[B-Greek] SUGKEKERASMENOUS in Hebrews 4:2‏

Leonard Jayawardena leonardj at live.com
Tue Sep 2 23:34:41 EDT 2008


Carl W. Conrad wrote:  A bit of confusion here, first regarding my name: my great-grandfather Carl Conrad changed his first name to "Charles" when he immigrated to the U.S. in the 1850's, but subsequent generations of my family have reverted to the older German name and spelling, "Carl."LJ: My apologies for getting the name wrong! but I did get it right at the first mention of the name (in the first para of my post). C.W.C.: Then there's the confusion of the slightly misquoted text of Heb 4:2: the text reads not THi TOIS AKOUSASIN but THi PISTEI TOIS AKOUSASIN.LJ: This was an oversight on my part. I meant to write THi PISTEI TOIS AKOUSASIN throughout.C.W.C.: Then there's the confusion about what BDAG offers as an interpretation of ALL' OUK WFELHSEN ... TOIS AKOUSASIN. BDAG Englishes this as "the word that they heard did not benefit those who were not united with those who listened in faith." And it was Mark Lama, who initiated the thread in which I was responding back in 2003 -- not I -- who cited BDAG. LJ: What I actually wrote is "According to the post linked to by Carl Conrad, BDAG understands THi TOIS AKOUSASIN as "those who listened in faith," making TOIS AKOUSASIN the dative complement of SUGKEKERASMENOUS and THi PISTEI dependent on THi TOIS AKOUSASIN."  I knew that it was Mark Lama who had mentioned BDAG's interpretation of ALL' OUK WFELHSEN ... TOIS AKOUSASIN, but I avoided reference to his name.  C.W.C.: Now it may be that THi PISTEI could construe as well with TOIS AKOUSASIN: "those who heard (the message) in faith." That is, in fact, the way NET Englishes the verse, otherwise along the same lines as my interpretation of SUGKEKERASMENOIS as middle: "2 For we had good news proclaimed to us just as they did. But the message they heard did them no good, since they did not join in with those who heard it in faith."Whether one construes THi PISTEI with SUGKEKERASMENOIS or with AKOUSASIN is perhaps not really so significant, since it must be understood with both (APO KOINOU): "those who joined with the ones having heard in faith" -- i.e. the ones who responded to the message with faith, the ones who believed the proclamation -- joined IN BELIEF the ones who had heard.LJ: You are right in saying that, whichever THi PISTEI is construed with, ultimately the idea is a joining in belief, though I think THi PISTEI TOIS AKOUSASIN as understood as "the ones having heard in faith" provides a direct match to hOI PISTEUSANTES in the immediately following verse. As I explained, hOI PISTEUSANTES of v. 3 are the NT antitype of THi PISTEI TOIS AKOUSASIN of the Israelites of Moses's day. Additionally, in the vast majority of cases of its use in the NT, AKOUW is used in its basic sense of "to hear"--including all other occurrences of this word in Hebrews itself--therefore the statistical probability too favours the construction of TOIS AKOUSASIN with THi PISTEI.  
 
