This passage occurs as a New Testament Lesson in the RCL
"Pentecost"/"Ordinary"/"Proper" Season, Year A, most recently August 2014.
Summary: The Greek highlights the key thrust of this passage: When human beings feel overwhelmed, God's abundance and compassion continues. Two Greek words help get at this. First, Jesus has compassion (σπλαγχνιζομαι). Yes, he is exhausted, but when he sees the crowd, his insides still get tight. Also, right after the disciples see nothing but a few loaves of bread, Jesus has them sit down on the χορτος, the grass, a reminder that God provides. In fact, the word for "filled" or "satisfied" means, literally, "grassed." In the midst of the wilderness, God's abundance still is present, but we need Jesus to show us this! Finally, this passage ends with a meal that echoes communion, the ultimate reminder of God's compassion in the midst of human limitations.
Key words:
αναχορεω; εν πλοιω; ερημος; κατα ιδιαν; ("withdrew"; "in a boat"; "by himself"; "wilderness", 14.13) Matthew puts together a string of words here to describe Jesus' determination to "get away" from it all. While each of these words may have their own importance, the cumulative effect is powerful!
κατα ιδιαν: by himself. This is the first time Jesus has done anything by himself in the Gospel of Matthew.
αναχορεω: withdrew. This has been the response of Jesus before (news of John's imprisonment; news of Pharisee's plot against him.) Jesus withdraw does not signify retreat though. Normally it just sends him away from the powerful and back to the people, whom he heals.
σπλαγχνιζομαι ("compassion", 14.14) Here Jesus has compassion -- which in Greek literally means "intestined." His gut is turning when he sees the crowds. It is also worth noting that Jesus compassion does not simply signify feelings, but leads him into action, here, healing.
απολοσον ("release" or even "divorce"; here as an aorist imperative) The reaction of the disciples to the crowd is the opposite of Jesus. Where as Jesus is moved internally by their condition, the disciples ask Jesus to move away from the disciples. Send them away! is what they are demanding. The disciples lack of concern and lack of faith is also noted by how they respond in vs 17 to Jesus command to feed them. First, the respond in the present tense, suggesting they are repeating this to Jesus! Secondly, they respond with "ουκ εχομεν" which means we are not having. Worth noting is that their response begins with ουκ mean "no!" They first see and indicate their lack instead of their abundance, who is Jesus Christ.
δοτε ("give"; aorist imperative) This is the same tense of the verb in the Lord's prayer, "Give us this day our daily bread." Perhaps this suggests that the disciples, in their worry about future provision are forgetting their only task is in the present. I wonder if sometimes we make the task of serving Jesus far bigger than it is; Jesus is not asking them to feed the crowds forever, just this once.
λαβων ευλογησεν κλασας εδωκεν ("took, gave thanks/bless, broke and gave", 19) Yes, yes, these appear again in Matthew 26:26. The NET Bible has an interesting note here:
"And after instructing the crowds to recline for a meal on the grass, after taking the five loaves and the two fish, after looking up to heaven, he gave thanks, and after breaking the loaves he gave them to the disciples." Although most of the participles are undoubtedly attendant circumstance, there are but two indicative verbs--"he gave thanks" and "he gave." The structure of the sentence thus seems to focus on these two actions and has been translated accordingly. Yes, good Lutherans, giving thanks is not an optional part of communion...
εχορτασθηασαν ("satified/fill", 19) The word here for "fill" is related to the word for grass -- the crowd sat on the grass "χορτος" and later was "χορτο"-ed. This is a reminder that God's abundance is always there -- even in the midst of a "ερημος" (wilderness, vs 13; and 15) and when the "ωρα" (hour) has past (vs 15).
Translation: "Genitive Absolute"
The genitive absolute has been cursed with a tricky name. It is actually not that bad to translate! Basically Greek writers will often begin a sentence with a phrase or clause that contains information about people/things besides the subject of the main sentence. For example: "After the sun rose, the people got up." The people are the subject of the main sentence. The rising of the sun is simply a phrase (adverbial) to give some background info.
What makes this tricky in Greek is that the writers stick the participle and the subject of the clause into the genitive case. For example, Matthew 14:15:
Οψιας δε γενομενης
Is "evening and became." Again evening and the participle became are both in the genitive case. You don't translate them in the genitive case "of the evening" or something like this. You simply put all these words together to form a little phrase to set up your sentence: "As evening fell" or something poetic like this.
Matthew 14:14 also has a participle phrase that sets up the rest of the sentence
και εκελθων In this case, this is not a genitive absolute; it describes the action of the subject in the main clause (Jesus): As he went out,...
So again, the genitive absolute is all in the genitive (which can sometimes make it easier to identify) and sets up a little participle phrase that the author uses to talk about something besides the subject. Matthew 14:32 is the next genitive absolute. Have fun.
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Romans 8:26-39
This passage occurs as a New Testament Lesson in the RCL
"Pentecost"/"Ordinary"/"Proper" Season, Year A, most recently July 2020.
Summary:
Often theologians dwell on words the Bible does not. For instance, in this passage, we have God predestining (προοριζω) his elect (εκλεκτος). The word predestine occurs 6 times in all of Scripture; Paul at most uses the word elect 6 times. Yet libraries are full of Paul's comments on predestination and election. I think the more interesting question for this week, however, lies in 8:28 and not 8:29. The standard translation of 8:28 is "All things work together for good for those who love God." One might argue, very strongly in fact, that it should read, "God works all things together through those who love him for good." This switches Paul's message from "God helps your pain" to "God uses you to help the pain of others." Both are good sermons; I think the later is more true to Paul.
