The Result Of Paul’s Preaching In Antioch: “As many as were ordained to eternal life believed.” Acts 13:48

By Robert P. Martin

Robert P. Martin, Ph.D., is Pastor of Emmanuel Reformed Baptist Church, Seattle, WA, and Editor of Reformed Baptist Theological Review.

Paul had preached the gospel in the synagogue at Antioch of Pisidia. As he and Barnabas were leaving, many of those who heard his message kept begging them to speak “these words” (i.e., the gospel) again on the following Sabbath (Acts 13:42). Whether this entreaty came from the synagogue elders as well as from the people, Luke doesn’t say. What is certain is that this was not a casual request but a repeated and urgent entreaty.[1] Here was evidence that the Spirit had begun a work in the hearts of many. They were hungry for the Word of the Lord, pleading with Paul and Barnabas to teach them more of Christ and the gospel.

Many appear to have been converted on this occasion. After the meeting ended, “many of the Jews and the devout proselytes (Gentile converts to Judaism) followed Paul and Barnabas” (13:43). In some texts, the word translated “followed” (ἀκολουθέω) means “to become someone’s disciple” (e.g., Lk. 5:28; 18:28). Likely this is also Luke’s meaning here. Having been converted, these folk attached themselves to Paul and Barnabas as disciples (cf., 13:52). For their part, Paul and Barnabas “urged them to continue in the grace of God” (13:43).

The time frame is indefinite. At first glance we may think that Luke is speaking only of what happened on the Sabbath; however, he likely also includes the activity of the week that followed. Paul and Barnabas diligently set about giving these new converts further instruction in the gospel - focusing, of course, on their most pressing need, which is that they should persevere in faith attachment to Christ. Jesus had said, “If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed” (Jn. 8:31). At Antioch of Syria, Barnabas had exhorted converts “that with purpose of heart they would cleave unto the Lord” (11:23). Here the emphasis is the same. As was also true on their return visit to Antioch of Pisidia, so on this occasion Paul and Barnabas were immersed in the work of “confirming the souls of the disciples, exhorting them to continue in the faith” (14:22).

During the week, excitement in the city grew as news spread.

Apparently Paul’s address in the synagogue became the universal topic of discussion and debate—so much so that when the next Sabbath came, “almost the whole city was gathered together to hear the word of God” (13:44). There, apparently gathered to hear the gospel, were not only Jews and devout Gentiles, but also many of the pagan inhabitants of the city—a gathering of such impressive dimensions as to stir up the jealousy of the Jews.

Not all of the Jews, of course, had been converted. Although Luke speaks of “many of the Jews” being favorable to the gospel (13:43), likely they were only a small part of the Jewish population. Among the majority of the Jews, especially among the leaders, were those who regarded the gospel with great animosity, as a threat to their position in the community, and who acted accordingly. Luke says, “But when the Jews saw the multitudes, they were filled with jealousy, and contradicted the things which were spoken by Paul, and blasphemed” (13:45). John Eadie says:

The Jews could not bear the spectacle; indignation and jealousy filled them at the apparent popularity of the new faith, as it supplanted theirs; and, true to their bigotry, they were found contradicting and blaspheming - opposing in a spirit of impious scorn. They had a recognized superiority among the Gentile races from their possession of a true and spiritual belief, and had won over many converts. They could not tolerate the loss of this prestige, and they must have been cut to the heart that many of their own people and of the proselytes seemed to be captivated. Their rage could not be vented in a simple denial; that denial must be barbed with vituperation of the apostles, or a profane caricature of Him whom they proclaimed.[2]

The apostles’ response accords with the example of the Lord himself, who “when he was reviled, reviled not again” (1 Pet. 2:23). Although they did not answer reviling with reviling, nevertheless they spoke with marked force and decision. The word παρρησιάζομαι (“speaking boldly,” ASV) conveys the idea of speaking freely, openly, fearlessly. As Alexander observed, “What might have been disclosed in a more gradual and gentle manner, was, in consequence of this malignant opposition, plainly and abruptly stated.”[3] Speaking plainly and fearlessly, the apostles explain why they have come first to the Jews and why they will now turn to the Gentiles. “It was necessary that the word of God should first be spoken to you. Seeing ye thrust it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles. For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee for a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the uttermost part of the earth” (13:46–47).

Paul and Barnabas further justify their taking the gospel to the Gentiles by citing Isa. 49:6. This, I take it, was as much for the encouragement of the Gentiles as for the instruction of the Jews. They claim that in offering the gospel to the Gentiles, they are fulfilling prophecy concerning the scope of Messiah’s ministry, i.e., that Messiah would be “a light to the Gentiles.” This statement caused the Gentiles to rejoice greatly—“and as the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of God” (13:48a).

