Peter:
Taking the Greek listed below, it is interesting to note that the verb is
singular, therefore it would not refer to TA APOKEIMENA which is plural, but
to AUTWi. I don't know Greek that well, ...
... nor do I have an LXX handy, but could TA APOKEIMENA refer back to $B+ and
MXQQ (the Hebrew words) that are the subjects of the first half of this verse?
Similarly YB) in Hebrew is singular, looking for a singular subject.You may be right. But perhaps it depends on what YIQ.:HAT means. BDB and KB explain as a noun "obedience" from the root YQH., with an anomalous dagesh, and most English versions agree. But it looks as if LXX has understood this as derived from QWH "wait for, hope" or similar. Indeed KB suggests that LXX, Syriac and Vulgate all support an emendation to T.IQ:WAT. Compare also the name Q:HFT, Kohath. Well, if the true reading is T.IQ:WAT, then the normal Hebrew construction would be with L- and the person hoped in; although in English a person can be described as a "hope", I don't think this is possible in Hebrew. But it clearly is possible with Greek PROSDOKIA. And so this would support the argument that the change from dative to nominative reflects the difference in linguistic structure between Hebrew and Greek.
As for the AUTOS after the KAI, it looks as if it is merely linguistic, not
theological.
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.