SLD

I posted a question on Apologetics.com asking for commentary on why Luke would feel the need to have Jesus use one of Dionysis's lines in Euripides' play "The Bacchae". I am of course referring to the famous line: "It is hard for you to kick against the pricks." Uttered by Jesus to Paul on the road to Damascus.

According to one reply I got, the original greek manuscripts did not contain this line and thus newer translations leave it out. I got a link to this website:

Clarke's Commentary

Which states the following about the line:

So is it really not found in any of the original Greek writings? Is it a later edition to Acts and if so, when? Also, I'm confused as to what this author is saying? In the KJV the line appears in two different places, Chapter 9, Verse 5 and Chapter 26 verse 14 again where Paul quotes Jesus saying it to him. So is it always found in Chapter 26 and only some in Chapter 9 of Acts in the older Greek manuscripts?

My question and their answers are posted here for those interested:

Apologetics.com

SLD

leftfist

I was wondering about this recently too. I have the Oxford Study Bible, which contains the Revised English Bible. It contains that line at 26:14 but not in chapter 9. The fact that Greek manuscripts do not contain it in chapter 9 is irrelevant to whether Luke used the phrase because as pointed out in your quote, those manuscripts do have it in chapter 26. Presumably it was added in chapter 9 to make Jesus's words in each account of Saul's vision the same.

This may not be much help but the notes for 26:14 say "kick like this against the goad" is from a Greek proverb. I don't know anything else about that, but if that's true, it may have just been a reasonably common phrase and thus Luke didn't necessarily get it from The Bacchae.

Peter Kirby

Here is the UBS page for Acts 9:5.



629-gr refers to a 14th century miniscule of Acts and the Epistles of Paul. it-gig refers to a 13th century Old Latin manuscript called Gigas. it-r refers to a 7th/8th century manuscript called Schlettstadtensis. Lucifer of Cagliari dates to 370. Ephraem dates to 373. Ambrose dates to 397. Theophylact dates to 1077. The other Latin manuscripts date to the fifth century or later. The phrase is omitted from 9:5-6 in the Vulgate. It is not found in the Greek manuscripts of the Byzantine, Western, Alexandrian, or any other text type before the 14th century. As stated in the quote above, the phrase was added in chapter 9 as an echo of its appearance in chapter 26, probably in Latin manuscripts sometime in the fourth century. The interpolation was picked up by the Stephens 1550 Textus Receptus and perpetuated through the KJV 1611.

On the other hand, there are no text-critical notes concerning Acts 26:14, which reads:

Acts 26:14 Greek. πάντων τέ καταπεσόντων ἡμῶν εἰς τὴν γῆν ἔκουσα φωνὴν λέγουσαν πρὸς μέ τῇ ἑβραΐδι διαλέκτῳ, Σαοὺλ Σαούλ, τί με διώκεις; σκληρόν σοι πρὸς κέντρα λακτίζειν.

Acts 26:14 Darby. And, when we were all fallen to the ground, I heard a voice saying to me in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? [it is] hard for thee to kick against goads.

Here are some parallels that turned up with a search of my TLG CD-ROM.

The phrase is found in the fourth century longer recension of the epistles of Ignatius (CCEL translation).

"For I have heard some saying, If I do not find the Gospel in the archives, I will not believe it. To such persons I say that my archives are Jesus Christ, to disobey whom is manifest destruction. My authentic archives are His cross, and death, and resurrection, and the faith which bears on these things, by which I desire, through your prayers, to be justified. He who disbelieves the Gospel disbelieves everything along with it. For the archives ought not to be preferred to the Spirit. 'It is hard to kick against the pricks;' (σκληρὸν τὸ πρὸς κέντρα λακτιζειν) it is hard to disbelieve Christ; it is hard to reject the preaching of the apostles."

The phrase is also found Constitutions of the fourth century Holy Apostles 7.46:

Οὐ γάρ ἐστιν ὁ Θεὸς ἀκαταστασίας, ἵνα οἱ ὑποβεβηκότες
τὰ τῶν κρειττόνων τυραννικῶς σφετερίζωνται, νομοθεσίαν
καινὴν ἀναπλάττοντες ἐπὶ κακῷ τῷ ἑαυτῶν, ἀγνοοῦντες
ὅτι σκληρὸν αὐτοῖς πρὸς κέντρα λακτίζειν.