Key words:
συνεργεω ("work together" 8:28) If I were not a Lutheran, I would not notice this verb. However, Lutherans tend to be allergic to this verb. We so want to protect the "bondage of the will" and God's grace that we tend toward a God-only-and-not-you theology for salvation. Which is fine. Unfortunately, we often carry this over and limit humanity's role in God's creative and redeeming work on earth. Paul says that things work together; the Spirit prays for and through us. God is making us right with him, God is praying for us; God is glorifying us; I would even argue that God is working through us.
προοριζω ("predetermine" or "predestine" 8:29) Loaded theological term. Means what it says. God preordained us for salvation. Deal.
εικων ("image" literally icon, 8:29) Humanity is made in the image of God; even after the fall, God still declares us made in his image (Gen 9:6). Yet Paul says we are being reborn in the image of Christ. Something about humanity is both in God's image yet needing to be restored.
συμμορφη ("same shape" 8:29) This word plays a key role in Paul's letter to the Philippians. It is worth pointing out that Paul continues the work of the Spirit in chpt 8-- not only are we co-inheritors, co-sufferes or co-glorifieders, but we are also co-shapers.
χαριζομαι (literally "grace"; "act favorably" or "forgive" 8:32) Heehee...how do you translate the word grace in action?
εκλεκτος (literally "elect") Means what we think it means. God elected and chose you. Deal.
Translation: Dative case in 8:28: Through or for those who love God?
Greek has four cases: nominative, accusative, dative and genitive. (Okay, there is a vocative case, but that is quite rare in the New Testament). The case of the word establishes its function within the sentence. In English, we use word order and prepositions for this purpose: "The man knocks a glass of wine onto a woman" means something different than "A glass of wine knocks the man onto a woman." In fact, in English the later makes no sense. In Greek, the later sentence word order could be used, because each word would be conjugated by case, which would give its function in the sentence. So, the four cases and the basic functions:
Normally nominative case indicates subject (who does the action: the man);
accusative indicates direct object (whom receives the action: the wine);
dative shows indirect object (to whom the action was directed: the woman);
genitive shows relation (the glass and wine are related somehow)
Dative and genitive both can actually take a wide variety of meanings. In 8:28, Paul employs the participial phrase "those who love God", τοις αγαπωσιν, in the dative. The most common meaning of the dative is indirect object. In this case then, all things work for God TO or FOR those who love God. However, the dative can just as easily signify means or instrument. Then this sentence could mean God works all things for good through those who love him.
Both seem pretty Pauline to me!
Summary:
Often theologians dwell on words the Bible does not. For instance, in this passage, we have God predestining (προοριζω) his elect (εκλεκτος). The word predestine occurs 6 times in all of Scripture; Paul at most uses the word elect 6 times. Yet libraries are full of Paul's comments on predestination and election. I think the more interesting question for this week, however, lies in 8:28 and not 8:29. The standard translation of 8:28 is "All things work together for good for those who love God." One might argue, very strongly in fact, that it should read, "God works all things together through those who love him for good." This switches Paul's message from "God helps your pain" to "God uses you to help the pain of others." Both are good sermons; I think the later is more true to Paul.
Key words:
συνεργεω ("work together" 8:28) If I were not a Lutheran, I would not notice this verb. However, Lutherans tend to be allergic to this verb. We so want to protect the "bondage of the will" and God's grace that we tend toward a God-only-and-not-you theology for salvation. Which is fine. Unfortunately, we often carry this over and limit humanity's role in God's creative and redeeming work on earth. Paul says that things work together; the Spirit prays for and through us. God is making us right with him, God is praying for us; God is glorifying us; I would even argue that God is working through us.
προοριζω ("predetermine" or "predestine" 8:29) Loaded theological term. Means what it says. God preordained us for salvation. Deal.
εικων ("image" literally icon, 8:29) Humanity is made in the image of God; even after the fall, God still declares us made in his image (Gen 9:6). Yet Paul says we are being reborn in the image of Christ. Something about humanity is both in God's image yet needing to be restored.
συμμορφη ("same shape" 8:29) This word plays a key role in Paul's letter to the Philippians. It is worth pointing out that Paul continues the work of the Spirit in chpt 8-- not only are we co-inheritors, co-sufferes or co-glorifieders, but we are also co-shapers.
χαριζομαι (literally "grace"; "act favorably" or "forgive" 8:32) Heehee...how do you translate the word grace in action?
εκλεκτος (literally "elect") Means what we think it means. God elected and chose you. Deal.
Translation: Dative case in 8:28: Through or for those who love God?
Greek has four cases: nominative, accusative, dative and genitive. (Okay, there is a vocative case, but that is quite rare in the New Testament). The case of the word establishes its function within the sentence. In English, we use word order and prepositions for this purpose: "The man knocks a glass of wine onto a woman" means something different than "A glass of wine knocks the man onto a woman." In fact, in English the later makes no sense. In Greek, the later sentence word order could be used, because each word would be conjugated by case, which would give its function in the sentence. So, the four cases and the basic functions:
Normally nominative case indicates subject (who does the action: the man);
accusative indicates direct object (whom receives the action: the wine);
dative shows indirect object (to whom the action was directed: the woman);
genitive shows relation (the glass and wine are related somehow)
Dative and genitive both can actually take a wide variety of meanings. In 8:28, Paul employs the participial phrase "those who love God", τοις αγαπωσιν, in the dative. The most common meaning of the dative is indirect object. In this case then, all things work for God TO or FOR those who love God. However, the dative can just as easily signify means or instrument. Then this sentence could mean God works all things for good through those who love him.
Both seem pretty Pauline to me!
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Romans 7:15-25
This passage occurs as a New Testament Lesson in the RCL
"Pentecost"/"Ordinary"/"Proper" Season, Year A, most recently July 2014.
