KJV: Except it be for this one voice, that I cried standing among them, Touching the resurrection of the dead I am called in question by you this day.
YLT: except concerning this one voice, in which I cried, standing among them -- Concerning a rising again of the dead I am judged to-day by you.'
Darby: other than concerning this one voice which I cried standing amongst them: I am judged this day by you touching the resurrection of the dead.
ASV: except it be for this one voice, that I cried standing among them, Touching the resurrection of the dead I am called in question before you this day.
| ἢ | [other] than |
|
Parse: Conjunction Root: ἤ Sense: either, or, than. |
|
| περὶ | concerning |
|
Parse: Preposition Root: περί Sense: about, concerning, on account of, because of, around, near. |
|
| μιᾶς | one |
|
Parse: Adjective, Genitive Feminine Singular Root: εἷς Sense: one. |
|
| ταύτης | this |
|
Parse: Demonstrative Pronoun, Genitive Feminine Singular Root: οὗτος Sense: this. |
|
| φωνῆς | voice |
|
Parse: Noun, Genitive Feminine Singular Root: φωνή Sense: a sound, a tone. |
|
| ἐκέκραξα | I cried out |
|
Parse: Verb, Aorist Indicative Active, 1st Person Singular Root: κράζω Sense: to croak. |
|
| ἑστὼς | standing |
|
Parse: Verb, Perfect Participle Active, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: ἵστημι Sense: to cause or make to stand, to place, put, set. |
|
| ὅτι | - |
|
Parse: Conjunction Root: ὅτι Sense: that, because, since. |
|
| ἀναστάσεως | [the] resurrection |
|
Parse: Noun, Genitive Feminine Singular Root: ἀνάστασις Sense: a raising up, rising (e. |
|
| νεκρῶν | of [the] dead |
|
Parse: Adjective, Genitive Masculine Plural Root: νεκρός Sense: properly. |
|
| κρίνομαι | am judged |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Indicative Middle or Passive, 1st Person Singular Root: κρίνω Sense: to separate, put asunder, to pick out, select, choose. |
|
| σήμερον | this day |
|
Parse: Adverb Root: σήμερον Sense: this (very) day). |
|
Greek Commentary for Acts 24:21
Literally, “than,” but after interrogative τι τι αλλο tōi ̂ tōi allo “what else than.” [source]
The normal Greek idiom with the attributive use of ουτος houtos calls for the article before μιας mias though some inscriptions show it as here (Robertson, Grammar, p. 702). That Genitive of the relative attracted to the case of the antecedent εκεκραχα phōnēs I cried (περι ekekraxa). Reduplicated aorist as is usual with this verb in the lxx (Judges 3:15). Robertson, Grammar, p. 348. -DIVIDER- Touching (κρινομαι peri). Concerning (around, about). I am called in question (επ υμων krinomai). As in Acts 23:6. -DIVIDER- Before you (eph' humōn). Same idiom as in Acts 24:19, Acts 24:20. [source]
Genitive of the relative attracted to the case of the antecedent εκεκραχα phōnēs I cried (περι ekekraxa). Reduplicated aorist as is usual with this verb in the lxx (Judges 3:15). Robertson, Grammar, p. 348. -DIVIDER- Touching (κρινομαι peri). Concerning (around, about). I am called in question (επ υμων krinomai). As in Acts 23:6. -DIVIDER- Before you (eph' humōn). Same idiom as in Acts 24:19, Acts 24:20. [source]
[source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for Acts 24:21
A neat Greek idiom difficult to render smoothly into English: “Not after many days these.” The litotes (not many=few) is common in Luke (Luke 7:6; Luke 15:13; Acts 17:27; Acts 19:11; Acts 20:12; Acts 21:39; Acts 28:14; Acts 28:2). The predicate use of ταυτας tautas (without article) is to be noted. “These” really means as a starting point, “from these” (Robertson, Grammar, p. 702). It was ten days hence. This idiom occurs several times in Luke (Luke 24:21; Acts 24:21), as elsewhere (John 4:18; 2 Peter 3:1). In Luke 2:12 the copula is easily supplied as it exists in Luke 1:36; Luke 2:2. [source]
