[B-Greek] Heb 8:13

Donald COBB docobb at orange.fr
Sat Oct 3 00:28:37 EDT 2009


I would understand the passage along the same lines. The end of the verse functions as a generalizing statement that gives a "universal" rule. That rule can then, by implication, be applied to the PROTHN KAINHN: "That which is (= whatever is) obsolete and old is close to disappearing". The present participle would be the most usual way of stating that.

Why the perfect PEPALAIWKEN? One reason is probably that the author is quoting Scripture. Formel Scripture quotations in the New Testament are habitually (not always) presented with an introductory formula in the present or perfect tense, such as the well-known GEGRAPTAI GAR, K.T.L. This would actually be close to what Elizabeth said about a forensic declaration: a declaration that retains an ongoing force, beyond the moment in which it was pronounced.

Donald Cobb
Aix-en-Provence, France

> Message du 03/10/09 01:40
> De : "Yancy W Smith" 
> A : "greek B-Greek" 
> Copie à : 
> Objet : Re: [B-Greek] Heb 8:13
> 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 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 --- 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 

More information about the B-Greek mailing list