Leonard Jayawardena
Sri Lanka
 
On Sep 2, 2008, at 4:42 AM, Leonard Jayawardena wrote:> According to the post linked to by Carl Conrad, BDAG understands THi > TOIS AKOUSASIN as "those who listened in faith," making TOIS > AKOUSASIN the dative complement of SUGKEKERASMENOUS and THi PISTEI > dependent on THi TOIS AKOUSASIN.>> I think the BDAG interpretation of this construction dovetails > neatly with hOI PISTEUSANTES of the following verse (v. 3) and so > derives additional support for itself.>> Verse 3 reads, EISERCOMEQA GAR EIS [THN] KATAPAUSIN hOI > PISTEUSANTES....>> In the view of the writer of Hebrews, those among the children of > Israel who believed that God would fulfill his promise of giving > them rest in the land of Canaan entered it (except Moses, who was > disqualified for another reason). They were the OT type of those > Christians who believed the gospel when it was preached to them (hOI > PISTEUSANTES of v. 3) and so "are entering" (EISERCOMEQA) their > rest. Therefore THi TOIS AKOUSASIN in v.2, i.e., "those who heard > with faith" and so entered the promised rest under Joshua, > correspond to and are the OT type of hOI PISTEUSANTES in v. 3, who > are "are entering" their rest. hOI PISTEUSANTES points to "with > those heard with faith" as being the correct meaning of THi TOIS > AKOUSASIN.>> Charles Conrad's interpretation "they refused to join in faith with > those who had heeded the proclamation" (found in the post linked to) > does not seem to provide a neat parallel to hOI PISTEUSANTES in v. 3.A bit of confusion here, first regarding my name: my great-grandfather Carl Conrad changed his first name to "Charles" when he immigrated to the U.S. in the 1850's, but subsequent generations of my family have reverted to the older German name and spelling, "Carl."Then there's the confusion of the slightly misquoted text of Heb 4:2: the text reads not THi TOIS AKOUSASIN but THi PISTEI TOIS AKOUSASIN.2 καὶ γάρ ἐσμεν εὐηγγελισμένοι καθάπερ κἀκεῖνοι· ἀλλ᾿ οὐκ ὠφέλησεν ὁ λόγος τῆς ἀκοῆς ἐκείνους μὴ συγκεκερασμένους τῇ πίστει τοῖς ἀκούσασιν.2 KAI GAR ESMEN EUHGGELISMENOI KAQAPER KAKEINOI; ALL' OUK WFELHSEN hO LOGOS THS AKOHS EKEINOUS MH SUGKEKERASMENOUS THi PISTEI TOIS AKOUSASIN.Then there's the confusion about what BDAG offers as an interpretation of ALL' OUK WFELHSEN ... TOIS AKOUSASIN. BDAG Englishes this as "the word that they heard did not benefit those who were not united with those who listened in faith." And it was Mark Lama, who initiated the thread in which I was responding back in 2003 -- not I -- who cited BDAG. My own current understanding of this difficult text is that THi PISTEI should be understood as a dative of respect and construed with SUGKEKERASMENOIS rather than with TOIS AKOUSASIN. Thus I would English verse 2 thus: "For we had the gospel proclaimed to us just as they did -- but the proclamation which they heard did THEM no good -- for the reason that they did not join in faith with those who had HEEDED (the proclamation)."Now it may be that THi PISTEI could construe as well with TOIS AKOUSASIN: "those who heard (the message) in faith." That is, in fact, the way NET Englishes the verse, otherwise along the same lines as my interpretation of SUGKEKERASMENOIS as middle: "2 For we had good news proclaimed to us just as they did. But the message they heard did them no good, since they did not join in with those who heard it in faith."Whether one construes THi PISTEI with SUGKEKERASMENOIS or with AKOUSASIN is perhaps not really so significant, since it must be understood with both (APO KOINOU): "those who joined with the ones having heard in faith" -- i.e. the ones who responded to the message with faith, the ones who believed the proclamation -- joined IN BELIEF the ones who had heard.I had hoped to avoid lengthy repetition of the 2003 thread, but Leonard has referred to it and somewhat misconstrued who said what in that thread, so let me repeat my own response -- no more than what I myself wrote -- from the September 24, 2003 message:=============CWC 2003.09.24: "I'm now inclining (perhaps not yet quite fully "inclined"?) towards a different understanding of the phrase MH SUGKEKERASMENOUS THi PISTEI TOIS AKOUSASIN, one hinted at by our recent discussions of John 3:36 and distinctive ways in which PISTEUW, APEIQEW, AKOUW are used in GNT and LXX to refer to "heeding" (APEIQEW to failure to heed) the gospel proclamation. The other factor entering into my fresh perspective is my readiness now to think that SUGKEKERASMENOUS is middle rather than passive: that is to say, those whom the gospel message "the word which they heard" did no good, "failed to join in commitment with those who had given heed to it." This may turn out to be as unsatisfactory as other attempts to resolve the problems of this passage, but at least it makes better sense of the word-order of the two datives following upon the participle--and also, I dare say, of the position of the participial phrase FOLLOWING the clause OUK WFELHSEN hO LOGOS THS AKOHS EKEINOUS."On this view, (a) the participial phrase is EXPLANATORY of that clause ("the word they heard didn't do them any good") and thus functions as would a GAR clause clarifying the assertion about the failure of the gospel proclamation in their case; (b) MH SUGKEKERASMENOUS, understood as a middle-voice verb implying (in this instance, at least) deliberate decision on the part of "them" ("they REFUSED to join in faith with those who had heeded the proclamation") allows for a more intelligible accounting for the two datives, though both are construed with the participle: THi PISTEI will be a dative of "reference" or "respect" while TOIS AKOUSASIN will be an old-fashioned "comitative" or "sociative" dative dependent upon the SUN- prefix of the participle."This account of the participial phrase and the two datives, including its implicit notion that AKOUW/AKOH in our verse carriees the broader sense of "heeding" or "commitment"--i.e. PISTIS, is confirmed, I think, by consideration of the ones referred to as EKEINOI; they are characterized at the end of the preceding chapter (Heb 3:18-19) thus: 3:18 TISIN DE WMOSEN MH EISELEUSESQAI EIS THN KATAPAUSIN AUTOU EI MH TOIS APEIQHSASIN? 19 KAI BLEPOMEN hOTI OUK HDUNHQHSAN EISELQEIN DI' APISTIAN. And note, by the way, the implicit parallelism of APEIQHSASIN and DI' APISTIAN. "Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)    
_________________________________________________________________
Connect to the next generation of MSN Messenger 
http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=wlmailtagline


More information about the B-Greek mailing list