Summary: While this passage describes the human captivity to sin, I believe 7:22 is worth a closer look. When Paul says he "delights" in the law, the word delight actually is a cognate of "hedonism." The inner man has a "with-hedonism" relationship to the law. I wonder if Paul, deep down, is pointing out that the inner person truly delights in doing the will of God. To drive this a bit further, Paul says that he has a body of death. We know he will later talk about an immortal body. This immortal body, I believe, will experience tremendous pleasure doing the will of God, whether serving others, enjoying creation or praising God.
Key words:
οικει, οικουσα ("dwell" 7:17, 18, 20) This word should be recognizable from the first few weeks of Greek (rememeber, οικος means house). Paul will come back to this verb in Romans 8:9 and 11 as well as 1 Cor 3:16 also 8:9 and 8:11. Here he speaks of the indwelling of the Spirit. One key difference however is that when Paul refers to the indwelling Spirit, he is referring to the Spirit dwelling in the plural you -- all of you, not the singular you. One might argue that he means the Spirit dwells in all of the individuals. Regardless, it is interesting that when he returns to what God can come inside of us, he does not speak on individual terms any more.
νομος ("law"; 50 times in the book of Romans) Alas, I cannot possibly do justice to Paul's use of this word. What I want to bring up rather is that, t the very least, there is a theological use going on here. By this I mean Paul is moving beyond specific commands or ceremonial practices; the law has become something else, something larger, something accomplishing God's purposes. What exactly the law is doing and what is the connection between Paul's understanding of the law, the OT's approach to the Law and 1st century Jewish understandings of the law, well, you'll just have to do your own research on that one!!
αμαρτια ("sin" 39 times in the book of Romans). Again, a bigger concept that I can take on here. But I want to point out again a theological use of the word here: sin no longer simply means a particular moral failure, but for Paul it has become a force enslaving and taking over his body. Paul here moves from laws to law; sins to sin.
συνηδομαι ("delight", 7:22) This word is great! It comes from hedon, like hedonism. It literally means "with hedonism"; The noun form of this word will be found in 2 Peter 2:13, James 4:1-2, and Luke 8:14, and Titus 3:3 and will always be considered "lawlessness/debaucherous pleasure" The irony of course is that Paul is talking about the law. Perhaps, and I press this too far here, I believe, but perhaps the point is that deep down inside, we crave to do the will of God and this will be our true delight.
΄ρυοεται ("rescue" from ΄ρυομαι; 7:25): This means deliver. It is tough to see the cognate, but the word "hero" comes from this. Jesus is the hero who will save us.
Grammar Review: Relative pronouns
Paul uses a number of relative pronouns in this section. A relative pronoun works like this:
There goes Tommy, whose mom is Linda. Whose is a relative pronoun.
I long for a vacation, which gives me the chance to relax. Which is a relative pronoun.
In Greek, the relative pronoun functions much like it does in English.
So Romans 7:19: ου γαρ ο θελω ποιω αγαθος
Literally: "Not for [which I want] I do good"
You need to bracket out the whole relative clause. Translate this: ο θελω "that which I want to do." Then move it back into the whole phrase: "For I do not do the good which I want."
A few things make Greek relative pronouns tricky. First, the relative pronouns themselves often look like the Greek word "the" but their accents are different (it has an accent!) Second, Greeks are always more flexible about word order. In English, we could not sandwhich a relative pronoun like Paul did. Third, English gets sloppy about the true case of relative pronouns.
"That is the woman who I love" should actually be "That is the woman whom I love." Reading Greek we have to be ready for the fact that Greek will use all four cases for relative pronouns. In English we still tend to use possessive relative pronouns (ie, whose) but we lump everything else together under "who" or "that" and ignore their case. Greek, again, will use all four cases. That said, Greek writers will also often get sloppy and the relative pronoun's case will "slide" to become like words around it instead of functioning like it shuld!
Lastly, participles in Greek take the case of the word which they modify; relative pronouns take the case of their function in the new sentence. It can be easy to get these confused.
Summary: While this passage describes the human captivity to sin, I believe 7:22 is worth a closer look. When Paul says he "delights" in the law, the word delight actually is a cognate of "hedonism." The inner man has a "with-hedonism" relationship to the law. I wonder if Paul, deep down, is pointing out that the inner person truly delights in doing the will of God. To drive this a bit further, Paul says that he has a body of death. We know he will later talk about an immortal body. This immortal body, I believe, will experience tremendous pleasure doing the will of God, whether serving others, enjoying creation or praising God.
Key words:
οικει, οικουσα ("dwell" 7:17, 18, 20) This word should be recognizable from the first few weeks of Greek (rememeber, οικος means house). Paul will come back to this verb in Romans 8:9 and 11 as well as 1 Cor 3:16 also 8:9 and 8:11. Here he speaks of the indwelling of the Spirit. One key difference however is that when Paul refers to the indwelling Spirit, he is referring to the Spirit dwelling in the plural you -- all of you, not the singular you. One might argue that he means the Spirit dwells in all of the individuals. Regardless, it is interesting that when he returns to what God can come inside of us, he does not speak on individual terms any more.
νομος ("law"; 50 times in the book of Romans) Alas, I cannot possibly do justice to Paul's use of this word. What I want to bring up rather is that, t the very least, there is a theological use going on here. By this I mean Paul is moving beyond specific commands or ceremonial practices; the law has become something else, something larger, something accomplishing God's purposes. What exactly the law is doing and what is the connection between Paul's understanding of the law, the OT's approach to the Law and 1st century Jewish understandings of the law, well, you'll just have to do your own research on that one!!
αμαρτια ("sin" 39 times in the book of Romans). Again, a bigger concept that I can take on here. But I want to point out again a theological use of the word here: sin no longer simply means a particular moral failure, but for Paul it has become a force enslaving and taking over his body. Paul here moves from laws to law; sins to sin.
