[B-Greek] Help with Hebrews 4:2
kline_dekooning at earthlink.net
Sat May 2 14:23:25 EDT 2009
On May 2, 2009, at 9:16 AM, Alan Martin wrote:
> This is my first posted question. I am grateful for this resource.
> My question regards the Perfect Participle translated "having been
> I noticed that it is a masculine, accusative, plural, probably
> the demonstrative pronoun ekeinous. My question is how does the
> participle make sense translated as a passive voice rather than a
> middle. It seems to me that a middle voice makes more sense, but I am
> still unsure.
> Thank you ahead of time for your help. I am still very far from
> advanced in my study, I am simply a pastor seeking to rightly divide
> word of truth.
Heb. 4:2 καὶ γάρ ἐσμεν εὐηγγελισμένοι
καθάπερ κἀκεῖνοι· ἀλλ᾿ οὐκ
ὠφέλησεν ὁ λόγος τῆς ἀκοῆς
ἐκείνους μὴ συγκεκερασμένους τῇ
πίστει τοῖς ἀκούσασιν.
HEB. 4:2 KAI GAR ESMEN EUHGGELISMENOI KAQAPER KA)KEINOI· ALL᾿ OUK
WFELHSEN hO LOGOS THS AKOHS EKEINOUS MH SUGKEKERASMENOUS THi PISTEI
This text has a number of variant readings, somewhat complex, but the
main issue is the ending for SUGKEKERASMENOUS, either --OUS our --OS.
The reading -OS is weakly attested, Sinaiticus 57. If we accept -
OUS then the antecedent would be EKEINOUS. The idea being that two
groups are involved, TOIS AKOUSASIN who had faith and those EKEINOUS
who MH SUGKEKERASMENOUS THi PISTEI TOIS AKOUSASIN.
Translation issues aside, the form SUGKEKERASMENOUS is used to demote
agency. In other words, the issue of agency isn't important, the
result is important. The subject of MH SUGKEKERASMENOUS is affected,
but the to suggest a reciprocal idea with the subject as agent acting
upon itself is to wander into dubious territory.
If you want to read a good discussion on this passage
A google on: "57" Tischendorf
took me right to page in Ellingworth where this is discussed.
More information about the B-Greek