[B-Greek] PARA with acc (was. PAR' AUTOU in Luke 18:9-14)

Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org
Fri Jul 17 03:02:00 EDT 2009


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Yancy Smith" <yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net>
To: "'B Greek'" <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: 17. juli 2009 01:15
Subject: [B-Greek] PAR' AUTOU in Luke 18:9-14

> [Yancy Smith]
>
> I want to register my agreement with Conrad's assessment here about the DIK- 
> verbs in this passage and suggest that Luke's quotation of Jesus' parable end 
> on a less that "once for all note." That may well be because of the way Luke 
> is handling his source. The statement that κατέβη οὗτος δεδικαιωμένος εἰς τὸν 
> οἶκον αὐτοῦ παρ᾽ ἐκεῖνον· KATEBH HOUTOS DEDIKAIOMENOS EIS TON OIKON AUTOU PAR' 
> EKEINON could and probably should be Englished, "this man went down to his 
> house more justified than the other." I understand that BDAG recommends the 
> exclusive righteousness idea, "instead of" rather than the comparative "more 
> than". However, the idea of comparative righteousness in surprising situations 
> is an echo of Gen. 38:26, Δεδικαίωται Θαμαρ ἢ ἐγώ DEDIKAWTAI QAMAR H EGW. The 
> delicious irony of the Luke's parable, however, is that the good Pharisee's 
> good works may well be the impetus that provokes the humble reaction of the 
> Tax Collector. A case of transferred merit, as it were! We know the Pharisee 
> compares himself with the tax collector. Are we to assume the Tax Collector 
> compares himself with the righteous Pharisee? If both men compare themselves 
> with one another, God sees the more humble man as the more righteous. Read in 
> this way, it becomes a trap of a parable, indicting any sort of self exalting 
> pride. As far as I can see, the only reason for choosing the exclusive meaning 
> of PAR'AUTOU rather than the comparative is the assumption that a Pharisee 
> (qua Pharisee) cannot possibly be a righteous person. The brilliant parable 
> then becomes a ham-fisted polemic against Pharisees. I can see how Luke is 
> complicit in our reading the parable this way, but as Jesus would have said 
> it, in the first context, it works better as a comparative. A great discussion 
> of this is found in the popular book by Amy Jill-Levine, _The Misunderstood 
> Jew_.

[Iver:]

First, let me say that I am quite convinced that DEDIKAIWMENOS in Luke 18:14 is 
intended to be passive in sense rather than middle based on how this verb is 
used in the GNT. Similarly, DIKAIWQHNAI in Acts 13:38 and DIKAIOUTAI in Acts 
13:39 are passives. It is God who justifies people, i.e. he has the right and 
authority to decide whether a person is considered "righteous" in God's eyes.

BAGD renders PARA in Luke 18:14 as "rather than the other". Another option is 
"contrary to" which is sense III.6 in BAGD.

I would think that the comparative option is unlikely. Many of the quotes in 
BAGD III.3 would fit better under III.6.
The Hebrews often spoke in extremes and contrasts. The tax collector left in a 
state of having been declared righteous, the Pharisee left in a state of having 
been declared not righteous, rather than less righteous. The text indicates that 
the Pharisee compared himself to the tax collector, but it also shows that the 
tax collector did not compare himself to the Pharisee. He did not lift up his 
eyes, so he was not even aware that the Pharisee was present.

PARA is used in Rom 1:15 where the KJV and its followers like RSV and NIV use 
"more than" or "rather than" while others like TEV, CEV and NLT use "instead 
of". The context indicates that the latter is better than the former. They did 
not serve God at all, but served the created things.

For PARA to be used in a comparative sense, it needs clear support from context. 
For instance, in Luke 3:13 we read:
MHDEN PLEON TO DIATETAGMENON hUMIN PRASSETE. It is the PLEON that gives the 
comparative sense.

In Luke 13:2 and 4, we have the description/adjective hAMARTWLOI and PARA in the 
basic sense of "beyond" probably indicates a comparison. But is also possible to 
think of it contrastively: Do you think that these were sinners and all the 
others are not?

I don't consider Gen 38:16 particularly relevant, partly because PARA is not 
used in the LXX, partly because it is a different sense of DIKAIOW. But even 
here, the contrastive use of hH is likely: She was in the right, I was not.

Iver Larsen




More information about the B-Greek mailing list