συνηδομαι ("delight", 7:22) This word is great! It comes from hedon, like hedonism. It literally means "with hedonism"; The noun form of this word will be found in 2 Peter 2:13, James 4:1-2, and Luke 8:14, and Titus 3:3 and will always be considered "lawlessness/debaucherous pleasure" The irony of course is that Paul is talking about the law. Perhaps, and I press this too far here, I believe, but perhaps the point is that deep down inside, we crave to do the will of God and this will be our true delight.
΄ρυοεται ("rescue" from ΄ρυομαι; 7:25): This means deliver. It is tough to see the cognate, but the word "hero" comes from this. Jesus is the hero who will save us.
Grammar Review: Relative pronouns
Paul uses a number of relative pronouns in this section. A relative pronoun works like this:
There goes Tommy, whose mom is Linda. Whose is a relative pronoun.
I long for a vacation, which gives me the chance to relax. Which is a relative pronoun.
In Greek, the relative pronoun functions much like it does in English.
So Romans 7:19: ου γαρ ο θελω ποιω αγαθος
Literally: "Not for [which I want] I do good"
You need to bracket out the whole relative clause. Translate this: ο θελω "that which I want to do." Then move it back into the whole phrase: "For I do not do the good which I want."
A few things make Greek relative pronouns tricky. First, the relative pronouns themselves often look like the Greek word "the" but their accents are different (it has an accent!) Second, Greeks are always more flexible about word order. In English, we could not sandwhich a relative pronoun like Paul did. Third, English gets sloppy about the true case of relative pronouns.
"That is the woman who I love" should actually be "That is the woman whom I love." Reading Greek we have to be ready for the fact that Greek will use all four cases for relative pronouns. In English we still tend to use possessive relative pronouns (ie, whose) but we lump everything else together under "who" or "that" and ignore their case. Greek, again, will use all four cases. That said, Greek writers will also often get sloppy and the relative pronoun's case will "slide" to become like words around it instead of functioning like it shuld!
Lastly, participles in Greek take the case of the word which they modify; relative pronouns take the case of their function in the new sentence. It can be easy to get these confused.
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Matthew 21:1-11
This passage occurs for Palm Sunday, year A.
Summary: When I first wrote this blog post, there had been a large earthquake in Japan; hence the word "εσεισθη" (shook, akin to seismic) caught my attention. The events of Holy Week shake the city. They still shake our world today, perhaps even causing a fair amount of disruption, if not sadly violence, in our world. Call it good, call it bad, but the events of Holy Week make every person ask the haunting question: "Who is this man?"
Key Words:
απεστειλεν ("sent" in 21:1 and 3; aorist form of αποστελλω) This is a well known verb to Greek students. I find the particular use interesting -- Jesus sends the disciples to get a donkey. A reminder that often times, our "missional" or "apostolic" calling can be very mundane, but serve a tremendously amazing purpose.
συνεταξεν ("commanded" in 21:6; aorist form of συντασσω) Ah, the "syntax" of discipleship. This would mean obedience to particular commands. Okay, its Holy Week. I am not going on a diatribe, but it is worth noting, especially for us Lutherans, that the disciples display here the syntax of discipleship: hearing specific tasks and doing them. Or to put it another way, the proper syntax of discipleship is "hearing, being sent and then obeying..."
οχλος vs πολις ("crowd" in 21:8 and 11 and "city" in 21:10). The events of Holy Week force each of us, whether disciple, distant follower or outsider, to confront the question facing the whole city: "Who is this?" Also, the same crowds that cheer him now will vote for his death...
ὠσαννα ("Hosanna" in 21:9). Here is the "NET" commentary: Hosanna, literally in Hebrew, "O Lord, save" in the quotation from Ps 118:25-26 was probably by this time a familiar liturgical expression of praise, on the order of "Hail to the king," although both the underlying Aramaic and Hebrew expressions meant "O Lord, save us." In words familiar to every Jew, the author is indicating that at this point every messianic expectation is now at the point of realization. It is clear from the words of the psalm shouted by the crowd that Jesus is being proclaimed as messianic king. See E. Lohse, TDNT 9:682-84.
εσεισθη ("shake" in 21:10; aorist form of σειω) This word comes into English as "seismic." The events of Holy Week shake the city and their aftershocks still continue to reverberate around the world two millenia later.
Grammar/translation:
Often times participles are stacked near other participles and verbs, which can make them seem more difficult to translate. Here are two examples:
21:1 λυσαντες αγαγετε μοι
The verbs (and pronoun!) should be fairly familiar: "loose/free", "lead", "me"
Let's translate this rather methodically. First, let's do the non-participle parts:
"[participle] lead to me"
Now, let's go back and add in the participle, in this case, some form of "free." The first thing to do is NOT worry about person, gender or any of that, but simply stick the verb in with an "ing"
"Freeing, lead to me"
Okay, now we need to check out the tense and voice. In this case it is active voice, so we don't have to fix anything. Tense wise, it is aorist. An aorist participle occurs before the other verb. So, we get:
"Freed, lead to me"
Yuck. Let's put this back in the "under the circumstances" machine:
Under the circumstances of having freed, lead to me."
What makes this hard is that you don't have an object. Let's add one in for clarity:
"UtC of having freed the donkey, lead it to me."
Now we simplify:
"After you freed/untied the donkey, lead it to me."
Next one is 21:9
ευλογημενος Ὁ ερχομενος εν ονοματι κυριου
Again, translate what you know here:
"[participle] the [participle] in the name of the Lord.
[Technical point: In Hebrew, you don't have articles in expressions like "name of the Lord" It is just assumed that it is all definitive: "the Name of the Lord." The Greek translators just left them out but we ain't talking about any Lord, here, but YHWH! Which leads always to the question of, how do you translate this name? Simply LORD using all caps??]
In this case, the second participle: ερχομενος is a lot easier. It is a substantive: You simply put in the "The one(s) that/which do X" formula. You get: "The one who comes" What makes this a little tricky is the "μεν" in the middle of the participle which might make you think this is passive, but no, this is simply a deponent verb!
