[B-Greek] Heb 5:2TOIS AGNOOUSIN KAI PLANWMENOIS

Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org
Fri Mar 14 13:04:47 EDT 2008


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Elizabeth Kline" <kline_dekooning at earthlink.net>
To: "greek B-Greek" <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: 14. marts 2008 00:29
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Heb 5:2TOIS AGNOOUSIN KAI PLANWMENOIS


>
> 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?

I wouldn't think so. He knew the prohibition against making idols, so I would not call this an 
unintentional sin.

> 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.
>

Yes, I think these two can be seen as closely related but slightly different. One thing is being 
ignorant, another thing is to be misled. I would consider a sin being committed unintentionally - 
AKOUSIWS - and in ignorance to be pretty close. One diffrerence could be that after having done an 
unintentional sin, you know that it was actually a sin even if it happened accidentally, but if you 
are ignorant, you won't know afterwards that it was a sin.
Aaron was clearly misled under pressure, but I don't think he could claim ingorance.

> 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?

The two words are antonyms, but the first is not used in the NT, so it is difficult to say whether 
Paul makes a similar distinction using different words. I am not aware of it.
But it does seem that Heb 5:2 talks about unintentional, accidental and excusable/pardonable sins, 
while 10:26 is the opposite: Clearly intentional sinning and unpardonable rebellion.

Iver Larsen 




More information about the B-Greek mailing list