For "God is not the God of confusion," that the subordinate persons should tyrannically assume to themselves the functions belonging to their superiors, forming a new scheme of laws to their own mischief, not knowing that "it is hard for them to kick against the pricks; "212 for such as these do not fight against us, or against the bishops, but against the universal Bishop and the High Priest of the Father, Jesus Christ our Lord. (CCEL translation)

Gregorius Nyssenus Theol., Adversus eos qui castigationes aegre ferunt; MPG 46.
Volume 46, page 312, line 26 (late fourth century)

Λεκτέον δὲ τῷ τοιούτῳ τὸ πρὸς Παῦλον λεχθὲν, ἡνίκα ἔτι Σαῦλος ἐτύγχανε· Σκληρόν σοι, ἄνθρωπε, πρὸς κέντρα λακτίζειν.

"It is said of such as this that which was said to Paul, when still happened to be Saul: It is hard for you, man, to kick against pricks." (my translation)

Epiphanius Scr. Eccl., Ancoratus
“Epiphanius, Band 1: Ancoratus und Panarion”, Ed. Holl, K.
Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1915; Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller 25.
Chapter 14, section 6, line 4 (late fourth century)

τί μάχῃ τῷ ἀκαταμαχήτῳ; σκληρόν σοι πρὸς κέντρα λακτίζειν.

"How would you fight the unconquerable? It is hard for you to kick against pricks." (my translation)

Athanasius Theol., Historia Arianorum
“Athanasius Werke, vol. 2.1”, Ed. Opitz, H.G.
Berlin: De Gruyter, 1940.
Chapter 39, section 3, line 3 (mid fourth century)

τοῦτο καὶ σοὶ συμβουλεύομεν· μὴ μάχου πρὸς τὸν δεδωκότα σοι τὴν ἀρχὴν
ταύτην· μὴ ἀντ' εὐχαριστίας ἀσεβήσῃς εἰς αὐτόν· μὴ δίωκε τοὺς πιστεύοντας εἰς αὐτόν·
μὴ ἀκούσῃς καὶ σύ· σκληρόν σοι πρὸς κέντρα λακτίζειν.

For after the Emperor had frequently written to Rome, had threatened, sent commissioners, devised schemes, on the persecution subsequently breaking out at Alexandria, Liberius is dragged before him, and uses great boldness of speech towards him. 'Cease,' he said, 'to persecute the Christians; attempt not by my means to introduce impiety into the Church. We are ready to suffer anything rather than to be called Arian madmen. We are Christians; compel us not to become enemies of Christ.' We also give you this counsel: fight not against Him who gave you this empire, nor show impiety towards Him instead of thankfulness; persecute not them that believe in Him, lest you also hear the words, 'It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.' Nay, I would that you might hear them, that you might obey, as the holy Paul did. (Atkinson translation)

The verse is also quoted in Asterius ("it is hard, after all for you to kick against pricks"), John Chrysostom ("for it is hard for you to kick against sharp pricks"), Cyrillus ("Paul declares, I know that it is hard for me to kick against pricks"), Theodorus Studites ("It is hard for you, he declares, to kick against pricks"), Theodoret, John Damascene, Nicolaus I, Ephraem Syrus, Severianus, and Ecumenical Council of 431.

My search above included texts that have "hard" and "prick(s)" in the same sentence. I did not turn up any non-Christian authors with the idiom. However, when I looked for the verb "kick" and the noun "prick(s)," I found the quote from Euripides. Here is the passage in Bacchae.

(For background, the Columbia Encylcopedia says, "Pentheus: in Greek mythology, king of Thebes, son of Cadmus' daughter Agave. When Dionysus came to Thebes, Pentheus denied his divinity and tried to prevent his ecstatic rites. The women of Thebes, led by Agave, were driven mad by the offended god and tore Pentheus to pieces. The story is the subject of Euripides' Bacchae.")

Chorus Leader
[775] I fear to speak freely to the king, but I will speak nevertheless: Dionysus is inferior to none of the gods.

Pentheus
Already like fire does this insolence of the Bacchae blaze up, a great reproach for the Hellenes. [780] But we must not hesitate. Go to the Electran gates, bid all the shield-bearers and riders of swift-footed horses to assemble, as well as all who brandish the light shield and pluck bowstrings with their hands, so that we can make an assault against [785] the Bacchae. For it is indeed too much if we suffer what we are suffering at the hands of women.

Dionysus
Pentheus, though you hear my words, you obey not at all. Though I suffer ill at your hands, still I say that it is not right for you to raise arms against a god, [790] but to remain calm. Bromius will not allow you to remove the Bacchae from the joyful mountains.

