Acts of the Sent Away Ones 11

ἀκροβυστία - acro-plug, extremity stopper, high-point bung

See note at Galatians 2:7.

περιτομῆς (genitive singular of περιτομή) is literally “a cutting around,” from περί “around” + τομή “a cut, incision,” derived from τέμνω “to cut”; the compound is thus semantically transparent and originally denotes a circular or circumferential cutting action, before any later specialized or technical extensions.

So it follows that "uncircumcised" in the Greek would be ἀπερίτμητος formed from the privative prefix ἀ- “not” + περίτμητος “circumcised.” This word is actually used only once in Acts 7:51. This is not the word used here in Acts 11:3 or any of the other 20 verses where most translations render the word "uncircumcised." It is uncertain speculation of a word exclusive to the NT that scholars could only give opinions on. The compound ἀκροβυστία has nothing signifying "cutting" nor "covering" and thus the signification of "uncircumcised" is forced onto it.

εὐαγγελιζόμενοι τὸν Κύριον Ἰησοῦν This means "evangelizing the Master Jesu/Salvation" or "gospelizing the Master Salvation/Jesu"

It does not mean "preaching."

It serves the same function as other similar "-izing" words:

When a –ίζω verb (such as εὐαγγελίζω, βαπτίζω, καθαρίζω, σκανδαλίζω) is followed by an accusative of a person, the construction reflects one of two tightly defined valency patterns in Greek:

1. Direct Object of Affect (Patient Accusative)

Here the person in the accusative is the one directly acted upon—i.e., the recipient of the action that the verb effects.

Structural pattern

Verb (–ίζω) + Accusative Person

Semantic value

“to cause that person to undergo X”

Examples (structural type)

• βαπτίζω τινά → “to immerse someone”
• καθαρίζω τινά → “to cleanse someone”
• σκανδαλίζω τινά → “to cause someone to stumble”
• δουλίζω τινά → “to enslave someone”

Here the accusative marks the directly transformed participant. This is the canonical transitive use of –ίζω.

2. Double-Object Frame (Person + Content)

With communicative or declarative –ίζω verbs (especially εὐαγγελίζω), Greek often uses:

Accusative of person + Accusative of thing
or
Accusative of person + περί / ὅτι + clause

Example patterns

• εὐαγγελίζω τινά τι
  = “to announce something to someone”

• εὐαγγελίζω τινά περὶ τινός
  = “to proclaim to someone about something”

Here:

• The person-accusative = recipient

• The second object or clause = semantic content

So the person is not transformed, but informed.

What This Means for εὐαγγελιζόμενοι + Accusative Person

When you see:

εὐαγγελιζόμενοι τινά

the accusative person is not undergoing a physical change, but is:

• the target of proclamation

• the recipient of communicated content

• grammatically functioning as a personal goal without a preposition

This is a regular Greek extension of the “affect” accusative into the semantic domain of information transfer.

With εὐαγγελιζόμενοι, an accusative person is not the content of the proclamation but the recipient of it. In Greek valency terms, the person in the accusative functions as the affected addressee (recipient/patient of the speech act), while the content is expressed separately—either by a second accusative (εὐαγγελίζω τινά τι), a prepositional phrase (περί + gen.), or a ὅτι/ὡς clause.

All the previous translations, trying to avoid the truthful reading, add words such as περί + gen. and/or change the noun "Jesu/Salvation" into a genitive form (e.g. of Jesus) when it (he) is in fact an accusative direct object. In other words, pretty much every rendering ever of this line has been falsely crafted.

Self Cycle

ἐνιαυτός originally means “the completed cycle" 
It is not just “year” in a calendar sense, but literally the returning / recurring period that closes upon itself.

Homeric and archaic examples preserve this cyclic sense:

• ἐνιαυτῷ = “at the completion of the annual cycle”
• περιπλομένων ἐνιαυτῶν (Od. 1.16) = “as the years rolled around (completed their orbits).”

Hence the semantic extension:
ἐνιαυτός → any full cycle / period that returns into itself.

In inscriptions (e.g., Delphi, Crete):

• πρὸ τῶ ἐνιαυτοῦ = “before the year has completed its cycle.”

• ἐνιαυτῷ = “when the yearly cycle expires.”

The term marks a closed temporal loop, not simply the number 12 months.

