[B-Greek] John 2:15--PANTAS ... TA TE PROBATA AND TOUS BOAS
Oun Kwon
kwonbbl at gmail.com
Wed Nov 17 23:14:11 EST 2010
(my apology for accidental blank return)
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 6:57 AM, Leonard Jayawardena <leonardj at live.com> wrote:
>
>
>
<clipped>
>
>
> LJ: And why do you exclude the doves and the coins? Isn't that arbitrary? If PANTAS includes the traders and the sheep and the oxen, then logically the doves and the coins too must be included, since they, too, are part of what Jesus "saw," as you said. If in answer you say that in the next clauses we are told that Jesus poured out the coins and told the owners of doves to take them away and therefore they are to be excluded, then your understanding of PANTAS, too, is conditioned by something in the following context, as mine is, and hence commands no premium over my interpretation as being a more "logical" or "natural" interpretation of PANTAS, if that is what you think. The masculine gender of PANTAS can, of course, be explained by BOAS, which is masculine.
>
> Actually, if you read only up to PANTAS (let's ignore the bit about the whip for the moment), its most logical antecedent is not even the merchants plus all the types of wares mentioned, including the doves and coins, but ONLY THE MERCHANTS, with the removal of their wares from the temple only implied as a natural consequence of Jesus putting out the merchants, since when they go out they take their wares out with them. Grammatically, there are really only two possibilities of understanding PANTAS EXEBALEN EK TOU hIEROU TA TE PROBATA KAI TOUS BOAS:
>
> A. He put all out of the temple, both the sheep and the oxen (my preference), in which case TA TE PROBATA KAI TOUS BOAS is in apposition to PANTAS; or
>
> B. TA TE PROBATA KAI TOUS BOAS is an addition to PANTAS and is translated "and the sheep and the oxen," as it is in the KJV, which is more idiomatically rendered in some such manner as 0"with the sheep and the oxen" (e.g., ESV). On this interpretation, PANTAS refers to the merchants and TE has the semantic force of KAI as a connective (coordinate) conjunction and effectively joins the sheep and the oxen to PANTAS as an additional object of EXEBALEN,i.e., "he put PANTAS (= the traders) and the sheep and the oxen out of the temple."
>
> The following translations, which I found on www.biblegateway.com, reflect one or the other position:
>
> 1. "So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple courts, both sheep and cattle" (NIV)--Interpretation A above.
>
<clipped>
>
> 15, "Jesus made a whip from some ropes and chased them all out of the Temple. He drove out the sheep and cattle, scattered the money changers’ coins over the floor, and turned over their tables" (NLT)--B above. (More on the NLT translation below as you have mistakenly mentioned it as supporting your position.)
>
> Translations adopting the view (B) are in a slight majority.
>
> From the foregoing it will be seen that, with your understanding of PANTAS, you--and Carl W. Conrad--are neither here nor there!
>
<clipped>
>
> LJ: If TA TE PROBATA KAI TOUS BOAS is in apposition to PANTAS, then it must be both syntactically and semantically in apposition to it for it to qualify as an appositive. Look again at the definition of apposition: "A construction in which a noun or noun phrase is placed with another as an explanatory equivalent, both having the same syntactic relation to the other elements in the sentence." If B is in apposition to A, then B must necessarily be co-refential with A, otherwise there is no apposition. What may be true is that a structure formally similar may have diferrent functions in different contexts. For example, POLLA TE TERATA KAI SHMEIA DIA TWN APOSTOLWN EGINETO (Acts 2:43) is rendered usually "and many signs and wonders were done through the apostles." Here we have two nouns in a TE ... KAI structure where TE can be rendered "and," i.e., functionally a connective conjunction. But in a different context, this phrase may in apposition to another noun or phrase.
>
<clipped>
>
> LJ: This sounds all very well in theory but what is the relevance of that to the case in hand? I have cited many passages from the NT where a TE ... KAI phrase is in apposition to another noun or phrase in a manner parallel to PANTAS ... TA TE PROBATA KAI TOUS BOAS, and the anchor and the appositive are co-referential. If you want to neutralize that evidence, then you need to adduce concrete evidence in the form of a text containing a TE ... KAI phrase which support what you say above instead of making a general statement.
