[B-Greek] Hebrews 9:2-5

Zionlcms zionlcms at qconline.com
Tue Nov 6 14:27:38 EST 2007


In Hebrews 9: 2-5 is there a way to know for sure what the referent is for
the prepositional phrase EN hH STAMNOS . (in v. 4)? The closest feminine
noun is KIBWTON, so most translations take that as the referent, leading to
the understanding that the jar of manna was "in the ark" rather than "in the
Holy of Holies."

But the phrase EN hH . occurs after a dependent clause (CRUSSOUN ECOUSA
QUMIATHRION KAI THN KIBWTON THS DIAQHKHS.), which modifies the main clause
in verse 2: SKHNH GAR KATESKEUASQH hH PRWTH EN hH . which is continued by
verse 3: META DE TO DEUTERON KATAPETASMA SKHNH hH LEGOUMENH hAGIA hAGIWN.
Verse 4 begins with the participial clause CRUSSOUN ECOUSA . which is
obviously descriptive of the second SKHNH in verse 3. Then comes the
prepositional phrase EN hH STAMNOS CRUSH ECOUSA TO MANNA. Since verse 2 uses
a phrase beginning EN hH to describe the first SKHNH, it seems to make sense
that verse 4 uses the phrase beginning EN hH to describe the second SKHNH of
verse 3.

The thought occurred to me that if the author had continued his description
of the hAGIA hAGIWN of verse 3 by using another participial phrase ECOUSA
STAMNON XRUSHN instead of the prepositional phrase EN hHi STAMNOS CRUSH,
then that would make the following participial phrase ECOUSA TO MANNA .
ambiguous, leading the reader to wonder "I thought the manna was in the jar,
but was it only in the tent?" So the author used a prepositional phrase to
continue his description of the hAGIA hAGIWN, rather than continuing the
description with another participle.

I think I understand why so many translations take EN hH STAMNOS CRUSH . as
referring to THN KIBWTON THS DIAQHKHS, since that is the closest feminine
noun in the context. But the author of Hebrews often uses word order that is
quite different from what we have to use in English.

E.g. in verse 5 the phrase hUPERANW DE AUTHS does not refer to the closest
feminine singular noun in the previous verse (DIAQHKHS), nor does it refer
to the two feminine singular nouns before that (hRABDOS or STAMNOS), but it
refers by sense to KIBWTON, which is far removed in word order but was well
known from the Old Testament has having the CEROUBIN above it. (Or does it
refer even farther back to hAGIA hAGIWN, and should be translated "at the
top of which."?)

 

So right now I would diagram the sense of the text thus:

2. SKHNH GAR KATESKEUASQH hH PRWTH 

EN hHi hH TE LUCVIA 

KAI hH TRAPEZA 

KAI hH PROQESIS TWN ARTWN 

hHTIS LEGETAI hAGIA

3. META DE TO DEUTERON KATAPETASMA SKHNH 

hH LEGOUMENH hAGIA hAGIWN

4. CRUSSOUN ECOUSA QUMIATHRION 

KAI THN KIBWTON THS DIAQHKHS 

PERIKEKALUMMENHN PANTOQEN CRUSIWi

EN hHi STAMNOS CRUSH 

ECOUSA TO MANNA

                        KAI hH hRABDOS AARWN 

hH BLASTHSASA

                        KAI AI PLAKES THS DIAQHKHS.

            5. hUPERANW DE AUTHS CEROUBIN DOXHS

                        KATASKIAZONTA TO ILASTHRION

PERI hWN OUK ESTIN NUN LEGEIN KATA MEROS.

 

The traditional interpretation of verses 3-5 would diagram more like this:

3. META DE TO DEUTERON KATAPETASMA SKHNH 

hH LEGOUMENH hAGIA hAGIWN

4. CRUSSOUN ECOUSA QUMIATHRION 

KAI THN KIBWTON THS DIAQHKHS 

PERIKEKALUMMENHN PANTOQEN CRUSIWi

EN hHi STAMNOS CRUSH 

ECOUSA TO MANNA

                                                KAI hH hRABDOS AARWN 

hH BLASTHSASA

                                                KAI AI PLAKES THS DIAQHKHS.

                                    5. hUPERANW DE AUTHS CEROUBIN DOXHS

                                                KATASKIAZONTA TO ILASTHRION

 

What led me to question the usual translations is that Exodus 16:34 does not
say that the jar of manna was "in the ark" but only "in front of the
testimony" ENANTION TOU MARTURIOU (which agrees with the Hebrew), and 1
Kings 8:9 states that there was nothing "in the ark" (EN THi KIBWTWi) except
the two tablets, with no mention of a jar of manna. I give the author of
Hebrews the credit for knowing what the OT said and not contradicting it.

 

What am I missing that leads many expositors to a different conclusion?

 

Mark Eddy

Zion Lutheran Church

Taylor Ridge, Ill.




More information about the B-Greek mailing list