KJV: And I fell unto the ground, and heard a voice saying unto me, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?
YLT: I fell also to the ground, and I heard a voice saying to me, Saul, Saul, why me dost thou persecute?
Darby: And I fell to the ground, and heard a voice saying to me, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?
ASV: And I fell unto the ground, and heard a voice saying unto me, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?
| ἔπεσά | I fell |
|
Parse: Verb, Aorist Indicative Active, 1st Person Singular Root: πίπτω Sense: to descend from a higher place to a lower. |
|
| ἔδαφος | ground |
|
Parse: Noun, Accusative Neuter Singular Root: ἔδαφος Sense: bottom, base, ground. |
|
| ἤκουσα | heard |
|
Parse: Verb, Aorist Indicative Active, 1st Person Singular Root: ἀκουστός Sense: to be endowed with the faculty of hearing, not deaf. |
|
| φωνῆς | a voice |
|
Parse: Noun, Genitive Feminine Singular Root: φωνή Sense: a sound, a tone. |
|
| λεγούσης | saying |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Participle Active, Genitive Feminine Singular Root: λέγω Sense: to say, to speak. |
|
| μοι | to me |
|
Parse: Personal / Possessive Pronoun, Dative 1st Person Singular Root: ἐγώ Sense: I, me, my. |
|
| Σαοὺλ | Saul |
|
Parse: Noun, Vocative Masculine Singular Root: Σαούλ Sense: the Jewish name of the apostle Paul. |
|
| Σαούλ | Saul |
|
Parse: Noun, Vocative Masculine Singular Root: Σαούλ Sense: the Jewish name of the apostle Paul. |
|
| τί | why |
|
Parse: Interrogative / Indefinite Pronoun, Accusative Neuter Singular Root: τίς Sense: who, which, what. |
|
| με | Me |
|
Parse: Personal / Possessive Pronoun, Accusative 1st Person Singular Root: ἐγώ Sense: I, me, my. |
|
| διώκεις | persecute you |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Indicative Active, 2nd Person Singular Root: διώκω Sense: to make to run or flee, put to flight, drive away. |
|
Greek Commentary for Acts 22:7
Second aorist active indicative with α ̇a rather than επεσον epeson the usual form of πιπτω piptō [source]
Old word, here alone in N.T. So the verb εδαπιζω edaphizō is in Luke 19:44 alone in the N.T. A voice saying (πωνης λεγουσης phōnēs legousēs). Genitive after ηκουσα ēkousa though in Acts 26:14 the accusative is used after ηκουσα ēkousa as in Acts 22:14 after ακουσαι akousai either being allowable. See note on Acts 9:7 for discussion of the difference in case. Saul‘s name repeated each time (Acts 9:4; Acts 22:7; Acts 26:14). Same question also in each report: “Why persecuted thou me?” (Τι με διωκεισ Ti me diōkeiṡ). These piercing words stuck in Paul‘s mind. [source]
Genitive after ηκουσα ēkousa though in Acts 26:14 the accusative is used after ηκουσα ēkousa as in Acts 22:14 after ακουσαι akousai either being allowable. See note on Acts 9:7 for discussion of the difference in case. Saul‘s name repeated each time (Acts 9:4; Acts 22:7; Acts 26:14). Same question also in each report: “Why persecuted thou me?” These piercing words stuck in Paul‘s mind. [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for Acts 22:7
Attic future of εδαπιζω edaphizō to beat level, to raze to the ground, a rare verb from εδαπος edaphos bottom, base, ground (Acts 22:7), here alone in the N.T. [source]
By this remarkably brief phrase Luke presents this epoch in the life of Saul Paul. The “also” Jerome held that the name of Sergius Paulus was adopted by Saul because of his conversion at this time, but this is a wholly unlikely explanation, “an element of vulgarity impossible to St. Paul “ (Farrar). Augustine thought that the meaning of the Latin paulus (little) would incline Saul to adopt, “but as a proper name the word rather suggested the glories of the Aemilian family, and even to us recalls the name of another Paulus, who was ‹lavish of his noble life‘” (Page). Among the Jews the name Saul was naturally used up to this point, but from now on Luke employs Paul save when there is a reference to his previous life (Acts 22:7; Acts 26:14). His real career is work among the Gentiles and Paul is the name used by them. There is a striking similarity in sound between the Hebrew Saul and the Roman Paul. Paul was proud of his tribe of Benjamin and so of King Saul (Philemon 3:5). [source]
