[B-Greek] GENOMENOS in Phil. 2:8

Carl Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Sat Mar 13 12:47:23 EST 2010


On Mar 13, 2010, at 12:01 PM, Blue Meeksbay wrote:
> Thanks to all!
>  
> One last question to clarify what has been said concerning this sense. BAG says concerning GINOMAI  “II. As a substitute for the forms of EIMI,” and later it says “with prep. and adv. – be.”  
>  
> Of course, as GENOMENOS is not being used with prep. in Phil. 2:8, I see your point, the reference above would not apply, but does GINOMAI always need to be understood with the sense of “coming into existence.” i.e. when not used with a prepositional phrase? 
>  
> For instance, with the reference in Rev. 1:18, are you saying the NIV just got it wrong, or can it legitimately be understood apart from the sense of “coming into that state?”  Can it just be used to emphasize the fact of that state?  In other words, even though one might not agree with the NIV’s take, is theirs a possible understanding. 

I think you mean the text,  καὶ ἐγενόμην νεκρὸς καὶ ἰδοὺ ζῶν εἰμι [ KAI EGENOMHN NEKROS KAI IDOU ZWN EIMI]
where NIV has: " I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever and ever!"

You say, "did NIV just get it wrong?" I think you have a distinctive notion of what a translation is. I'd say that NIV emphasizes the present state of everlasting life despite having at some point heretofore having been dead. Certainly EGENOMHN NEKROS does mean "I died."

>  Another example would be Heb. 1:4 – 
>  
> TOSOUTWi KREITTWN GENOMENOS TWN AGGELWN hOSWi DIAFORWTERON PAR᾽ AUTOUS KEKLHRONOMHKEN ONOMA
>  
> The Bishop’s Bible understood GENOMENOS as “being,” and not as “being made,” or “becoming.” (Please note – this is not the result of a frantic search. : >) I have known about the Bishop’s Bible’s take on this verse for a long time. : >)
>  
> Hebrews 1:4Beyng so much more excellent then the Angels, as he hath by inheritaunce obtayned a more excellent name then they.
>  
> Are they 100% wrong, or is this understanding of GENOMENOS  possible?

No -- of course, it's not the result of a frantic search. Nevertheless it seems a strange procedure to search out the various translations and find what you think the Greek might mean in one of them and then say, "Isn't THAT what the Greek really means?" I think you would do better to hunt up as strictly literal an interlinear as you can find. Real literary translations are intended to convey the sense of whole texts, not individual words.

>  
> P.S. On Phil. 2:8, thanks for the clarification. I see your point and Carl’s point. Perhaps, if Paul had used a preposition like was used in Luke 22:44 it might then be understood as a state of obedience, at least, at that point in time. Is that correct?
>  
> KAI GENOMENOS EN AGWNIAi EKTENESTERON PROSHUCETO· KAI EGENETO hO hIDRWS AUTOU hWSEI QROMBOI hAIMATOS KATABAINONTES EPI THN GHN.

No. What this says is that he prayed all the more intensely after coming into a state of "anguish." You may perhaps take comfort in noting that NET has, "And in his anguish he prayed more earnestly" -- and the note 112 says "and being in anguish" -- but in fact GENOMENOS EN AGWNIAi means that entry into this turmoil occasioned the more intense prayer.

CWC

> ________________________________
> From: Iver Larsen <iver_larsen at sil.org>
> To: Blue Meeksbay <bluemeeksbay at yahoo.com>; Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>
> Cc: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> Sent: Fri, March 12, 2010 9:17:20 PM
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] GENOMENOS in Phil. 2:8
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Blue Meeksbay" <bluemeeksbay at yahoo.com>
> To: "Carl Conrad" <cwconrad2 at mac.com>
> Cc: <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Sent: 12. marts 2010 22:22
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] GENOMENOS in Phil. 2:8
> 
> 
>> Hi Dr. Conrad:
>> 
>> You wrote: It says nothing about "continuation" in a "state" of obedience.
>> 
>> I may be missing something, (I probably am since you disagree), but cannot a stative sense be marked by certain parameters? For instance, EGENOMHN in Rev. 1:18, “I was dead.” Did not he *continue* in the single event of death until he arose? (And I do not want to get distracted by Rev. 1:18. It was just the first example that popped into my mind.)
> 
> The aorist does not have a stative aspect. I think the translation of Rev 1:18 (NIV) you cite does not lend itself to a clear understanding of EGENOMHN. It should have been rendered "I died" (or more literally: became dead). Of course, being dead is a state, but the aorist points to entering into that state as Carl has mentioned.
> 
> You may compare with other examples of EGENOMHN, e.g. Rev 1:9, which was rendered by NIV as "I was", but this loses the aorist aspect. GNB has "I was put on" which retains the focus on entering into the state of being on the island. CEV: "I was sent to", NLT: "I was exiled to". (When I quote English versions, I am not trying to get at the meaning of the Greek text, but giving examples of how the Greek text has been rendered more or less accurately.)
> 
>> Therefore, could not the *single event* of the aorist be the incarnation? In other words, Paul was simply emphasizing the obedient mindset of the Lord in his incarnation?
> 
> No, that is ruled out by context. It is not his obedience to become or be born as SARX or hWS ANQRWPOS, but his acceptance of having to die, and surprisingly the humiliating and painful death on a cross.
> 
> Iver Larsen 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
> B-Greek mailing list
> B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek




Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)






More information about the B-Greek mailing list