1) εξιοντων δε εκ της συναγωγης των ιουδαιων f35 (60.2%) HF,RP,TR
2) εξιοντων δε αυτων (A,B,C,D (16.2%) NU
3) εξιοντων δε αυτων εκ της συναγωγης των ιουδαιων (20.8%) OC,CP
4) εξιοντων δε αυτων εκ της συναγωγης (2.3%)
(two other readings) (0.4%)
I believe this variant set must be considered along with the presence of τα εθνη after παρεκαλουν, but TuT does not include the second set. However, from UBS3 it appears that virtually the same roster of witnesses, including the three ancient versions (!), read variant 2) and omit “the Gentiles”. Where then is the Subject of the main verb παρεκαλουν? Presumably for those witnesses it would be the Jews and proselytes who had just heard Paul and wanted to hear it all over again the next Sabbath. So why are they (Jews and proselytes) mentioned overtly again in verse 43? And on what basis would the whole city show up the next week (verse 44)? But to go back to verse 42, why would the first hearers want to hear the same thing (τα ρηματα ταυτα) again anyway? The really interested ones stuck with Paul and Barnabas to learn more (verse 43), just as we would expect.
The witnesses to variants 1) and 3) join in support of “the Gentiles”, giving us a strong majority (over 80%). So the Subject of παρεκαλουν is τα εθνη—they want a chance to hear the Gospel too, and the whole city turns out. It fits the context perfectly. So, variant 3) appears to be a conflation and the basic reading is variant 1). The witnesses to variant 3), because they have “the Gentiles”, are really on the side of variant 1), not 2), so presumably 1) may be viewed as having 80% attestation. For the witnesses to variant 1) the antecedent or referent of εξιοντων must be Paul's group, since the Gentiles would presumably address their request to the teacher.
In variant 2) αυτων presumably serves as Subject of both the participle and the main verb, but in that event the main verb should take precedence and the pronoun should be nominative, not genitive. However one might explain the motivation for such a change—from 1) to 2) and deleting “the Gentiles”—variant 2) is evidently wrong, even though attested by the three ancient versions. Perhaps someone faced with variant 1) took “of the Jews” to be the referent of the participle instead of modifying “synagogue” (like NKJV), and thought it should be Subject of the main verb as well—then, of course, “the Gentiles” were in the way and were deleted. Then 1) might have been shortened to 2) for ‘clarity’.
I take it that the original text had: εξιοντων δε εκ της συναγωγης των ιουδαιων παρεκαλουν τα εθνη etc. that these words might be spoken to them the next Sabbath. 43 The synagogue service having been dismissed, many of the Jews and the devout proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas, who started addressing them, urging them to continue in the grace of God. 44 Well the next Sabbath almost the whole city was gathered to hear the Word of God.§Instead of ‘God’ perhaps 4% of the Greek manuscripts have ‘the Lord’ (as in NIV, LB, TEV, etc.). 45 But when the Jews saw the crowds, they were filled with envy*Isn't human nature wonderful? and started speaking against the things said by Paul, contradicting and†Perhaps 20% of the Greek manuscripts omit “contradicting and” (as in NIV, NASB, LB, TEV, etc.). blaspheming.
*13:4 Note the emphasis on the Holy Spirit's agency.
†13:4 Recall that Barnabas was a native of Cyprus (Acts 4:36); he was doubtless eager to evangelize his own country, and would also know his way around.
‡13:9 It is at this point that Luke starts using ‘Paul’ instead of ‘Saul’.
§13:10 To be an ‘enemy of all righteousness’ one would have to be pretty bad! If ‘son of a devil’ is literal, Elymas was a humanoid, and would indeed be completely evil.
*13:12 Demonstrated supernatural power has a way of lending credence to the spoken word.
†13:13 When the party arrived in Cyprus, Barnabas was the leader; when it left, Paul had taken over. Barnabas was John's uncle, and quite possibly John did not like the change.
‡13:15 Or ‘exhortation’.
§13:20 The events recorded in the book of Judges, plus Eli's 40 years, equal 450.
*13:20 Along with his other functions, Samuel was a prophet.
†13:21 Saul reigned for forty years—a considerable period of time.
‡13:23 Instead of ‘brought’, some 25% of the Greek manuscripts have ‘raised up’, as in AV and NKJV.
§13:23 Instead of ‘Salvation’, some 15% of the Greek manuscripts have ‘a Savior, Jesus’, as in most versions.
*13:24 Instead of ‘to Israel’, some 20% of the Greek manuscripts read ‘to all the people of Israel’, as in most versions.
†13:25 At first people speculated that John the Baptizer might be the Messiah, but John was quick to deny it.
‡13:26 Instead of ‘to you’, perhaps 4% of the Greek manuscripts have ‘to us’ (as in NIV, NASB, LB, TEV, etc.). How was that word sent? By Paul and Barnabas.
§13:29 Literally ‘tree’. Note that Paul emphasizes the fulfillment of prophecy.
