[B-Greek] Double article

Albert Pietersma albert.pietersma at sympatico.ca
Tue Feb 22 10:48:49 EST 2011


I don't have the time right now to verify this, but I think you'll  
find that the lack of article matches the source text.
Al
On Feb 22, 2011, at 10:43 AM, Blue Meeksbay wrote:

> Hi Joe,
>
> What George Somsel said is certainly correct. On the other hand, if  
> that is what
> a Greek writer was trying to communicate that would certainly be a  
> way you could
> do it. By using the article you could be emphasizing the identity of  
> the person,
> in this case *the Man,* i.e. Adam.( I do not think *the Man* is ever  
> used of
> David).
>
>
> What is also interesting is that, as far as I can tell, every use of  
> Son of Man
> in the LXX is anarthrous.  However, this may be because it is  
> *translation
> Greek*. Someone like Albert Pietersma can confirm this, but *Son of  
> Man* in the
> LXX seems to be a Semitic idiom and, as such, the anarthrous  
> construction would
> be a good way to communicate this. In other words, the emphasis is  
> simply being
> a human being – a man.
>
> But that is what is all the more interesting.  If the GNT writers  
> were intent on
> using the title Son of Man in the same Semitic manner, (as it was  
> used, for
> example, in Heb. 2:6), it would have been easy for them to simply  
> follow the LXX
> pattern and give it forth without the article. The fact that they  
> didn’t could
> indicate that they were using it in the way you suggest. I believe  
> the title is
> used without the article in just only three or four places in the  
> GNT. In the
> majority of places it carries the article.
>
> Some early Christians did believe Jesus was the *promised seed* of  
> the woman
> (Gen. 3:15) – in other words, the Son of the Man (Adam). *If*  the  
> GNT writers
> also believed this, this certainly could have been a way for them to  
> communicate
> that belief.
>
>
> As to whether such is the case, as you can see, is a matter of  
> opinion and
> cannot be proven or disproven from the grammar alone. However, if  
> you are
> interested in my opinion, (which doesn’t mean much) I would be in  
> the camp of a
> non-idiomatic use, except in those few places like Heb. 2:6 where it  
> seems to be
> used in a Semitic manner to simply mean a human being.
>
> Cordially,
> Blue Harris
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Joe Ripley <joseph.ripley at ntlworld.com>
> To: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> Sent: Sat, February 19, 2011 4:14:22 PM
> Subject: [B-Greek] Double article
>
> Dear List - Does anyone have any thoughts about the use of the  
> double article in
> hO hUIOS TOU ANQRWPOU which Jesus used of himself many times?  He  
> even asked the
> newly healed man who had been born blind, if he knew who "The son of  
> the man
> is". Stephen used it too when he saw Jesus at the right side of God.
> In Daniel 7, Revelation 14 and Ezekiel 37 no definite article is  
> used for "son
> of man".
> Could it be some Jewish 'code speak' for Messiah, "The man" being  
> perhaps
> understood to be David or maybe Adam?
>
> Joe Ripley
> ---
> 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
>
>
>
>
> ---
> 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

—
Albert Pietersma PhD
21 Cross Street,
Weston ON Canada M9N 2B8
Email: albert.pietersma at sympatico.ca
Homepage: http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~pietersm




More information about the B-Greek mailing list