Confronted with the same gospel on the same occasion by the same preacher, some (both Jews and Gentiles) believed, while others not only rejected the gospel but also “contradicted and blasphemed.” How shall these dramatically different responses be accounted for? Luke, in a very straightforward and unqualified way, at 13:48b describes the evangelistic results at Antioch in remarkable terms: “and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.” There are several passages in Acts where Luke states that the sovereignly exercised power and grace of God was at work in bringing men to faith in Christ (cf., 11:21; 16:14; 18:27). Acts 13:48 teaches the same doctrine.

The underlying Greek text is unambiguous. Acts 13:48b contains two verbal expressions representing two actions. The relationship of these verbal ideas is indicated by their relative positions in the sentence and by their tenses. “Believed” (ἐπίστευσαν) is an aorist indicative and indicates an action completed in the past from the perspective of the writer, i.e., from Luke’s point of view at the time he wrote Acts, these believers at Antioch had “believed.” The expression “were ordained” (ῆσαν τεταγμένοι) is a periphrastic pluperfect and indicates an action which has been completed prior to the main verb in the sentence (in this case prior to “believed”). By using these two verbs, Luke teaches that the believers at Antioch “believed” (the past action from Luke’s point in time), having been “ordained” to eternal life (a completed action antecedent or prior to their act of believing).

There is no legitimate way to translate Acts 13:48b so as to make the two actions concurrent in time (i.e., so that believing and ordaining occur at the same moment) or to reverse their relative positions in time (i.e., “as many as believed were ordained to eternal life”). Recognizing this, without exception the translators of the major English versions follow the unambiguous grammar of the original:

• As many as were ordained to eternal life believed (KJV, ASV, RSV)
• As many as had been appointed to eternal life believed (NASB, NKJV, ESV)
• All who were appointed for eternal life believed (NIV)
• And those who were marked out for eternal life became believers (NEB)
• And those who had been chosen for eternal life became believers (GNB)
• And as many as had been destined for eternal life became believers (NRSV)

All these versions support the view that Luke is teaching the doctrine of predestination, i.e., that behind the act of man’s believing lies the foreordaining decision of God. Many, of course, take issue with this view. For example, Delling says that at Acts 13:48, “The idea that God’s will to save is accomplished in Christians with their conversion is obviously not connected with the thought of predestination.”[4] Bloomfield, speaking of this text, says:

Now there would seem to be no vestige of any thing savouring of an absolute decree, or predestination.. .. There is assuredly nothing, either in the context, or in the language used by St. Luke, either in this Book or in his Gospel, that can lead us to suppose any such sense intended here: nay, there is not a little that utterly excludes it.. .. so far from favouring the system of absolute election, the words rather support the opposite doctrine, namely, that God, while “binding nature fast in fate, left free the human will.”[5]

Adam Clarke says:

This text has been most pitifully misunderstood. Many suppose that it simply means that those in that assembly who were fore-ordained; or predestinated by God’s decree, to eternal life, believed under the influence of that decree. Now, we should be careful to examine what a word means, before we attempt to fix its meaning. Whatever tetagmenoi may mean, which is the word we translate ordained, it is neither protetagmenoi nor proorismenoi which the apostle uses, but simply tetagmenoi, which includes no idea of pre-ordination or predestination of any kind. And if it even did, it would be rather hazardous to say that all those who believed at this time were such as actually persevered unto the end, and were saved unto eternal life. But, leaving all these precarious matters, what does the word tetagmenoi mean? The verb tatto or tasso signifies to place, set, order, appoint, dispose; hence it has been considered here as implying the disposition or readiness of mind of several persons in the congregation, such as the religious proselytes mentioned ver. 43, who possessed the reverse of the disposition of those Jews who spake against those things, contradicting and blaspheming, ver. 45. Though the word in this place has been variously translated, yet, of all the meanings ever put on it, none agrees worse with its nature and known signification than that which represents it as intending those who were predestinated to eternal life: this is no meaning of the term, and should never be applied to it. Let us, without prejudice, consider the scope of the place: the Jews contradicted and blasphemed; the religious proselytes heard attentively, and received the word of life: the one party were utterly indisposed, through their own stubbornness, to receive the Gospel; the others, destitute of prejudice and prepossession, were glad to hear that, in the order of God, the Gentiles were included in the covenant of salvation through Christ Jesus; they, therefore, in this good state and order of mind, believed. Those who seek for the plain meaning of the word will find it here: those who wish to make out a sense, not from the Greek word, its use among the best Greek writers, and the obvious sense of the evangelist, but from their own creed, may continue to puzzle themselves and others; kindle their own fire, compass themselves with sparks, and walk in the light of their own fire, and of the sparks which they have kindled; and, in consequence, lie down in sorrow, having bidden adieu to the true meaning of a passage so very simple, taken in its connection, that one must wonder how it ever came to be misunderstood and misapplied.[6]

