Stephen Carlson wrote:Rom 7:10 wrote:ἐγὼ δὲ ἀπέθανον καὶ εὑρέθη μοι ἡ ἐντολὴ ἡ εἰς ζωήν, αὕτη εἰς θάνατον·
Can anyone explain the function of the dative μοι in Rom 7:10? A lot of translations and even BDAG (s.v. εὑρίσκω) seem to construe it with θάνατον ("and the commandment ... was found to be death for me"), but I find this to be unlikely, as it belongs to a following clause / intonation unit.
This dative is not specifically discussed in Robertson or Wallace. BDF/BDR § 190(3) includes this in a string cite of several verses without comment in a comment that suggests it's a dative with a predicate noun, but it seems to me that, if this so, the predicate noun should be the subject of the MP2 aorist εὑρέθη, i.e. ἡ ἐντολὴ ἡ εἰς ζωήν, not εἰς θάνατον.
Any ideas?
Stephen
Well,on the one hand, the dative used for the subject of a passive verb is pretty standard in Greek, especially with a perfect or aorist passive, and some might be content to understand that as sufficient explanation here. On the other hand, there are a couple of matters that seem to me worthy of particular notice here, namely (a) the quasi-idiomatic usage of the passive of εὑρίσκω, and (b) the obvious highlighting of the first-person pronouns in these two clauses. Let's take these ὕστερον πρότερον:
(b) Emphasis on the first-person pronoun: the chiastic arrangement of ἐγὼ δὲ ἀπέθανον καὶ εὑρέθη μοι is striking. Whether one prefers to understand this section of Romans 7 as autobiographical or as a figurative first-person retelling of the onset of sin in Genesis 3 (LXX: Gen. 3:7 καὶ διηνοίχθησαν οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ τῶν δύο, καὶ ἔγνωσαν ὅτι γυμνοὶ ἦσαν ...), the text speaks of a profound eye-opening
personal experience: the experience of death is
personal and the discovery of the death-dealing power of the commandment is also
personal -- or they may constitute two perspectives on the same experience. At any rate the phrasing clearly underscores that this is not a statement of an abstract theoretical proposition but rather a personal existential awakening. In view of this, the placement of the dative pronoun μοι seems very deliberate.
(a) We've had discussion in the past over the question whether the passive forms of εὑρίσκω ought properly to be understood as passive or as middle intransitive. Iver Larsen has insisted that εὑρέθη in Mt 1:18 (εὑρέθη ἐν γαστρὶ ἔχουσα) and in Acts 8:40 (Φίλιππος δὲ εὑρέθη εἰς Ἄζωτον) is really passive, while I've argued that neither text really supposes any process of search and discovery but rather this usage describes a process of the coming-to-light of a surprising fact. I think that εὑρέθη in Rom 7:10 and in the other two passages has much the same sense as ἐφάνη or ἐγένετο: "came to light" or "turned out to be." BDAG's entry on εὑρίσκω seems to view this usage of εὑρέθη as a Semitism:
נִמְצָא be found, appear, prove, be shown (to be) (Cass. Dio 36, 27, 6; SIG 736, 51; 1109, 73; 972, 65; POxy 743, 25 [2 BC]; ParJer 4:5; Jos., Bell. 3, 114; Just., A I, 4, 2; Tat. 41:3; Mel., P. 82, 603; Ath. 24, 4) εὑρέθη ἐν γαστρὶ ἔχουσα it was found that she was to become a mother Mt 1:18. εὑρέθη μοι ἡ ἐντολὴ εἰς θάνατον (sc. οὖσα) the commandment proved to be a cause for death to me Ro 7:10. οὐχ εὑρέθησαν ὑποστρέψαντες; were there not found to return? Lk 17:18; cp. Ac 5:39; 1 Cor 4:2 (cp. Sir 44:20); 15:15; 2 Cor 5:3; Gal 2:17; 1 Pt 1:7; Rv 5:4; 1 Cl 9:3; 10:1; B 4:14; Hm 3:5 and oft. ἄσπιλοι αὐτῷ εὑρεθῆναι be found unstained in his judgment 2 Pt 3:14. σχήματι εὑρεθεὶς ὡς ἄνθρωπος when he appeared in human form Phil 2:7. εὑρεθήσομαι μαχόμνενος τῷ νόμῳ κυρίου . . . εὑρεθήσομαι παραδιδοὺς ἀθῶον αἷμα GJs 14:1.
It's noteworthy that the lexicographer (I don't know whether this is Danker or one of the earlier editors) clearly views the μοι in Rom 7:10 as understood with εἰς θάνατον; I think that's true (and so I
don't think that it's the dative with a passive verb( , but I think that the μοι is fronted here, as I noted above, in an intentional chiastic pairing with the ἐγὼ that opens the sequence: ἐγὼ δὲ ἀπέθανον καὶ εὑρέθη μοι .. "it became evident in my case that the life-giving commandment was death-dealing."