Pentheus
Do not instruct me, but be content in your escape from prison. Or shall I bring punishment upon you again?

Dionysus
I would sacrifice to the god rather [795] than kick against his spurs in anger, a mortal against a god. (θύοιμ' ἂν αὐτῶι μᾶλλον ἢ θυμούμενος πρὸς κέντρα λακτίζοιμι θνητὸς ὢν θεῶι.)

Pentheus
I will sacrifice, making a great slaughter of the women, as they deserve, in the glens of Kithairon.

Dionysus
You will all flee. And it will be a source of shame that you turn your bronze shields away from the thyrsoi of the Bacchae.

Pentheus
[800] This stranger with whom I am locked together is impossible, and neither suffering nor doing will he be quiet.

Dionysus
My friend, there is still opportunity to arrange these things well.

Pentheus
Doing what? Being a slave to my slaves?

Dionysus
Without weapons I will bring the women here.

Pentheus
[805] Alas! You are contriving this as a trick against me.

Dionysus
What sort, if I wish to save you by my contrivances?

Pentheus
You have devised this together, so that you may have your revelry forever.

Dionysus
I certainly did--that is so--with the god.

Pentheus
(To a servant) Bring me my armor.
(To Dionysus) And you, stop speaking.

Yet Euripides is not the first to use the phrase. Look at what we find in Pindar's Odes, Pythia 2.94 and surrounding lines.

φέρειν δ' ἐλαφρῶς ἐπαυχένιον λαβόντα ζυγόν ἀρήγει· ποτὶ κέντρον δέ τοι λακτιζέμεν τελέθει ὀλισθηρὸς οἶμος· ἁδόν- τα δ' εἴη με τοῖς ἀγαθοῖς ὁμιλεῖν.

A crafty citizen is unable to speak a compelling word among noble men; and yet he fawns on everyone, weaving complete destruction. I do not share his boldness. Let me be a friend to my friend; but I will be an enemy to my enemy, and pounce on him like a wolf, [85] treading every crooked path. Under every type of law the man who speaks straightforwardly prospers: in a tyranny, and where the raucous masses oversee the state, and where men of skill do. One must not fight against a god, who raises up some men's fortunes at one time, and at another gives great glory to others. But even this [90] does not comfort the minds of the envious; they pull the line too tight and plant a painful wound in their own heart before they get what they are scheming for. It is best to take the yoke on one's neck and bear it lightly; kicking against the goad [95] makes the path treacherous. I hope that I may associate with noble men and please them.

Here we find the expression "to kick against the goad" used of resisting the will of a god already in the early fifth century before Christ. (Bacchae of Euripides was posthumously produced in 405 BCE.) Aelius Aristides specifically refers to Pindar as advising not to kick against goads in "From Plato Concerning Rhetoric" (Jebb edition, page 53, line 15).

The phrase is also found in Aeschylus, Agamemnon, Line 1624. With the death of Aeschylus set around 456 BCE, this work was also published before Euripides' Bacchae.

Aegisthus
You speak like that, you who sit at the lower oar when those upon the higher bench control the ship? Old as you are, you shall learn how bitter it is at your age to be schooled when prudence is the lesson set before you. Bonds and the pangs of hunger are far the best doctors of the spirit when it comes to instructing the old. Do you have eyes and lack understanding? Do not kick against the goads lest you strike to your own hurt. (πρὸς κέντρα μὴ λάκτιζε, μὴ παίσας μογῇς.)

The following is found in the epitome of Aristophanes (late third century BCE to early second century BCE) of Aristotle's History of Animals.

ὁ μὲν γὰρ ταῖς ἀκμαῖς τῶν τριχῶν ἐμβεβηκὼς αὑτοῦ τοὺς ὀδόντας ξυνῆκε, τοῦτο δὴ τὸ λεγόμενον, εἰς κέντρα λακτίζων, εἶτα καὶ νῶτα δοὺς ὀξὺς οἴχεται.

Julian the Emperor (mid fourth century) writes the following in Orations 246B:

Χρὴ δὲ καὶ οὗ γεγόναμεν τιμᾶν, ἐπειδὴ τοῦτο θεῖός ἐστι νόμος, καὶ πείθεσθαί γε οἷς ἂν ἐπιτάττῃ καὶ μὴ βιάζεσθαι μηδέ, ὅ φησιν ἡ παροιμία, πρὸς κέντρα λακτίζειν· ἀπαραίτητον γάρ ἐστι τὸ λεγόμενον ζυγὸν τῆς ἀνάγκης· οὐ μὴν ὀδυρτέον οὐδὲ θρηνητέον ἐφ' οἷς ἐπιτάττει τραχύτερον, ἀλλὰ τὸ πρᾶγμα λογιστέον αὐτό.