The way that this class of writers gets around the doctrine of predestination is by suggesting an alternate translation for Luke’s key term (τάσσω).[7] We see this in Clarke’s comments above. In the words of David Thomas:

The word “ordained” here does not necessarily mean appointed or decreed, but rather prepared or disposed. The true version seems to be, “As many as were disposed, bent on, or inclined to eternal life, believed. .. . The Jews were hostile to the gospel, and would not listen; the Gentiles were disposed to listen, and believed.[8]

This view of the meaning of τάσσω, of course, eliminates any real sense of God’s participation. One man is disposed to believe and therefore believes; another is not so disposed and therefore does not believe. According to this view, God’s decree or power is not part of the picture whatever.

But what shall we make of this suggested translation of τάσσω? According to the standard lexicons, the word basically means “to put in place,” “to arrange,” “to appoint,” “to order,” “to determine,” “to fix,” “to ordain.”[9] Here Luke uses the passive form, i.e., to be appointed, ordained, etc. to do a thing. None of the standard works support the translation “disposed.”

The word τάσσω occurs seven other times in the NT. In what follows we will examine each of these places to see what the predominant sense of the word is in the NT.

According to Matt. 28:16, the Eleven are to go to the mountain where “Jesus had appointed them” (ἐτάξατο), i.e., to the place where the authority of Jesus and his decree determined that they were to wait for him. The disciples did not go there as the result of self-determination or personal bent, but as the result of an authority exercised outside of themselves.

According to Lk. 7:8, the centurion declares himself to be a man “set under authority” (τασσόμενος), i.e., he is a man who is subject to orders imposed on him by a superior authority external to himself. The centurion does not use this expression to describe himself as a self-determined man.

According to Acts 15:2, the church at Antioch “appointed” (ἔταξαν) that Paul and Barnabas and some others should go to Jerusalem. Here again the word is used to express the idea of an authority external to the persons in question-an authority which determines their actions. These men did not go to Jerusalem as the result of their own self-inclination but in response to the exercise of a higher authority.

According to Acts 22:10, Paul is to go to Damascus, for there he will be told “all things which are appointed (τέτακται) for you to do.” Paul’s life and labors will not be self-determined. He will not be told in Damascus that his ministry will consist of “all things that you are disposed to do.” Instead, an authority external to himself (i.e., God) has determined what his course will be.

According to Acts 28:23, the chief Jews at Rome “appointed” (ταξάμενοι) a time to hear Paul’s message. They set the time, not Paul. Again, the word expresses the idea of the exercise of an authority external to the subject in question.

According to Rom. 13:1, the powers that be are “ordained” (τεταγμέναι εἰσίν) of God. The most basic principle underlying this passage is that civil rulers occupy their stations not because of self-determination or personal disposition but in accordance with the prior decision of God. Behind their present station stands Jehovah’s eternal decree.

Only at 1 Cor. 16:15 is the word used of determining or devoting oneself to something: “ye know the house of Stephanas, that it is the firstfruits of Achaia, and that they have set (ἑταξαν) themselves (ἑαυτούς) to minister unto the saints.” Here, however, the reflexive pronoun (which shows that the action of the verb in fact terminates on the subject) is needed to make this sense clear.

J.I. Packer observes that τάσσω means “to direct or appoint someone to a task, and to arrange, set up and put in order things or plans which would otherwise be indefinite and uncertain” and that it implies “an acknowledged authority and power residing in the person from whom the decisions and directives issue.”[10] To this I add an additional observation. With the one exception where the reflexive pronoun limits the sense of the word to the exercise of power over oneself, in the NT the word (especially in the passive forms - as here) always expresses the idea of the exercise of an authority or power outside of the person of the subject in question. Where the word stands alone (without the reflexive pronoun), it never means to dispose oneself to do something.

