[B-Greek] DUO ENTEUQEN KAI ENTEUQEN
frjsilver at optonline.net
frjsilver at optonline.net
Mon Dec 4 10:18:53 EST 2006
The verse in question (JN 19:32) reads TOU MEN PRWTOU KATEAXAN TA SKELH KAI TOU ALLOU TOU SUSTAURWQENTOS AUTWi.
We see that TOU MEN PRWTOU is prothetic to KAI TOU ALLOU. In such a numerical sequence, it's clear that there are only two individuals, the 'first one' and 'the other one' -- that's all there are, just two.
This reading is confirmed if we recognize that the final AUTOS is a referent of PRWTOS rather than of IHSOUS in the following verse, as some have done.
I 'feel' ALLOS as a slightly stronger word than hETEROS, sort of like ALLOS means 'different from, as opposed to' while hETEROS suggests a real but weaker distinction, like 'another one, additional one'.
But the designation hETEROS doesn't appear in this verse, so I can't imagine why it was adduced. I suspect that Oun Kwon's source has a rather active imagination in addition to a somewhat limited use of Greek.
Father James Silver
----- Original Message -----
From: Oun Kwon
Date: Sunday, December 3, 2006 9:13 pm
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] DUO ENTEUQEN KAI ENTEUQEN
To: "frjsilver at optonline.net"
> On 12/3/06, frjsilver at optonline.net wrote:
> > Dear Friends --
> >
> > The larger gospel narrative makes it otherwise clear that
> there were but two thieves, but let's stay with the grammar.
> >
> > The adverbial enclitic -QEN generally indicates 'from (a
> direction defined by the first particle of the word). For
> example, ANWQEN 'from on high, from above'.
> >
> > By itself, the adverb ENTEUQEN means simply 'from this or that
> direction', or 'to one or the other side' -- depending on one's
> perspective.>
> > Were there to have been four thieves rather than two, TESSERA
> would have been written instead of DUO, or DUO would have to be
> repeated. Writing DUO only once tells us that there were but
> two thieves, one to one side and one to the other, clarified by
> 'Jesus in the middle'.
> >
> > Peace and blessings to all.
> >
> > Father James Silver
> >
>
> Thanks to you (Also to George).
>
> Can you guide me how to understand the following quotation regarding
> difference between HETEROS and ALLOS from the same people? Does he
> make a plausible argument?
>
> "The word "other" in John 19:32 ("and of the other which was crucified
> with him") is another key to further substantiate that four men were
> crucified with Jesus. In the Bible, there are two Greek words
> translated "other." One is heteros and the other is allos, and their
> usage is for two different situations. In John 19:32, allos is used
> because more than two may be involved. The two malefactors and
> the two
> thieves (robbers) make four. Therefore, the soldiers broke the
> legs of
> the first and of the other (allos) of the four involved."
>
> Oun Kwon
>
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list