David
Bentley Hart, in his translation of Acts 13:48, as “And hearing this the
gentiles were elated and gave glory to the Lord’s word, and as many as were
disposed to the life of the Age had faith.” With respect to his translation
choice of “disposed” instead of “elected” or some other like term, and the Calvinistic
abuse of this verse, Hart wrote:
τεταγμενοι. I have to admit that I know practically nothing
about the scriptural arguments current among the various actions of Reformed
tradition. In my translation, however, I inadvertently stumbled across one of
the objects of contention littering the battlefield. It was just lying there
unobtrusively in Acts 13:48: Ἀκούοντα δὲ τὰ ἔθνη ἔχαιρον καὶ ἐδόξαζον τὸν λόγον
τοῦ κυρίου καὶ ἐπίστευσαν ὅσοι ἦσαν τεταγμένοι εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον. I rendered the
verse thus: “And hearing this the gentiles were elated and gave glory to the
Lord’s word, and as many as were disposed to the life of the Age had faith.”
Apparently—at least, so I was informed by an earnest email sent to me by a
Presbyterian minister—those of the Reformed tradition who insist upon a strict
doctrine of predestination attach a great deal of significance to this verse
and are absolutely convinced that the homely participle τεταγμενοι should be rendered at least as “ordained”
and ideally as “predestined.” My correspondent even accused me of intentionally
enfeebling the verb for theological reasons. Actually, all I intentionally did
was translate the word accurately; and, I have to say, one must have a very
small acquaintance with ancient Greek literature in general to imagine that τεταγμενοι could possibly bear the
hermeneutical burden that this stream of Calvinist tradition apparently assigns
it (but, then again, given that Luke’s writings militate so thoroughly against
the predestinarian line, I suppose old-fashioned Calvinists must grasp at
whatever straws they can). True, the verb τασσω does in fact mean “ordain,” in
the now nearly obsolete proper sense of “set in order,” “arrange,” “appoint,”
or “assign to a station”; in matters military, to which it has a common
application, it means something along the lines of arranging soldiers in rank
and file, or assigning them their stations on the battlements; principally, though
the emphasis in the verb is not upon the act of giving commands but only upon
the work of setting things in appropriate order to prepare them for battle or
unexpected aggression. In the passive or middle voice, therefore (and τεταγμενοι could be taken as either), its participial
form has, at most, the force of “arranged,” “ready for,” “prepared for,” “suited
to,” or (again) “disposed to.” It would be absolutely misleading to render the
participle as “predestined,” as the verb has nothing to do with determining any
fixed result. I soon learned that, among representative of the Reformed factions,
those of Arminian leanings expended a great deal of energy arguing that the
participle should be read in the middle voice rather than the passive, and this
is probably correct as far as it goes, both idiomatically and in the context of
Acts. The tale, as one might recall, concerns the second of two sermons
delivered by Paul on successive Sabbaths at the synagogue in Pisidian Antioch:
the first having made so great an impression on both the Jews and the gentile “God-fearers”
of the congregation, Paul and Barnabas were invited to return the next week to
continue their disquisition; but, on the second occasion, the Jewish
congregants rejected Paul’s message as heretical, having turned against it in
the interim, while many of the gentiles were persuaded to accept it. It makes
sense, then, to say that the latter group had “prepared themselves” or “disposed
themselves” (as τεταγμενοι would mean
if read as middle voice) to the life of the Age to come, since they had been
ready since the previous week to be persuaded by Paul and Barnabas. Such a
reading would also fit nicely with verse 46, where Paul tells the Jewish
congregants, “You have passed judgment on yourselves”—or, better perhaps, “proved
yourselves” (κρινετε)—as unworthy
of that life. One could, then, read the whole passage as saying that each of
the two groups had disposed itself for or against the gospel. But, really, it
does not matter whether the participle is read as passive or middle; in either
case, as any survey of the verb’s use in the literature of antiquity would
confirm, it has much the same force: “ready,” “disposed to,” “properly placed.”
To take it as a statement to the effect that God had irresistibly predestined a
certain group of gentiles in Pisidian Antioch for eternal life ante praevisa merita, and to encumber
the text with a doctrine of which it is wholly innocent, is both a philological
and an exegetical catachresis (but, then again, in my confessionally bigoted
soul, I tend to think that true of the Reformed theology of predestination as a
whole). (David Bentley Hart, “Different Idioms, Different
Worlds: Various Notes on Translating the New Testament” in Theological Territories: A David Bentley Hart Digest [Notre Dame,
Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press, 2020], 351-89, here, pp. 359-61)
With respect to τασσω in Greek
literature, here is the entry for τασσω in TDNT:
† τάσσω.
