[B-Greek] Luke 4:7
Iver Larsen
iver_larsen at sil.org
Fri Jun 15 05:07:47 EDT 2007
----- Original Message -----
From: "Elizabeth Kline" <kline_dekooning at earthlink.net>
To: "greek B-Greek" <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 8:03 AM
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Luke 4:7
>
> On Jun 14, 2007, at 12:33 PM, Iver Larsen wrote:
>
>> I would consider the conditional clause in 4:7 (and in 4:3 and 4:9)
>> more salient than the main
>> clause.
>
> Jonathan Robie's point seems to make sense in regard to Lk 4:3,
>
> LUKE 4:3 EIPEN DE AUTWi hO DIABOLOS: EI hUIOS EI TOU QEOU, EIPE TWi
> LIQWi TOUTWi hINA GENHTAI ARTOS. 4 KAI APEKRIQH PROS AUTON hO
> IHSOUS: GEGRAPTAI hOTI OUK EP' ARTWi MONWi ZHSETAI hO ANQRWPOS.
>
> Here, EI hUIOS EI TOU QEOU is part of the shared information common
> to both the speaker and the addressee. The command EIPE ... ARTOS is
> the new information. Within the command TWi LIQWi TOUTWi is part of
> the shared information and hINA GENHTAI ARTOS is the new
> information. A further indicator that ARTOS is salient is that Jesus
> responds with a statement about bread not stones.
In the case of Greek, new and prominent information normally comes before old and less prominent
information at the clause level, but it seems to me that we are putting too much emphasis on word
order and new/old information and too little on the context and pragmatics.
The previous verse states that Jesus was hungry after having fasted 40 days, so a temptation to
create food is pertinent. Since Satan is tempting Jesus to prove that he is indeed God's son, the
condition is again salient. This is the topic for the first and third temptation: Jesus, if you
really are God's son, then you should prove it by doing a miracle. The second temptation is focused
on whether his allegiance is to God or to Satan.
The main clause in 4:3 only gives a possible and relevant way for Jesus to "prove" his powers by
doing a miracle. The word order in the main clause is as expected with the verb first, since it is a
command. The word order in the rest of the sentence could have been different, but that would have
indicated an unintended contrast. For instance, TOUTWi TWi LIQWi would have contrasted this
particular stone with another stone, but that is not intended. The order hINA ARTOS GENHTAI would
have contrasted "bread" with other possible food items, but that is not intended. The hINA content
clause naturally follows the verb it complements.
Jesus' response is not related primarily to stone or bread, but to the fact that obedience and
submission to God is more important than satisfying temporary physical needs, so it would not be
right to take upon himself to "prove" anything by doing a miracle. The test is a test of who is
supreme: God, Jesus or the Devil.
Iver Larsen
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list