The second aorist active infinitive is the subject of εδει edei with τον Χριστον ton Christon the accusative of general reference. This is Paul‘s major premise in his argument from the Scriptures about the Messiah, the necessity of his sufferings according to the Scriptures, the very argument made by the Risen Jesus to the two on the way to Emmaus (Luke 24:25-27). The fifty-third chapter of Isaiah was a passage in point that the rabbis had overlooked. Peter made the same point in Acts 3:18 and Paul again in Acts 26:23. The minor premise is the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. To rise again from the dead (αναστηναι εκ νεκρων anastēnai ek nekrōn). This second aorist active infinitive αναστηναι anastēnai is also the subject of εδει edei The actual resurrection of Jesus was also a necessity as Paul says he preached to them (1 Thessalonians 4:14) and argued always from Scripture (1 Corinthians 15:3-4) and from his own experience (Acts 9:22; Acts 22:7; Acts 26:8, Acts 26:14; 1 Corinthians 15:8). This Jesus is the Christ More precisely, “This is the Messiah, viz., Jesus whom I am proclaiming unto you.” This is the conclusion of Paul‘s line of argument and it is logical and overwhelming. It is his method everywhere as in Damascus, in Antioch in Pisidia, here, in Corinth. He spoke as an eye-witness. [source]
This second aorist active infinitive αναστηναι anastēnai is also the subject of εδει edei The actual resurrection of Jesus was also a necessity as Paul says he preached to them (1 Thessalonians 4:14) and argued always from Scripture (1 Corinthians 15:3-4) and from his own experience (Acts 9:22; Acts 22:7; Acts 26:8, Acts 26:14; 1 Corinthians 15:8). [source]
Old word, here alone in N.T. So the verb εδαπιζω edaphizō is in Luke 19:44 alone in the N.T. A voice saying (πωνης λεγουσης phōnēs legousēs). Genitive after ηκουσα ēkousa though in Acts 26:14 the accusative is used after ηκουσα ēkousa as in Acts 22:14 after ακουσαι akousai either being allowable. See note on Acts 9:7 for discussion of the difference in case. Saul‘s name repeated each time (Acts 9:4; Acts 22:7; Acts 26:14). Same question also in each report: “Why persecuted thou me?” (Τι με διωκεισ Ti me diōkeiṡ). These piercing words stuck in Paul‘s mind. [source]
Genitive after ηκουσα ēkousa though in Acts 26:14 the accusative is used after ηκουσα ēkousa as in Acts 22:14 after ακουσαι akousai either being allowable. See note on Acts 9:7 for discussion of the difference in case. Saul‘s name repeated each time (Acts 9:4; Acts 22:7; Acts 26:14). Same question also in each report: “Why persecuted thou me?” These piercing words stuck in Paul‘s mind. [source]
Second aorist active participle. So in Acts 22:7 Paul says: “I fell unto the ground” But here in Acts 9:7 ”the men that journeyed with him stood speechless” But surely the points of time are different. In Acts 26:14 Paul refers to the first appearance of the vision when all fell to the earth. Here in Acts 9:7 Luke refers to what occurred after the vision when both Saul and the men had risen from the ground. [source]
The accusative here may be used rather than the genitive as in Acts 22:7 to indicate that those with Paul did not understand what they heard (Acts 9:7) just as they beheld the light (Acts 22:9), but did not see Jesus (Acts 9:7). The difference in cases allows this distinction, though it is not always observed as just noticed about Acts 22:14; Acts 26:14. The verb ακουω akouō is used in the sense of understand (Mark 4:33; 1 Corinthians 14:2). It is one of the evidences of the genuineness of this report of Paul‘s speech that Luke did not try to smooth out apparent discrepancies in details between the words of Paul and his own record already in ch. 9. The Textus Receptus adds in this verse: “And they became afraid” Clearly not genuine. [source]
The Hebrew form occurs also in Acts 22:7; Acts 26:14 where it is expressly stated that the voice was in the Hebrew (Aramaic) tongue as also in Acts 9:17 (Ananias). Deissmann (Bible Studies, p. 316) terms this use of με Saoul “the historian‘s sense of liturgical rhythm.” For the repetition of names by Jesus note Luke 10:41 (Martha, Martha), Luke 22:31 (Simon, Simon). Me (me). In persecuting the disciples, Saul was persecuting Jesus, as the words of Jesus in Acts 9:5 made plain. Christ had already spoken of the mystic union between himself and his followers (Matthew 10:40; Matthew 25:40, Matthew 25:45; John 15:1-5). The proverb (Pindar) that Jesus quotes to Saul about kicking against the goad is genuine in Acts 26:14, but not here. [source]