But the first one...ευλογημενος...tricky.
Stick in the word+ing
"blessing the one who comes in the name of the Lord."
Now we check tense and voice. Voice is passive, so we have to reverse the language: "Blessed be" or "blessed is." The tense is perfect which means the action, having occurred in the past, still has an implication for today.
"Blessed and still is blessed the one who comes in the name of the Lord."
Summary: When I first wrote this blog post, there had been a large earthquake in Japan; hence the word "εσεισθη" (shook, akin to seismic) caught my attention. The events of Holy Week shake the city. They still shake our world today, perhaps even causing a fair amount of disruption, if not sadly violence, in our world. Call it good, call it bad, but the events of Holy Week make every person ask the haunting question: "Who is this man?"
Key Words:
απεστειλεν ("sent" in 21:1 and 3; aorist form of αποστελλω) This is a well known verb to Greek students. I find the particular use interesting -- Jesus sends the disciples to get a donkey. A reminder that often times, our "missional" or "apostolic" calling can be very mundane, but serve a tremendously amazing purpose.
συνεταξεν ("commanded" in 21:6; aorist form of συντασσω) Ah, the "syntax" of discipleship. This would mean obedience to particular commands. Okay, its Holy Week. I am not going on a diatribe, but it is worth noting, especially for us Lutherans, that the disciples display here the syntax of discipleship: hearing specific tasks and doing them. Or to put it another way, the proper syntax of discipleship is "hearing, being sent and then obeying..."
οχλος vs πολις ("crowd" in 21:8 and 11 and "city" in 21:10). The events of Holy Week force each of us, whether disciple, distant follower or outsider, to confront the question facing the whole city: "Who is this?" Also, the same crowds that cheer him now will vote for his death...
ὠσαννα ("Hosanna" in 21:9). Here is the "NET" commentary: Hosanna, literally in Hebrew, "O Lord, save" in the quotation from Ps 118:25-26 was probably by this time a familiar liturgical expression of praise, on the order of "Hail to the king," although both the underlying Aramaic and Hebrew expressions meant "O Lord, save us." In words familiar to every Jew, the author is indicating that at this point every messianic expectation is now at the point of realization. It is clear from the words of the psalm shouted by the crowd that Jesus is being proclaimed as messianic king. See E. Lohse, TDNT 9:682-84.
εσεισθη ("shake" in 21:10; aorist form of σειω) This word comes into English as "seismic." The events of Holy Week shake the city and their aftershocks still continue to reverberate around the world two millenia later.
Grammar/translation:
Often times participles are stacked near other participles and verbs, which can make them seem more difficult to translate. Here are two examples:
21:1 λυσαντες αγαγετε μοι
The verbs (and pronoun!) should be fairly familiar: "loose/free", "lead", "me"
Let's translate this rather methodically. First, let's do the non-participle parts:
"[participle] lead to me"
Now, let's go back and add in the participle, in this case, some form of "free." The first thing to do is NOT worry about person, gender or any of that, but simply stick the verb in with an "ing"
"Freeing, lead to me"
Okay, now we need to check out the tense and voice. In this case it is active voice, so we don't have to fix anything. Tense wise, it is aorist. An aorist participle occurs before the other verb. So, we get:
"Freed, lead to me"
Yuck. Let's put this back in the "under the circumstances" machine:
Under the circumstances of having freed, lead to me."
What makes this hard is that you don't have an object. Let's add one in for clarity:
"UtC of having freed the donkey, lead it to me."
Now we simplify:
"After you freed/untied the donkey, lead it to me."
Next one is 21:9
ευλογημενος Ὁ ερχομενος εν ονοματι κυριου
Again, translate what you know here:
"[participle] the [participle] in the name of the Lord.
[Technical point: In Hebrew, you don't have articles in expressions like "name of the Lord" It is just assumed that it is all definitive: "the Name of the Lord." The Greek translators just left them out but we ain't talking about any Lord, here, but YHWH! Which leads always to the question of, how do you translate this name? Simply LORD using all caps??]
In this case, the second participle: ερχομενος is a lot easier. It is a substantive: You simply put in the "The one(s) that/which do X" formula. You get: "The one who comes" What makes this a little tricky is the "μεν" in the middle of the participle which might make you think this is passive, but no, this is simply a deponent verb!
But the first one...ευλογημενος...tricky.
Stick in the word+ing
"blessing the one who comes in the name of the Lord."
Now we check tense and voice. Voice is passive, so we have to reverse the language: "Blessed be" or "blessed is." The tense is perfect which means the action, having occurred in the past, still has an implication for today.
"Blessed and still is blessed the one who comes in the name of the Lord."
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Matthew 6:24-34
This passage occurs in the Epiphany season of the Revised Common Lectionary (Year A).
Summary:
As usual, the Greek makes things more exciting! First, the word for "serve" in 6:24, as "cannot serve God and Mammon" is not serve like "wait on the table" but serve as in "be a slave to." Second, Jesus gives a number of commands throughout this passage. The tenses of the commands (for which I devote an entire section) highlight Jesus’ point. A brief review: Jesus tells his disciples to look up into the sky using an aorist command; he tells his disciples to seek the Kingdom of God using a present tense command. The one is a simple request; the other is a constant task. The translations generally do not capture this distinction.
Key words:
δουλευω ("serve" or "be enslaved to," twice in 6:24): This word does not simply mean "serve" as "I painted a wall for a poor person's house." It is more akin to slavery and servanthood. "It is not possible to be a slave to God and Money." Saving "serve" allows us a bit more control, I think, than Jesus implies. The word for serve as in clean-up/pitch-in is διακονεω.