"The whole world is my city and fatherland, and my friends are the gods and lesser divinities and all good men whoever and wherever they may be. Yet it is right to respect also the country where I was born, since this is the divine law, and to obey all her commands and not oppose them, or as the proverb says kick against the pricks. For inexorable, as the saying goes, is the yoke of necessity." (Loeb translation)

There is one final proof of the ubiquity of the phrase. Diogenianus of Heraclea flourished during the reign of Hadrian (117-138 CE). He wrote an alphabetical lexicon, mostly of poetical idioms. Here is one entry (Centuria 7, section 84, line 1).

πρὸς κέντρα λακτίζεις· δήλη ἡ παροιμία.

"You are kicking against pricks: the saying is clear." (my translation)

Thus, the use of an expression "to kick against pricks" in reference to resisting a god is widespread in the ancient Greek-speaking world and cannot in itself show dependence of one author upon another.

best,
Peter Kirby

Steven Carr

As always, an awesome post by Peter.

Aren't there other references to Euripides in Acts?

In Euripides' Bacchae, line 447, we read the following 'Of their own accord (autamato), the chains were loosed from their feet and keys opened the doors (thura) without human hand.' In Acts 10:12, we read how doors opened for Peter of their own accord (automatos) and in Acts 16:26, we read how an earthquake loosed the chains from everybody and all the doors opened by themselves.

Did an earthquake really loose a chain from a prisoner, not a noted result of seismic activity? Or did Luke base his account of Peter and Paul's escapes on Euripides' play about the persecuted followers of a persecuted and misunderstood deity, the son of Zeus and a young , mortal woman?

Peter Kirby

Since Luke writes in excellent Greek and is known to echo Greek literature on several other occasions, I see no strong objection to the idea that Luke had read Bacchae by Euripides, using it either to shape the contours of his tradition or even as the primary inspiration for the stories mentioned.

Several scholars have noted the parallels of prison escape, as narrated in Acts, in other Greek literature, including but not limited to Bacchae.

Luke Timothy Johnson writes: "Accounts of prison-escapes are found everywhere in Hellenistic fiction, whether their wonderful character is owed to some human virtue or relationship (see Lucian of Samosata, Toxaris 28-33; Achilles Tatius, Clitophon and Leucippe 3:9-11), or due to some divine intervention (Ovid, Metamorphoses 3:690-700; Artapanus, On the Jews, frag. three; The Acts of Paul 7; The Acts of Thomas 162-163). One of the most interesting examples of the type-scene is also one of the earliest, the escape of the devotees of Bacchus from prison by divine intervention after a tyrant had jailed them in an attempt to halt the growth of the cult (see Euripides, Bacchae 346-357; 434-450; 510-643)." (The Acts of the Apostles, p. 217)

Ovid's account says (Metamorphoses 699-700):

"Of their own accord the doors fly open wide; of their own accord, with no one loosing them, the chains fell from the prisoner's arms."

sponte sua patuisse fores lapsasque lacertis
sponte sua fama est nullo solvente catenas.

Here is what we find in Artapanus, On the Jews, fragment three (as translated by J. J. Collins in Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, vol. 2, p. 901):

"The king of the Egyptians learned of Moses' presence, summoned him and asked for what purpose he had come. He responded that the master of the universe had orderd him to release the Jews. When the king learned of this, he confined him in prison. But when night came, all the doors of the prison opened of themselves (αὐτομάτως), and some of the guards died, while others were relaxed by sleep and their weapons were broken."

Commenting on Acts 12:7, Conzelmann writes, "There is, however, no literary dependence of Luke upon Euripides here, but rather the appropriation of a widespread motif," (Acts, p. 94), referencing Alfred Vogeli's article "Lukas and Euripides" in ThZ 9 (1953) 415-38. (Nope, I haven't read it.)

