πλάνη active or passive sense.

Forum rules
Please quote the Greek text you are discussing directly in your post if it is reasonably short - do not ask people to look it up. This is not a beginner's forum, competence in Greek is assumed.
Andrew Chapman
Posts: 248
Joined: February 5th, 2013, 5:04 am
Location: Oxford, England

πλάνη active or passive sense.

Post by Andrew Chapman » February 26th, 2014, 2:00 pm

ἡ γὰρ παράκλησις ἡμῶν οὐκ ἐκ πλάνης οὐδὲ ἐξ ἀκαθαρσίας οὐδὲ ἐν δόλῳ, [1 Thessalonians 2:3]

Most take πλάνη here and elsewhere in the New Testament in the passive sense of error (having been deceived); but some in the active sense of deceit (the action or practice of deceiving others).

I am trying to make sense of the BDAG entry, and have three questions.
BDAG πλάνη.png
BDAG πλάνη.png (193.78 KiB) Viewed 939 times
Their definition is 'wandering fr. the path of truth, error, delusion, deceit, deception to which one is subject.'

1) I don't understand how 'deceit' can be given as a possible translation, since by definition it refers to the action or practice of deceiving others, not to being subject to deceit.

2) 'see New Docs 2, 94 on frequent use in pap in sense of 'deceit' ' Well, I looked this up in Horsley 'New Documents etc., vol.2':
πλάνη Horsley New Documents 2, 94-5.png
πλάνη Horsley New Documents 2, 94-5.png (148.73 KiB) Viewed 939 times
and it seems to me to say the opposite. It gives one instance from BGU 1208 (of αὐθεντεῖν fame) where it has been taken to mean deceit, and then says that the passive sense of 'error, delusion' is attested by a number of papyri. So is BDAG in error itself here?

3) Sorry for my ignorance, but I am not sure what BDAG means by 'in our literature'. Is it distinguishing it from the papyri - ie in the papyri it often (it claims) means 'deceit' (which I am taking to be in the active sense of deceiving), but 'in our literature' it is used only in the passive sense. I would have thought that the literature (in a broad sense) that BDAG is interested in would have included koine papyri.

Andrew

Barry Hofstetter
Posts: 933
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm

Re: πλάνη active or passive sense.

Post by Barry Hofstetter » February 26th, 2014, 2:10 pm

1) Deceit in English can also refer to the quality of deception. From dictionary.com:
the quality of being deceitful; duplicity; falseness: a man full of deceit.
2) My understanding of BDAG is that it focuses on the NT and other early Christian literature, and not the papyri per se, though they will reference MM and other resources which take the papyri into account on occasion.

Has anyone considered or is anyone working on a revision to MM?
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
ἐγὼ δὲ διδάσκώ τε καὶ γράφω ἵνα τὰ ἀξιώτερα μανθάνω

Stephen Carlson
Posts: 2502
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: πλάνη active or passive sense.

Post by Stephen Carlson » February 26th, 2014, 2:21 pm

Not sure "active" or "passive" is the best term for a noun. Maybe process vs. result is better.

1. BDAG offers definitions, not merely glosses. You have to read the whole line, not just pick out the words. So it is not merely "deceit" but "deceit ... to which one is subject." This refers to an error that someone has as the result of deception, or your "passive" sense.

2. Looks like Danker misread the entry in New Docs. This shows the importance of following up the references.

3. BDAG's "in our literature" is listed in the front matter (I don't have it here with me). It refers to the NT, the Apostolic Fathers, and perhaps other early Christian literature. It generally does not include the documentary papyri.
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia

cwconrad
Posts: 2099
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:52 pm
Location: Burnsville, NC 28714
Contact:

Re: πλάνη active or passive sense.

Post by cwconrad » February 26th, 2014, 3:08 pm

I would argue that πλανᾶσθαι is fundamentally an intransitive middle verb and that the active πλανᾶν is its causative. I really think the verb ought to be lemmatized in the middle voice-form. Certainly the verb is a denominative based upon the noun ἡ πλάνη.
οὔτοι ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς πάντα θεοὶ θνητοῖς ὑπέδειξαν,
ἀλλὰ χρόνῳ ζητέοντες ἐφευρίσκουσιν ἄμεινον. (Xenophanes, Fragment 16)

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)

MAubrey
Posts: 788
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 8:52 pm
Location: Washington
Contact:

Re: πλάνη active or passive sense.

Post by MAubrey » February 26th, 2014, 3:49 pm

Barry Hofstetter wrote:Has anyone considered or is anyone working on a revision to MM?
John Lee and G. H. R Horsley were, but nothing has been heard on that front for a decade or so.
Mike Aubrey, Linguist
Koine-Greek.com

Andrew Chapman
Posts: 248
Joined: February 5th, 2013, 5:04 am
Location: Oxford, England

Re: πλάνη active or passive sense.