>
<clipped>
>
>
> LJ: As already mentioned, the NLT translation does not follow your "generic-specific" pattern and this is a misunderstanding on your part of this translation. Let us look at both v. 14 and v. 15 to get the context:
>
>
> "[v.14] In the Temple area he saw merchants selling cattle, sheep, and doves for sacrifices; he also saw dealers at tables exchanging foreign money.
>
> "[v.15] Jesus made a whip from some ropes and chased them all out of the Temple. He drove out the sheep and cattle, scattered the money changers’ coins over the floor, and turned over their tables."
>
> The referent of "them" in "chased them" is only the merchants. Note the use of the two different words: He "chased" out the merchants and "drove out" the sheep and the cattle.
>
> Finally, I would reiterate that the interpretation that sees TA TE PROBATA KAI TOUS BOAS as being in apposition to PANTAS (AND co-referential :>)) is superior to any other alternative interpretation both (a) grammatically; and (b) contextually (or, if you like, pragmatically?).
>
> GRMATICALLY, for the reasons explained above.
>
> CONTEXTUALLY, because
>
> i. The qualification of EXEBALEN by the adverbial clause POIHSAS FRAGELLION EK SCOINIWN suggests that the whip was used on the animals only, since whips are normally used on animals, not humans (or doves for that matter).
>
> ii. After "all" (the merchants) are put out of the temple as per v. 15, the sellers of doves are still standing around for Jesus to tell them, "Take these things hence" (v. 16). Doesn't that sound inconsistent?
>
> But the interpretation that sees PANTAS = TA TE PROBATA KAI TOUS BOAS results in a logical sequence and neat pattern:
>
> 1. Jesus enters the temple and sees those who selling sheep and oxen and doves, and moneychangers seated
>
> 2. He makes a whip out of cords and drives out the sheep and the oxen (probably with the help of his disciples).
>
> 3. He pours out the coins and overturns the tables.
>
> 4. He orders the sellers of doves to take their birds out. This is because the birds were kept in cages and Jesus could not directly put them out.
>
> Note that the narrative flows smoothly with none of the inconsistencies or logical absurdities entailed in the alternative interpretations. Note also that Jesus' actions are directed only towards the animals and inanimate objects and he follows a course of action more expected of a sane person in the circumstances. we can assume that Jesus telling the merchants politely, "I would appreciate your taking your wares out so as not to desecrate the temple" in the first instance would not have worked in this case :>). He then did the next most sensible thing. Your interpretation has Jesus driving out both the merchants and the sheep and the oxen with a whip. Why, pray tell me, the need to drive out both? Once Jesus started chasing the merchants out, they would have gathered their sheep and oxen and exited the temple. Or was there a possibility of them exiting the temple leaving their animals behind? Consider also that it was not the presence of the merchants per se which desecrated the temple, but the presence of their wares and so a more natural object of Jesus' actions would be the wares, not the humans. Once Jesus started driving out the animals, their owners would have naturally followed them out of the temple.
>
>
> Leonard Jayawardena
> ---
Thanks for your detailed and persistent argument to have me convinced.
I have to agree with Leonard 110%. I don't see how else the text can
be taken. Note: NLT is an example of (A), not (B).
The segment v v. 14-16 may be seen as outlined:
1. Jesus came upon the merchants. Then,
a. He made a whip and drove out both sheep and oxen (referred by 'all').
(The merchants were going after their animals;
but the whip was not for men, but for the large animals.)
b. He scattered the coins and knocked over their tables.
(The dealers scrambled after coins.)
c. He told those dove sellers to take the doves out of there.
(Seeing all this happening, they were shocked and got dumbfound)
Regarding the rendering by CEV: "together with their sheep and cattle"
is misleading, not clarifying. There is no sense of 'together with' I
can find in the Greek TA ~ KAI.
Oun Kwon.
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list