[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