Perceiving (second aorist ingressive of γινωσκω ginōskō). Paul quickly saw that his cause was ruined before the Sanhedrin by his unwitting attack on the high priest. It was impossible to get a fair hearing. Hence, Vincent says, “Paul, with great tact, seeks to bring the two parties of the council into collision with each other.” So Alford argues with the motto “divide and conquer.” Farrar condemns Paul and takes Acts 24:21 as a confession of error here, but that is reading into Paul‘s word about the resurrection more than he says. Page considers Luke‘s report meagre and unsatisfactory. Rackham thinks that the trial was already started and that Paul repeated part of his speech of the day before when “the Sadducees received his words with ostentatious scepticism and ridicule: this provoked counter-expressions of sympathy and credulity among the Pharisees.” But all this is inference. We do not have to adopt the Jesuitical principle that the end justifies the means in order to see shrewdness and hard sense in what Paul said and did. Paul knew, of course, that the Sanhedrin was nearly evenly divided between Pharisees and Sadducees, for he himself had been a Pharisee. [source]
This was strictly true as we know from his Epistles (Philemon 3:5). Touching the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question (περι ελπιδος και αναστασεως νεκρων κρινομαι peri elpidos kai anastaseōs nekrōn krinomai). This was true also and this is the point that Paul mentions in Acts 24:21. His failure to mention again the fact that he was a Pharisee throws no discredit on Luke‘s report here. The chief point of difference between Pharisees and Sadducees was precisely this matter of the resurrection. And this was Paul‘s cardinal doctrine as a Christian minister. It was this fact that convinced him that Jesus was the Messiah and was “the very centre of his faith” (Page) and of his preaching. It was not a mere trick for Paul to proclaim this fact here and so divide the Sanhedrin. As a matter of fact, the Pharisees held aloof when the Sadducees persecuted Peter and the other apostles for preaching resurrection in the case of Jesus and even Gamaliel threw cold water on the effort to punish them for it (Acts 5:34-39). So then Paul was really recurring to the original cleavage on this point and was able to score a point against the Sadducees as Gamaliel, his great teacher, had done before him. Besides, “Paul and Pharisaism seem to us such opposite ideas that we often forget that to Paul Christianity was the natural development of Judaism” (Page). Paul shows this in Galatians 3; Romans 9-11. [source]
This was true also and this is the point that Paul mentions in Acts 24:21. His failure to mention again the fact that he was a Pharisee throws no discredit on Luke‘s report here. The chief point of difference between Pharisees and Sadducees was precisely this matter of the resurrection. And this was Paul‘s cardinal doctrine as a Christian minister. It was this fact that convinced him that Jesus was the Messiah and was “the very centre of his faith” (Page) and of his preaching. It was not a mere trick for Paul to proclaim this fact here and so divide the Sanhedrin. As a matter of fact, the Pharisees held aloof when the Sadducees persecuted Peter and the other apostles for preaching resurrection in the case of Jesus and even Gamaliel threw cold water on the effort to punish them for it (Acts 5:34-39). So then Paul was really recurring to the original cleavage on this point and was able to score a point against the Sadducees as Gamaliel, his great teacher, had done before him. Besides, “Paul and Pharisaism seem to us such opposite ideas that we often forget that to Paul Christianity was the natural development of Judaism” (Page). Paul shows this in Galatians 3; Romans 9-11. [source]
First aorist active participle of παραγγελλω paraggellō with which compare ματων mathōn above (Acts 23:27), not subsequent action. Dative case in κατηγοροις katēgorois Before thee (επι σου epi sou). Common idiom for “in the presence of” when before a judge (like Latin apud) as in Acts 24:20, Acts 24:21; Acts 25:26; Acts 26:2. What happened to the forty conspirators we have no way of knowing. Neither they nor the Jews from Asia are heard of more during the long five years of Paul‘s imprisonment in Caesarea and Rome. [source]