1. τάσσω in Gk. means “to
appoint,” “order,” hence a. “to arrange,” e.g., religious festivals
and their celebration, Plat. Leg., VII, 799a, “to determine,” e.g., the
law-giver “lays down” what is bad or good, Leg., V, 728a, or ὁ
νόμος οὕτω τάττει, La., 199a, the ἄρχοντες command, Leg., VI,
762c, similarly of the Jewish Law, Jos. Ap., 2, 203 f., 206; b. “to appoint,”
officers draw up soldiers for battle, Plat. Ap., 28e, ἀρχὰς
τὰς ἐφʼ ἑκάστοις τεταγμένας are authorities appointed for various tasks,
Aristot. Pol., IV, 14, p. 1298a, 23, officials are τεταγμένοι
ἐπί τινι, appointed to something, Plat. Leg., XII, 952e,
cf. ὁ τεταγμένος σατράπης, Jos. Ap., 1, 135.
Priests are appointed as supervisors and judges, 2, 187, God will appoint an
angelic guard for the righteous, Gr. En. 100:5, the senses are appointed to
serve, Epict. Diss., II, 23, 7 and 11, a man is “set” in his place (post)
before God, Ench., 22, cf. already Socrates: οὗ
ἄν τις ἑαυτὸν τάξῃ ἡγησάμενος βέλτιστον εἶναι ἢ ὑπʼ ἄρχοντος ταχθῇ, ἐνταῦθα δεῖ … μένοντα
κινδυνεύειν, Plat. Ap., 28d; there is ref. to the Great Bear ἣν
ὁ κύριος θεὸς ἔταξε to circle around the sacred pole, Preis. Zaub., I,
4, 1306 f., cf. 1278 f.; the ταχθέντες (sic) δυνάμεις appointed for the day
of judgment on the spirits of Beliar are in the third heaven, Test. L. 3:3. c. ὥρᾳ
τεταγμένῃ, “at the appointed time,” Epict. Diss., III, 15, 3
(cf. 24, 86); ἐν τεταγμένῃ πολιτείᾳ, “in an ordered
state,” Plat. Resp., X, 619c, par. κοσμέω, Gorg., 504a; “to
establish an order” in the cosmos, e.g., Aristobul. in Eus. Praep. Ev., 13, 12,
11 f.; Corp. Herm., 5, 4 (cf. 11, 9); cf. στοιχεῖα
πάντα τεταγμένα σοῖσι νόμοισι, Preis. Zaub., I, 4, 440 (cf. 1961); through
the appointed courses of the stars, days, months and years came into being,
Philo Op. Mund., 60, rain and wind come κατὰ
τεταγμένας καιρῶν περιόδους, Poster. C., 144. d. The mid. sense is “to
fix for oneself,” Plat. Leg., V, 733e.
2. In the LXX the verb is most commonly used for שׂוס or
שׂים. It means a. “to ordain,” “issue a prohibition,” Da. 6:13 f. Θ; b. “to appoint”
someone as something, 2 Macc. 8:22; 1 Βασ. 22:7, e.g., judges over the
people, 2 Βασ. 7:11, Levites in their
ministry, 1 Ch. 16:4; τεταγμένος ἐπὶ τῶν πραγμάτων, Εσθ.
3:13φ.; cf. 3 Macc. 7:1; 2 Macc. 6:21; 3 Macc. 5:14 and τῶν
ἐπʼ ἐξουσίαις τεταγμένων of those “put” in positions of power,
obviously by God, Εσθ. 8:12ε; c. “to set,” e.g.,
God sets limits for the sea, Jer. 5:22, or with ref. to the statutes of David, 1
Εσδρ. 1:15; d. “to draw up,” “set up,” e.g., troops, 2 Macc.
15:20, men, 4 Βασ. 10:24, idols, Jer. 7:30, cf.
Ez. 14:4, 7, altars, Jer. 11:13; cf. τεταγμένη as the division of an
army (→ 31, 14 f.), Cant. 6:4, 10; τεταγμένος “well-ordered,” of
government (→ line 9 f.) Sir. 10:1. In the mid. a. “to command” (God as subj.)
Ex. 29:43, “to make dispositions,” e.g., the last will Is. 38:1, τὸ
ταχθέν, “charge,” Ep. Jer. 61; b. “to appoint (for oneself),” 2 Macc. 10:28;
“to fix,” e.g., of time, 2 Βασ. 20:5; Job 12:5; 14:13; a
day, 2 Macc. 3:14; 14:21, a plan, 1 Macc. 5:27; 12:26. The peculiarities due to
transl. from the HT need not all be adduced here; example “to turn” one’s gaze
on something, 4 Βασ. 12:18 (cf. ἐστήρισεν Lk. 9:51); Da. 11:17 Θ; “to set” the heart on
something, Hag. 1:5; Ez. 44:5, “to make” Zech. 7:14; Hos. 2:5; Zech. 10:3 etc.
3. In the NT as in non-biblical Greek τάσσω means “to determine,” Ac. 15:2, “to
appoint,” Ac. 28:23; 12:21; → line 9 f., “to order,” Mt. 28:16 mid.; on 1 C.
16:15 → 27, 11 ff.; lines 3
ff. The officer who commands others is himself under orders (Lk. 7:8) and thus
knows from two-sided experience what it means concretely to be subject to
authority with no possibility of resistance, → 41, 9 ff.
