[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/functions_content.php on line 1014: Undefined array key 3 Acts 21:25 - B-Greek: The Biblical Greek Forum
The forum for those who still struggle with morphology, syntax, and idiom, or who wish to discuss basic questions about the meaning of Greek texts, syntax, or words.
Forum rules
This is not a place for students to ask for the answers to their homework assignments. Users who do that may be banned.
I was reading Acts 21:25, and thought that it might be translated as follow (from the byzantine text) :
And concerning those of the nations who have believed, we sent an epistle, having judging them not keeping such thing, except keeping to themselves both idol-sacrifices, and blood, and a strangled thing, and whoredom.
Do you agree that such a reading could be possible regarding "keeping to themselves both idol-sacrifices, and blood, and a strangled thing, and whoredom" and "having judging them not keeping such thing" ?
I was reading Acts 21:25, and thought that it might be translated as follow (from the byzantine text) :
And concerning those of the nations who have believed, we sent an epistle, having judging them not keeping such thing, except keeping to themselves both idol-sacrifices, and blood, and a strangled thing, and whoredom.
Do you agree that such a reading could be possible regarding "keeping to themselves both idol-sacrifices, and blood, and a strangled thing, and whoredom" and "having judging them not keeping such thing" ?
Thanks,
Gustav.
Please copy and paste the Greek text so that we may see exactly what you are translating, thank you
Two curious things I’ve just noticed about the word τε. First, most English Bibles don’t translate it at all in this verse. They have opted to leave it out. The word “both” can’t be correctly used here, because it introduces a list of three things: meat that has been sacrificed to idols, blood, and the meat of animals that were slaughtered by strangling. (Or even four things if you include πορνεία.)
The other thing is that τε is an extraordinarily common word in Acts, with some 150 occurrences, but a comparatively uncommon word in all the rest of the NT (fewer than 70 occurrences, including nine in Luke). To my inexpert eye this strange imbalance looks like something that calls for an explanation.
If you take a look at the occurrences of τέ, you'll see that it clusters in Acts, Hebrews, and Luke. Those books are generally considered the "best" Greek, i.e., closer to Attic/Classical Greek. It's part of their Atticizing style.
HTH,
James
Proofreading and copyediting of ancient Near Eastern and biblical studies monographs
Brian Gould wrote: ↑September 17th, 2024, 8:32 am
Two curious things I’ve just noticed about the word τε. First, most English Bibles don’t translate it at all in this verse. They have opted to leave it out. The word “both” can’t be correctly used here, because it introduces a list of three things: meat that has been sacrificed to idols, blood, and the meat of animals that were slaughtered by strangling. (Or even four things if you include πορνεία.)
The other thing is that τε is an extraordinarily common word in Acts, with some 150 occurrences, but a comparatively uncommon word in all the rest of the NT (fewer than 70 occurrences, including nine in Luke). To my inexpert eye this strange imbalance looks like something that calls for an explanation.
The particle τὲ is learned in the early stages of any introductory textbook to Attic Greek (e.g., Athenaze ch. 3α; Reading Greek §1A; ΛΟΓΟΣ ch. 6; White’s First Greek Book ch. 18). It certainly does not require to be translated, since it generally functions simply to lock in a pair, but sometimes it is translated as “both” while καί is rendered as “and” (οἵ τε διδάσκαλοι καὶ οἱ μαθηταί “both the teachers and the students”). The problem is that there are parts of the NT that represent very good compositional Greek, and there are parts that represent just spoken language. The higher register will approach closer to Attic, while the lower register will not. Most introductory Koinē textbooks don’t reach the level of Greek required to read Luke-Acts or Hebrews, which are the best examples of Greek in the NT corpus.
What about my second point? Of all the 220 or so occurrences in the NT, Acts alone accounts for two-thirds of the total. There aren’t even all that many in Luke, comparatively speaking. Has anyone ever given an explanation of what’s going on here?
I was reading Acts 21:25, and thought that it might be translated as follow (from the byzantine text) :
And concerning those of the nations who have believed, we sent an epistle, having judging them not keeping such thing, except keeping to themselves both idol-sacrifices, and blood, and a strangled thing, and whoredom.
Do you agree that such a reading could be possible regarding "keeping to themselves both idol-sacrifices, and blood, and a strangled thing, and whoredom" and "having judging them not keeping such thing" ?
Thanks,
Gustav.
Why do you think it should be translated this way? First off, what does “having judging” mean? How can you translate κρίναντες with two participles? Wouldn’t you really mean “having judged”?
You say that this proposed translation is of the following Greek text:
But concerning the believing gentiles we ourselves have informed [you] by letter, having determined [that they must keep no such thing, except] to avoid what has been sacrificed to idols, blood, strangled meat, and fornication.
The way that you have translated θυλάσσεσθαι αὐτούς as “keep to themselves” almost sounds like you think that idolatry should be kept a secret thing and not made public. This is not what the verb means. In the middle voice, it means “to be on one’s guard against, look out for, avoid” (BDAG) and takes an object in the accusative. In this case, the object is the compound τό τε εἰδωλόθυτον καὶ αἷμα καὶ πνικτὸν καὶ πορνείαν, saying what they should avoid or be careful not to engage in.
I don’t quite understand how you got to the translation that you’re proposing. Have you studied Greek from any textbooks or are you just guessing at it?
Brian Gould wrote: ↑September 17th, 2024, 1:15 pm
Thank you, Jason. That’s very helpful.
What about my second point? Of all the 220 or so occurrences in the NT, Acts alone accounts for two-thirds of the total. There aren’t even all that many in Luke, comparatively speaking. Has anyone ever given an explanation of what’s going on here?
I’m not really sure why an account needs to be given. An author may choose to use a particle as much or as little as he likes. There is no quota for using τὲ in your writing.
James Spinti wrote: ↑September 17th, 2024, 9:42 am
If you take a look at the occurrences of τέ, you'll see that it clusters in Acts, Hebrews, and Luke. Those books are generally considered the "best" Greek, i.e., closer to Attic/Classical Greek. It's part of their Atticizing style.
HTH,
James
Thank you, James. My apologies, I hadn't spotted your post until just know, after I had replied to Jason. I get your point about Luke — along with the author of Hebrews — writing “better” literary Greek than Mark and the others, but there’s still that odd discrepancy between his gospel (nine occurrences) and Acts (around 150). I’m vaguely aware that some people think there was a long gap between the two books: they date the gospel to the eighties and Acts to the late nineties or even after 100. However, I have never seen any explanation offered to support that conclusion.