Common idiom for “in the presence of” when before a judge (like Latin apud) as in Acts 24:20, Acts 24:21; Acts 25:26; Acts 26:2. What happened to the forty conspirators we have no way of knowing. Neither they nor the Jews from Asia are heard of more during the long five years of Paul‘s imprisonment in Caesarea and Rome. [source]
Same use of επι epi with the genitive as in Acts 23:30; Acts 24:19, Acts 24:21. Festus, seeing that it was unjust to condemn Paul and yet disadvantageous to absolve him (Blass), now makes the very proposal to Paul that the rulers had made to him in Jerusalem (Acts 25:3). He added the words “επ εμου ep' emou ” (before me) as if to insure Paul of justice. If Festus was unwilling to give Paul justice in Caesarea where his regular court held forth, what assurance was there that Festus would give it to him at Jerusalem in the atmosphere of intense hostility to Paul? Only two years ago the mob, the Sanhedrin, the forty conspirators had tried to take his life in Jerusalem. Festus had no more courage to do right than Felix, however plausible his language might sound. Festus also, while wanting Paul to think that he would in Jerusalem “be judged of these things before me,” in reality probably intended to turn Paul over to the Sanhedrin in order to please the Jews, probably with Festus present also to see that Paul received justice Festus possibly was surprised to find that the charges were chiefly against Jewish law, though one was against Caesar. It was not a mere change of venue that Paul sensed, but the utter unwillingness of Festus to do his duty by him and his willingness to connive at Jewish vengeance on Paul. Paul had faced the mob and the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem, two years of trickery at the hands of Felix in Caesarea, and now he is confronted by the bland chicanery of Festus. It is too much, the last straw. [source]
For this use of καιρος kairos see Mark 11:13; Luke 21:24. By “the dead” John apparently means both good and bad (John 5:25; Acts 24:21), coincident with the resurrection and judgment (Mark 4:29; Revelation 14:15.; Revelation 20:1-15). The infinitive κριτηναι krithēnai is the first aorist passive of κρινω krinō epexegetic use with the preceding clause, as is true also of δουναι dounai (second aorist active infinitive of διδωμι didōmi), to give. [source]
Second aorist active indicative of ερχομαι erchomai the prophetic aorist again. The Dies Irae is conceived as already come.The time of the dead to be judged (ο καιρος των νεκρων κριτηναι ho kairos tōn nekrōn krithēnai). For this use of καιρος kairos see Mark 11:13; Luke 21:24. By “the dead” John apparently means both good and bad (John 5:25; Acts 24:21), coincident with the resurrection and judgment (Mark 4:29; Revelation 14:15.; Revelation 20:1-15). The infinitive κριτηναι krithēnai is the first aorist passive of κρινω krinō epexegetic use with the preceding clause, as is true also of δουναι dounai (second aorist active infinitive of διδωμι didōmi), to give.Their reward This will come in the end of the day (Matthew 20:8), from God (Matthew 6:1), at the Lord‘s return (Revelation 22:12), according to each one‘s work (1 Corinthians 3:8).The small and the great (τους μικρους και τους μεγαλους tous mikrous kai tous megalous). The accusative here is an anacoluthon and fails to agree in case with the preceding datives after δουναι τον μιστον dounai ton misthon though some MSS. have the dative τοις μικροις tois mikrois etc. John is fond of this phrase “the small and the great” (Revelation 13:16; Revelation 19:5, Revelation 19:18; Revelation 20:12).To destroy First aorist active infinitive of διαπτειρω diaphtheirō carrying on the construction with καιρος kairos Note τους διαπτειροντας tous diaphtheirontas “those destroying” the earth (corrupting the earth). There is a double sense in διαπτειρω diaphtheirō that justifies this play on the word. See Revelation 19:2. In 1 Timothy 6:5 we have those “corrupted in mind” God will destroy the destroyers (1 Corinthians 3:16.). [source]