[B-Greek] The Genealogy of Jesus in Luke 3
Iver Larsen
iver_larsen at sil.org
Thu Sep 14 05:45:01 EDT 2006
> Marshal is intersting. Is there a rule governing the use of the article
> in Greek? When does it modify the following noun and when would it
> refer back to the preceding noun. Is there a rule governing this, and
> are there examples of this use in non-Biblical documents that might
> apply in this situation?
>
> Roger Hutchinson
>
> Elizabeth Kline wrote:
>
>>
>> On Sep 13, 2006, at 10:24 AM, Elizabeth Kline wrote:
>>
>> LK3:23 KAI AUTOS HN IHSOUS ARCOMENOS hWSEI ETWN TRIAKONTA, WN hUIOS,
>> hWS ENOMIZETO, IWSHF TOU HLI ...
>>
>> Marshal (p.163) "The omission of the article before IWSHF led Godet
>> to the view that the whole phrase hWS ENOMIZETO IWSHF as a
>> parenthesis, so that Jesus was presented as the son of Eli ...".
>> Marshal considers this is a misunderstanding of the function of TOU.
>> He reads TOU as appositional to the preceding noun, not the article
>> for the following noun. On this reading there is no missing TOU. "...
>> so that the structure is: 'Jesus was the son ... of Joseph (who was)
>> the (son) of Eli (who was) the (son) of ...'".
>>
>> I am certain that someone will take exception to this but keep in
>> mind you are arguing with I.H.Marshall no with E.Kline :-)
>>
>> Elizabeth Kline
Well, I am not aware of any rule that would determine the case, but I have no qualms about arguing with Marshall.
The topic in focus is Jesus - KAI AUTOS HN IHSOUS. and several things are said about him. One of those things is that he
was considered or counted as the son of Josef - hUIOS, hWS ENOMIZETO, IWSHF. The implication is that he was not
physically the son of Joseph, but rather like an adopted son.
I would then take the TOU HLI as a second statement linked to WN as, for instance, in
Jhn 6:46 hO WN PARA TOU QEOU
Jhn 8:47 hO WN EK TOU QEOU
Jhn 11:49,51 ARCIEREUS WN TOU ENIAUTOU EKEINOU (being highpriest of/in that year)
In this way it would be possible to understand Jesus as "being of/from Eli", not that he was the son of Eli, but that he
came from the lineage of Eli, possibly a grandson through his mother. In a genealogy the TOU does not necessarily imply
"son of", but rather "descendant of" which may or may not refer to a son. It seems quite possible that Luke wanted to
trace Mary back to David's son Nathan, just as Matthew traces Joseph back to David's son Solomon.
In any case, it is a matter of interpretation how to take the two genealogies.
Iver Larsen
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list