Εἶπε δὲ ὁ ἀρχιερεύς· εἰ ἄρα ταῦτα οὕτως ἔχει;
Main Narrative Verb and Speaker Identification: Εἶπε δὲ ὁ ἀρχιερεύς
-
- Εἶπε: Aorist active indicative, 3rd person singular of λέγω, “he said.”
- Aorist marks a completed act of speech.
- δὲ: Postpositive coordinating conjunction—”then,” “and,” or “but,” providing narrative continuation.
- ὁ ἀρχιερεύς: Nominative singular masculine with article—”the high priest.”
- Subject of the verb εἶπε, identifying the speaker as the judicial authority presiding over the Sanhedrin.
Interrogative Clause: Εἰ ἄρα ταῦτα οὕτως ἔχει;
-
- Εἰ: Conditional particle introducing a first-class condition or rhetorical question.
- Often rendered “Is it the case that…?” or “Are these things so?”
- ἄρα: Inferential particle—”then,” “therefore.”
- Indicates logical consequence or inquiry.
- ταῦτα: Nominative or accusative neuter plural demonstrative pronoun—”these things.”
- οὕτως: Adverb—”thus,” “in this way.”
- ἔχει: Present active indicative, 3rd person singular of ἔχω, here meaning “to be so,” “to be the case.”
- Full rendering: “Are these things so then?” or “Is it really so concerning these matters?”
- This concise interrogation encapsulates the formal accusation and invites the defendant (Stephen) to speak.
Forensic Context and Conditional Inquiry in Koine Greek
The verse opens the dramatic courtroom scene in which Stephen is called to answer accusations of blasphemy against the temple and the law (cf. Acts 6:13–14). The simple yet loaded question posed by the high priest—Εἰ ἄρα ταῦτα οὕτως ἔχει;—is both judicial and rhetorical.
The grammar supports this:
- The conditional particle εἰ in this context introduces not a hypothetical but a question of fact—akin to “Is it true that…?”
- The inferential ἄρα suggests that the high priest is weighing previous testimony and drawing an investigative inference.
- The use of ἔχει with οὕτως idiomatically means “stand thus” or “be the case in this way.”
- It’s a stock expression for factual inquiry in forensic speech.
This succinct interrogation serves as a legal formality, framing the transition to Stephen’s long and historically grounded defense (Acts 7:2–53). The fact that no formal charges are restated here may reflect Luke’s narrative focus on injustice, and the power imbalance in the trial setting—Stephen stands accused by false witnesses, while the high priest offers only a vague question to elicit a self-incriminating reply.
Thus, grammatically and contextually, Acts 7:1 stands as a narrative hinge, marking the shift from accusation to defense, and showcasing Luke’s mastery of judicial language in Koine Greek. The phrasing respects legal protocol while simultaneously opening space for a powerful prophetic speech.
