[B-Greek] Is GRAFH ever used as a proper noun in the NT?
Leonard Jayawardena
leonardj at sltnet.lk
Fri Aug 18 05:44:42 EDT 2006
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 10:50:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Is GRAFH ever used as a proper noun in the NT?
To: Leonard Jayawardena <leonardj at sltnet.lk>,
b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
Message-ID: <20060815175045.18331.qmail at web38503.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
GFS: That partly depends upon how you wish to understand these passages. 2 Tim 3.16 can be understood to say "Every inspired writing is also . . ." 1 Pet 2.6 can be read as "For it says in writing . . ." (note there is no article before GRAFHi and it is singular). 2 Pet 1.20 probably has the greatest claim to being used as a sort of proper name. This is because it is in the genitive. If it were the same case as PROFHTEIA it would be understood as "prophetic writing." Even as a genitive, however, it could be a simple common noun. Robertson refers to the genitive as the "specifying case" in the quotation below.
LJ: You are right about 2 Peter 1:20. This is the most difficult occurrence of GRAFH for anyone wishing to maintain that in the NT GRAFH in the singular never refers to the entire OT. How best can PASA PROFHTEIA GRAFHS IDIAS EPILUSEWS OU GINETAI in 2 Pet. 1:20 be translated without taking GRAFH as a proper noun? If, as you say, even as a genitive, GRAFH could be a simple noun, what would be the translation that reflected it?
I raised the subject question in the first instance mainly because of the implications the answer to that question have on the translation of PASA GRAFH in 2 Timothy 3:16. Many translations, including KJV, render it "All scripture." In his article "Every Scripture Inspired of God," J. W. Roberts says, "The rule of Greek as expressed by Souter's lexicon is that [PAS] as an adjective in the singular without the article means ['every or every kind of']; in the singular with the article preceding or following it means the ['whole,' 'all the']; in the plural without the article it means ['all']. Thus 'every scripture' is the expected translation. 'All scripture' would be possible if scripture could have the collective sense of 'every passage of scripture taken together.' But we have seen that it is always used of the individual passage and never in the collective sense. Hence strictly speaking 'all scripture' is somewhat of a solecism in the N.T. Paul certainly means 'every passage of Scripture.'"
(My own understanding is that in 2 Tim. 3:16 Paul says, "Every God-breathing (or God-breathed) writing is also profitable...." The reference, I think, is to books or letters, such as Paul's, other than the OT.)
However, in his article titled "Biblical Inspiration in 2 Timothy 3:16" ("Bibliotheca Sacra"), H. Wayne House argues in favour of the construction "All scripture" on the basis that when the noun accompanying PAS is a proper noun or collective term, the adjective may be translated "the whole" or "all," the authorities he cites being J. H. Thayer's lexicon and Arndt and Gingrich.
I mentioned in my last post that B. B. Warfield considers the anarthrous GRAFH in 1 Pet. 2:6, 2 Peter 1:20 and 2 Timothy 3:16 to be a proper noun. Is GRAFH treated as a proper noun by some in the above verses because it is thought also to have a collective sense (as, e.g., in Galatians 3:22), or because it is used anarthrously there or for both reasons? I am really confused. What is the exact relationship in Greek between the definite article and proper nouns?
It appears that ultimately the validity of the translation "All scripture" depends on the presupposition that GRAFH is elsewhere used in the NT in the singular in a collective sense to refer to the entire OT.
I would greatly appreciate your further comments on this and the comments of anyone who can contribute to this.
Leonard Jayawardena
Colombo, Sri Lanka
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list