Romans 10:20: Are all English translations in error?
Carl Conrad
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Sun Dec 1 14:05:14 EST 2002
This "passive" verb seems to be giving a lot of trouble. I've already
suggested that it might better be viewed as a middle with a sense
something like German SICH BEFINDEN. I think actually that it functions in
the expressions being discussed in a manner very similar to WFQH + dative
or EGENETO/EGENHQH + dative in the sense "appear" or "be open to view" or
even simply "exist."
I think it might be worth checking BDAG s.v. hEURISKW 1.b: Pass. be found,
find oneself, be (Dt 20:11; 4 Km 14:14; 1 Esdr 1:19; 8:13; Bar 1:7;
TestSol 7:6; GrBar 4:11) F, hEUREQH EIS AZWTON Philip found himself or was
present at Azotus Ac 8:40 (cp. Esth 1:5 TOIS EQNESIN TOIS hEUREQEISIN EIS
T. POLIN; also s. 4 Km 2), on the other hand, a Semitic phrase . . . V;b
jA;kA;tVvTa=to arrive in, or at, may underlie the expr. here and in
hEUREQHNAI EIS T. BASILEIAN Hs 9, 13, 2 (s. MBlack, Aramaic Studies and
the NT, JTS 49, 48, 164). OUDE TOPOS hEUREQH AUTWN ETI EN T. OURANWi?
there was no longer any place for them in heaven Rv 12:8 (s. Da 2:35
Theod.); cp. 18:22, 24. OUDE hEUREQH DOLOS EN T. STOMATI AUTOU) 1 Pt 2:22;
1 Cl 16:10 (both Is 53:9); cp. Rv 14:5 (cp. Zeph 3:13). hINA hEUREQW EN
AUTWi? (i.e. Cristw?) that I might be found in Christ Phil 3:9
(JMoffatt, ET 24, 1913, 46).
At 4:32 PM +0100 12/1/02, Jerker Karlsson wrote:
>r.vandenhengel at hetnet.nl writes:
>>Yes, there are more than one examples that would naturally be understood
>>as "I was to be found". I found the following examples (English
>>translations from the RSV):
>>- 2 Peter 3:14 SPOUDASATE ASPILOI KAI AMWMHTOI AUTW EUREQHNAI EN EIRHNH:
>>be zealous to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace.
>>- Hebrews 11:5 writes about Enoch: KAI OUK HURISKETO DIOTI: and he was
not
>>found. The translation 'and he was not to be found' lies at hand.
>>- Revelation 16:20: KAI PASA NHSOS EYUGEN KAI ORH OUX EUREQHSAN: And
every
>>island fled away, and no mountains were to be found.
>>- Revelation 18:21: says about Babylon: KAI OU MH EURETH ETI: and shall
be
>>found no more.
>>Revelation 20:15: KAI EI TIS
>
>>hEUREQH
>
>>TH BIBLW THS ZWHS GEGRAMMENOS: and if
>>any ones name was not found written in the book of life. The
translation
>>"was not to be found" lies at hand.
>
>
>Rev 20: 15 sic! :: Nov. leg. KAI EI TIS OUX hEUREQH EN TH BIBLW THS
ZWHS
>GEGRAMMENOS
>
>Does not these examples prove wrong what you stated earlier when saying
>"The subject of the active sentence (They found me) consists of persons
>(They), so the passive mode (I was found by those) would be 'hEUREQHN UPW
>TWN' and not hEUREQHN TOIS'? Since here, the dative is proved to
>functions as an agent for both animale and inanimale, i.e. 2Pet 3:14
>
>I see no reason why Paul should deviate from the normal construction of
>pass.aor + dat. as expressing passive verb and agent only in Romans, and
>only at this instance.
>
>On a general level I see no support in the loci you just cited for the
>reading "was to be found" for hEUREQHN in Rom 10:20. The only real
parallel
>is 2Pet. 3:14 and there the RSV translates correctly by "found by him".
>
>By the way, how does the Dutch translation go verbatim?
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)
1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu OR cwconrad at ioa.com
WWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list