apostle (Galatians 1:19), though certainly not one of the twelve. The twelve apostles probably were engaged elsewhere in mission work save James now dead (Acts 12:2) and Peter. The leadership of James is here recognized by Peter and is due, partly to the absence of the twelve, but mainly to his own force of character. He will preside over the Jerusalem Conference (Acts 15:13). To another place (eis heteron topon). Probably Luke did not know the place and certainly it was prudent for Peter to conceal it from Herod Agrippa. Probably Peter left the city. He is back in Jerusalem at the Conference a few years later (Acts 15:7) and after the death of Herod Agrippa. Whether Peter went to Rome during these years we do not know. He was recognized later as the apostle to the circumcision (Galatians 2:7; 1 Peter 1:1) and apparently was in Rome with John Mark when he wrote the First Epistle (1 Peter 5:13), unless it is the real Babylon. But, even if Peter went to Rome during this early period, there is no evidence that he founded the church there. If he had done so, in the light of 2 Corinthians 10:16 it would be strange that Paul had not mentioned it in writing to Rome, for he was anxious not to build on another man‘s foundation (Romans 15:20). Paul felt sure that he himself had a work to do in Rome. Unfortunately Luke has not followed the ministry of Peter after this period as he does Paul (appearing again only in chapter Acts 15). If Peter really left Jerusalem at this time instead of hiding in the city, he probably did some mission work as Paul says that he did (1 Corinthians 9:5). [source]
First aorist active indicative of compound verb ευτυδρομεω euthudromeō (in Philo) from adjective ευτυδρομος euthudromos (in Strabo), running a straight course In the N.T. only here and Acts 21:1. It is a nautical term for sailing before the wind. Luke has a true feeling for the sea. To Samothrace (τηι επιουσηι eis Samothrāikēn). A small island in the Aegean about halfway between Troas and Neapolis. The day following Locative case of time with εις Νεαν Πολιν hēmerāi (day) to be supplied (Acts 7:26; Acts 20:15; Acts 21:18; Acts 23:11). With adverse winds it took five days to make the run of 125 miles (Acts 20:6). To Neapolis (eis Nean Polin). To New Town (Newton, Naples, Neapolis). The port of Philippi ten miles distant, Thracian, but reckoned as Macedonian after Vespasian. [source]
Imperfect active of εισειμι eiseimi old classic verb used only four times in the N.T. (Acts 3:3; Acts 21:18, Acts 21:26; Hebrews 9:6), a mark of the literary style rather than the colloquial Koiné{[28928]}š use of εισερχομαι eiserchomai Together with us to James So then Luke is present. The next use of “we” is in Acts 27:1 when they leave Caesarea for Rome, but it is not likely that Luke was away from Paul in Jerusalem and Caesarea. The reports of what was done and said in both places is so full and minute that it seems reasonable that Luke got first hand information here whatever his motive was for so full an account of these legal proceedings to be discussed later. There are many details that read like an eye witness‘s story (Acts 21:30, Acts 21:35, Acts 21:40; Acts 22:2, Acts 22:3; Acts 23:12, etc.). It was probably the house of James And all the elders were present (παντες τε παρεγενοντο οι πρεσβυτεροι pantes te paregenonto hoi presbuteroi). Clearly James is the leading elder and the others are his guests in a formal reception to Paul. It is noticeable that the apostles are not mentioned, though both elders and apostles are named at the Conference in Acts chapter 15. It would seem that the apostles are away on preaching tours. The whole church was not called together probably because of the known prejudice against Paul created by the Judaizers. [source]
One of the phrases in Acts 20:15 for the coming day. Locative case of time. Purifying himself with them (συν αυτοις αγνιστεις sun autois hagnistheis first aorist passive participle of αγνιζω hagnizō). The precise language again of the recommendation in Acts 21:24. Paul was conforming to the letter. Went into the temple Imperfect active of εισειμι eiseimi as in Acts 21:18 which see. Went on into the temple, descriptive imperfect. Paul joined the four men in their vow of separation. Declaring (διαγγελλων diaggellōn). To the priests what day he would report the fulfilment of the vow. The priests would desire notice of the sacrifice. This verb only used by Luke in N.T. except Romans 11:17 (quotation from the lxx). It is not necessary to assume that the vows of each of the five expired on the same day (Rackham). Until the offering was offered for every one of them This use of εως ου heōs hou (like εως heōs alone) with the first aorist passive indicative προσηνεχτη prosēnechthē of προσπερω prospherō to offer, contemplates the final result (Robertson, Grammar, pp. 974f.) and is probably the statement of Luke added to Paul‘s announcement. He probably went into the temple one day for each of the brethren and one for himself. The question arises whether Paul acted wisely or unwisely in agreeing to the suggestion of James. What he did was in perfect harmony with his principle of accommodation in 1 Corinthians 9:20 when no principle was involved. It is charged that here on this occasion Paul was unduly influenced by considerations of expediency and was willing for the Jewish Christians to believe him more of a Jew than was true in order to placate the situation in Jerusalem. Furneaux calls it a compromise and a failure. I do not so see it. To say that is to obscure the whole complex situation. What Paul did was not for the purpose of conciliating his opponents, the Judaizers, who had diligently spread falsehoods about him in Jerusalem as in Corinth. It was solely to break the power of these “false apostles” over the thousands in Jerusalem who have been deluded by Paul‘s accusers. So far as the evidence goes that thing was accomplished. In the trouble that comes in Jerusalem and Caesarea the Judaizers cut no figure at all. The Jewish Christians do not appear in Paul‘s behalf, but there was no opportunity for them to do so. The explosion that came on the last day of Paul‘s appearance in the temple was wholly disconnected from his offerings for the four brethren and himself. It must be remembered that Paul had many kinds of enemies. The attack on him by these Jews from Asia had no connexion whatever with the slanders of the Judaizers about Paul‘s alleged teachings that Jewish Christians in the dispersion should depart from the Mosaic law. That slander was put to rest forever by his following the advice of James and justifies the wisdom of that advice and Paul‘s conduct about it. [source]
