rplende wrote:this may undermine the whole Calvinist premise around this verse
That's quite a good observation, that the Calvinist interpretation of this verse depends on the "Calvinist premise". Because if you don't accept the Calvinist premise up front then there is no logical reason to buy the Calvinist interpretation (of individual election). That is, nothing in the context of Acts 13 leads you to that interpretation.
But you are left with a confusing verse. And a Calvinist can still say, "Hey, at least I gave an explanation. Can you come up with anything better??? If not, then you
have to accept my interpretation!" In my mind that argument is no different than a Mormon using 1 Cor 15:29 ("baptism for the dead") as a "proof text" for their church's theology on that topic. Sometimes the best answer is, "We don't know what this verse means. The context (or early church writings) don't give us much of a clue."
But perhaps you
can find evidence from the context, and I agree that your observations re Acts 13:16 and 13:26 are on the mark. God did appoint people earlier, and now at this time they are believing. And yes, many of them were Gentiles.
I also agree with you that "were appointed" is the correct interpretation of the Greek words. It is not necessary, and quite strained in the Greek, to interpret the words as "appointed themselves", just because you want to avoid the Calvinist interpretation.
For a variation of your proposal you might consider changing "God appointed
people earlier" to "God appointed
peoples earlier." In other words those "appointed to eternal life" refer to nations, not to individuals.
This interpretation might sound odd to us westerners but would be quite natural to the first century church, and it has compelling support from the ever widening gospel progression in Acts (Jerusalem, all Judea, Samaria, and to the ends of the earth). Right here in 13:47 we see that God has indeed brought salvation to the "ends of the earth". After all, this was the first significant missions trip outside of Palestine. So "those in Jerusalem" believed, "those in all Judea" believed, "those in Samaria" believed, and now when the nations at the ends of the earth heard, "they believed!". This was an exciting place in the gospel story for Luke and it is quite appropriate that he would express himself in this way, strange as it is to our modern ears.
On the other hand, if you take the Calvinist interpretation you have to ask, "Why does Luke want to throw in a verse of Calvinist theology at this point in the book (right after 13:47)?" And I can't think of any sensible answer to that question. That in itself is enough reason to look for another interpretation. It has nothing to do with whether you like Calvinism or not.