Post by Andrew Chapman » February 26th, 2014, 4:16 pm

Thanks for all your help with this.
Stephen Carlson wrote:BDAG offers definitions, not merely glosses. You have to read the whole line, not just pick out the words."
Surely the italicised words are meant as glosses? That was the point I was trying to make - the meaning would be clear as a definition, but it seems to contradict itself by giving 'deceit' as a gloss.
Stephen Carlson wrote:Not sure "active" or "passive" is the best term for a noun. Maybe process vs. result is better.
Wouldn't 'process' be ambiguous between the process of deceiving and that of being deceived?
Barry Hofstetter wrote:Deceit in English can also refer to the quality of deception. From dictionary.com:

the quality of being deceitful; duplicity; falseness: a man full of deceit.
This would still give the same sense that I have called 'active', would it not? 'A man full of deceit' is one who deceives others, surely, not one who has been deceived?
cwconrad wrote:Certainly the verb is a denominative based upon the noun ἡ πλάνη.
I had read BDAG as saying that πλάνη was derived from πλανάω. Have they got it the wrong way around?

Andrew

Hefin J. Jones
Posts: 47
Joined: July 3rd, 2013, 1:41 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: πλάνη active or passive sense.

Post by Hefin J. Jones » February 26th, 2014, 4:30 pm

MAubrey wrote:
Barry Hofstetter wrote:Has anyone considered or is anyone working on a revision to MM?
John Lee and G. H. R Horsley were, but nothing has been heard on that front for a decade or so.
I thought that Lee and Horsley had not been quiet and that they'd declared the project dead (or at least permanently stalled). I could try and find out more today if I go in to the library.
Hefin Jones
Associate Pastor - Chatswood Baptist Church, Sydney, Australia

MTh student - Moore College

Hefin J. Jones
Posts: 47
Joined: July 3rd, 2013, 1:41 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: πλάνη active or passive sense.

Post by Hefin J. Jones » February 26th, 2014, 4:41 pm

Hefin J. Jones wrote:I thought that Lee and Horsley had not been quiet and that they'd declared the project dead (or at least permanently stalled). I could try and find out more today if I go in to the library.
As usual spoke too soon... a google search turned this up:

"A 10-year project is now under way to produce a new Lexicon of Epigraphic and Papyrus Parallels to the New Testament Vocabulary. According to Gregory Horsley (email May 2012) this will be published, but there is not a target date."

from http://hst.edu/wp-content/uploads/2011/ ... OOLS14.pdf
Hefin Jones
Associate Pastor - Chatswood Baptist Church, Sydney, Australia

MTh student - Moore College

Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3186
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am
Location: PRC

Re: πλάνη active or passive sense.

Post by Stephen Hughes » February 26th, 2014, 9:13 pm

Stephen Carlson wrote:Not sure "active" or "passive" is the best term for a noun. Maybe process vs. result is better.
I work with the model of three possibilities not two, it seems clear to me but maybe I can't express it, so be patient with my lack of terminology - I know that this probably seems like gibberish, I probably even if I did have terms to describe it, I couldn't - anyway, perhaps you would like to consider it...
  • What goes into the meaning - "delusion" (in the sense that sb is doing it sb else), "deception" (the strategy to decieve), I would add "deceitfulness"
  • The meaning of the word as the context within which something happens - deceit (This is the thing looked at in itself - possibly with other things happening at the same time as it), perhaps "delusion" could be here too.
  • What comes out of the meaning - error (sb might do this after they have been deceived), mistake
The most striking example of this that I have found is a word like δύναμις "ability" is used in English as "ability to do", but in Greek it is only ever the context of another action - NOT reaching out or giving. But I have heard so many people say, "We have the dunamis of God, so we can do anything."

To compose idiomatically in Greek, I think it is useful to note which of these three ways a word is used, then our writing can sound less un-Greek.

--------------------------------------
For the verses in the New Testament, perhaps they could be categorised as
Matthew 27:64 wrote:καὶ ἔσται ἡ ἐσχάτη πλάνη χείρων τῆς πρώτης.
This is what is feared will deceive others – Type 1 (also Ephesians 4:14, 1 Thessalonians 2:3, 2 Thessalonians 2:1, 2 Peter 3:17, 1 John 4:6, Jude 11 – if that means Baalam was making other have the wrong idea)
2 Peter 2:18 wrote:τοὺς ὄντως ἀποφυγόντας τοὺς ἐν πλάνῃ ἀναστρεφομένους,
Other actions are happening now that this is happening – Type 2 [the authour of second Peter is often unique in their Greek]
Romans 1:27 wrote:καὶ τὴν ἀντιμισθίαν ἣν ἔδει τῆς πλάνης αὐτῶν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς ἀπολαμβάνοντες.
They already did things. – Type 3 (also Jude 11 – if that means Baalam was wrong himself and therefore prophesying)
Clothes don't make the man. The man make the clothes.

Andrew Chapman
Posts: 248
Joined: February 5th, 2013, 5:04 am
Location: Oxford, England

Re: πλάνη active or passive sense.

Post by Andrew Chapman » February 27th, 2014, 5:50 am

Heinrich Meyer on Ephesians 4:14:
To take πλάνη as seduction (Luther, Beza, and others, including Rückert, Matthies, Baumgarten-Crusius, de Wette) is not to be justified by linguistic usage, since it always (also 2 Th 2:11) means error, delusion, going astray; as with the Greek writers also it never has that active meaning.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest