τινὲς δὲ καὶ τῶν Ἐπικουρείων καὶ Στωϊκῶν φιλοσόφων συνέβαλλον αὐτῷ, καί τινες ἔλεγον· τί ἂν θέλοι ὁ σπερμολόγος οὗτος λέγειν; οἱ δέ, Ξένων δαιμονίων δοκεῖ καταγγελεὺς εἶναι· ὅτι τὸν Ἰησοῦν καὶ τὴν ἀνάστασιν εὐηγγελίζετο αὐτοῖς. (Acts 17:18)
And some also of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers were conversing with him, and some were saying, “What might this seed-picker wish to say?” But others said, “He seems to be a proclaimer of foreign deities,” because he was proclaiming Jesus and the resurrection to them.
Declinable Elements That Shape the Scene
Luke’s Greek in Acts 17:18 is full of vivid declinable forms—participles, articles, and nouns—that highlight conflict, identity, and rhetorical nuance in Paul’s encounter with Athenian philosophers. Below is a case-by-case breakdown showing how declensions encode social, theological, and narrative dynamics.
Form, Function, and Force
| Greek Word | Morphology | Case & Syntactic Role | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| τινὲς | Indefinite pronoun, nominative plural masculine | Subject (of συνέβαλλον and ἔλεγον) | Refers to an unspecified subset of listeners—immediate shift to individual response |
| τῶν Ἐπικουρείων | 2nd declension masculine genitive plural proper noun | Partitive genitive | Specifies which group “some” belonged to |
| Στωϊκῶν | 2nd declension masculine genitive plural proper noun | Partitive genitive | Paired with Ἐπικουρείων, emphasizing dual philosophical representation |
| φιλοσόφων | 2nd declension masculine genitive plural noun | Genitive of apposition | Explains who the Epicureans and Stoics are—“philosophers” |
| αὐτῷ | Dative singular masculine personal pronoun | Indirect object of συνέβαλλον | “They conversed with him”—refers to Paul |
| ὁ σπερμολόγος οὗτος | 2nd declension masculine nominative singular with demonstrative | Subject of θέλοι and λέγειν | Pejorative: “seed-picker” (babbler), emphasized by article and demonstrative “this” |
| οἱ | Article, nominative plural masculine | Subject of δοκεῖ | Second group of respondents; shifts the tone to accusation |
| Ξένων | 2nd declension masculine genitive plural adjective | Attributive genitive | Modifies δαιμονίων, specifying what kind of deities |
| δαιμονίων | 2nd declension neuter genitive plural noun | Genitive of possession/description | Used ambiguously; could mean “divinities” or “spirits” |
| καταγγελεύς | 3rd declension masculine nominative singular | Predicate nominative with δοκεῖ | Describes what Paul “seems” to be |
| τὸν Ἰησοῦν | 2nd declension masculine accusative singular proper noun | Accusative object of εὐηγγελίζετο | The core content of Paul’s proclamation |
| τὴν ἀνάστασιν | 1st declension feminine accusative singular noun with article | Accusative object (conjoined) | Proclaimed alongside Jesus; may have been misunderstood as a second deity |
| αὐτοῖς | Dative plural masculine personal pronoun | Dative of indirect object | The recipients of the evangelistic message |
Articles in Dialogue: Identity and Irony
– ὁ σπερμολόγος + οὗτος: The definite article makes it personal and mocking—“this babbler.”
– τὸν Ἰησοῦν…τὴν ἀνάστασιν: Articular accusatives emphasize specificity. This isn’t just a resurrection—it’s the Resurrection, tied to a known person.
When Agreement Sheds Light
– Ξένων and δαιμονίων are perfectly aligned: genitive plural, with a tight attributive relationship.
– The article οἱ introduces the second group of speakers. Their use of δοκεῖ (he seems) and the nominative καταγγελεύς keeps the syntax neat but layered with irony.
The Declension That Divides
This verse is a clash of minds, but it’s also a clash of declensions. Greek precision sets the stage for misunderstanding and mockery. The article and noun choices reveal worldview: “foreign deities” isn’t a neutral term—it’s a category of suspicion. And the articular accusatives show Paul’s unwavering focus: Jesus and resurrection, proclaimed clearly, declined decisively.
Declensions That Divide and Declare
Declensions here draw the lines—between groups, beliefs, and theologies. They clarify Paul’s subject, isolate his audience, and expose how truth can be grammatically misunderstood. The stoic and epicurean sneers are preserved not only in vocabulary, but in the form. Grammar becomes ideology—and Paul’s gospel still finds its structure even among skeptics.
