[B-Greek] Translating Hebrews 11:11

Carl Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Wed Apr 29 13:19:19 EDT 2009


On Apr 29, 2009, at 11:40 AM, Iver Larsen wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tom Moore" <tom at katabiblon.com>
> To: "Daniel Buck" <bucksburg at yahoo.com>; <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Sent: 29. april 2009 03:08
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Translating Hebrews 11:11
>
>
>> I don't think there are any substantive differences in the variants  
>> listed.
>
> Even though the UBS/NA text has included STEIRA, NA25 did not  
> include it, and NA26/27 were ill
> advised to put it in, IMO. I am not saying this to initiate a TC  
> discussion, only as a background
> for my adjustment of and comments on the text below. However, it  
> doesn't influence the question of
> who is subject, Abraham or Sarah.
>
>>
>> The question of who the subject is, seems to hinge on the  
>> expression DUNAMIN EIS KATABOLHN
>> SPERMATOS ELABEN. There are a couple of threads in the archives  
>> discussing Heb. 11:11, dating back
>> to Sep. 2001 and Dec. 2000.
>>
>> Πίστει καὶ αὐτὴ Σάρρα [στεῖρα]  
>> δύναμιν εἰς καταβολὴν σπέρματος  
>> ἔλαβεν καὶ παρὰ καιρὸν ἡλικίας,
>> ἐπεὶ πιστὸν ἡγήσατο τὸν  
>> ἐπαγγειλάμενον.
>> PISTEI KAI AUTH SARRA [STEIRA] DUNAMIN EIS KATABOLHN SPERMATOS  
>> ELABEN KAI PARA KAIRON hHLIKIAS,
>> EPEI PISTON hHGHSATO TON EPAGGEILAMENON. (Hebrews 11:11)
>>
>> Both BDAG and Metzger comment that it is used of the male role, not  
>> the female, in which case any
>> apparent ambiguity disappears; it also clears up the last part of  
>> the verse, since Genesis doesn't
>> seem to me to support the idea that it was Sarah who counted the  
>> one who had promised as faithful.
>> (Not everyone in the threads agree that the expression is reserved  
>> for the male role, nor
>> obviously do some very competent translators, such as those of the  
>> ESV.)
>
> KATABOLH is used 11 times in the NT. 10 times it occurs with KOSMOS  
> and refers to the "laying down"
> or "foundation" of the world. It could well have a similar meaning  
> of "foundation" in Heb 11:11.
>
> SPERMA is commonly used as metonym referring to "offspring,  
> descendant(s)". It is usually connected
> with a man, and expressions like SPERMA ABRAAM and SPERMA DAVID are  
> common. However, it is connected
> with a woman in Rev 12:17, but the woman here is a metaphor, so it  
> may not carry much weight. In any
> case, the reference is not to literal seed, but to the posterity.  
> (See below for LXX references.)
>
> EIS indicates a result, so that DUNAMIN EIS KATABOLHN SPERMATOS  
> ELABEN means that he/she received
> power towards or resulting in the foundation/laying down of  
> offspring. This does not tell us whether
> the subject is he or she, since both parties are needed for the  
> founding of a line of descendants.
> BAGD suggests that the normal translation "foundation" is also  
> possible for this verse. Has that
> been changed in BDAG? The t.t. definition in BAGD and BDAG appears  
> to be completely alien to and
> irrelevant for the NT and LXX.
>
> Looking at the whole clause:
> PISTEI KAI AUTH SARRA DUNAMIN EIS KATABOLHN SPERMATOS ELABEN
> it seems reasonable that Sara should be the subject. Abraham was the  
> subject for verses 8-10,
> introduced by name in v. 8. In these "By faith" constructions, the  
> subject is introduced by name
> near the beginning of the sentence. The KAI refers to addition and  
> may indicate that not only did
> Abraham do something by faith, but Sarah herself also did something.  
> If we take the dative option
> AUTHi SARRAi meaning that Abraham with Sarah fathered a son, then  
> the KAI is out of place.
>
> The next clause KAI PARA KAIRON hHLIKIAS gives an added reason for  
> why Sarah needed faith to be part
> of the process of bringing forth descendants.
>
> Even though Sarah was incredulous in the beginning, she turned  
> around and accepted to become
> pregnant and later bear a son, so she, too, showed faith. To have  
> the subject shift between Abraham
> and Sarah in the verse is very strange and the reader would not have  
> enough clues to follow such
> shifts.
>
> So, as a translator, I have opted for the choice of Sarah as subject  
> like REB, CEV, NLT, ESV and
> others, because that makes most sense of the Greek text and context.
>
>>
>> Here are a few of the pertinent links:
>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-greek/2001-September/018267.html
>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-greek/2001-September/018266.html
>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-greek/2000-December/014501.html
>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-greek/2000-December/014509.html
>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-greek/2000-December/014500.html
>>
>> Excerpts from the above links from both sides of the discussions,  
>> incl. BDAG and Metzger, are
>> here: http://forums.katabiblon.com/topic.php?tid=21.
>
> Looking at these posts it seems to me that they wrongly assume that  
> SPERMA is used in the literal
> sense of English sperm, which is very unlikely when the normal sense  
> is the metonym of posterity in
> the context of the Bible. The corresponding Hebrew word is used for  
> both plant seeds in the OT and
> offspring of both a female and male genitive. (e.g. the famous Gen  
> 3:15, but also other places like
> 4:25, 16:10, 24:60). This is not a problem, since it does not refer  
> to "sperm" but to "offspring,
> posterity" in these contexts. In fact, when the reference is to  
> "sperm" in the LXX, it is
> consistenly rendered KOITH SPERMATOS, never SPERMATOS alone and  
> never in connection with PARABOLH.
> (See LEV 15:16, 17, 18, 32, LEV 18:20, LEV 19:20, LEV 22:4, NUM  
> 5:13, WIS 3:16).

Iver wants to understand SARRA as the suject of DUNAMIN EIS KATABOLHN  
SPERMATOS ELABEN. I don't have any problem with that; I think it's  
almost surely right.
On the other hand, Iver wants to; understand SPERMATOS in a  
metaphorical sense of "offspring" -- as the word is indeed quite  
frequently used in the GNT; in the present context, however, there's  
every reason to believe that SPERMA has its more literal sense of  
"seed." And although it is true that this would be the only instance  
in the GNT wherein SPERMA is used in the literal sense, BDAG is able  
to offer several Hellenistic instances of KATABOLH in the sense of  
procreation. BDAG then says, " If this mng. is correct for Hb 11:11,  
there is prob. some error in the text, since this expression could not  
be used of Sarah, but only of Abraham." I wonder whether the error  
really lies in the text; I wonder whether the error originated in the  
author of this text, whether the author didn't mistakenly employ the  
expression commonly used for "beget" in the sense of "conceive." It  
seems to me that we sometimes go to extraordinarily lengths to defend  
the author of a Biblical text from the possibiity of making a mistake  
in Greek usage.


Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)






More information about the B-Greek mailing list