Rom 12:9 hH AGAPH ANUPOKRITOS

Jonathan Robie jonathan at texcel.no
Thu Jan 7 08:07:30 EST 1999


At 03:41 AM 1/7/99 -0600, Carl W. Conrad wrote:
>At 9:46 PM -0500 1/6/99, Jonathan Robie wrote:
>>I was doing a study of the attributes of love, and I ran into this verse:
>>
>>Rom 12:9 hH AGAPH ANUPOKRITOS
>>
>>I interpreted this as meaning "love is genuine" (or perhaps "love does not
>>play-act", which changes the adjective into a verb, but seems to express
>>the same thought). But when I turned to five translations (NRSV, REB, NAB,
>>NJB, NASB), *none* of them interpreted it this way. They all said something
>>like "*let* love be sincere".
>>
>>Why? What am I missing?
>
>Context, I think, primarily. This little snippet is in a sequence of
>ethical parenesis. If you'll look at the snippets preceding and following
>it, you'll see, I think, that there's a quality of what I'd call Laconian
>eloquence: participles here may serve as imperatives, as in the remainder
>of verse 9: APOSTUGOUNTES TO PONHRON, KOLLWMENOI TWi AGAQWi--and continuing
>all the way through verse 13, at the end of which we finally get a direct
>imperative: EULOGEITE KAI MH KATARASQE. Then follows an infinitive
>functioning as an imperative: CAIREIN META CAIRONTWN, KLAIEIN META TWN
>KLAIONTWN.  

[SNIP!]

I can see that for the participles and the infinitives. In "hH AGAPH
ANUPOKRITOS", isn't ANUPOKRITOS and adjective? Can an adjective function as
an imperative? Or can an implicit ESTIN function as an imperative?

Jonathan
 
jonathan at texcel.no
Texcel Research
http://www.texcel.no



More information about the B-Greek mailing list