Peter Spitaler, «Doubting in Acts 10:27?», Vol. 20 (2007) 81-93
The verb diakri/nomai occurs twice in the Acts of the Apostles. Many contemporary interpreters assert it means «hesitate/doubt» in 10:20 –a meaning of the middle and passive voices that, according to opinio communis, first surfaces in NT texts– and «contest/dispute» in 11:2, its classical/Hellenistic meaning. In this article, I first discuss and critique the criteria that guide scholars to render diakri/nomai in Acts 10:20 with a meaning that diverges from extra-biblical Greek meaning categories. Next, I investigate the verse within its immediate (10:9-20) and larger literary contexts (10:1-11:18) to show that interpretations of the phrase mhde\n diakrino/menoj that rely on a «NT meaning» of diakri/nomai (i.e., «doubting nothing») have no support in the text. Rather, the placement of Acts 10:20 within its literary context supports a rendering of diakri/nomai in accordance with classical/Hellenistic Greek conventions.
“Doubting†in Acts 10:20? 93
“hesitateâ€, or “waverâ€) are missing from the text. The type of conflict
Luke describes with his use of διακÏίνομαι is a marker of interpersonal
controversy –between Peter and “the voice†(10:20) and between Peter and
the Jerusalem disciples (11:2)– not a description of Peter’s intrapersonal
conflict.
I agree with Baumert that διακÏίνομαι’s traditional, classical/Hellenis-
tic range of meaning allows the reader to understand this verse within its
literary context. My interpretation differs from Baumert’s in the manner
in which we analyze the literary context to support our respective trans-
lations of the verb, διακÏίνομαι. Regardless the differences, the text’s
internal data strongly suggest that Luke did not use διακÏίνομαι with
a meaning that deviates from the classical/Hellenistic language system;
“NT meaning†approaches to Acts 10:20 should be reconsidered.
Peter SPITALER
Villanova University
Department of Theology
and Religious Studies
800 Lancaster Ave
Villanova, PA 19085 (USA)
FOLLOW US