[B-Greek] Rom. 5,7
Arie Dirkzwager
dirkzwager at pandora.be
Mon Jun 28 11:41:57 EDT 2004
I see in Strack-Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und
Midrasch, München 1994 (=1926), a.l., that some Jewish theologians made a
difference between a righteous person (tsaddiq) and a good person (tov). A
righteous person would be good to God, whereas a good person (or a good
tsaddiq) would be not only good to God but also good to men.
That distinction would fit our verse in Rm, for Paul sees a possibility that
a person would die for a good person, i.e. a person that had been good for
the person who would die for him. To die for a tsaddiq, who had been only
good to God, is less probable.
Arie
Dr. A. Dirkzwager
Hoeselt, Belgium
e-mail dirkzwager at pandora.be
----- Oorspronkelijk bericht -----
Van: <newsgroupstuff at swiftdsl.com.au>
Aan: "'B-Greek Greek'" <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Verzonden: maandag 28 juni 2004 10:36
Onderwerp: RE: [B-Greek] Rom. 5,7
> > MOLIS GAR hUPER DIKAIOU TIS APOQANEITAI
> > hUPER GAR TOU AGAQOU TACA TIS KAI TOLMAi APOQANEIN
> >
> > (For rarely will anyone die for a righteous person,
> > though for a good person perhaps someone might
> > possibly dare to die.)
> >
> > Am I understanding this correctly? The author is
> > saying that it would be very rare for someone to be
> > willing to die for a DIKAIOU/righteous person. But, 7b
> > suggests that someone would be 'more likely' to die
> > for a AGAQOU/good person. Why does this seem to say
> > that a person is less likely to die for a righteous
> > person and perhaps every so slightly but more willing
> > to die for a good person?
> >
> > =====
> > Eddie Mishoe
> > Pastor
>
> I have heard that really they are both just saying the same thing, not
> making a big distinction between the two statements, kind of like Proverbs
> often states the same thing twice, slightly differently.
>
> On the other hand, if there is a distinction, it could be in the sense
that
> the 'righteous' may be understood as someone who does the right thing, but
> does not necessarily warm himself to you, yet, on merits of his
> righteousness, someone ought to die for him. There is no reason not to
want
> to (other than self-preservation!). 'Good' may have more attractiveness
and
> virtue inheritantly associated with it, so that one might feel a bit more
> compelled to die for such a one.
>
> Of course, either way, obviously the contrast with 'ungodly', 'sinners'
and
> 'enemies' is much more to the point.
>
> Craig Johnson
> Brisbane, Australia
>
> ---
> B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
> B-Greek mailing list
> B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
>
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list