[B-Greek] 2Pet. 1:17-18 FWNHS ENECQEISHS AUTWi

Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org
Wed May 13 04:03:31 EDT 2009


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Elizabeth Kline" <kline_dekooning at earthlink.net>
To: "greek B-Greek" <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: 13. maj 2009 00:10
Subject: [B-Greek] 2Pet. 1:17-18 FWNHS ENECQEISHS AUTWi


> 2Pet. 1:17 λαβὼν γὰρ παρὰ θεοῦ πατρὸς
> τιμὴν καὶ δόξαν φωνῆς ἐνεχθείσης
> αὐτῷ τοιᾶσδε ὑπὸ τῆς μεγαλοπρεποῦς
> δόξης· ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός μου
> οὗτός ἐστιν εἰς ὃν ἐγὼ εὐδόκησα,  18
> καὶ ταύτην τὴν φωνὴν ἡμεῖς
> ἠκούσαμεν ἐξ οὐρανοῦ ἐνεχθεῖσαν
> σὺν αὐτῷ ὄντες ἐν τῷ ἁγίῳ ὄρει.
>
> 2PET. 1:17 LABWN GAR PARA QEOU PATROS TIMHN KAI DOXAN FWNHS ENECQEISHS
> AUTWi TOIASDE hUPO THS MEGALOPREPOUS DOXHS· hO hUIOS MOU hO AGAPHTOS
> MOU hOUTOS ESTIN EIS hON EGW EUDOKHSA,  18 KAI TAUTHN THN FWNHN hHMEIS
> HKOUSAMEN EX OURANOU ENECQEISAN SUN AUTWi ONTES EN TWi hAGIWi OREI
>
>
> R. Bauckham (Jude,2Pet WBC p. 219) remarks on a *perceived*
> discrepancy between FWNHS ENECQEISHS AUTWi and the words quote hO
> hUIOS MOU hO AGAPHTOS MOU hOUTOS ESTIN EIS hON EGW EUDOKHSA. The
> referent of AUTWi is Jesus but the quoted FWNH is addressed not to
> Jesus but to those present at the transfiguration(?).  My question:
> Does FWNHS ENECQEISHS AUTWi really imply that Jesus was the addressee?
> That is probably the most obvious way to read it but is it really
> required by the idiom?
>
> The use of FERW with speech acts, written messages, and other forms of
> communication is an idiom(?) that goes back to Homer[1]. The
> metaphor(?) appears to account for the fact that messages were
> transported from one place to another by a messenger who carried the
> verbal message or the written document. I haven't really studied all
> the examples, but I did look up the citations in BDAG  (no other
> datives) and the LSJ examples w/dat,  all of which appear to use the
> dative as the addressee; Hom. Iliad 10:288,15:201, Soph. Ajax 781.
>
> Even though I didn't find any supporting examples, it seems that the
> dative pronoun in  FWNHS ENECQEISHS AUTWi could be used to mark the
> person who is the beneficiary of the FWNHS but not the addressee. In
> other words the voice speaks to bear wittiness to Jesus in his
> presence but does not address the words to Jesus. [a.k.a. dative of
> advantage or dativus commodi]
>
> Elizabeth Kline

Yes, I would agree with you. The dative does not necessarily imply the addressee. For the similar 
incident when a voice came at the baptism of Jesus, Matthew 3:17 have the words addressed to the 
spectators, while both Mark and Luke have the form addressed to Jesus (Mark 1:11 and Luke 3:22). So, 
in both cases, the voice may have been addressed to Jesus or the spectators, but that small detail 
doesn't seem to be important to the biblical writers, since both Jesus and the spectators heard it 
and therefore it was seen as involving both parties. Different writers may have a different focus, 
but I think they would agree that both parties heard the words. At this time in history, people were 
not so concerned with quoting verbatim, especially since they often quoted from memory (Margaret Sim 
makes the same observation in her thesis recently mentioned on this list.)

The other day I was looking at a comparable dative in Gal 3:16 where the text reads:

τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ ἐρρέθησαν αἱ ἐπαγγελίαι καὶ τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦ
TWi DE ABRAAM ERREQHSAN hAI EPAGGELIAI KAI TWi SPERMATI AUTOU.

So, were the promises spoken to Abraham or to his "seed" or to both?
In v. 17 Paul argues that the intended "seed" is Jesus, so from my perspective, it was not spoken to 
the "seed" who was not present, but to Abraham. However it applied to both Abraham and his "seed", 
so in a secondary sense it was "spoken" to both.

Then in v. 19 Paul continues:
ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται
ACRIS hOU ELQH TO SPERMA hWi EPHGGELTAI

So, according to Paul, the promise was given to the "seed".
It seems to me that the datives here are not just talking about the one who first heard the promise, 
but also those others who were also involved in fulfilling the promise and/or benefiting from it.

Notice how NIV has made some of this explicit by translating:
until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come.

Iver Larsen 




More information about the B-Greek mailing list