[B-Greek] 2Cor 3:15-16 hHNIKA ... AN

Donald Cobb docobb at orange.fr
Fri Feb 5 01:49:30 EST 2010


Hello Brian,

< "In the Exodus passage, the use of hHNIKA D' AN has nothing causal or 
conditional about it. It merely states when: "every time that"." I think 
this is quite incorrect. If one looks at the Exodus passage, it seems 
clear that Moses took the veil off because he was going into the Lord's 
presence, that going into the Lord's presence occasioned his removing 
the veil. This is substantiated by the fact that he left the veil off 
until he came out, when he would put the veil back on again. >

I think a distinction needs to be made between one action contingent on 
another (= condition or cause) and one action concomitant with another. 
It is clear that the expression hHNIKA AN in 2 Cor 3 and its various OT 
occurrences makes reference to an action that accompanies another 
action, i.e., "when Moses is read a veil is placed on their hearts" (v. 
15). But the difficulty of seeing that as inherently causal or 
conditional becomes evident when you try to english that by saying: 
"because Moses is read a veil is placed on their hearts" or "if Moses is 
read, (then) a veil is placed on their hearts", as you pointed out in 
your remark to Elizabeth.

In Ex 34:34 the focus of the text is concomitance: "When, i.e., each 
time (not if or because) Moses went into the tent". In that sense, the 
LXX gives an accurate translation of the Heb (inf. + Be : "in Moses' 
going").

I would be afraid that trying to put more content into the expression 
would run the risk of over-reading it, theologically.

Regards,

Donald Cobb
Aix-en-Provence, France


Brian Abasciano a écrit :
>
> Elizabeth,
>
> I don't think that the use of  hHNIKA in 3:15 gainsays my position. 
> For one, while Paul is not saying that the veil is lifted when they 
> stopped reading, I think he is saying that the veil comes into play at 
> the reading of Moses. So there is a sort of priority given to 
> ANAGINWSKHTAI MWUSHS that brings about the significance of KALUMMA EPI 
> THN KARDIAN AUTWN KEITAI, or one might even say activates it. The 
> veiledness of heart that Paul refers to there is irrelevant, and in a 
> way, non-existant apart from the reading of Moses/the Old Covenant. 
> That's why Paul states 3:15 as he does. Second, and perhaps more 
> importantly from a grammatical point of view, the statement of 3:15 
> and 3:16 differ in a critical way. In the former, there is a stative 
> situation suggested by the nature of something lying on something 
> else. (I suppose one could take this as the veil getting laid at that 
> time, but I am sure you would agree that is highly unlikely in this 
> context. Besides, that would bring us to even 3:15 indicating an 
> action contingent on the hHNIKA phrase.) But 3:16 presents the veil 
> getting removed. This reading is supported by 3:14 which tells us that 
> the veil is removed in Christ, a state resulting from conversion ( = 
> turning to the Lord). Third, as I mentioned in citation of my book, In 
> the LXX, hHNIKA with EAN and the subjunctive always presents the 
> associated action as in some way determinative for a subordinate 
> contingent action (Gen. 20.13 [without subjunctive]; 24.41; 27.40; 
> Exod. 13.5; Lev. 5.23; Deut. 25.19; 27.3; Josh. 24.20; 24.27; Jdt. 
> 14.2). Moreover, hHNIKA is so used in every one of its five 
> occurrences in Exodus 32-34 (32.19; 33.8, 22; 34.24, 34), with Exod. 
> 34.34 providing the basis of Paul's use in 2 Cor. 3.16.
>
> So Don, that addresses a comment you made, that "In the Exodus 
> passage, the use of hHNIKA D' AN has nothing causal or conditional 
> about it. It merely states when: "every time that"." I think this is 
> quite incorrect. If one looks at the Exodus passage, it seems clear 
> that Moses took the veil off because he was going into the Lord's 
> presence, that going into the Lord's presence occasioned his removing 
> the veil. This is substantiated by the fact that he left the veil off 
> until he came out, when he would put the veil back on again.
>
>
>
> *************
>
> Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:08:05 -0800
> From: Elizabeth Kline <kline_dekooning at earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] 2Cor 3:15-16 hHNIKA ... AN
> To: greek B-Greek <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID: <70E07ED9-7476-418E-B58A-3477D272D0B6 at earthlink.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
>
> It seems to me that 2Cor. 3:15 undermines Brian's reading:
>
> On Feb 3, 2010, at 10:51 AM, Brian Abasciano wrote:
>
>> I actually think it is pretty certain that a causal/conditional 
>> relationship
>> is implied.
>
>
> There doesn't seem to be any conditional or causal element in 2Cor. 3:15
>
> ALL? hEWS SHMERON hHNIKA AN ANAGINWSKHTAI MWUSHS, KALUMMA EPI THN 
> KARDIAN AUTWN KEITAI?
>
> Paul isn't saying that the KALUMMA EPI THN KARDIAN AUTWN KEITAI is 
> somehow contingent on ANAGINWSKHTAI MWUSHS, as if the veil was lifted 
> when they stopped reading. In English, a straight reading of  v16 
> appears to make PERIAIREITAI TO KALUMMA contingent of EPISTREYHi PROS 
> KURION. However, because "we do this in English" it is a good idea to 
> be skeptical about reading it that way in Greek. It is far too easy to 
> read our native language habits in to the text.
>
> Re: the Exodus passage, not sure what to do with that. It explains the 
> use of  hHNIKA AN but I not certain how it helps to resolve the issue 
> of conditional and/or causal semantic features in  2Cor. 3:15-16.
>
>
> Elizabeth Kline
>
> *****************
>
> From: Donald Cobb <docobb at orange.fr>
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] 2Cor 3:15-16 hHNIKA ... AN
> To: Elizabeth Kline <kline_dekooning at earthlink.net>
> Cc: greek B-Greek <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID: <4B6A5D2A.8060607 at orange.fr>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
> Elizabeth,
>
> You raise a good point with v. 15. The connotation there is simply 
> temporal.
>
> I think the Exodus passage really is the key, given the total absence of
> hHNIKA elsewhere in Paul and the NT. Paul is quoting/re-rwiting Exodus
> to talk about what happens to New Covenant believers. But given that 1)
> he doesn't use the term elsewhere, and 2) the fact that he is fairly
> clearly quoting, I think it would be unwise to assume that he's giving
> any other meaning to hHNIKA AN  than what it has in Ex 34.
>
> In the Exodus passage, the use of hHNIKA D' AN has nothing causal or
> conditional about it. It merely states when: "every time that". I don't
> think we can safely say that Paul has any other meaning in mind.
>
> Donald Cobb
> Aix-en-Provence, France
>
>
>





More information about the B-Greek mailing list