An examination of the uses of τάσσω in the Septuagint simply confirms what we have already seen. At only two places (Jdg. 18:31[A]; 2 Ki. 10:24) is the reflexive idea present and in both cases the presence of a reflexive pronoun is needed (and used) to make that plain. Bloomfield appeals to the use of the word in 2 Macc. 6:21.[11] But at that place, τεταγμένοι refers to those who “had charge of” a pagan feast, which hardly provides a parallel to Luke’s use of the word at Acts 13:48. Those who believed the gospel at Antioch did not do so because they “had charge of” the situation. That is to strain language far past the breaking point.

Above I cited every committee translation of the English Bible produced since 1611. They all agree in their assessment of the basic meaning of τάσσω. To my knowledge the only popular versions which vary from the overwhelming consensus of translators are The New World Translation of the Jehovah’s Witnesses (“and all those who were rightly disposed for everlasting life became believers”) and The Living Bible (“and as many as wanted eternal life believed”). Surely, careful scholarship cannot follow. The evidence shows that we must take our stand in the great Reformed tradition to which we are heirs - as ably represented by Melancthon Jacobus.

And as many as were ordained to eternal life - (not ordained themselves, nor disposed themselves, nor were inclined, but) - were purposely and positively appointed unto eternal life. The term means, arranged, ordered, disposed, (not in the sense of self-inclination, but of being ordained by a power from without.) Here the ordination is such as issues in their believing, and it must be the Divine ordination every where spoken of in Scripture. Believers are spoken of as “elect,” they are “predestinated” - “foreordained.” And it is clearly taught as a fact, however, it be accounted for, that only such as are ordained to eternal life do believe.[12]

Notes

1. Note the imperfect tense of παρακαλέω (cf., Acts 19:31).
2. John Eadie, Paul the Preacher; or, a Popular and Practical Exposition of His Discourses and Speeches, as Recorded in the Acts of the Apostles (New York: Robert Carter and Brothers, 1860), 108. Emphasis his.
3. J.A. Alexander, A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles (reprint ed., Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1980), 2:41.
4. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (TDNT), ed. Gerhard Friedrich, trans. and ed. Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans), s.v.τάσσω, 8:28–29.
5. S.T. Bloomfield, The Greek Testament, with English Notes, Critical, Philological, and Exegetical (Boston: Perkins and Marvin, 1837), 1:522–23. Emphasis his.
6. Adam Clarke, The New Testament of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, Volume I. Matthew to the Acts (New York: T. Mason & G. Lane, 1837), 790. Stier also speaks of Calvinistic exegesis of this text in a derogatory way, saying, “I do not comprehend the coarse predestinarian exegesis of this passage.. .. Luke surely did not intend to thrust in the dogmatico-Calvinistic τεταγμένοι as the one only reason for faith.” Rudolf Stier, The Words of the Apostles (reprint ed., Minneapolis: Klock & Klock, 1981), 210. That is precisely Luke’s point, of course.
7. Knowling, using the translation “ordained” as a foil, puts an interesting twist on this text, saying, “there is no countenance here for the absolutum decretum of the Calvinists, since ver. 46 had already shown that the Jews had acted through their own choice. The words are really nothing more than a corollary of St. Paul’s ἀναγκαιͅον [at 13:46]: the Jews as a nation had been ordained to eternal life - they had rejected this election - but those who believed amongst the Gentiles were equally ordained by God to eternal life, and it was in accord with His divine appointment that the Apostles had turned to them.” R.J. Knowling, The Acts of the Apostles, in The Expositor’s Greek Testament (reprint ed., Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1974), 2:300. Two things are wrong with this approach. First, this reduces election to ratification. If God elected every one, he elected no one in any effectual way. This is simply not the Bible’s doctrine of election as set out clearly in such places as 1 Thess. 1:4–5 and 2 Thess. 2:13–14. Second, Knowling misses Paul’s meaning in the word ἀναγκαιͅον at 13:46. His speaking the word of God first to the Jews was “necessary” because it (as with the believing of the believers) was ordained of God. As Alexander says, it was necessary “to the execution of the divine plan and purpose.” Alexander, 2:41.
8. David Thomas, Acts of the Apostles (reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1980), 212.
9. See, e.g., Joseph Henry Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (reprint ed., Wheaton, IL: Evangel Publishing Co., 1974), s.v., τάσσω; William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1957), s.v., τάσσω; TDNT, s.v. τάσσω; The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (NIDNTT), ed. Colin Brown (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1980), s.v. τάσσω.
10. NIDNTT, 1:476.
11. Bloomfield, The Greek Testament, 1:522.
12. Melancthon Jacobus, Notes, Critical and Explanatory, on the Acts of the Apostles (Philadelphia: Presbyterian Board of Publication, 1859), 249. Emphasis his.