Comparison between the New Testament and Euripides goes back to the second century. Origen writes in Contra Celsum 2.34:

This Jew of Celsus, ridiculing Jesus, as he imagines, is described as being acquainted with the Bacchae of Euripides, in which Dionysus says:- "The divinity himself will liberate me whenever I wish."85 Now the Jews are not much acquainted with Greek literature; but suppose that there was a Jew so well versed in it (as to make such a quotation on his part appropriate), how (does it follow) that Jesus could not liberate Himself, because He did not do so? For let him believe from our own Scriptures that Peter obtained his freedom after having been bound in prison, an angel having loosed his chains; and that Paul, having been bound in the stocks along with Silas in Philippi of Macedonia, was liberated by divine power, when the gates of the prison were opened. But it is probable that Celsus treats these accounts with ridicule, or that he never read them; for he would probably say in reply, that there are certain sorcerers who are able by incantations to unloose chains and to open doors, so that he would liken the events related in our histories to the doings of sorcerers. "But," he continues, "no calamity happened even to him who condemned him, as there did to Pentheus, viz., madness or discerption."86 And yet he does not know that it was not so much Pilate that condemned Him (who knew that "for envy the Jews had delivered Him"), as the Jewish nation, which has been condemned by God, and rent in pieces, and dispersed over the whole earth, in a degree far beyond what happened to Pentheus. Moreover, why did he intentionally omit what is related of Pilate's wife, who beheld a vision, and who was so moved by it as to send a message to her husband, saying: "Have thou nothing to do with that just man; for I have suffered many things this day in a dream because of Him? "87 And again, passing by in silence the proofs of the divinity of Jesus, Celsus endeavours to cast reproach upon Him from the narratives in the Gospel, referring to those who mocked Jesus, ...

It seems that Celsus is not comparing the stories in Acts (Origen says he may never have read them) but saying that Jesus should have been able to let himself down off the cross. Origen replies that the disciples of Jesus could escape their bonds, so how much more could the master? Origen antipates the objection of a neo-Celsus, that a magician could release himself from imprisonment (Houdini, anyone?). This once again shows the proliferation of stories about prison escape in the Greco-Roman world. In the Life of Apollonius by Philostratus, the divine man can easily loosen his chains (7.34, 8.30), while Luke would consider the "magic" in his story to be the miracle of God's doing (but, nevertheless, is probably influenced by these magical ideas).

My bet is that this kind of prison escape scene was stock in trade for fiction in the first century. Which definitely casts doubt on historicity, but doesn't necessarily indicate Euripides as the sole source (or in the mind of Luke while writing at all).

best,
Peter Kirby

SLD

Well, I knew Peter would reply and tell me far more than I could ever find out on my own. Excellent work. You are indeed a scholar of first rate.

So is this a phrase that Jesus would use? A first Century AD Israelite? Well, a resurrected one in any event.

I don't think so. Sounds like Luke is borrowing it from a variety of Greek Sources if not from another religion that he himself was familiar. Another example of how the Bible is just a bunch of baloney.

SLD

leftfist

Of course the most likely scenario is that Luke decided to put those words in Jesus's mouth and Jesus never said them and Paul probably never said Jesus said them. Nevertheless...

A. So what? I'm not sure Luke or most of the other authors of the NT books necessarily purport that the dialogue in their books is word for word exactly what was said.

B. I don't think it was exactly uncommon for Israelites to know Greek at that time. And considering that Jesus is here presented as the resurrected son of God, one would assume he could communicate in any language he felt like. Paul obviously knew Greek, and Jesus would presumably communicate in whatever manner would be most effective to get Paul to understand, using whatever proverbs or expressions or what have you Paul would understand.

Steven Carr

Jesus might have known Greek and been able to communicate in Greek, but Acts 26:14 says that Jesus spoke those words in Hebrew.

The Greek is therefore Luke's translation, or Paul's, if we think Luke is reporting what Paul said to Agrippa.

judge

Hi Acts was written in Aramaic not greek. This can be shown by comparing the texts.

Whnthnwtstmntbkwrfrstwrttnthywrprbblywrttnlkths.

I just wrote this last sentence without vowels or spacing or plurals which is probably how the NT was written.

Anyone doing a translation would leave some evidence no matter how hard they tried.

Is it singular or plural?
Is that dog or dig?
Is that crane(the bird) or crane (the machine)?

These kinds or "smoking guns are all through the NT, but because everone already knows it was written in greek no one one has bothered to really study whether it really was.

Peter Kirby

Keeping some continuity with the original post, and in response to the sentence above, I've shown that "to kick against pricks" as found in Acts 26:14 was a well-known proverb in Greek. Can you find any attestation at all for the saying in Aramaic? (Other than your claim of its appearance in Aramaic in the passage of concern, Acts 26:14, of course.)

best,
Peter Kirby