Yesterday, somebody said:
so, you denying that contextually the Greek has the "middle voice"? Since God did not prevent the Jews from accepting the Gospel in the first place, then He did not make the Gentiles accept it. If He did the latter, then He must have done the former!
Not once in any of my posts did I deny that. In fact, I wasn't even speaking on "voice", rather my focus was on "rendering".
Somebody took issue with my post because I supported the "ordain" rendering.
Even A.T. Robertson would disagree:
"
As many as were ordained to eternal life (οσο ησαν τεταγμενο εις ζωην αιωνιον). Periphrastic past perfect passive indicative of τασσω, a military term to place in orderly arrangement. The word "ordain" is not the best translation here. "Appointed," as Hackett shows, is better."
Word Pictures in the New Testament, A.T. Roberson, Acts 13:48, p. 935
However, when we start pursuing this avenue, we come against the same arguments most use when advocating against the KJV. It's old, its antiquated, its outdated, no one uses that language anymore.
And all that is true. However, as long as "ordained" is a faithful rendering, it should still be used.
I cite:
"in the operations of war; whence
the law ordains that the general shall give orders to the seer, and not the seer to the general. May we say this, Laches?"
Plato, Laches, Section 199a
Plato. Plato in Twelve Volumes, Vol. 8 translated by W.R.M. Lamb. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd. 1955.
I was also accused of not recognizing that the Greek has a "middle voice".
Again, that never came up aon any of my posts.
However, lets address that.
In Herbert Weir Smyth's book: "A Greek Grammar of Colleges, Part VI, Syntax, Active Voice, Middle Voice" he addresses the "middle voice";
He says:
"The middle voice shows that the action is performed with special reference to the subject:
λοῦμαι I wash myself."
Ibid
He also cite about seven different cases:
"The
Direct Reflexive Middle, The Indirect Reflexive Middle, Active and Reflexive, Middle and Reflexive, The Causative Middle, Reciprocal Middle, Middle Deponents."
In looking at all the definitions given for the middle voice, the only one that even come close to the context of the verse is:
"
The Causative Middle: denotes that the subject has something done by another for himself: ““
ἐγὼ γάρ σε ταῦτα ἐδιδαξάμην” for I had you taught this”
X. C. 1.6.2,
παρατίθεσθαι σῖτον to have food served up 8. 6. 12,
ὅσοι ὅπλα ἀφῄρηνται,
ταχὺ ἄλλα ποιήσονται all who have had their arms taken from them will soon get others made 6. 1. 12,
ἑαυτῷ σκηνὴν κατεσκευάσατο he had a tent prepared for himself 2. 1. 30."
Ibid
Here is where we start to run into a problem.
I also have The New Analytical Greek Lexicon, by: Wesley J. Perschbacher.
In it he cites our word as:
"nom, pl., perf., pass., part."
Ibid, p. 405
Which also means that deciding on which "voice", is purely objective.
Here I cite:
"The primary argument revolves around the word τεταγμένοι (tetagmenoi) which is a form of the Greek verb tassw (tasso). The verb tasso means to draw up in order, to arrange, assign, fix, determine, appoint, or position. It is a word that is derived from the positioning of units in military order. The verb form in this verse, Tetagmenoi, is in the perfect tense meaning that it implies past action that has ongoing consequences (at least to the time of the writing). It is also part of a phrase that can be taken to be a past perfect (pluperfect) construction. This simply means that it establishes some point in the past (the time of the events in the narrative) and then describe some action prior to that time (tetagmenoi).
This brings us to the crucial part of the argument. If the verb is taken to be in the passive voice, meaning that the subject is receiving rather than doing the action of the verb, then the common translation is preferred. If, however, we understand the verb to be in the middle or reflexive voice, meaning that the subject acts upon themselves and both gives and receives the action of the verb, then Dr. Cottrell’s translation would be preferable. The problem is that τεταγμένοι, could be either middle or passive since the form of the verb would be the same in both cases. Since both the middle and passive renderings of the word are grammatically indistinguishable the decision on which is being used has to be made based upon its usage and context."
Source
In this instance, the Causative Middle fits the description for both the "middle" and "passive".
Looking at the grammatical construction, placing it purely in the middle or reflective does not agree with the scripture. Did the Gentile look back and say "If I believe I can be appointed/ordained?"
The only avenue in this case is to accept both the "Causative Middle" and "passive" as the right rendering.
From the context alone, the Gentiles absolutely played no part in the "arranging, appointing, ordaining".
The Middle voice clearly indicates that that was something that done for them, by something/somebody outside themselves on their behalf.
Furthermore, if you take the Causative middle, then you are also forced to admit that it changes "τεταγμένοι" into what is sometimes seen as a "Causative Verb". In other words, The Gentiles were passive and played not part in their "arrangement, assignment, appointment, position, or ordaining, but the causative verb causes them "to believe". Believing comes as a result of their "arrangement, assignment, appointment, position, or ordaining".
And we also have to be careful here in that while scripture leads us to this conclusion, we cannot say that each and every Gentile that heard the preaching believed.
What we can say from the verse is that of the Gentile audience that attended, those who were "appointed/ordained" to eternal life, believed.
God Bless
Till all are one.