[b-greek] Re: BDAG at Rv 3:14 - Christ was the first creation now probable

From: Wes Williams (WesWilliams@usa.net)
Date: Tue Jan 23 2001 - 03:48:13 EST


> > > Has anyone been making note of changes from BAGD to BDAG?
> > >
> > > I just noticed on page 138 that the interpretation that ARXH
> means that
> > > Christ was created at Rv 3:14 has been upgraded from poss. to prob.
> > >
...

Dear Iver,

you wrote:

> Since Bauer lists "ruler, (person with) authority" as another
> common sense of
> ARCH (I would have listed this as the secondary) sense rather
> the rare "first
> cause") and since the primary sense of "beginning" does not fit
> in Rev 3:14,
> would it not be more reasonable to suggest that ARCH here is to
> be understood in
> its secondary sense, i.e.. "ruler of God's creation"?

Pardon my tardy response but I subscribe to the digest. Since you replied to
this with a linguistic point of view rather than a theological one, I will
take some time here. As you stated, context is important to determine which
sense of a word applies. Since "beginning" is the unmarked meaning of ARCH,
we should look for signals from the near context that would warrant us to
adopt a different sense than the unmarked one (i.e. "beginning"). Otherwise,
an argument that "the context reveals X" is really little more than the
reader's theology that believes whatever X is and then what I call
"word-smithing" begins. In other words, as I am sure you have seen as well,
"word-smithing" is sometimes performed under an appeal to "context" when the
context reveals no such thing clearly. That is why we must be careful with
appeals to "context" and double-check that the semantic signals truly exist.
I am not saying that you are directly doing this since you have consulted a
lexical entry first.

As for ARCH as "ruler", please note with a careful reading of the BAGD
reference that you cited that the sense of "ruler" is with EXOUSIA and when
it occurs in the plural form in the bible. BAGD 1979 says:

ARCH 3. _ruler, authority_ ... w. EXOUSIA Lk 20:20; pl. [plural] Lk 12:11;
Tit. 3:1 ...

Rev 3:14 does not have this kind of language to mark its use in the sense of
"ruler". Therefore, linguistic semantics does not appear to be directly
driving the rendering of "ruler" here, does it? There is a theological
difficulty accepting that the Son is a part of creation and so a motive for
pursuing another sense is borne. There is hardly any other book of the bible
that exalts the Son as highly as does Rev., but this provides no clear
indication of how ARCH should be translated here. Objectively and taking
theological hats off, honesty must cause us to admit that this scripture can
be used to support the theology that the Son is a created being, as DBAG
suggests. There is no instance of EXOUSIA or similar in the verse that would
mark ARCH for the sense of "ruler".

Perhaps this is why BDAG interprets ARCH as meaning that Christ was a
created being from linguistically possible to probable? If not, what do you
suggest?

Returning to the JTS article, many scholars believe that the language of Rev
3:14/Col 1:15 comes from Prov 8:22, as did both parties at Nicea, "Jahve
brought me forth [EKTISEN, LXX] as the beginning of his way." (Keil and
Delitzsch commentary on Proverbs, p. 183). Granted that Prov 8:22 is among
the most hotly contested scriptures in the O.T., after reading JTS Burney
that BAGD/DBAG cites, he concludes fairly convincingly that the Hebrew QaNaH
has the sense of acquisition, or "producing" rather than passively
"possessing". Thus, the Son was "begotten" or EKTISEN given this definition
and this can have a bearing on how we understand Rev 3:14/ Col 1:15.

Thus, linguistics provides constraints as to what senses of the words can
reasonably apply. This, in turn, should constrain the variety of theological
interpretations that are available to one. These may be some reasons why
DBAG decided to update their commentary and did not put forth the sense of
"ruler" for Rev 3:14. Having said this, there are other interpretations of
"beginning of the creation of/ by God" that do not hold that the Son was a
created being, but ARCH can also be used as support of that, as DBAG cites
as "prob."

Sincerely,
Wes Williams

>
>
>
> Iver Larsen
> Kolding, Denmark
> alice-iver_larsen@wycliffe.org


---
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu




This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:36:48 EDT