Elsewhere God is the One who orders or appoints, though only in the
passive in the NT and with no mention of God in Ac. God has arranged the
commission which results for Paul from his experience on the Damascus Road →
VI, 863, 5 ff. (Ac. 22:10, cf. 14f.). According to Ac. 13:48 the man who is a
Christian is ordained to eternal life. The idea that God’s will to
save is accomplished in Christians with their conversion is obviously not
connected with the thought of predestination (→ IV, 192, 1 ff.) but rather with
that of conferring status (→ 31, 20 ff.); cf. οὐκ ἀξίους, Ac. 13:46.
According to R. 13:1
existing secular powers are “instituted” by God and derive their authority from
Him. This is why Christianity subjects itself to their rule (43, 25 ff.),
conscious of the divine appointment (→ 36, 15 ff.) and the implied commission
of the authorities (→ 43, 24 ff.). This is given unrestricted emphasis,
obviously in opposition to a contrary tendency (→ 36, 15 ff.) Immediately after
there is express mention of the obligation (→ III, 618, 21 ff.) to pay taxes,
R. 13:7.
The meaning of τεταγμέναι in R. 13:1 cannot be
expounded apart from a proper understanding of ἐξουσίαι. The widespread
expression οἱ ἐν (ταῖς) ἐξουσίαις means “those in
office,” Aristot. Eth. Nic., VIII, 7, p. 1158a, 28; 9, p. 1159a, 19; “in
positions of government,” Diod. S., 1, 58, 3. ὑπατικὴ
ἐξουσία is “consular power,” Diod. S., 14, 113, 6 (here in the hands of those
who are not consuls), τὴν ὅπατον ἐξουσίαν παραλαβόντων means “to hold as the
consulate,” Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom., 7, 1, 1; δημαρχικῆς
ἐξουσίας is said of the holder of the tribunicia potestas (here Augustus), Ditt. Syll.3, II,
780, 4 (6 b.c.), cf. also → II, 563, n. 15. The officebearer of the
Essenes is not to ἐξυβρίζειν εἰς τὴν ἐξουσίαν, against the position
conferred on him, Jos. Bell., 2, 140, cf. Εσθ.
8:12ε (→ 28, 22). Cf. the
phrase λαμβάνω ἐξουσίαν, “to receive
authority,” Jos. Bell., 2, 117. Ditt. Or., II, 665, 16 f. speaks of men who
greedily and shamelessly abuse their office; the sense “powers” is obviously
close here and in other places. As regards non-biblical use of ἐξουσία in the political sphere
one can hardly carry through a simple lexical integration and thus suggest a
single word by which to render R. 13:1. Note must be taken of the great breadth
of meaning the term can have outside the NT and in principle in R. 13 too, at
least so far as we are concerned with our non-Greek sense of language. The
context implies some limitation. On the one hand ἐξουσία in R. 13:1 is not
abstract even though the statements claim a more general validity → 43, 25 ff. Yet ἐξουσία here does not ref.
merely to a single authority or official,17 even though R. 13 is
speaking of the actual authorities with which Christians had to do at the time.
Again, these are not just the authorities of the Roman state which exercised
power through its governors; they include those of the Hell. polis, and it is in this light that we
are to understand R. 13, including the plur. of v. 1. In R. 13 the power of the
state is decisively seen as the watcher over good and evil on God’s commission,
19 and it is presupposed that in principle at least it is able to
use a just standard in its judgments and decisions, →44, 24 ff.
R. 13 does not object
that the ruling powers promote the pagan cultus with all their might (on this
cf. R. 1:21–25), nor that in practice their official acts are in part inseparably
bound up with this. Again, it does not charge that power is abused by one or other of those that bear office. There is a clear connection between
13:7 and 13:8, which leads on from obligations to those in authority to
obligations characterising the relations between man and man. On
Rev. 13 → III, 134, 23 ff.
4. In the post-apost. fathers the verb occurs 4 times but only in the
part. of the pass. perf.: the course of the stars “ordained” by God, 1 Cl., 20,
2; the “set” times of cultic practice, 40, 1f.; the author of 1 Cl. stresses
order in other places too, cf. στάσις, → VII, 571, 18 ff. On the ways of light angels
are posted to direct him, Barn., 18, 1 cf. 1QS 3:20f., 24f. In Mart. Pol., 10,
2 the saying of the martyr to the governor carries a plain ref. to R. 13:1, 7: δεδιδάγμεθα … ἀρχαῖς
καὶ ἐξουσίαις (→ 44, n. 27) ὑπὸ τοῦ
θεοῦ τεταγμέναις τιμὴν κατὰ τὸ προσῆκον τὴν μὴ βλάπτουσαν ἡμᾶς ἀπονέμειν. (Gerhard Delling, “Τάσσω, Τάγμα, Ἀνατάσσω, Ἀποτάσσω, Διατάσσω, Διαταγή,
Ἐπιταγή, Προστάσσω, Ὑποτάσσω, Ὑποταγή, Ἀνυπότακτος, Ἄτακτος (ἀτάκτως), Ἀτακτέω,”
ed. Gerhard Kittel, Geoffrey W. Bromiley, and Gerhard Friedrich, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament
(Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1964–), 27–31)
An Examination and Critique of the Theological Presuppositions Underlying Reformed Theology
