[B-Greek] Can QEOS be used in apposition to MONOGENHS inJohn 1:18-revised
Blue Meeksbay
bluemeeksbay at yahoo.com
Thu Nov 5 09:55:17 EST 2009
Carl Conrad wrote:
This appears to derive from the Latin vulgate version, "Filium suum
unigenitum," so that it was evidently Jerome who associated the GEN-
of the Greek word with the Latin verb "gigno, gignere, genui,
genitus." That is to say, Jerome appears to be the translator of the
Greek who drew the link between the GEN- of MONOGENHS and GENNAW.
There is evidence to suggest otherwise. The Vetus Latina routinely translates MONOGENHS by unigenitus. There is misinformation on the web concerning this, but in texts, which Alford called the ancient Latin versions before Jerome, out of a total 41 recorded occurrences of the Greek word monogenes, 29 render it unigenitus and 12 render it unicus. The Vetus Latina Project is doing a terrific work in regard to these texts. You can go online, http://www.vetuslatina.org/, and peruse their website. And at this address you can download the Old Latin Texts in question and confirm the use of unigenitus in the texts. http://arts-itsee.bham.ac.uk/itseeweb/iohannes/vetuslatina/index.html)
Also, Irenaeus understood MONOGENHS with the sense of begotteness long before Jerome. He wrote the following in the second century,
“If any one, therefore says to us, 'How then was the Son produced by the Father?' we reply to him, that no man understands that production, or generation, or calling, or revelation, or by whatever name one many describe His generation, which is in fact altogether indescribable. Neither...angels, nor archangels, nor principalities, nor powers [possess this knowledge], but the Father only who begat, and the Son who was begotten...the Only-Begotten Word of God.”[1]
Best regards,
B.Harris
________________________________
[1] Roberts, Alexander; Donaldson, James, ed., The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. I (Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, MI 1985), pg. 401
________________________________
________________________________
From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>
To: Vasileios Tsialas <tsialas78 at hotmail.com>
Cc: B-Greek Lists <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Thu, November 5, 2009 5:52:12 AM
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Can QEOS be used in apposition to MONOGENHS inJohn 1:18-revised
On Nov 5, 2009, at 6:05 AM, Vasileios Tsialas wrote:
>
>> From: cwconrad2 at mac.com> Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 05:12:54 -0500
>> To: leonardj at live.com
>> CC: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
>> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Can QEOS be used in apposition to MONOGENHS
>> inJohn 1:18-revised
>>
>>
>> On Nov 5, 2009, at 1:10 AM, Leonard Jayawardena wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Tom Moore wrote:> "MONOGENHS (pred.) QEOS means God's only
>>>> begotten?">> MONOGENHS and QEOS are in the same case. Using the
>>>> same sense and> terminology you used, it would need be, I think,
>>>> "only begotten is> God"> using the same word order as Greek. For my
>>>> part, I would prefer the> attributive position becasue of the
>>>> context.
>>>
>>> Except that MONOGENHS does not mean "only-begotten" but rater "one
>>> of a kind," "unique."
>>>
>>> Carl W. Conrad
>>>
>>>
>>> LJ: Is not GENHS in MONOGENHS cognate with GENNAW (used in v. 1:13).
>>> Why cannot it mean "only-begotton"?
>>
>> Only insofar as GENNAW "generate/beget" derives from the root GEN-
>> "come-to-be" or "kind/kindred"
>> -GENHS derives directly from GEN-
>>
>> Carl W. Conrad
>> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
> As far as I remember, according to TDNT the usual meanning of
> μονογενής MONOGENHSis "only-beggoten" and that the meanning
> "unique" is not quite often.
The fact of the matter is that MONOGENHS is consatrued almost always
with hUIOS, once with QUGATHR in the GNT.
> At the begining of the article, it ιs explaind how
> μονογενής literally means "of sole descent", "without
> brothers and sisters".The stem γεν GEN is related with
> γένεσις GENESIS, which some times is used interchangablywith
> γέννησις GENNHSIS, because the basic concept is the same, the
> origin of existance.I hope I remember well.After many hours from
> now, I will be home to check the article again.Tsialas
> VasileiosAthens Greece>
This etymology seems a bit fanciful to me -- fanciful, rather than
wrong. I think we are aware, most of us at this point, how little
bearing etymology may have upon usage and understood meanings.
GENESIS is the action noun derived from the verb GI(G)NOMAI (root GEN/
GON/GN). GENNAW is not the equivalent of GINOMAI; GENNAW uses the
present stem infix -NA- (Smyth §523g); GENNAW is an active (causative)
verb; GINOMAI is a middle verb.
As John Sanders notes, "only begotten" is an English word and enters
into the English Biblical tradition, apparently in Wycliffe's
translation o f John 3:16 "his oon bigotten sone"; Tyndale has "his
only son"; Douay-Rheims and KJV both have "his only begotten son."
This appears to derive from the Latin vulgate version, "Filium suum
unigenitum," so that it was evidently Jerome who associated the GEN-
of the Greek word with the Latin verb "gigno, gignere, genui,
genitus." That is to say, Jerome appears to be the translator of the
Greek who drew the link between the GEN- of MONOGENHS and GENNAW.
When MONOGENHS as an adjective is attributive to a noun such as hUIOS
or QUGATHR, it is reasonable enough to understand it to indicate a
child brought into existence by natural generation, although I wonder
what adjective would be applied to an adoptive "only" child.If I
recall aright, Raymon Brown suggested in "Birth of the Messiah" that
Jesus was Joseph's adoptive son and that Hebrew genealogical descent
could include adoptive figures in the line, so that it is appropriate
to account for Jesus' descent from David in these terms.
I guess what bothers me most about "beget" is that it is has such an
archaic ring to it; certainly it's what we call "Biblish." The
etymology of the English word, which is only used (or used to be used,
in another century) of producing a child by natural reproduction, is
also of some interest; my dictionary gives: "Old English begietan
[get, obtain by effort] (see be- , get )."
Certainly the Greek text is easier to understand than it is to put
into English, I note that NET has:
"No one has ever seen God. The only one, himself God, who is in
closest fellowship with the Father, has made God known"
and Peterson's Message has:
"No one has ever seen God, not so much as a glimpse. This one-of-a-
kind God-Expression, who exists at the very heart of the Father, has
made him plain as day."
The more one looks at John 1:18, the more one wonders whether the
Greek was ever intended for conversion into English. At any rate, a
"woodenly-literal" version of this verse is not very helpful to one
trying to understand the usage of the key words in it.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
---
B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
B-Greek mailing list
B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list