3rd Missionary Trip - Lorin

Δημήτριος καὶ οἱ σὺν αὐτῷ τεχνῖται ἔχουσιν πρός τινα λόγον, ἀγοραῖοι ἄγονται καὶ ἀνθύπατοί εἰσιν, ἐγκαλείτωσαν
ἀλλήλοις. 39 εἰ δέ τι περαιτέρω ἐπιζητεῖτε, ἐν τῇ ἐννόμῳ ἐκκλησίᾳ ἐπιλυθήσεται. 38 If therefore Demetrius and the
artisans with him have a complaint against anyone, the courts are open, and there are proconsuls; let them bring charges
there against one another. 39 If there is anything further you want to know, it must be settled in the regular assembly. The
clerk is openly critical of Demetrius and his craftsmen buddies for creating this disturbance. They have sought
their goals through mob violence, but a legal system was in place where proper charges of violating laws should
be made. The clerk mentions both the courts (ἀγοραῖοι) and the proconsuls (ἀνθύπατοί). The term translated as
‘courts’, ἀγοραῖοι, designates the marketplace (Agora) where the day courts functioned daily, and was located
rather close to the theater, as indicated by the map on the above right (the photo is of the modern ruins of the
Agora). 133 The other term refers to Roman governors of the various provinces in the empire. Luke correctly uses
the proper Greek term here ἀνθύπατος which specified the governor of a senatorial province, which Asia was at
this point in time. What some find as problematic is the use of the plural term ἀνθύπατοί, since every province
only had a single governor. Most likely Luke, with the plural terms for both courts and proconsuls, is speaking
generally of the existing legal system. 134 The town clerk well understood the Roman insistence on orderly procedure
for legal matters. Demetrius thought he could bypass this with mob rule. It didn’t work! The senatorial
province in Asia is one of the reasons that mob rule didn’t get to first base whereas it was successful in the imperial
province of Galatia to the east, where the mob almost succeeded in killing Paul at Lystra and did succeed in
driving him and Barnabas out of Pisidion Antioch and Iconium (cf. Acts 13-14).
Fourth, he warns the crowd of possible negative consequences from Roman authorities, v. 40: καὶ γὰρ
κινδυνεύομεν ἐγκαλεῖσθαι στάσεως περὶ τῆς σήμερον, μηδενὸς αἰτίου ὑπάρχοντος περὶ οὗ [οὐ] δυνησόμεθα
ἀποδοῦναι λόγον περὶ τῆς συστροφῆς ταύτης. For we are in danger of being charged with rioting today, since there
is no cause that we can give to justify this commotion. The clerk’s insistence on following orderly legal procedure is
based (γὰρ) on the questionable legality of this present assembly. In v. 39, Luke records that the clerk carefully
distinguished between a legal and an illegal assembly. The legally constituted assembly is labeled a τῇ ἐννόμῳ
ἐκκλησίᾳ (v. 39), while this present assembly (περὶ τῆς σήμερον) was in danger of being labeled a στάσις, riot (v.
40). The clerk cast further negative tones on this assembly by also labeling it τῆς συστροφῆς ταύτης (v. 40). Literally,
he calls it a ‘seditious gathering.’ Both συστροφή and στάσις have strongly negative thrusts implying actions
clearly in violation of Roman law. The expression τι περαιτέρω ἐπιζητεῖτε, you seek something more (v. 39), clearly
signals the standard Roman legal process of careful investigation of the facts connected to legal charges brought
against someone. To be sure, the means of investigation standard in that day would be dramatically different
than those followed in any modern western court procedure. But before action was taken against a defendant
Roman law indicated that sufficient evidence be produced to justify an punishment imposed. Public assemblies
could be convened by the magistrates for just such purposes, but they had to be a τῇ ἐννόμῳ ἐκκλησίᾳ, a legal
assembly. The δῆμος, assembly, that the clerk was addressing had not met these legal requirements. Consequently
the city was in jeopardy of being called on the carpet by the Roman governing authorities for this meeting.
Illegal assemblies would have been considered quite serious breaches of Roman law.
Luke’s narrative conclusion to the speech in v. 41 brings the disturbance in the city to an effective
close without any Christian leader getting hurt: καὶ ταῦτα εἰπὼν ἀπέλυσεν τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, When he had said this,
133 “ἀγοραῖοι ἄγονται, the law is open. This is the general sense. With ἀγοραῖοι we must supply ἡμέραι. The sense will then be
‘court days are appointed’ i.e. there are proper times fixed when such causes can be heard; or perhaps better, because of the verb which
seems to imply that the opportunity of legal action is even now open, ‘court-meetings are now going on.’ In this latter sense σύνοδοι
or some similar noun must be supplied with ἀγοραῖοι.” [J. Rawson Lumby, The Acts of the Apostles, Cambridge Greek Testament for
Schools and Colleges (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1891), 348.]
134 “and there are deputies. The word is the same which in 13:7, 8, 12 should be rendered ‘proconsul,’ and that word is rightly
given here by the Rev. Ver., for Asia was a proconsular province (see on this matter Conybeare and Howson, II. 78). The difficulty in the
present verse has arisen from the use of the plural number, for there was only one proconsul over a province at the same time, and there
could only be one in Ephesus when the townclerk was speaking. But if we consider that he is speaking merely of the provision made by
the institutions of the empire for obtaining justice in a case of wrong, we can see that his words need not occasion much trouble. ‘Proconsuls
are (he says) an imperial institution. In every province like ours there exists such a supreme magistrate, and so there is no fear
about obtaining redress for real injuries.’ Another explanation (due to Basnage, and alluded to in the notes of Conybeare and Howson, u.
s.) is that after the poisoning of Silanus the proconsul, (as related Tac. An. XIII. 1) Celer and Ælius, who governed the province of Asia
as procurators, might be intended by this plural title. Others have thought that there might be present in Ephesus some other proconsul
from a neighbouring province, as Cilicia, Cyprus, Bithynia or elsewhere; but what was first said seems the easier explanation.” [J. Rawson
Lumby, The Acts of the Apostles With Maps, Introduction and Notes, The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1891), 264-65.]
Page 417