grogers wrote:Jonathan Robie wrote:As I understand it, φωτισθέντας and παραπεσόντας are aorist because they refer to a time prior to ἀνακαινίζειν. But you can't fall away until you have something to fall away from, so logically παραπεσόντας indicates a time after φωτισθέντας - that relationship is not expressed in the grammar, but several translations add something or other to indicate that difference in time.
Yes, I certainly agree. I researched quite a number of example in the NT where verbs are represented as conditional and in every example i found it is always either a verb that is a present participle or εἴ is already supplied in the text. There is only one example I have found where an aorist verb is translated as a conditional where the εἴ is not already supplied in the text and that is Luke 9:25. Here, the 'if' is added by most translators because even without the εἴ the text still remains conditional.
It's a good example, and it demonstrates that this meaning is possible.
Luke 9:25 wrote:τί γὰρ ὠφελεῖται ἄνθρωπος κερδήσας τὸν κόσμον ὅλον ἑαυτὸν δὲ ἀπολέσας ἢ ζημιωθείς;
I don't know if there are other examples or not - I'm reasonably good at searching Greek texts, but not at searching corresponding English translations. I don't know how to search for "aorist participles translated using an English conditional". But I would be surprised if this is the only such example.
grogers wrote:Is there any grammatical support in Heb 6:6 for adding the εἴ in "if they fall away?" This would seem unwarranted and inconsistent with the flow of the other aorist verbs in 4-6.
I'm not sure how to read the question, it feels like a category error. Nobody is inserting εἴ into the Greek text, and it doesn't exist in the English text. Whatever the Greek text means, it means it in Greek. Whatever the English text means, it means it in English. Here's what you said for Luke 9:25:
grogers wrote:Here, the 'if' is added by most translators because even without the εἴ the text still remains conditional.
So I guess the question is this: is there a conditional sense to παραπεσόντας in this particular sentence? Is Ἀδύνατον γὰρ πάλιν ἀνακαινίζειν εἰς μετάνοιαν conditional on having fallen? Translations express this in different ways - "and who have fallen away", "and then have fallen away", "if they shall fall away".
I don't like the verb tense "shall" here as a translation for the Aorist, but I guess it was used to distinguish the time of παραπεσόντας from the time of the earlier participles. In any of these translations, there seems to be three times (1) being enlightened and tasting and sharing in really good stuff, (2) falling away, (3) seeking repentance that is not possible or no longer possible.
I guess I should acknowledge that (1) there's a vehement theological debate that assumes a big difference between translations that use "if" and translations that do not, and (2) I don't understand what difference in meaning is proposed in the original Greek, and get annoyed by discussions that seem to involve more theology than careful reading of the text. NOTE: The discussions I'm talking about are in the commentaries I looked at, not in this thread.
So a request: instead of asking what words should be used in an English translation, can we focus on what the Greek does or does not mean?