[B-Greek] Heb 5:2TOIS AGNOOUSIN KAI PLANWMENOIS
Elizabeth Kline
kline_dekooning at earthlink.net
Thu Mar 13 17:29:07 EDT 2008
On Mar 11, 2008, at 1:51 PM, Carl Conrad wrote:
>
> On Mar 11, 2008, at 4:19 PM, Elizabeth Kline wrote:
>
>> HEB. 5:1 PAS GAR ARCIEREUS EX ANQRWPWN LAMBANOMENOS hUPER ANQRWPWN
>> KAQISTATAI TA PROS TON QEON, hINA PROSFERHi DWRA TE KAI QUSIAS hUPER
>> hAMARTIWN, 2 METRIOPAQEIN DUNAMENOS TOIS AGNOOUSIN KAI PLANWMENOIS,
>> EPEI KAI AUTOS PERIKEITAI ASQENEIAN
>>
>> Are we compelled by the evidence to read TOIS AGNOOUSIN KAI
>> PLANWMENOIS as the semantic equivalent of AKOUSIWS (LXX) as it is
>> distinguished from hEKOUSIWS (LXX, Heb. 10:26)?
>
> Good question; reminds me of Aristotle's discussion early in
> Nicomachean Ethics of whether someone who willingly gets drunk is
> responsible for misdeeds performed while drunk.
>
> Carl W. Conrad
Thank you Carl,
I am having some difficulty with this text. Take Aaron as an example
of a ARCIEREWS who PERIKEITAI ASQENEIAN. When Aaron manufactures the
golden calf is this a case that falls under the heading AKOUSIWS?
Another question. Assuming in TOIS AGNOOUSIN KAI PLANWMENOIS the
subjects of the participles are coreferential, does that require us
to read this as a hendiadys? If not couldn't we understand AGNOOUSIN
KAI PLANWMENOIS are making reference to two different aspects of
human weakness with the same human subjects? In this case Aaron's
golden calf caper might fall under PLANWMENOIS but not under AGNOOUSIN.
A third question. Does Paul or the other epistles (not Hebrews) ever
make a clear distinction between AKOUSIWS and hEKOUSIWS in dealing
with post-baptismal transgressions?
I know there was a dispute about this among the Church Fathers but I
am trying to figure out if Hebrews 5:2 is really making a distinction
between AKOUSIWS and hEKOUSIWS.
Elizabeth Kline
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list