Because the base meaning is “a completed cycle,” Greeks extended it to any recurring temporal pattern, especially astronomical ones. Thus:

a. The Metonic Cycle

19 years = period after which lunar and solar calendars realign.
DS 12.36:
ὁ μέγας ἐνιαυτός used of the 19-year Metonic cycle.

b. The 600-year cycle

Josephus (AJ 1.3.9) mentions a 600-year ἐνιαυτός for a long astronomical period.

c. “ἀΐδιος ἐνιαυτός” (Apollodorus)

The “eternal cycle” = an unending cosmic recurrence.

Pythagorean usage — ὁ μέγας ἐνιαυτός

Eudemus (ap. Theon Smyrnaeus 198H) gives the Pythagorean doctrine:

μέγας ἐνιαυτός =

the cosmic cycle after which the entire configuration of the heavens returns to the same starting-point
(all planets, sun, moon in identical relative positions).

Characteristics:

• A determinable but immense number of years.

• Not a simple solar year; it is a harmonic / astronomical cycle.

• Based on numerical ratios of planetary periods.

• When completed, all phenomena recur exactly (Pythagorean “eternal recurrence” doctrine).

Thus for the Pythagoreans:
ἐνιαυτός = cycle of recurrence.
μέγας ἐνιαυτός = total cosmic recurrence.

This turns “year” into a metaphysical notion:
a closed, resonant period determined by the harmonic ratios (λόγοι) of celestial motions.

The root of ἐνιαυτός is transparently cyclic:

• ἐν (in) + αὐτός (self) → originally “the time that returns into itself.”
  (cf. ancient etymologists: ἐν αὑτῷ γιγνόμενος χρόνος = “the time that becomes what it was.”)

Hence:

ἐνιαυτός = a completed, self-returning period.

The Pythagorean cycle (μέγας ἐνιαυτός) is the extension of the basic meaning of ἐνιαυτός—a completed, self-returning temporal loop—to the largest possible astronomical recurrence. The term naturally expands because its core sense is cyclic completion, not merely “year.”

(cf. LSJ ἐνιαυτός)

χρηματίσαι is not a passive verb nor a past tense. It is an infinitive active “to conduct public business / to officially designate / to deal” This comes from the cluster of senses where χρηματίζω =

• deliberate / issue a determination, 
• conduct formal business, 
• give an official response, 
• be designated in an official or public manner. 

The verb casts the naming as a public, civic, or administrative act, not a casual nickname. It aligns with the sense used of assemblies and authorities “conducting business,” “issuing determinations,” or “designating something in an official capacity.”

Χριστιανούς "Christians"

The form, Χριστιανός (Christianos) is a Latinized political word. One would expect a suffix like -ικός (-ikos) Χρισματικος (Chrismatikós) if it was supposed to carry the meaning of Pertaining to the Anointing, similar to the name Charismatics derived from the Greek charis "divine gift." It skips these native Greek formations and instead uses the Latin loan suffix -ιανός (-ianos). This strongly implies the name's actual genesis was based on the social and political naming conventions of the Roman Empire, rather than theological derivation. 

That said, τοὺς μαθητὰς Χριστιανούς means unequivocally The Christian Learners or Christian Disciples. Does the verb χρηματίσαι split these words up as direct object + name? These three words are all in the accusative. χρηματίσαι is an aorist infinitive active in every single Greek manuscript.

Every translation mistranslates this into a past tense "were called." χρηματίσαι in itself cannot mean “were called.” It is the aorist active infinitive of χρηματίζω, whose primary senses are “to transact, do business, conduct affairs; to have dealings” (Classical → Hellenistic usage). The specialized sense is “to give oracular responses” from the noun χρησμός), but not passive “to be named/called.” (cf. LSJ χρηματίζω). Even the specialized sense doesn't fit. No one is giving divine oracles here. Julia Smith was the only one apparently to attempt to translate this as "by divine intimation" but that still defies the infinitive with an accusative. Since this was apparently too difficult for scholars to figure out, and they were absolutely certain of what was meant, it was an inconsequential thing to wave the wand and magically change the aorist infinitive active into a passive past tense. I mean, who's going to notice such subtle craft, right? And—as the reasoning goes—it's not like it's going to change the entire narrative or history of the Church, so...

"Presto!"

Agabus the Locust

The earliest manuscripts have an imperfect indicative active ἐσήμαινεν not the aorist active indicative seen in later copies. This means the aspect is different: Imperfective (ongoing, explanatory, background) and the sense: was showing / kept signifying.

"Behold! days are those who come—a whisper of inner master of myself, He Is— and I have let loose a hunger within the Earthly One, not a hunger for the bread loaf and not a thirst for dual-waters, but rather to hear self eternal alignments of He Is!"

(Amos 8:11 RBT)