No subject
Tue May 3 10:41:24 EDT 2011
John Moe's extremely insightful (and apparently now inciteful!) inquiry=20
brought=20
replies from two excellent scholars on our List. I am impelled to reply as=20
well, since this is an extremely important text (and issue).=20
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Habakkuk 2:4---=20
Hebrew: WTSDDYQ B'MUNTHO YHYH:=20
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0But-the-righteous by-his-faith(fulness) shall-=
live.=20
LXX: hO DE DIKAIOS EK PISTEWS MOU ZHSETAI.=20
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0But the righteous by my faith(fulness) shall-l=
ive.=20
Rom. 1:17--- hO DE DIKAIOS EK PISTEWS ZHSETAI.=20
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0(Omitting Hebrew "HIS" and LXX=20=
"MY")=20
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Paul drops the HIS (Hebrew) or MY (LXX) to universalize the s=
tatement=20
in Hab. 2:4. [The fact that W, the Freer MS. of the Minor Prophets, omits=20
MOU does not indicate that Paul's LXX lacked the word; it is almost=20
certainly a Christian scribe's correction, done VERY early--third century.]=20
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Both Carl and Carlton have suggested ways Paul SHOULD have re=
written=20
this text if he thought it meant "The righteous through faith shall live."=20
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0But I would argue that he did not feel free to rewrite the te=
xt. Paul=20
does not rewrite his citations from the LXX to conform to his grammar.=20
E.g., he uses the future ZHSW, not the classical ZHSOMAI, except when=20
citing LXX, where he retains the future middle form (classical). See=20
Zerwick, Section 226. He almost certainly could read Hebrew, and I would=20
be incredulous if I were told that he didn't even bother to look in his=20
Bible(s) for one of the two most central texts in his thinking. Hence he=20
saw both "HIS" and "MY" as modifiers of "FAITH(FULNESS)", thus a legitimate=20
variable he could omit to universalize the text.=20
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0(And Carl, I would incline to think of this is the M=
OTTO for=20
Romans, not a "proof text.")=20
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Now, how did Paul understand this text? (I won't refer you to=
my=20
piece on this published just forty years ago, since I can't find it here=20
myself.) Carlton put it correctly when he said that some commentators base=20
their interpretation (The one who is righteous through faith shall live) on=20
the structure of Romans. The modern commentator who fought hardest for=20
this was Anders Nygren; his _Romerbrevet_ argued the case at great length=20
and with substantial evidence. What question is Paul offering to answer in=20
Romans? Is it, "How shall the righteous live? -- Answer: They shall live=20
by faith." Or is it, "How can anyone find life, the goal of all human=20
striving? I.e., Who shall live? Answer: The righteous through faith shall=20
live."=20
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Ch. 1-4 -- The righteous through faith=20
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Ch. 5-8 (or 5-15) -- Shall live=20
And in each case, he argues first negatively (what righteous through faith=20
is not: it is not UNrighteousness, nor is it righteousness through=20
law/works) (what life is not: not being under the power of wrath, sin, law,=20
or death) then what it IS.=20
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0No point in repeating Nygren (my copies of the original Swedi=
sh and=20
the ET are in my office, not here in my cold basement, so I couldn't=20
anyway, could I?); you can all read him.=20
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0But he convinced me, long ago; and he convinced the RSV trans=
lators in=20
1946. Alas, the NRSV went back to Luther's interpretation, and consigned=20
Lutheran Bishop Nygren to the margin. But then they usually got Paul=20
wrong, I suspect.=20
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0A final point on word order: Carl said,=20
'By terms of "normal" Greek grammar, EK PISTEWS in Rom. 1:17 SHOULD be=20
construed with ZHSETAI . . . .'=20
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0But as Carl well knows, lots of things in Hellenistic writers=
,=20
including Paul, do not follow classical canons; and this example is=20
probably one of them. Whether Paul would have moved EK PISTEWS before=20
DIKAIOS if he felt free to re-write his Biblical text, I don't know; but=20
I'm somewhat doubtful. The issue isn't whether this text COULD mean "The=20
righteous shall live by faith," but whether it HAS to mean that. In my=20
opinion, it doesn't--it can quite plausibly be read "The righteous through=20
faith shall live," probably with the same ambiguity as that English=20
sentence.=20
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Just in case you don't know, I shudder to disagree with Carl=20=
on=20
grammar. But then, I am -- or used to be -- a grammarian myself; so I=20
decided to "Sin boldly!" (If sin it be.)=20
Edward Hobbs=20
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list