[B-Greek] Matthew 8.7
Thomas Hagen
thomas.hagen at libero.it
Thu Mar 12 17:29:47 EDT 2009
Dear Drs. Conrad and Larsen -
I want to thank you very, very much for your replies to my query concerning
Matt. 8.7. Your comments have helped me to resolve a question which has been
nagging at me for some time.
I am also very glad to see how well B-Greek works! I am less than less than
a beginning student of NT Greek, but you'll see me soon with some other
questions. I just hope they won't be too simple for the "philosophy" of the
list.
Thanks again -
Thomas Hagen
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl W. Conrad" <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>
To: "Iver Larsen" <iver_larsen at sil.org>
Cc: "Thomas Hagen" <thomas.hagen at libero.it>; "B-Greek"
<b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2009 12:37 PM
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Matthew 8.7
For what it's worth, I have to confess that I find Iver's argument in
this instance quite convincing, whereupon I renounce the position
which he cites at the head of his response, and repent me in sackcloth
and ashes. I hadn't really taken into account the force of the EGW,
and one really should ALWAYS take an EGW that is not required
syntactically and must necessarily be there for a rhetorical purpose.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Ret)
On Mar 8, 2009, at 4:50 AM, Iver Larsen wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Carl W. Conrad" <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>
> To: "Thomas Hagen" <thomas.hagen at libero.it>
> Cc: "B-Greek" <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Sent: 8. marts 2009 04:44
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Matthew 8.7
>
>
>>
>> On Mar 7, 2009, at 6:25 PM, Thomas Hagen wrote:
>>
>>> This is my very first question and I'm not sure how to address all
>>> of you potential readers. How about "Dear B-Greekers"?
>>>
>>> Well, I'm interested in knowing how strong the argument is for
>>> considering Jesus' words in Matthew 8:7 - "εγω ελθων
>>> θεραπεύσω αυτόν / EGW ELQWN QERAPEUSW AUTON" - a
>>> question rather than a statement.
>>>
>>> Thank you for any help you can give me -
>>
>> I don't really see anything in the context that suggests that it is a
>> question. But perhaps you are deriving that understanding from the
>> participle ἀποκριθεὶς [APOKRIQEIS] in what follows
>> immediately....
>
> Since I am of the opinion that it most likely is a question, let me try
> to give some reasons. The
> use of APOKRINOMAI is not one of my reasons.
>
> One problem is the use and position of EGW.
> You may have read the commentaries already, but let me briefly quote from
> Morris:
> "Most translations take Jesus’ words as a statement, “I will come and
> heal him,” and this may be
> correct. ... But if the words are taken as a statement, it is difficult
> to understand why Jesus uses
> the emphatic I."
>
> So, why use the emphatic EGW?
> Matthew uses EGW 28 times. One of these (21:30) is a special ellipsis, so
> I won't include it.
> In the vast majority of cases there is a clear contrast between *I* and a
> specific person or persons
> understood from context.
> In the remaining cases, it is possible that the use of *I* indicates the
> status of authority of the
> person speaking, i..e *I* as contrasted to people in general.
>
> 10:16: Ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ ἀποστέλλω ὑμᾶς ὡς πρόβατα ἐν μέσῳ λύκων
> IDOU EGW APOSTELLW hUMAS hWS PROBATA EN MESW LUKWN
> (Listen, I am sending you as sheep among wolves).
> Maybe there is a contrast to how Jesus sends his disciples and how other
> rabbis sent theirs? (The
> Pharisees sent their disciples as wolves among sheep, according to Jesus
> in Matt 23:15.)
