[B-Greek] Jn 2:4 TI EMOI KAI SOI, GUNAI

Elizabeth Kline kline-dekoning at earthlink.net
Fri Apr 1 12:30:35 EST 2005


On 4/1/05 7:53 AM, "Jim West" <jwest at highland.net> wrote:

> 
> 
> Elizabeth Kline wrote:
> 
>>> Goodspeed says that every time this phrase is used, whether in the LXX or
>>> NT, it is expressing protest, warning or hostility.
>>>    
>>> 
>> 
>> That would be a significant fact if it could be substantiated.
>> 
> 
> Hi- what kind of evidence are you looking for.  Common use in the NT
> substantiates it; the lexica substantiate it; learned scholars have
> substantiated it.  One can only presume that you have decided it cannot
> be so and are looking for confirmation for your already held view.  Is
> this an incorrect reading of your postings?

Yes Dr. West, that is an incorrect reading. This question came up because
Tim Bayly Ben Joseph  posted on his blog a complaint that the TNIV in a foot
note on Jn 2:4 muted the harsh nature of Jesus' reply to his mother. My
question is about the pragmatic force of Jesus' reply. Did the reply serve
as a rebuke? The "learned scholars" seem to be undecided on this issue. I
consulted a number of them Danker, Westcott, Brown, Beasly-Murray and
several others. There didn't appear to be any consensus about TI EMOI KAI
SOI, GUNAI serving as a rebuke to Mary. GUNAI alone does not amount to a
rebuke. But TI EMOI KAI SOI is ambiguous. The pragmatic force can be a very
harmless request for disengagement or it can be a something like "go away
and leave me alone" which is a rebuke.

Bayly Ben Joseph objected to a "soft" reading of this text and based his
argument on a quote from Calvin. It appears that Ben Joseph has some issues
with the TNIV which are driving him to nit picking about uncontroversial
statements made in footnotes. But we should not digress from the language
issue. This is a language list.

Rev. Crick suggested that TI EMOI KAI SOI is used in the LXX as a covenant
formula but that doesn't really address the issue of rebuke or not rebuke.
The covenant formula could be used either to affirm or to deny the covenant
relationship. If it is being used in Jn 2:4 to deny it, then perhaps that is
an aspect of how the rebuke is being delivered.  Rev. Crick's valuable
insight is something worth looking into.


Elizabeth Kline 





More information about the B-Greek mailing list