Mute. Only here in N.T., though old word. Hearing the voice, but beholding no man (ακουοντες μεν της πωνησ μηδενα δε τεωρουντες akouontes men tēs phōnēsμεν δε mēdena de theōrountes). Two present active participles in contrast (το μεν πως ετεασαντο menτην δε πωνην ουκ ηκουσαν του λαλουντος μοι de). In Acts 22:9 Paul says that the men “beheld the light” (πωνη to men phōs etheasanto), but evidently did not discern the person. Paul also says there, “but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me” (ακουω tēn de phōnēn ouk ēkousan tou lalountos moi). Instead of this being a flat contradiction of what Luke says in Acts 9:7 it is natural to take it as being likewise (as with the “light” and “no one”) a distinction between the “sound” (original sense of πωνη phōnē as in John 3:8) and the separate words spoken. It so happens that ακουω akouō is used either with the accusative (the extent of the hearing) or the genitive (the specifying). It is possible that such a distinction here coincides with the two senses of πωνην phōnē They heard the sound (Acts 9:7), but did not understand the words (Acts 22:9). However, this distinction in case with ηκουσεν πωνην akouō though possible and even probable here, is by no means a necessary one for in John 3:8 where ηκουσα πωνης phōnēn undoubtedly means “sound” the accusative occurs as Luke uses ηκουσα πωνην ēkousen phōnēn about Saul in Acts 9:4. Besides in Acts 22:7 Paul uses ēkousa phōnēs about himself, but ēkousa phōnēn about himself in Acts 26:14, interchangeably. [source]
Two present active participles in contrast In Acts 22:9 Paul says that the men “beheld the light” Instead of this being a flat contradiction of what Luke says in Acts 9:7 it is natural to take it as being likewise (as with the “light” and “no one”) a distinction between the “sound” (original sense of πωνη phōnē as in John 3:8) and the separate words spoken. It so happens that ακουω akouō is used either with the accusative (the extent of the hearing) or the genitive (the specifying). It is possible that such a distinction here coincides with the two senses of πωνην phōnē They heard the sound (Acts 9:7), but did not understand the words (Acts 22:9). However, this distinction in case with ηκουσεν πωνην akouō though possible and even probable here, is by no means a necessary one for in John 3:8 where ηκουσα πωνης phōnēn undoubtedly means “sound” the accusative occurs as Luke uses ηκουσα πωνην ēkousen phōnēn about Saul in Acts 9:4. Besides in Acts 22:7 Paul uses ēkousa phōnēs about himself, but ēkousa phōnēn about himself in Acts 26:14, interchangeably. [source]
The call to be an apostle came to Paul through Jesus Christ as he claimed in 1 Corinthians 9:1 and as told in Acts 9:4-6; Acts 22:7.; Acts 26:16. He is apostle also by the will of God. Who raised him from the dead (του εγειραντος αυτον εκ νεκρων tou egeirantos auton ek nekrōn). And therefore Paul was qualified to be an apostle since he had seen the Risen Christ (1 Corinthians 9:1; 1 Corinthians 15:8.). This verb εγειρω egeirō is often used in N.T. for raising from the sleep of death, to wake up the dead. [source]
Concessive participle agreeing with με me Blasphemer (βλασπημον blasphēmon). Old word either from βλαχ blax (stupid) and πημη phēmē speech, or from βλαπτω blaptō to injure. Rare in N.T. but Paul uses βλασπημεω blasphēmeō to blaspheme in Romans 2:24. Persecutor So far found only here. Probably made by Paul from διωκω diōkō which he knew well enough (Acts 22:4, Acts 22:7; Acts 26:14.; Galatians 1:13, Galatians 1:23; Philemon 3:6; 2 Timothy 3:12). Injurious (υβριστην hubristēn). Substantive, not adjective, “an insolent man.” Old word from υβριζω hubrizō in N.T. only here and Romans 1:30. I obtained mercy First aorist passive indicative of ελεεω eleeō old verb. See 2 Corinthians 4:1; Romans 11:30. Ignorantly (αγνοων agnoōn). Present active participle of αγνοεω agnoeō “not knowing.” Old verb (Romans 2:4). In a blindness of heart. In unbelief See Romans 11:20, Romans 11:25. [source]
So far found only here. Probably made by Paul from διωκω diōkō which he knew well enough (Acts 22:4, Acts 22:7; Acts 26:14.; Galatians 1:13, Galatians 1:23; Philemon 3:6; 2 Timothy 3:12). Injurious (υβριστην hubristēn). Substantive, not adjective, “an insolent man.” Old word from υβριζω hubrizō in N.T. only here and Romans 1:30. I obtained mercy First aorist passive indicative of ελεεω eleeō old verb. See 2 Corinthians 4:1; Romans 11:30. Ignorantly (αγνοων agnoōn). Present active participle of αγνοεω agnoeō “not knowing.” Old verb (Romans 2:4). In a blindness of heart. In unbelief See Romans 11:20, Romans 11:25. [source]