μαμωνα ("mammon" or "money," 6:24): This word is not a Hebrew or Greek word, but is Aramiac, meaning wealth or property. It it not found in the OT; it is not picked up in any of the NT letters. It appears a few times, three times in Luke and once in Matthew. I guess it is a deeper question -- is Jesus trying to personify money here or not? I would suggest so, based less on what the word Mammon actually means, and more within the context of serving a master.
ολιγοπιστοι ("little faith," 6:30; appears in a few forms in Matthew's Gospel, also 8:26,14:31, 16:8, 17:20); This is a "pet" phrase of Matthew. The question is -- is this a rebuke or an encouragement? Of course, there is some element of rebuke, but perhaps there is an element of encouragement. Even being of little faith is better than being of none! In fact, if you compare the stories in chapter 8 and 16 from Matthew's Gospel with their Marcan parallels, you will see that Matthew adds this word into to soften the words of Jesus! (Or Mark excludes it). It is a humbling reminder that Jesus teaches us, not simply when we are wise and have full faith, but even when we have little faith.
προσθειναι ("add" an aorist infinitive of προστιθημι in 6:27; also in 6:34): Jesus here makes the point that worrying will not add an inch to our lives but seeking the kingdom of God will add all these things to us!
Translation issues
1) What does that refer to?
In English grammar, a pronoun needs an "antecedent," ie, what it is playing the roll of pronoun for. For example, "She and her sister are nice. I like her." The "her" doesn't really have a clear antecedent and so it is hard to understand. In this case, Jesus says, "Seek the KoG and its righteousness and all these things shall be added unto you." The question is, what are these things? Righteousness or clothing and wealth? (Kind of like King Solomon, who, in asking for wisdom, gained wealth).
2) Tenses in commands: Aorist vs Present
Jesus gives a number of commands in this section. Commands can also be called imperatives. They provide a helpful way to understand how tenses function in Greek commands. In English, we really only have present tense commands: "Go!" or "Help!" In Greek, however, the command can be given in either the aorist or the present tense. This impacts how the verb should be translated.
The aorist is used for a simply command, like a "Do this now" sort of thing. For example, εμβλεψατε ("Look up in the sky!", 6:26) or καταμαθετε ("Consider the lillies", 6:28). An aorist command requests a specific action to be taken right now.
The present tense is used for a command that requires continued action. For example, ζητειτε ("Seek the Kingdom of God," 6:33). Jesus wants his followers to ALWAYS seek the Kingdom of God. While the "continuous" nature of present tense can be sometimes overstated, the present imperative strongly suggests a continuous action.
In English the distinction between these two tenses is often overlooked. In this case, a fair translation would be "always" or "continually seek the Kingdom of God." (Whereas you don't always have to look up into the sky)
With negatives, it is a little more tricky. I confess, I get them confused! Jesus uses the same verb here in both the negative aorist and negative present command forms, so this will hopefully clarify.
Jesus uses the negative present imperative in 6:25: μη μεριμνησητε. In this verse, he is telling the disciples a forever command: "Do not ever worry about your life." The implication too, with a present tense negative imperative, is that the listener was in fact doing this action. For example, angels often have to tell people μη φοβου. (Present tense of "fear") We translate this "Do not be afraid" but it would better as "Stop being and continue to stop being afraid." Or perhaps, more poetically, "Do not fear."
Jesus then switches to a negative aorist command in 6:31 μη μεριμνατε. This verb is actually an aorist subjunctive. (Why? Well, I don't know the deep reason, but the basic reason is that negative aorist prohibitions take the subjunctive mood.) In this verse, Jesus is telling the people not to ask "What shall I eat?" While this could also be considered a permanent command, Jesus uses the aorist here because he was neither suggesting that the disciples were specifically doing that at that moment nor was he suggesting that this would be their constant question. Lastly, Jesus tells the disciples (again using a negative aorist subjunctive) not to worry about tomorrow. The use of the aorist is almost humerous here. It is almost as if Jesus is saying, "For today, I tell you, don't worry about tomorrow." The command is not in the present tense because Jesus doesn't want them to think about their actions for tomorrow!
Final note: Sometimes trying to figure out why a particular author used a particular tense is challenging. This is certainly true with negative aorist prohibitions! They could easily have been present tense! Sometimes there is a bit of sloppiness in the tenses. However, when you see Jesus using a present tense command for seeking the Kingdom of God, you can know that Jesus wants them to do this all the time!
Summary:
As usual, the Greek makes things more exciting! First, the word for "serve" in 6:24, as "cannot serve God and Mammon" is not serve like "wait on the table" but serve as in "be a slave to." Second, Jesus gives a number of commands throughout this passage. The tenses of the commands (for which I devote an entire section) highlight Jesus’ point. A brief review: Jesus tells his disciples to look up into the sky using an aorist command; he tells his disciples to seek the Kingdom of God using a present tense command. The one is a simple request; the other is a constant task. The translations generally do not capture this distinction.
Key words:
δουλευω ("serve" or "be enslaved to," twice in 6:24): This word does not simply mean "serve" as "I painted a wall for a poor person's house." It is more akin to slavery and servanthood. "It is not possible to be a slave to God and Money." Saving "serve" allows us a bit more control, I think, than Jesus implies. The word for serve as in clean-up/pitch-in is διακονεω.
μαμωνα ("mammon" or "money," 6:24): This word is not a Hebrew or Greek word, but is Aramiac, meaning wealth or property. It it not found in the OT; it is not picked up in any of the NT letters. It appears a few times, three times in Luke and once in Matthew. I guess it is a deeper question -- is Jesus trying to personify money here or not? I would suggest so, based less on what the word Mammon actually means, and more within the context of serving a master.
