[B-Greek] Heb 8:13

Yancy W Smith yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net
Fri Oct 2 19:40:17 EDT 2009


My simplified translation:

13 God called this a new agreement, so he has made the first agreement  
old. And anything that is old and useless is ready to disappear.
>> TO DE PALAIOUMENON KAI
>> GHRASKON
>> EGGUS AFANISMOU

It is simpler. The  PALAIOUMENON  is the subject of a verbless clause.  
Once something is declared old it can be referred to as TO  
PALAIOUMENON substantive.

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 2, 2009, at 5:36 PM, Elizabeth Kline <kline_dekooning at earthlink.net 
 > wrote:

>
> On Oct 2, 2009, at 10:44 AM, Cornell Machiavelli wrote:
>
>> ἐν τῷ λέγειν Καινὴν
>> πεπαλαίωκεν τὴν πρώτην: τὸ δὲ
>> παλαιούμενον καὶ γηράσκον ἐγγὺς
>> ἀφανισμοῦ.
>>
>> EN TWi LEGEIN KAINHN PEPALAIWKEN THN PRWTHN: TO DE PALAIOUMENON KAI
>> GHRASKON
>> EGGUS AFANISMOU
>>
>> The first πεπαλαίωκεν is Perfect tense: the first covenant
>> is in a state of
>> being obsolete. It continues with παλαιούμενον καὶ
>> γηράσκον Present participles: the
>> first covenant is then said to becoming obsolete and growing old..
>> It has moved from a state
>> of being obsolete to a process (or, something in progress) of
>> becoming obsolete. Why the move from Perfect
>> to Present with PALAIOW?
>
>
> The following is all very tentative analysis.
>
>
> Heb 10:8
> ἰδοὺ ἡμέραι ἔρχονται, λέγει κύριο 
> ς,
> καὶ συντελέσω ἐπὶ τὸν οἶκον Ἰσρα 
> ὴλ
> καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν οἶκον Ἰούδα διαθήκην
> καινήν
> .
> IDOU hHMERAI ERCONTAI, LEGEI KURIOS, KAI SUNTELESW EPI TON OIKON
> ISRAHL KAI EPI TON OIKON IOUDA DIAQHKHN KAINHN
> .
> In regard to sentence articulation EN TWi LEGEIN KAINHN appears to
> function as a contextualizer, pointing back to DIAQHKHN KAINHN in 10:8
> with the focus (most salient information) found in the prefect active
> finite PEPALAIWKEN. Some would probably say the entire clause
> PEPALAIWKEN THN PRWTHN is in focus.
> .
> Concerning PEPALAIWKEN Ellingworth[1] states that the subject is to be
> understood as QEOS and the meaning forensic "to declare
> old" (Ellingworth) or "obsolete" (BDAG, C.Koester AB ). In other
> words, we have a speech act EN TWi LEGEIN KAINHN (ref. DIAQHKHN KAINHN
> Heb. 10:8) which has the legal (forensic) effect of making THN PROTHN
> DIAQHKHN obsolete. I suspect the reasoning behind this reading
> involves the unusual use of PALAIOW in the active with an implied
> agent (QEOS). The legal status of having been declared obsolete does
> not rule out the historical process of becoming old PALAIOUMENON
> assuming we accept a shift in sense/reference between PEPALAIWKEN and
> PALAIOUMENON.
> .
> Heb. 8:13 ἐν τῷ λέγειν καινὴν
> πεπαλαίωκεν τὴν πρώτην· τὸ δὲ
> παλαιούμενον καὶ γηράσκον ἐγγὺς
> ἀφανισμοῦ.
> .
> HEB. 8:13 EN TWi LEGEIN KAINHN PEPALAIWKEN THN PRWTHN· TO DE
> PALAIOUMENON KAI GHRASKON EGGUS AFANISMOU.
> .
> This analysis raises a small problem. The sentence articulation of
> 10:13b suggests to me that  PALAIOUMENON functions as a
> contextualizer, linking to PEPALAIWKEN in 13a. I suppose that even if
> we accept a shift in sense/reference between these, just the form of
> the word might serve the purpose of linking the two clauses. I think
> we could find other examples of a repeated lexeme used with a shift in
> sense/reference that still provides textual cohesion simply because of
> the similarity in the form of the word.
>
> Anyway, my time is up. I will probably have seen numerous problems by
> tomorrow morning.
>
> .
> Elizabeth Kline
>
> [1] Hebrews, NIGTC 1993. BTW, Ellingworth's Hebrews is one of the best
> works in this series.
>
>
>
Yancy Smith


More information about the B-Greek mailing list