[B-Greek] IRom 1:0

Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Mon Dec 22 09:46:03 EST 2003


At 9:37 PM -0500 12/21/03, Polycarp66 at aol.com wrote:
>In a message dated 12/21/2003 9:19:55 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>brent at riveroflifembchurch.com writes:
>IRom 1:0 is non existant verse.  The passage is actually from the prologue. 
>The full passage from the Loeb edition is as follows:
>
>IGNATIOS, hO KAI QEOFOROS, THi ELEHMENHi EN MEGALEIOTHTI PATROS hYISTOU KAI
>iHSOU cRISTOU TOU MONOU hUIOU AUTOU EKKLHSIAi HGAPHMENHi KAI PEFWTISMENHi EN
>QELHMATI TOU QELHSANTOS TA PANTA, hA ESTIN, KATA AGAPHN IHSOU CRISTOU, TOU
>QEOU
>hHMWN, hTIS KAI PROKAQHTAI EN TOPWi CWRIOU hRWMAIWN, AXIOQEOS, AXIOPREPHS,
>AXIOMAKRISTOS, AXIEPAINOS, AXIEPITEUKTOS, AXIAGNOS KAI PROKAQHMENH THS AGAPHS,
>CRISTWNUMOS, PATWNUMOS hHN KAI
>
>ASPAZOMAI EN ONOMATI IHSOU CHRISTO, hUIOU PATROS, KATA SARKA KAI PNEUMA
>hHNWMENOIS PASHi ENTOLHi AUTOU, PEPLHRWMENOIS CARITOS QEOU ADIAKRITWS KAI
>APODIULISMENOIS APO PANTOS ALLOTRIOU CRWMATOS PLEISTA EN IHSOU CRISTWi,
>TWi >QEWi hHMWN, AMWMWS CAIREIN.

Thanks to Brent Hudson for posting the text of the opening of Ignatius to
the Romans. It now appears that Bert de Haan did indeed transcribe the
Greek text accurately from Mounce's workbook--but unless there was more of
the Ignatius passage cited in that workbook, it appears that the passage
was lifted out of its context in such a manner that its syntactical
structure is left dangling quite precariously. The object of ASPAZOMAI must
be hHN in the immediately preceding words that have been omitted in the
transcript; ASPAZOMAI must take an accusative--BDAG doesn't cite any
absolute usage for it. If I were punctuating the text as cited above, I'd
make hHN KAI ASPAZOMAI EN ONOMATI IHSOU CRISTOU, hUIOU PATROS a
parenthetical clause altogether, inasmuch as the syntax of what then
follows seems to me to depend upon the dative of the salutation formula at
the beginning THi ... EKKLHSIAi with its lengthy modifier strings of
perfect passive participles with their own qualifiers. In fact, I would
guess that the KAI immediately preceding ASPAZOMAI is intended to link the
relative clause hHN ASPAZOMAI to the preceding relative clause, hHTIS KAI
PROKAQHTAI ... PATRWNUMOS so that what we have as parenthetical is hHTIS
KAI PROKAQHTAI ... hHN KAI ASPAZOMAI. Then, as I noted above, the text
seems to continue in apposition to the initial salutatory dative THi ...
EKKLHSIAi--but with the difference that the congregation is now
"pluralized" as hHNWMENOIS ... PEPLHRWMENOIS ... APODIULISMENOIS ..., i.e.
the congregation is addressed as its individual members rather than as a
unit. Moreover, ASPAZOMAI does NOT convey the greeting in the formal
salutatory phrase, the elements of which are rather (a) subject in the
nominative (IGNATIOS ...), (b) addressee in the dative  (THi ... EKKLHSIAi
with literally oodles of appositional qualifiers), and (c) the concluding
verbal formula which is most commonly in the infinitive CAIREIN with its
probably implicit 3d-sg. verb KELEUEI (PLEISTA ... CAIREIN).

Bert asked:
>How does -according to flesh and spirit- belong to the recipients of the
>greetings and not to -Jesus Christ, Son of the Father-?

He cited the Answer Key translation as follows:
>The answer key has the following translation:" I send greetings in the
>name of Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, to all who are united
>according to flesh and spirit to his every command".

then asked:
>How does -according to flesh and spirit- belong to the recipients of the
>greetings and not to -Jesus Christ, Son of the Father-?

I think that the answer to this lies in (a) the fact that such an adverbial
phrase tends to precede the verb which it governs, so: KATA SARKA KAI
PNEUMA hHNWMENOIS PASHi ENTOLHi AUTOU--it indicates "unified/united in
flesh and spirit" or I'd prefer to say "at one in body and soul ..."

But I continue to be wonder about another feature of this excerpt that
bothered me last night when I first saw it: how is the participle
hHNWMENOIS linked syntactically to PASHi ENTOLHi AUTOU; the meaning of this
latter phrase is not in question; what I find unsatisfactory is the
suggestion in the "Answer Key" cited by Bert, that the congregation is
"united TO every one of his commandments." Isn't that an odd idea? If so it
means that PASHi ENTOLHi AUTOU is being understood as a comitative or
sociative dative and that each commandment is something TO WHICH the
congregation is unanimously bound. The verb in question here, hENOW, does
not appear in the GNT at all, but it's a good Hellenistic Greek word and
not at all uncommon in patristic literature, as indicated in BDAG's entry:
--------
hENOW 1 aor. pass. hHNWQHN; pf. pass. ptc. hHNWMENOS (s. hEIS; Aristot. et
al.; Sb 2034, 5; 4832, 5; Sym.; TestNapht; Philo, Migr. Abr. 220, Mut. Nom.
200; Jos., Bell. 3, 15; Ath.) to cause to be unified, unite, in our lit.
only pass. Of a congregation hHNWMENH united IEph ins. Of prayer hh
hHNWMENH hUMWN EN QEWi PROSEUCH your united prayer in God IMg 14. Of the
Lord hHNWMENOS WN 7:1. Here TWi PATRI is to be supplied; it actually occurs
ISm 3:3, united w. the father. The dat. is also used elsewh. to indicate
that w. which (or whom) the unification takes place (TestNapht 8:2 TWi
LEUI; Herm. Wr. 1, 10; Proclus on Pla., Cratyl. p. 59, 23; 83, 27 P.) TWi
EPISKOPWi IMg 6:2. PASHi ENTOLHi IRo ins.-B. 844. DELG s.v. hEIS.
--------
The last note in BDAG indicates that the dative in every other instance
cited is of a PERSON with whom or to whom one is united--; against that a
commandment, even if it is "Jesus' each and every commandment" seems an odd
thing to be united WITH or TO. Wouldn't it make more sense to understand
PASHi ENTOLHi AUTOU as instrumental in meaning: "united in/by every one of
his commandments"?

I guess this is a quibble, but inasmuch as Bert has thrown us this morsel
of Ignatius, this bit of it seems to me strangely indigestible.
-- 

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)
1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
WWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/



More information about the B-Greek mailing list