Imperfect active of εισειμι eiseimi as in Acts 21:18 which see. Went on into the temple, descriptive imperfect. Paul joined the four men in their vow of separation. Declaring (διαγγελλων diaggellōn). To the priests what day he would report the fulfilment of the vow. The priests would desire notice of the sacrifice. This verb only used by Luke in N.T. except Romans 11:17 (quotation from the lxx). It is not necessary to assume that the vows of each of the five expired on the same day (Rackham). Until the offering was offered for every one of them This use of εως ου heōs hou (like εως heōs alone) with the first aorist passive indicative προσηνεχτη prosēnechthē of προσπερω prospherō to offer, contemplates the final result (Robertson, Grammar, pp. 974f.) and is probably the statement of Luke added to Paul‘s announcement. He probably went into the temple one day for each of the brethren and one for himself. The question arises whether Paul acted wisely or unwisely in agreeing to the suggestion of James. What he did was in perfect harmony with his principle of accommodation in 1 Corinthians 9:20 when no principle was involved. It is charged that here on this occasion Paul was unduly influenced by considerations of expediency and was willing for the Jewish Christians to believe him more of a Jew than was true in order to placate the situation in Jerusalem. Furneaux calls it a compromise and a failure. I do not so see it. To say that is to obscure the whole complex situation. What Paul did was not for the purpose of conciliating his opponents, the Judaizers, who had diligently spread falsehoods about him in Jerusalem as in Corinth. It was solely to break the power of these “false apostles” over the thousands in Jerusalem who have been deluded by Paul‘s accusers. So far as the evidence goes that thing was accomplished. In the trouble that comes in Jerusalem and Caesarea the Judaizers cut no figure at all. The Jewish Christians do not appear in Paul‘s behalf, but there was no opportunity for them to do so. The explosion that came on the last day of Paul‘s appearance in the temple was wholly disconnected from his offerings for the four brethren and himself. It must be remembered that Paul had many kinds of enemies. The attack on him by these Jews from Asia had no connexion whatever with the slanders of the Judaizers about Paul‘s alleged teachings that Jewish Christians in the dispersion should depart from the Mosaic law. That slander was put to rest forever by his following the advice of James and justifies the wisdom of that advice and Paul‘s conduct about it. [source]
Jesus. Paul never needed Jesus more than now. On a previous occasion the whole church prayed for Peter‘s release (Acts 12:5), but Paul clearly had no such grip on the church as that, though he had been kindly welcomed (Acts 21:18). In every crisis Jesus appears to him (cf. Acts 18:9). It looked dark for Paul till Jesus spoke. Once before in Jerusalem Jesus spoke words of cheer (Acts 22:18). Then he was told to leave Jerusalem. Now he is to have “cheer” or “courage” Jesus used this very word to others (Matthew 9:2, Matthew 9:22; Mark 10:49). It is a brave word. Thou hast testified (διεμαρτυρω diemarturō). First aorist middle indicative second person singular of διαμαρτυρομαι diamarturomai strong word (See note on Acts 22:18). Must thou That is the needed word and on this Paul leans. His hopes (Acts 19:21) of going to Rome will not be in vain. He can bide Christ‘s time now. And Jesus has approved his witness in Jerusalem. [source]
Genitive absolute with the perfect passive participle of κατασκευαζω kataskeuazō for which verb see Hebrews 9:2. A mere summary has been made of the furniture. Go in Present active indicative of εισειμι eiseimi to go in, old verb, in N.T. only here, Acts 3:3; Acts 21:18, Acts 21:26. Accomplishing Present active participle of επιτελεω epiteleō for which see Hebrews 8:5. [source]
First aorist (ingressive) middle imperative of προσκαλεω proskaleō Note change of tense (aorist) and middle (indirect) voice. Care for the sick is urged in 1 Thessalonians 5:14 (“help the sick”). Note the plural here, “elders of the church,” as in Acts 20:17; Acts 15:6, Acts 15:22; Acts 21:18; Philemon 1:1 (bishops).Let them pray over him (προσευχαστωσαν επ αυτον proseuxasthōsan ep' auton). First aorist middle imperative of προσευχομαι proseuchomai Prayer for the sick is clearly enjoined.Anointing him with oil First aorist active participle of αλειπω aleiphō old verb, to anoint, and the instrumental case of ελαιον elaion (oil). The aorist participle can be either simultaneous or antecedent with προσευχαστωσαν proseuxasthōsan (pray). See the same use of αλειπω ελαιωι aleiphō elaiōi in Mark 6:13. The use of olive oil was one of the best remedial agencies known to the ancients. They used it internally and externally. Some physicians prescribe it today. It is clear both in Mark 6:13 and here that medicinal value is attached to the use of the oil and emphasis is placed on the worth of prayer. There is nothing here of the pagan magic or of the later practice of “extreme unction” (after the eighth century). It is by no means certain that αλειπω aleiphō here and in Mark 6:13 means “anoint” in a ceremonial fashion rather than “rub” as it commonly does in medical treatises. Trench (N.T. Synonyms) says: “Αλειπειν Aleiphein is the mundane and profane, χριειν chriein the sacred and religious, word.” At bottom in James we have God and medicine, God and the doctor, and that is precisely where we are today. The best physicians believe in God and want the help of prayer. [source]