James 1:13 final follow-up
Carlton Winbery
winberyc at speedgate.net
Fri Jan 26 17:35:24 EST 2001
Mark Wilson wrote;
>James 1:13 follow-up
>
>hO GAR QEOS APEIRASTOS ESTI KAKWN
>
>An offlist response suggested this translation for
>this troublesome clause:
>
>"because God does not tempt in an evil way (evilly, KAKWN)"
>
>Now I am back to this second clause as part of James'
>response to the claim "I am being tempted by God."
>
>Claimant: I am being tempted by God
>
>James: (Impossible!) for God does not tempt in an evil manner;
> in fact (DE), he himself tempts no one.
>
>I take it then that verses 13 and 14 form a close union and therefore
>justify this change from test to tempt. Here, James qualifies why
>it is wrong to say I am "tempted" (not tested) by God. Why? Because
>God does not tempt in an evil sense (unlike testing for our good).
>
>To date, this is the only suggestion that makes smooth sense
>of the awkward, seemingly out of place middle clause.
>
APEIRASTOS is an adjective that appears only hear in the NT. Other words
built on the same root are given in the major dictionary as both tested and
tempted. The structure of this clause links the adjective APEIRASTOS with
the adjective used like a noun KAKWN in the genitive case. This a common
structure in the NT where the adjective is related to the substantive as a
matter of reference such as Heb. 5:13 APEIROS LOGOU "inexperienced with
reference to the word".
I see no other way to translate this clause except, "For God is untempted
by (with reference to) evil things."
Carlton L. Winbery
Fogleman Prof. of Religion
Louisiana College Box 612
Pineville, LA 71359
winbery at andria.lacollege.edu
winberyc at speedgate.net
Phones 318 487 7241, Home 318 448 6103
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list