“Examined the Scriptures”?: The Meaning of ἀνακρίνοντɛς τὰς γραφάς in Acts 17:11

Discussions about Paul’s use of Scripture have focused significant attention on the question of literacy rates and access to scrolls and other manuscripts in ancient synagogues and the early church.¹ If most of the people in Paul’s churches could not read and those who could had little if any access to biblical texts, they could not be expected to have an accurate knowledge of the biblical passages cited or alluded to in his letters and would not have been able to look them up to check on the accuracy of his interpretations. Based on the standard translations of Acts 17:11, modern readers may be tempted to imagine a setting in which most or many members of a community (or at least several people) had access to a copy of a Bible that they could use to consult the relevant texts. As traditionally translated, the text suggests that members of an ancient synagogue would indeed be able to examine the Scriptures to see if Paul’s interpretations were credible. Given the realities of ancient employment of biblical texts, such a scenario seems extremely unlikely. Still, Acts 17:11 would seem to be an important datum for understanding how Scripture was engaged in the ancient synagogue since, issues of historical accuracy aside, the depiction of events in Beroea presumably reflects a realistic scenario.

One would think that further evidence of ancient approaches to the study of Scripture might be found by looking for other places where the verb ἀνακρίνω is used for the examination of ancient texts. But there do not seem to be any other such instances, and it turns out, as shall be argued below, that although this text would seem (based on its traditional translation) to provide positive evidence regarding the direct handling and study of the Scriptures in ancient synagogues, it does not actually provide such evidence.

The evidence to be analyzed below suggests that the word ἀνακρίνω is never used of the examination or study of texts or artifacts. When used with an impersonal object in a nonjudicial setting (as in Acts 17:11), the verb means to ask [someone] questions about the direct object. The meanings of the verb that are found in the NT may be more fully outlined as follows. In nonjudicial contexts it is usually used with personal objects but is sometimes used with impersonal objects and sometimes with both personal and impersonal objects. When a personal object is used, it usually means to ask [the object] a question [about something]. The context may make it clear, however, that the person named or referenced as the object is not the one being questioned but the one about whom someone else (identified in the context) is questioned (see the example below from Antiphon, Speeches 2.3.2). When there is both a personal and an impersonal object, the personal object refers to the person who is asked the question(s) and the impersonal object identifies the topic about which the subject inquires. In cases where there is an impersonal object but no personal object, the impersonal object identifies the topic about which the subject asks another person questions and the personal object is omitted because it (the person who is asked the questions) has already been identified in the near context. When the word is used in judicial contexts, personal objects identify those who are questioned (or “examined” in the courtroom sense) during a legal proceeding (usually a preliminary hearing), and impersonal objects identify the charges or issues regarding which a legal hearing (usually a preliminary hearing) is held. No evidence has been found, in either judicial or nonjudicial contexts, of a case where the verb refers to the study or examination of a text or document, despite the standard understanding of Acts 17:11 over many centuries. The lexical evidence suggests that the Beroeans are portrayed as asking Paul questions about the Scriptures every day (in order to decide if his teaching was consistent with what the Scriptures said). This essay will attempt to explain both the lexical evidence and how it has been neglected...