Gen 4:23

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
Michael W Abernathy
Posts: 18
Joined: June 11th, 2015, 3:43 pm

Gen 4:23

Post by Michael W Abernathy » July 18th, 2020, 7:18 pm

I was reading Genesis 4:23 and the usual English translation made me wonder if this was a passage that would support the “causal εἰς.” Genesis 4:23 εἶπεν δὲ Λάμεχ ταῖς ἑαυτοῦ γυναιξίν
Ἀδὰ καὶ Σελλά, ἀκούσατέ μου τῆς φωνῆς·
γυναῖκες Λάμεχ, ἐνωτίσασθέ μου τοὺς λόγους·
ὅτι ἄνδρα ἀπέκτεινα εἰς τραῦμα ἐμοί,
καὶ νεανίσκον εἰς μώλωπα ἐμοί·

The NASB translates this as, “Lamech said to his wives, ‘Adah and Zillah, Listen to my voice, You wives of Lamech, Give heed to my speech, For I have killed a man for wounding me; And a boy for striking me;

Then I checked Rashi’s translation, “Now Lemech said to his wives, "Adah and Zillah, hearken to my voice; wives of Lemech, incline your ears to my words, for I have slain a man by wounding (him) and a child by bruising (him).”
I’m not sure the Greek can support this translation. Am I missing something?
0 x



Barry Hofstetter
Posts: 1898
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm

Re: Gen 4:23

Post by Barry Hofstetter » July 18th, 2020, 11:13 pm

All the translations you mention are based on the Hebrew. We can of course discuss what the Greek of the LXX means, and how that shows the translator's understanding of the Hebrew, but the translations and Rashi all work with the Hebrew.
0 x
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
καὶ σὺ τὸ σὸν ποιήσεις κἀγὼ τὸ ἐμόν. ἆρον τὸ σὸν καὶ ὕπαγε.

Michael W Abernathy
Posts: 18
Joined: June 11th, 2015, 3:43 pm

Re: Gen 4:23

Post by Michael W Abernathy » July 19th, 2020, 12:19 pm

Sorry, I should have been clearer and stuck to the Greek. I was writing because I don’t generally accept the causal εἰς but it appeared that Genesis 4:23 might support that use.
Accept for giving τραῦμα and μώλωπα a metaphorical meaning, Brenton translates this in a way that is closer to what I expect.
“And Lamech said to his wives, Ada and Sella, Hear my voice, ye wives of Lamech, consider my words, because I have slain a man to my sorrow and a youth to my grief.”
Are there other possibilities I am not taking into account?
0 x

Ken M. Penner
Posts: 823
Joined: May 12th, 2011, 7:50 am
Location: Antigonish, NS, Canada
Contact:

Re: Gen 4:23

Post by Ken M. Penner » July 19th, 2020, 1:25 pm

Besides Brenton, have you checked other LXX translations such as NETS or LES or Brayford (Brill)? Or Wevers’ Notes?
LES2 wrote: “Adah and Zillah, hear my voice,
wives of Lamech, give ear to my words,
because I killed a man for a wound to me
and a young man for a bruise to me,
because sevenfold revenge has been given to Cain,
but from Lamech seventy times seven.”
NETS wrote: Now Lamech said to his own wives:
“Ada and Sella, hear my voice;
you wives of Lamech, listen to my words,
because I have killed a man for a wound to me,
and a young man for a welt to me,
because seven times vengeance has been exacted by Kain,
but by Lamech seventy times seven.”
Brayford wrote:Ada and Sella, listen to my voice;
Wives of Lamech, pay attention to my words;
Because I killed a man for my wounds,
And a young man for my bruises;
24 Because Kain has been avenged seven times,
But Lamech seventy times seven.
Wevers wrote:
Gen 4.24.jpg
Gen 4.24.jpg (147.96 KiB) Viewed 793 times
Gen 4.24 notes.jpg
Gen 4.24 notes.jpg (39.17 KiB) Viewed 792 times
0 x
Ken M. Penner
St. Francis Xavier University

Stephen Carlson
Posts: 3044
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Gen 4:23

Post by Stephen Carlson » July 19th, 2020, 6:59 pm

Perhaps to stir the pot a bit, but what's the difference between causal and final (purpose)?
0 x
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia

Ken M. Penner
Posts: 823
Joined: May 12th, 2011, 7:50 am
Location: Antigonish, NS, Canada
Contact:

Re: Gen 4:23

Post by Ken M. Penner » July 21st, 2020, 6:49 am

Stephen Carlson wrote:
July 19th, 2020, 6:59 pm
what's the difference between causal and final (purpose)?
Causes happen beforehand; purposes happen afterward.
0 x
Ken M. Penner
St. Francis Xavier University

Stephen Carlson
Posts: 3044
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Gen 4:23

Post by Stephen Carlson » July 22nd, 2020, 2:52 am

Ken M. Penner wrote:
July 21st, 2020, 6:49 am
Stephen Carlson wrote:
July 19th, 2020, 6:59 pm
what's the difference between causal and final (purpose)?
Causes happen beforehand; purposes happen afterward.
But the purpose is formulated prior to the action, no?
0 x
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia

Ken M. Penner
Posts: 823
Joined: May 12th, 2011, 7:50 am
Location: Antigonish, NS, Canada
Contact:

Re: Gen 4:23

Post by Ken M. Penner » July 22nd, 2020, 8:00 am

Stephen Carlson wrote:
July 19th, 2020, 6:59 pm
Perhaps to stir the pot a bit, but what's the difference between causal and final (purpose)?
"I killed a man because I got wounded" would be causal.
"I killed a man in order (for me) to get wounded" would be final. Yes, the purpose (getting wounded) was formulated before the killing, but it happened afterward.
1 x
Ken M. Penner
St. Francis Xavier University

Daniel Semler
Posts: 200
Joined: February 18th, 2019, 7:45 pm

Re: Gen 4:23

Post by Daniel Semler » July 22nd, 2020, 11:44 am

Ken M. Penner wrote:
July 22nd, 2020, 8:00 am
Stephen Carlson wrote:
July 19th, 2020, 6:59 pm
Perhaps to stir the pot a bit, but what's the difference between causal and final (purpose)?
"I killed a man because I got wounded" would be causal.
"I killed a man in order (for me) to get wounded" would be final. Yes, the purpose (getting wounded) was formulated before the killing, but it happened afterward.
Hi Ken (and Stephen), I am probably having problems with your somewhat odd example - one would not normally I think kill someone in order to be wounded but rather to avoid it. Nonetheless, "happened afterward" doesn't make sense to me. If it was the reason the act was undertaken rather than post-facto spin as it were, then the intent precedes the action. Now if there was no conscious intent but nevertheless purpose (which I'm having trouble with without some ultimate agent and manipulation of an intermediary) then I'm not so sure.

All that to say, I accept that cause and purpose may differ (I suspect that they can also be the same in some cases), say in some proximate vs ultimate sense I would expect both to predate the action regardless of how the telling of the events is structured in language.

What, and it may well be a lot, am I missing ?

Thx
D
0 x

Daniel Semler
Posts: 200
Joined: February 18th, 2019, 7:45 pm

Re: Gen 4:23

Post by Daniel Semler » July 23rd, 2020, 1:13 am

Ok, I think I get your example now Ken, the distinction being which clause carries the precipitating event and which the consequence.
Let me know if I'm off.

Thx
D
0 x

Post Reply

Return to “Septuagint and Pseudepigrapha”