πλουτῶν εἰς Romans 10:12

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.
Post Reply
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

πλουτῶν εἰς Romans 10:12

Post by Stephen Hughes »

Has anyone had a look into the πλουτῶν εἰς Romans 10:12?
Romans 10:12 wrote:Οὐ γάρ ἐστιν διαστολὴ Ἰουδαίου τε καὶ Ἕλληνος· ὁ γὰρ αὐτὸς κύριος πάντων, πλουτῶν εἰς πάντας τοὺς ἐπικαλουμένους αὐτόν.
Apparently this is an allusion to somebody asking for aid in a state of poverty from a ruler. The language seems legal or administrative. I few things I can see are that διαστολή means distinction, but it is not referring to the mental ability to tell the difference between two things, such as διάκρισις in:
Hebrews 5:14 wrote:Τελείων δέ ἐστιν ἡ στερεὰ τροφή, τῶν διὰ τὴν ἕξιν τὰ αἰσθητήρια γεγυμνασμένα ἐχόντων πρὸς διάκρισιν καλοῦ τε καὶ κακοῦ.
. It is more like our "make a distinction between", rather than "see the difference between", contextually that would mean something like treat differently in times of need. ἐπικαλουμένους is a reference to a request for aid from a ruler.

What I don't understand is the extended meaning of πλουτεῖν εἰς τίνα here. I see that BDAG explains that he is rich (and generous) to all. πλουτεῖν is a verb describing a state someone is in. πλουτεῖν εἰς τίνα is either describing a disposition or an action. Which is more likely? Is the disposition to give described here with us left to infer that they will get the riches too, or is the actual disbursing described by this construction? Is this change in the type of the verb a result of the εἰς being brought into play, or for some other reason?
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
Thomas Dolhanty
Posts: 401
Joined: May 20th, 2014, 10:13 am
Location: west coast of Canada

Re: πλουτῶν εἰς Romans 10:12

Post by Thomas Dolhanty »

CEB Cranfield (Romans ICC, V2, pg 532) notes that,
“The expression πλουτεῖν εἴς τινα occurs in the NT only in Lk 12:21 (οὕτως ὁ θησαυρίζων ἑαυτῷ καὶ μὴ εἰς θεὸν πλουτῶν) and here. The meaning of the present clause must be that Christ is rich to the advantage of all who call on him, that is, that He gives liberally of His riches (we may think of His wealth of goodness, kindness, love, glory, etc.) to them.”
The Lukan example -"storing up" treasure on earth and not in heaven, would seem to suggest, with Cranfield, that it is an active rather than stative idea. The man was actively at work, piling up treasure (in the wrong place), and likewise God (actively) "gives liberally of His riches" .
γράφω μαθεῖν
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Re: πλουτῶν εἰς Romans 10:12

Post by Stephen Hughes »

Thomas Dolhanty wrote:CEB Cranfield (Romans ICC, V2, pg 532) notes that,
“The expression πλουτεῖν εἴς τινα ocusut in the NT only in Lk 12:21 (οὕτως ὁ θησαυρίζων ἑαυτῷ καὶ μὴ εἰς θεὸν πλουτῶν) and here. The meaning of the present clause must be that Christ is rich to the advantage of all who call on him, that is, that He gives liberally of His riches (we may think of His wealth of goodness, kindness, love, glory, etc.) to them.”
The Lukan example -"storing up" treasure on earth and not in heaven, would seem to suggest, with Cranfield, that it is an active rather than stative idea. The man was actively at work, piling up treasure (in the wrong place), and likewise God (actively) "gives liberally of His riches" .
θησαυρίζειν is definitely an action of piling up or storing away, cf. verse 17
Τί ποιήσω, ὅτι οὐκ ἔχω ποῦ συνάξω τοὺς καρπούς μου;
but εἰς θεὸν πλουτῶν is not so clear.

The "logical" statement would be something like ὁ θησαυρίζων ἑαυτῷ καὶ πλουτῶν "the man who stores up things for himself and is rich".

The Greek of the Lukan verse is beyond my ability. I'm not sure what an articular participle with two participles joined by
Kai between them means, and much less when one is negative. I think that because alla mh doesn't occur, that it could be a kai adversative as you've read it, but not necessarily. If eis qeon we're there, would the sense of eis eauton be there? That's non-sensical I think because eis seems to mark an external reference for why / how things can be considered valuable. Whether that extends to for the needs / requirements of others is another question.

