[B-Greek] Ephesians 1:22

Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org
Mon Mar 8 10:49:01 EST 2010


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net>
To: "greek B-Greek" <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: 8. marts 2010 14:13
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Ephesians 1:22


> The use of DIDWMI has some interesting parallels with the idiomatic usage of 
> NaTaN in Hebrew. Whether or not in Eph 1:22 one could call it a semitism, some 
> interesting parallels are given in BDAG and others can be plucked from the 
> LXX.
> 2 Chron 25:16 Μὴ σύμβουλον τοῦ βασιλέως δέδωκά σε; MH SUMBOULON TOU BASILEWS 
> DEDWKA SE? "[Would you shut up?] I haven't I made you [my] royal counselor 
> have I?"
> Num 14:4 καὶ εἶπαν ἕτερος τῷ ἑτέρῳ Δῶμεν ἀρχηγὸν καὶ ἀποστρέψωμεν εἰς 
> Αἴγυπτον. KAI EIPAN hETEROS TWi ETERWi DWMEN ARCHGON KAI APOSTREYWMEN EIS 
> AIGUPTON. "And they said each one to the other, "Let us appoint a leader and 
> return to Egypt."
-----------
Well, I am hesitant to rely much on the LXX because of its translation Greek, 
and I do not accept Eph 1:22 to be a semitism.
NaTaN has a large semantic range which according to TWOT fall in three main 
classes:
"The three broad areas of meaning of the verb natan are 1) give, 2) put or set, 
and 3) make or constitute."

The semantic verb "give" has three roles: A, P and B. The semantic verb 
"put/place" is very similar. It also has three roles: A, P, and L(ocation). In 
many languages the same word would be used in the same frame for these two. 
Whether the Beneficiary or Location is marked as a dative or with a 
prepositional phrase is not important.
The common Greek word for put/place is TIQHMI, and as far as I can see it would 
be a semitism to use DIDWMI for that semantic verb. I could not find Paul doing 
that anywhwere except in LXX quotes, but there is an interesting parallel 
between 1 Cor 12:28 with TIQHMI and Eph 4:11 with DIDWMI.
The third sense of natan above does not properly belong within the Greek DIDWMI 
as fas as I can tell, and it seems to be translation Greek when the LXX renders 
it with DIDWMI.

> A very nice example from Egyptian papyri is given in BDAG:
> Papyrus Grecs de Lille (3rd century B.C.), in what looks to me like a legal 
> notice sort of like a power of attourney,  αὐτοῖς ἐδώκαμεν μεσίτην Δωρίωνα 
> AUTOIS EKWDAMEN MESITHN DWRIWNA "We appointed Dorion as mediator for them."
-------------------
IL: And why could this not be translated: We gave them Dorion as mediator?
--------
> DIDWMI is used for the action of designating, choosing, electing or appointing 
> someone to an office or function. The Numbers 14:4 shows that no pronoun is 
> necessary. Paul could have said, "KAI EDWKEN KEFALHN hUPER PANTA THi 
> EKKLHSIAi" without AUTON, meaning "he chose/appointed a leader over everything 
> for the church."
------------
IL: I don't think Paul could have said that, but how can we be sure? Nor can I 
find a basis for your explanation of DIDWMI in BAGD. Does it come from somewhere 
else?

Elizabeth mentioned #5 in BAGD. Unfortunately I don't have BDAG.
BAGD says:
"5. equivalent to TIQENAI put, place ARGURION EPI TRAPEZAN put money in the bank 
Lk 19:23; appoint someone (Num 14:4) KRITAS judges Ac 13:20; w. double acc. 
appoint someone someth. (PLille 28, II [III bc] ...) TOUS MEN APOSTOLOUS some 
(to be) apostles Eph 4:11. TINA KEFALHN make someone head 1:22. Also D. TINA EIS 
TI B 14:7 (Is 42:6).—For POIEIN, which is read by some mss., in SUMBOULION D. 
hold a consultation Mk 3:6."

Luke 19:23 looks like a semitism, using DIDWMI for TIQHMI.  Ac 13:20 can as well 
be translated: he (God) gave (them) judges. The beneficiary is implicit. Is 
there any English version that uses "appoint" here?
Then BAGD says "appoint someone [as/to?] something", and they may be thinking of 
the Papyrus text above and maybe Eph 4:11.
Eph 4:11 is not appointing in the normal sense of that word. It is Jesus who 
gave gifts to the church and these gifts were, first, the apostles, then the 
prophets, etc. Again the Beneficiary is implicit in this verse (the church), and 
I am not sure whether we have a double accusative or not. Many translations take 
them as a double accusative, but I don't see why they could not be simple 
accusatives: He gave (to the church) the apostles, the prophets, etc. That is 
how GW translates it: "He also gave apostles, prophets, missionaries, as well as 
pastors and teachers as gifts [ to his church ]"
We have already discussed Eph 1:22. Isa 42:6 is clearly translation Greek.
Mark 3:6 is a nice example of how Semitic Greek has been corrected to normal 
Greek by many mss. Some say EPOIHSAN, most say EPOIOUN.

Iver Larsen




More information about the B-Greek mailing list