ολιγοπιστοι ("little faith," 6:30; appears in a few forms in Matthew's Gospel, also 8:26,14:31, 16:8, 17:20); This is a "pet" phrase of Matthew. The question is -- is this a rebuke or an encouragement? Of course, there is some element of rebuke, but perhaps there is an element of encouragement. Even being of little faith is better than being of none! In fact, if you compare the stories in chapter 8 and 16 from Matthew's Gospel with their Marcan parallels, you will see that Matthew adds this word into to soften the words of Jesus! (Or Mark excludes it). It is a humbling reminder that Jesus teaches us, not simply when we are wise and have full faith, but even when we have little faith.
προσθειναι ("add" an aorist infinitive of προστιθημι in 6:27; also in 6:34): Jesus here makes the point that worrying will not add an inch to our lives but seeking the kingdom of God will add all these things to us!
Translation issues
1) What does that refer to?
In English grammar, a pronoun needs an "antecedent," ie, what it is playing the roll of pronoun for. For example, "She and her sister are nice. I like her." The "her" doesn't really have a clear antecedent and so it is hard to understand. In this case, Jesus says, "Seek the KoG and its righteousness and all these things shall be added unto you." The question is, what are these things? Righteousness or clothing and wealth? (Kind of like King Solomon, who, in asking for wisdom, gained wealth).
2) Tenses in commands: Aorist vs Present
Jesus gives a number of commands in this section. Commands can also be called imperatives. They provide a helpful way to understand how tenses function in Greek commands. In English, we really only have present tense commands: "Go!" or "Help!" In Greek, however, the command can be given in either the aorist or the present tense. This impacts how the verb should be translated.
The aorist is used for a simply command, like a "Do this now" sort of thing. For example, εμβλεψατε ("Look up in the sky!", 6:26) or καταμαθετε ("Consider the lillies", 6:28). An aorist command requests a specific action to be taken right now.
The present tense is used for a command that requires continued action. For example, ζητειτε ("Seek the Kingdom of God," 6:33). Jesus wants his followers to ALWAYS seek the Kingdom of God. While the "continuous" nature of present tense can be sometimes overstated, the present imperative strongly suggests a continuous action.
In English the distinction between these two tenses is often overlooked. In this case, a fair translation would be "always" or "continually seek the Kingdom of God." (Whereas you don't always have to look up into the sky)
With negatives, it is a little more tricky. I confess, I get them confused! Jesus uses the same verb here in both the negative aorist and negative present command forms, so this will hopefully clarify.
Jesus uses the negative present imperative in 6:25: μη μεριμνησητε. In this verse, he is telling the disciples a forever command: "Do not ever worry about your life." The implication too, with a present tense negative imperative, is that the listener was in fact doing this action. For example, angels often have to tell people μη φοβου. (Present tense of "fear") We translate this "Do not be afraid" but it would better as "Stop being and continue to stop being afraid." Or perhaps, more poetically, "Do not fear."
Jesus then switches to a negative aorist command in 6:31 μη μεριμνατε. This verb is actually an aorist subjunctive. (Why? Well, I don't know the deep reason, but the basic reason is that negative aorist prohibitions take the subjunctive mood.) In this verse, Jesus is telling the people not to ask "What shall I eat?" While this could also be considered a permanent command, Jesus uses the aorist here because he was neither suggesting that the disciples were specifically doing that at that moment nor was he suggesting that this would be their constant question. Lastly, Jesus tells the disciples (again using a negative aorist subjunctive) not to worry about tomorrow. The use of the aorist is almost humerous here. It is almost as if Jesus is saying, "For today, I tell you, don't worry about tomorrow." The command is not in the present tense because Jesus doesn't want them to think about their actions for tomorrow!
Final note: Sometimes trying to figure out why a particular author used a particular tense is challenging. This is certainly true with negative aorist prohibitions! They could easily have been present tense! Sometimes there is a bit of sloppiness in the tenses. However, when you see Jesus using a present tense command for seeking the Kingdom of God, you can know that Jesus wants them to do this all the time!
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Lord's Prayer
For this week, I will analyze the Greek in Matthew and Luke's version of the Lord's Prayer. I am comparing then Matthew 6:9-15 and Luke 11:2-4
Intro: The two prayers have different set-ups. In Matthew, the Lord's Prayer is folded into a longer section about Christian discipleship during the Sermon on the Mount. In Luke, the Lord's Prayer teaching occurs in the middle of the narrative. Obviously how Luke and Matthew set up the prayer is not a Greek issue, however interesting it may be. So, let's start playing in the Greek.
Luke sets his up with a subjunctive phrase: "Whenever you pray"; Matthew says (building on what Jesus says earlier), "Thus you shall pray." It is an indicative, a command. Jesus is not commanding his disciples to pray in Luke, he is simply saying, when you pray...
However, Luke also adds another verb: lego. Based on its form, it is unclear whether it is a command (imperative) or description of action (indicative). Ie, it could read:
a) Whenever you pray, you shall say OR
b) Whenever you pray, are continually saying.
It probably is a command. Assuming this we can summarize the Greek difference in the intro as:
In Matthew, Jesus commands them to pray; in Luke, Jesus commands them how to pray.
Regardless, both use a present tense of the verb for pray, indicating this is a continual and repeated action.
Invocation: Big difference here. In Luke, you just call God, "Father" (Pater); in Matthew Jesus calls God "Our Father in the heavens" NOT "in heaven." However, this is fairly common in Matthew to refer to heaven as "the heavens." Sounds a bit more grand!
Hallowed be your name: Same in both. Worth noting is that the word "hallowed" (αγιαζω, hagiazoo) is a passive aorist imperative in the third person here. Yuck! The first tricky thing is the verb itself. It does not mean holy, but to make holy, to set aside. If Jesus had prayed, "Let your name be holy" we would have a real theological problem. But Jesus does not do this. The reality is that God's name is always holy, but it is not always hallowed, in that it is not always set aside for holy purposes. The NET tries to get at this by translating it "Let your name be honored." The problem here is that the verb "hagiazo" does not refer to cleaning things for shelves, but for using them in worship. In other words, Luther's explanation of this petition gets at the fact that Jesus (in Luke's words) uses a verb (make holy) and not an adjective (is holy).