Even asking and answering those questions won't get to an understanding of whether supplying an external reference to a verb of state makes it like an active verb.
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
Thomas Dolhanty
Posts: 401
Joined: May 20th, 2014, 10:13 am
Location: west coast of Canada

Re: πλουτῶν εἰς Romans 10:12

Post by Thomas Dolhanty »

"ocusut"!! Wow! I really got my fingers tangled on that word! That doesn't even look like "occurs"! Why do those always hide until after the "Edit" light goes off?
οὕτως ὁ θησαυρίζων ἑαυτῷ καὶ μὴ εἰς θεὸν πλουτῶν. (Lk12:21)
The Lukan sentence is certainly an attractive and compact little chiasm, with the dative ἑαυτῷ opposite εἰς θεὸν, and πλουτῶν completing the idea of θησαυρίζων in the outer ring. It has the feeling of Hebrew poetry to me, where the whole must be read as a piece, each part completing and expanding on its opposite.
  • θησαυρίζων
    • ἑαυτῷ
      • καὶ
      μὴ εἰς θεὸν
    πλουτῶν
  • laying up treasure
    • to himself
      • and
      not unto God
    being rich
Best I could do with BBCode!
γράφω μαθεῖν
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Re: πλουτῶν εἰς Romans 10:12

Post by Stephen Hughes »

Thomas Dolhanty wrote:"ocusut"!! Wow! I really got my fingers tangled on that word! That doesn't even look like "occurs"! Why do those always hide until after the "Edit" light goes off?
That seems to have arisen from an interactive difficulty between me an my phone. Your version further up towards the head of the thread is correct.
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
Barry Hofstetter
Posts: 2159
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm

Re: πλουτῶν εἰς Romans 10:12

Post by Barry Hofstetter »

In extra-biblical Greek, the usual meaning is "be rich." From the LSJ:

πλουτ-έω, (πλοῦτος)
to be rich, wealthy, opp. πένομαι, τάχα σε ζηλώσει ἀεργὸς πλουτεῦντα Hes.Op.313; πενιχρὸς αἶψα μάλ' ἐπλούτησε becomes rich, Thgn.663, cf. Pl.R.421d, Men.Kol.42; π. μέγα, μάλιστα, μεγάλως, Hdt.1.32, 3.57, 6.125; πλούτει κατ' οἶκον μέγα S.Ant.1168; ὄναρ πεπλουτηκέναι 'build castles in the air', Pl.Ly.218c, cf. Tht.208b; μὴ σπεύδετε πλουτεῖν μᾶλλον ἢ χρηστοὶ δοκεῖν εἶναι Isoc.3.50; ταχέως πλουτῆσαι Lys.18.18; π. ἀπὸ τῶν κοινῶν to be rich from the public purse, Ar.Pl.569; π. ἀφ' ἑαυτῶν Porph.Sent.40; π. ἐκ τῶν ἀλλοτρίων Lys.32.25; ὑφ' ὑμῶν πεπλουτηκότας D.21.189 (ἀφ' Cobet).
c. gen. rei, to be rich in a thing, πόνου A.Fr.241; φίλων X.An.7.7.42; νομίσματος Arist.Pol.1257b13; πλουτῖον (i.e. -τεῖον, metri gr. for -τέον) τέκνων . . δωμάτιον IG12(8).442.8 (Thasos).
c. dat. rei, π. ἐμπύροισιν E.Hel.756; σιδήρῳ, χαλκῷ, X.Ath.2.11.
c. acc. cogn., π. πλοῦτον Luc.Tim.48; π. φίλους, φιλίαν, Them.Or.1.17c, 22.267a.
N.E. Barry Hofstetter, M.A., Th.M.
Ph.D. Student U of FL
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
καὶ σὺ τὸ σὸν ποιήσεις κἀγὼ τὸ ἐμόν. ἆρον τὸ σὸν καὶ ὕπαγε.
Tony Pope
Posts: 134
Joined: July 14th, 2011, 6:20 pm

Re: πλουτῶν εἰς Romans 10:12

Post by Tony Pope »

Stephen Hughes wrote:Even asking and answering those questions won't get to an understanding of whether supplying an external reference to a verb of state makes it like an active verb.
BAGD/BDAG, as well as Cranfield, cite this parallel from Philostratus, Life of Apollonius, 4.8. In the context Apollonius is advising the citizens of Smyrna that they need a healthy mixture of concord and party spirit in the affairs of their city. In this sentence the construction with ἐς (= εἰς) is the same as in the two NT references.

εἰ γὰρ ὁ μὲν ἀπὸ δημαγωγίας θαυμασθήσεται, ὁ δὲ ἀπὸ σοφίας, ὁ δὲ ἀπὸ τοῦ ἐς τὸ κοινὸν πλουτεῖν, ... εὖ κείσεται ἡ πόλις, μᾶλλον δὲ ἑστήξει.
For that city will recline in peace, nay, will rather stand up erect, where one man is admired for his popular influence, and another for his wisdom, and another for his liberal expenditure on public objects, ...
(tr. F. C. Conybeare, Loeb Classical Library) http://archive.org/stream/lifeofapollon ... 0/mode/2up
Post Reply

Return to “New Testament”