[B-Greek] Another example of a qualitative QEOS
Barry
nebarry at verizon.net
Sat Jul 8 07:28:06 EDT 2006
> -----Original Message-----
> From: b-greek-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org
[mailto:b-greek-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org]
> On Behalf Of Rolf Furuli
> Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2006 3:52 AM
> To: B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Another example of a qualitative QEOS
Comments below:
> MONOGENHS QEOS hO WN EIS TON KOLPON TOU PATROS
>
> There is a textcritical question in connection with MONOGENHS QEOS, but
> these words are found in P66 and P75 and have a rather strong backing.
> In this verse we find hO PATHR, which is a singular noun refering to hO
> QEOS. There is a relationship between hO PATHR and MONOGENHS QEOS similar
> to
> the relationship expressed by PROS in 1:1b: a/the unique/onlybegotten god
> is "at the father´s side/in the father´s bosom" In this verse the meaning
of
> the word QEOS can be easier to understand because of the preceding
adjective
> MONOGENHS. M. J. Harris "Jesus as God: The New Testament use of Theos in
> Reference to Jesus" (1992) refers to seven translations and and nine
> commentators who take MONOGENHS as a substantivized adjective (giving the
> rendering "God, the only Son" or something similar). He refers to one
Bible
> translation and sixteen commentators who take MONOGENHS as an adjective
that
> qualifies QEOS (giving the rendering a/the onlybegotten/unique God" or
> something similar), and he refers to two translations and fifteen
> commentators who in different ways avoid using MONOGENHS as an adjective
> qualifying QEOS, (giving the rendering "the only One, who is the same as
> God" or something similar).
>
> In my view the case is very clear. As far as I know, in every instance in
> the NT where an adjective immediately precedes a noun in the same gender,
> number, and case, it qualifies that noun. To take MONOGENHS as a
> substantivized adjective, or in other ways avoid its qualifying force in
the
> translation of the verse is theologically and not linguistically
motivated.
> F. Büchsel (TDNT 4, p 740, n.14 writes that MONOGENHS QEOS can only mean
> "´an only-begotten god´; to render ´an only-begotten, one who is God´ is
an
> exegetical invention. It can hardly be credited of (John), who is
> distinguished by monumental simplicity of expression."
>
> On the background of the use of adjectives that precedes nouns in the NT,
in
> 1:18 we have a passage that can help us decide the meaning of the word
QEOS
> in 1:1c. The adjective MONOGENHS can hardly qualify a quality, but it
> naturally qualifies a generic count noun. Thus "a unique/onlybegotten
> god"/"the unique/onlybegotten god" justifies the rendering "a god" in
1:1c.
> A footnote, or an appendix discussing 1:1c with some of this would be very
> fine.
This is all a very interesting and clever justification of what you believe
is the correct rendering, but I think you have missed the real issue here.
Let me approach it this way: how would you render the alternative reading,
MONONGENHS hUIOS? "An only begotten son" is an extremely difficult
rendering in English. "An only son" seems to work, but assumes that there
are other sons, part of a class of "sons," but MONONGENHS, even if
incorrectly translated "only-begotten" still bears a meaning of "absolutely
unique," so that doesn't work either. English usage actually demands the
article here, not because of any rationale concerning the substantizing
nature of the adjective, but because such adjectives qualify the noun
definitely in English ("an only god" simply doesn't work). The real issue
you are raising concerns the referent for QEOS. Your underlying assumption
appears to be that when referring to the LOGOS/hUIOS, QEOS refers to a class
of beings to which the LOGOS/hUIOS may be conceived as belonging. I am
beginning to wonder if John's carefully chosen MONOGENHS is intended to
belie that assumption, considering that many of John's readers would have
been from a polytheistic background. You might want to study how John
utilizes his key terminology here throughout his gospel. Quite intriguing,
indeed!
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
Adjunct Faculty & IT Support
The Center for Urban Theological Studies
http://www.cuts.edu
Classics Instructor, The American Academy
http://www.theamericanacademy.net
And my site:
http://mysite.verizon.net/nebarry
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list