[B-Greek] Jn 2:25 AUTOS DE IHSOUS OUK EPISTEUEN AUTON AUTOIS
Webb
webb at selftest.net
Thu Feb 22 15:09:27 EST 2007
FWIW,
I don't think "entrusting yourself to someone" is identical to "trusting someone". In Greek (see BDAG PISTEUW, def. 3), as in English, the former involves giving someone else concrete say-so on matters that directly impinge on you. For example, I entrust myself to a cab driver when I take a cab. I entrust myself to a surgeon when I agree to undergo surgery. Depending on my religious tradition, I may entrust myself to a spiritual director or pastor or leader. You probably wouldn't entrust yourself to someone you didn't trust, but "I trust the cab driver" and "I entrust myself to the cab driver" are two different statements. The latter is about giving the person some kind of power of decision and/or action in relation to me. It's about choosing to submit yourself to someone else's influence in one way or another.
So I think that in Jn 2:25, John is saying, roughly, that lots of people were enthusiastic about Jesus, but he wasn't giving in to being influenced by their enthusiasm. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I think a similar decision not to allow himself to be influenced by others' enthusiasm about him is narrated in Jn 6:15.
Webb Mealy
-----Original Message-----
From: Carl W. Conrad [mailto:cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu]
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 5:08 AM
To: Webb
Cc: 'Wayne Leman'; 'B-Greek'
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Jn 2:25 AUTOS DE IHSOUS OUK EPISTEUEN AUTON AUTOIS
On Feb 20, 2007, at 2:50 PM, Webb wrote:
> I think something significant drops out if one translates AUTOS DE
> IHSOUS
> OUK EPISTEUEN AUTON AUTOIS as "Jesus didn't trust them. I would
> render it:
>
> "But Jesus himself wasn't entrusting himself to them."
> Or maybe, in order to remove the stylistic clumsiness of the two
> instances
> of "himself":
> "But as for Jesus, he wasn't entrusting himself to them."
I've been puzzling over this for several days now. It must
unquestionably mean "wasn't entrusting himself to them," mustn't it?
Jarring as it is, the problem with this locution doesn't lie in usage
of AUTON for hEAUTON; the rough breathing was no longer pronounced, I
think, and the EAU had long been pronounced AU -- so presumably even
if it were written as hEAUTON there would be no differentiation in
pronunciation of hEAUTON and AUTON.
My problem is rather with the intended sense of the locuation OUK
EPISTEUEN AUTON AUTOIS.
Considering alternatives from what BDAG indicates, I find:
1. to consider someth. to be true and therefore worthy of one’s
trust, believe
c. w. pers. and thing added π. τινί τι believe someone with
regard to someth. (X., Apol. 15 MHDE TAUTA EIKHi PISTEUSHTE TWi QEWi)
Hm 6, 2, 6.—W. dat. of pers. and ὅτι foll. (ApcEsdr 4:35 p. 29,
12 Tdf.): PISTEUETE MOI hOTI EGW EN TWi PATRI J 14:11a. Cp. 4:21; Ac
27:25.
2. to entrust oneself to an entity in complete confidence, believe
(in), trust, w. implication of total commitment to the one who is
trusted.
(several usages indicated here, including (a) dative of person, (b)
with EIS and acc. of person, (c) with EPI and dat. of person, (d)
with EN and dat. of person, (e) absolute, i.e. without a complement.
3. entrust TINI TI someth. to someone
Here we find AUTON (so N. and Tdf.; v.l. hEAUTON) TINI trust oneself
to someone (Brutus, Ep. 25; Plut., Mor. 181d ANDRI MALLON AGAQWi
PISTEUSAS hEAUTON H OCURWi TOPWi=entrusting himself to a good man
rather than to a stronghold; EpArist 270; Jos., Ant. 12, 396) J 2:24
(EStauffer, CDodd Festschr., ’56, 281–99.—Diod. S. 34 + 35 fgm.
39a OU TOIS TUCOUSI FILOIS hEAUTON EPISTEUSEN=he did not trust
himself to casual friends).
Also here is Pass. PISTEUOMAI TI (B-D-F §159, 4) I am entrusted with
something.
What I'm having trouble understanding here is how the locution (BDAG
#3) with the reflexive pronoun (hEAUTON PISTEUEIN TINI) is different
in meaning from locution (BDAG #2) with all those alternative modes
of indicating the complement of PISTEUEIN. That is to say, I'm
wondering whether there is a real semantic difference between OUK
EPISTEUEN AUTON AUTOIS and OUK EPISTEUEN AUTOIS. I'm wondering
whether BOTH expressions don't really mean the same thing, namely,
"he did not put his trust in them."
And even IF there's an intent to emphasize that these Jerusalemites
are dangerous and could very well turn on him and bring about his
death, would that sense be less clearly indicated if our texts simply
said OUK EPISTEUEN AUTOIS? Using BDAG #2 we could English this as "he
would not entrust himself to them in complete confidence."
The locution strikes me as somewhat fishy.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad2 at mac.com
WWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list