>
> 11:10: Ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ ἀποστέλλω τὸν ἄγγελόν μου πρὸ προσώπου σου
> IDOU EGW APOSTELLW TON AGGELWN MOU PRO PROSWPOU SOU
> (Listen, I am sending my messenger before you)
>
> 23:34 διὰ τοῦτο ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ ἀποστέλλω πρὸς ὑμᾶς προφήτας καὶ σοφοὺς καὶ
> γραμματεῖς
> DIA TOUTO IDOU EGW APOSTELLW PROS hUMAS PROFHTAS KAI SOFOUS KAI
> GRAMMATEIS
> (So I am sending to you prophets and wise men and learned men)
>
> Maybe the word "send" indicates the authority of the one sending? Of the
> 7 APOSTELLW in the NT, 5 of
> them have EGW, 3 in Matthew and 2 in Luke. In is interesting that Mrk 1:2
> and Luke 7:27 have the
> same OT quote as in Matt 11:10, but without EGW. Similarly Luke 10:3 is
> the parallel to Matt 10:16,
> without EGW. The EGW is there in the LXX of Mal 3:1, so it is likely that
> Mark and Luke left out the
> EGW because there is no clear contrast in view. It seems that where the
> EGW has survived it is often
> a reflection of the Hebraic Greek of the LXX.
>
> 28:20 καὶ ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν εἰμι πάσας τὰς ἡμέρας
> KAI IDOU EGW MEQ' hUMWN EIMI PASAS TAS HMERAS
> (And listen, I am with you all the days)
>
> The remaining two are in the passage under study:
>
> 8:7 Ἐγὼ ἐλθὼν θεραπεύσω αὐτόν
> EGW ELQWN QERAPEUSW AUTON
> (I having-come I-shall-heal him)
>
> 8:9 καὶ γὰρ ἐγὼ ἄνθρωπός εἰμι ὑπὸ ἐξουσίαν
> KAI GAR EGW ANQRWPOS EIMI hUPO EXOUSIAN
> (For I, too, is a man under authority)
> Here, I assume the EGW is needed because of the KAI. The centurion has
> recognized and accepted the
> authority of Jesus and says: Me, too. I know what it is to be under
> authority and therefore also
> have the right to exercise authority.
>
> Now, IF Jesus had only wanted to say the straightforward "I shall come
> and heal him", there is no
> reasonable explanation for the use of the emphatic EGW. It can better be
> understood if it is a
> question: "Shall *I* come and heal him?" I am using "shall" to reflect
> the open-ended future
> indicative tense. Had a subjunctive been used, it would have been more
> like "should I" with the
> indication that this was unlikely to happen.
>
> A second reason comes from the response of the Gentile centurion:
> I know that you as a Jew cannot come into my house and heal him. But that
> is not needed. You can
> just say a word.
>
> Morris says: " [If it is a statement ...] It is also difficult to
> understand why the centurion
> should have protested as he did in his reply. As McNeile puts it, if
> Jesus’ words “are a direct
> statement assenting to the request that He would come, the humble answer,
> with its profound faith,
> is called forth by no apparent cause.”"
>
> This second reason is connected to an overall theme of Jesus as having
> been sent to the "lost sheep
> of the house of Israel". In Matt 15:21-28, there is a similar incident of
> a non-Jew asking for
> healing of her child. Jesus initially stalls by not responding to her
> plea (15:23) and the disciples
> want to send her away. Jesus then objects that he was only sent to the
> Jews (v. 24). The woman
> repeats her plea (v. 25). Jesus objects again (26). The woman argues that
> even if she is "a dog" she
> can still benefit from the crumbs of the children's bread. The final
> result is that the daughter is
> healed and Jesus commends her great faith.
> The exact same theme is also found in 8:10. Jesus commends the non- Jewish
> centurion for his great
> faith.
>
> Because of such parallels, it seems likely to me that Jesus is stalling
> in 8:7 and after a further
> argument from the Gentile, he accepts and does the requested miracle.
> This fits much better with a
> question: "Do you really want me to come to your house and heal him?"
>
> I think this is an important theme for Matthew. His audience is Jews, and
> he wants them to believe
> in Jesus as the Messiah, but he also hints that the obstacle is their
> faith or rather lack of it (as
> Matthew several times explains about the 12 disciples), and some Gentiles
> have greater faith. It may
> be a way of enticing the Jews to have faith. Paul did the same, trying to
> make the Jews jealous of
> the Gentiles.
>
> Iver Larsen
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list