Matthew 5:40 χιτών, ἱμάτιον

Forum rules
Please quote the Greek text you are discussing directly in your post if it is reasonably short - do not ask people to look it up. This is not a beginner's forum, competence in Greek is assumed.
Post Reply
Jonathan Robie
Posts: 4237
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Matthew 5:40 χιτών, ἱμάτιον

Post by Jonathan Robie »

Matthew 5 wrote:39 ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν μὴ ἀντιστῆναι τῷ πονηρῷ· ἀλλ’ ὅστις σε ῥαπίζει εἰς τὴν δεξιὰν σιαγόνα, στρέψον αὐτῷ καὶ τὴν ἄλλην· 40 καὶ τῷ θέλοντί σοι κριθῆναι καὶ τὸν χιτῶνά σου λαβεῖν, ἄφες αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ ἱμάτιον· 41 καὶ ὅστις σε ἀγγαρεύσει μίλιον ἕν, ὕπαγε μετ’ αὐτοῦ δύο.
Wait. I don't get it.

For some reason, I've been reading this backwards for years without realizing it. I assumed that if someone sued you, they would sue you for your ἱμάτιον. It's the more expensive garment, you can give it up and still be covered, and it's been a lot less intimately involved with your body (which makes it more desirable for the person who is suing you). And I thought this said that if they do that, give them your χιτών as well - taking it to a hyperbolic extreme.

But ... it's obviously written the other way around. And it doesn't make sense to me as written. Can someone help?
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
Eeli Kaikkonen
Posts: 621
Joined: June 2nd, 2011, 7:49 am
Location: Finland
Contact:

Re: Matthew 5:40 χιτών, ἱμάτιον

Post by Eeli Kaikkonen »

Is it possible that Exod. 22:26 is behind it, so that Jews couldn't take one's ἱμάτιον because of their (interpretation of the) law?
Jonathan Robie
Posts: 4237
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Re: Matthew 5:40 χιτών, ἱμάτιον

Post by Jonathan Robie »

Eeli Kaikkonen wrote:Is it possible that Exod. 22:26 is behind it, so that Jews couldn't take one's ἱμάτιον because of their (interpretation of the) law?
Could be. If so, it's rather legalistic to sue for the χιτών.

I found one commentary that suggested that a minor suit might go for the cheaper χιτών, and a more major suit would go for the expensive ἱμάτιον.

Interesting that the order is reversed in Luke 6:29:
τῷ τύπτοντί σε ἐπὶ τὴν σιαγόνα πάρεχε καὶ τὴν ἄλλην, καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ αἴροντός σου τὸ ἱμάτιον καὶ τὸν χιτῶνα μὴ κωλύσῃς.
But that does not involve a lawsuit.
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
Shirley Rollinson
Posts: 437
Joined: June 4th, 2011, 6:19 pm
Location: New Mexico
Contact:

Re: Matthew 5:40 χιτών, ἱμάτιον

Post by Shirley Rollinson »

Jonathan Robie wrote:
Matthew 5 wrote:39 ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν μὴ ἀντιστῆναι τῷ πονηρῷ· ἀλλ’ ὅστις σε ῥαπίζει εἰς τὴν δεξιὰν σιαγόνα, στρέψον αὐτῷ καὶ τὴν ἄλλην· 40 καὶ τῷ θέλοντί σοι κριθῆναι καὶ τὸν χιτῶνά σου λαβεῖν, ἄφες αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ ἱμάτιον· 41 καὶ ὅστις σε ἀγγαρεύσει μίλιον ἕν, ὕπαγε μετ’ αὐτοῦ δύο.
Wait. I don't get it.

For some reason, I've been reading this backwards for years without realizing it. I assumed that if someone sued you, they would sue you for your ἱμάτιον. It's the more expensive garment, you can give it up and still be covered, and it's been a lot less intimately involved with your body (which makes it more desirable for the person who is suing you). And I thought this said that if they do that, give them your χιτών as well - taking it to a hyperbolic extreme.

But ... it's obviously written the other way around. And it doesn't make sense to me as written. Can someone help?
Or the sense might be that, if someone wants to get the cheaper article from you - give them the more valuable one also :-)
David Lim
Posts: 901
Joined: June 6th, 2011, 6:55 am

Re: Matthew 5:40 χιτών, ἱμάτιον

Post by David Lim »

Jonathan Robie wrote:
Eeli Kaikkonen wrote:Is it possible that Exod. 22:26 is behind it, so that Jews couldn't take one's ἱμάτιον because of their (interpretation of the) law?
Could be. If so, it's rather legalistic to sue for the χιτών.

I found one commentary that suggested that a minor suit might go for the cheaper χιτών, and a more major suit would go for the expensive ἱμάτιον.

Interesting that the order is reversed in Luke 6:29:
τῷ τύπτοντί σε ἐπὶ τὴν σιαγόνα πάρεχε καὶ τὴν ἄλλην, καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ αἴροντός σου τὸ ἱμάτιον καὶ τὸν χιτῶνα μὴ κωλύσῃς.
But that does not involve a lawsuit.
I doubt the involvement of a lawsuit is an important consideration. I am inclined to think the version in Luke is the correct one, as it is more vague and merely implies that if you are not in the wrong yet someone wants take things from you, let him take even more than he originally intended. Matthew's account gives specific examples of the situations in which the principle may apply, in this case a lawsuit.
δαυιδ λιμ
David Lim
Posts: 901
Joined: June 6th, 2011, 6:55 am

Re: Matthew 5:40 χιτών, ἱμάτιον

Post by David Lim »

By the way, what exactly is a χιτων and an ιματιον? In the LXX a χιτων seems to refer to a shirt-like vesture, and an ιματιον seems to refer to a generic garment. (Lev 16:4)
δαυιδ λιμ
Jonathan Robie
Posts: 4237
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Re: Matthew 5:40 χιτών, ἱμάτιον

Post by Jonathan Robie »

David Lim wrote:By the way, what exactly is a χιτων and an ιματιον? In the LXX a χιτων seems to refer to a shirt-like vesture, and an ιματιον seems to refer to a generic garment. (Lev 16:4)
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
Post Reply

Return to “New Testament”