*13:31 Paul says ‘are’—evidently many/most of the original Apostles were still alive.
†13:33 The “raised up” here presumably refers to the incarnation; the resurrection comes in verse 34.
‡13:33 See Psalm 2:7.
§13:34 The resurrection of Jesus from the dead is crucial; without it we have no Gospel.
*13:34 People like Lazarus who were returned to life, had to die again (and decompose); with Jesus it was different: His resurrection was definitive, and involved a glorified body.
†13:34 See Isaiah 55:3.
‡13:35 See Psalm 16:10.
§13:37 Only supernatural intervention could forestall decay after physical death.
*13:39 The Law as a means of justification was sadly deficient; the resurrected Jesus is marvelously efficient.
†13:41 See Habakkuk 1:5. According to 2 Thessalonians 2:10-11, to those who reject the love of the truth God Himself sends active delusion, so they will believe the lie. The ‘despisers’ are rendered incapable of understanding the explanation.
‡13:42 We have here an important set of variant readings, wherein the evidence is rather badly divided. I have decided to give the Greek, for those who can handle it, but will here give a literal rendering of the four variants, for those who can't. However, the discussion includes ‘the Gentiles’, as being part of the puzzle: 1) now as the Jews were going out of the synagogue; 2) now as they were going out; 3) now as they were going out of the synagogue of the Jews; 4) now as they were going out of the synagogue.1) εξιοντων δε εκ της συναγωγης των ιουδαιων f35 (60.2%) HF,RP,TR 2) εξιοντων δε αυτων (A,B,C,D (16.2%) NU 3) εξιοντων δε αυτων εκ της συναγωγης των ιουδαιων (20.8%) OC,CP 4) εξιοντων δε αυτων εκ της συναγωγης (2.3%) (two other readings) (0.4%)I believe this variant set must be considered along with the presence of τα εθνη after παρεκαλουν, but TuT does not include the second set. However, from UBS3 it appears that virtually the same roster of witnesses, including the three ancient versions (!), read variant 2) and omit “the Gentiles”. Where then is the Subject of the main verb παρεκαλουν? Presumably for those witnesses it would be the Jews and proselytes who had just heard Paul and wanted to hear it all over again the next Sabbath. So why are they (Jews and proselytes) mentioned overtly again in verse 43? And on what basis would the whole city show up the next week (verse 44)? But to go back to verse 42, why would the first hearers want to hear the same thing (τα ρηματα ταυτα) again anyway? The really interested ones stuck with Paul and Barnabas to learn more (verse 43), just as we would expect. The witnesses to variants 1) and 3) join in support of “the Gentiles”, giving us a strong majority (over 80%). So the Subject of παρεκαλουν is τα εθνη—they want a chance to hear the Gospel too, and the whole city turns out. It fits the context perfectly. So, variant 3) appears to be a conflation and the basic reading is variant 1). The witnesses to variant 3), because they have “the Gentiles”, are really on the side of variant 1), not 2), so presumably 1) may be viewed as having 80% attestation. For the witnesses to variant 1) the antecedent or referent of εξιοντων must be Paul's group, since the Gentiles would presumably address their request to the teacher.In variant 2) αυτων presumably serves as Subject of both the participle and the main verb, but in that event the main verb should take precedence and the pronoun should be nominative, not genitive. However one might explain the motivation for such a change—from 1) to 2) and deleting “the Gentiles”—variant 2) is evidently wrong, even though attested by the three ancient versions. Perhaps someone faced with variant 1) took “of the Jews” to be the referent of the participle instead of modifying “synagogue” (like NKJV), and thought it should be Subject of the main verb as well—then, of course, “the Gentiles” were in the way and were deleted. Then 1) might have been shortened to 2) for ‘clarity’.I take it that the original text had: εξιοντων δε εκ της συναγωγης των ιουδαιων παρεκαλουν τα εθνη etc.
§13:44 Instead of ‘God’ perhaps 4% of the Greek manuscripts have ‘the Lord’ (as in NIV, LB, TEV, etc.).
*13:45 Isn't human nature wonderful?
†13:45 Perhaps 20% of the Greek manuscripts omit “contradicting and” (as in NIV, NASB, LB, TEV, etc.).
‡13:46 Note the “it was necessary”. The apostles had a clear conviction that the Jews should be given the first chance.
§13:46 This sounds a little bit like sarcasm to me.
*13:47 See Isaiah 49:6. The prophecy refers to the Messiah, but Paul and Barnabas are representing Him.
†13:48 Here God's sovereignty and human responsibility are placed side by side—God appoints, but we have to believe.
‡13:49 This presumably means that a fair number of local congregations sprang up there.
§13:50 When the women get stirred up, watch out!
*13:51 They were following an instruction given by the Lord Himself (Matthew 10:14-15, Luke 9:5), and that He illustrated by example (Matthew 11:23-24), although He spoke the curse. I believe that history records that Pisidian Antioch entered into decline at that point.
†13:52 The apostles went on their way, but they left Life and joy behind them.