Now, on to the conjugation. An aorist imperative implies that we are to do an action, but not necessarily do over and over again. Furthermore, any passive imperative is tricky. "Get hit!" is an example of an aorist passive infinitive. In the third person this would be "Let him get hit." So if we apply this to the Lord's Prayer, specifically this case of the verb "make holy" we get "let your name get made holy." Again, yuck. Let's make this a bit prettier English: "Let your name be set aside for holy purposes." That is beginning to sound a bit better.
The tough issue however is that the verb doesn't have the sense of an on-going action. This is not "Continue to let you name be set aside..." but refers to a one time event. So we can go to ways here. The first is to completely emphasize the moment of prayer: God's name be used right now at this very moment for the holy purpose of prayer. The other is to completely emphasize the future moment of prayer: Your name will one day be completely set aside for holiness. Let that day come. The reality is that this petition is eschatological in nature: There is a day when God's kingdom will come; in this prayer we catch a glimpse of that, here and now and only in this moment.
Your kingdom come. Same in both. I guess the most interesting thing for a sermon is what the word Kingdom actually means! Royal monarchy might make sense. This term, from what I can tell, does not have a specific culturally connotation more than the word kingdom or government would today. It was a catch all phrase common in society. Worth noting is the aorist imperative nature of the verb 'come.' This again puts us back in the eschatological moment. God's kingdom comes for a moment and will fully come later (also in a moment).
It is worth noting that whatever intimacy and presence one wishes to ascribe to the idea of "hallowed is your name" one must ascribe to "your kingdom come." The Greek is the same; God's name is hallowed in the same time-dimension as the kingdom coming.
Your will be done: In Matthew, not in Luke
Daily bread: Matthew and Luke differ here. Luke makes the verb in the present: Continue to give us our daily bread day after day. Matthew leaves it in the aorist: Give us our bread for today.
Forgive us: In Luke, the verb "forgive" (αφιημι, aphieemi) when we pray is again in an aorist tense, indicating we are asking for forgiveness right now. However, the verb "forgive" is in the present tense when it comes to our own action, suggesting an on-going action! Matthew keeps both verbs the same. Perhaps Matthew encourages the one praying to forgive in that moment of prayer; Luke perhaps realizes the need of humans to forgive again and again, not simply once.
Furthermore, Luke uses the word "sin"; Matthew keeps the word "debt." I am going to walk away slowly from commentary here...
Lead us not into temptation: Same in both.
But deliver us from evil: Only in Matthew
For thine is the Kingdom, the power and the glory. Amen. This is in the Didache, around 100-110 AD...not in the oldest copies we have of Matthew's Gospel.
Intro: The two prayers have different set-ups. In Matthew, the Lord's Prayer is folded into a longer section about Christian discipleship during the Sermon on the Mount. In Luke, the Lord's Prayer teaching occurs in the middle of the narrative. Obviously how Luke and Matthew set up the prayer is not a Greek issue, however interesting it may be. So, let's start playing in the Greek.
Luke sets his up with a subjunctive phrase: "Whenever you pray"; Matthew says (building on what Jesus says earlier), "Thus you shall pray." It is an indicative, a command. Jesus is not commanding his disciples to pray in Luke, he is simply saying, when you pray...
However, Luke also adds another verb: lego. Based on its form, it is unclear whether it is a command (imperative) or description of action (indicative). Ie, it could read:
a) Whenever you pray, you shall say OR
b) Whenever you pray, are continually saying.
It probably is a command. Assuming this we can summarize the Greek difference in the intro as:
In Matthew, Jesus commands them to pray; in Luke, Jesus commands them how to pray.
Regardless, both use a present tense of the verb for pray, indicating this is a continual and repeated action.
Invocation: Big difference here. In Luke, you just call God, "Father" (Pater); in Matthew Jesus calls God "Our Father in the heavens" NOT "in heaven." However, this is fairly common in Matthew to refer to heaven as "the heavens." Sounds a bit more grand!
Hallowed be your name: Same in both. Worth noting is that the word "hallowed" (αγιαζω, hagiazoo) is a passive aorist imperative in the third person here. Yuck! The first tricky thing is the verb itself. It does not mean holy, but to make holy, to set aside. If Jesus had prayed, "Let your name be holy" we would have a real theological problem. But Jesus does not do this. The reality is that God's name is always holy, but it is not always hallowed, in that it is not always set aside for holy purposes. The NET tries to get at this by translating it "Let your name be honored." The problem here is that the verb "hagiazo" does not refer to cleaning things for shelves, but for using them in worship. In other words, Luther's explanation of this petition gets at the fact that Jesus (in Luke's words) uses a verb (make holy) and not an adjective (is holy).
Now, on to the conjugation. An aorist imperative implies that we are to do an action, but not necessarily do over and over again. Furthermore, any passive imperative is tricky. "Get hit!" is an example of an aorist passive infinitive. In the third person this would be "Let him get hit." So if we apply this to the Lord's Prayer, specifically this case of the verb "make holy" we get "let your name get made holy." Again, yuck. Let's make this a bit prettier English: "Let your name be set aside for holy purposes." That is beginning to sound a bit better.
The tough issue however is that the verb doesn't have the sense of an on-going action. This is not "Continue to let you name be set aside..." but refers to a one time event. So we can go to ways here. The first is to completely emphasize the moment of prayer: God's name be used right now at this very moment for the holy purpose of prayer. The other is to completely emphasize the future moment of prayer: Your name will one day be completely set aside for holiness. Let that day come. The reality is that this petition is eschatological in nature: There is a day when God's kingdom will come; in this prayer we catch a glimpse of that, here and now and only in this moment.
Your kingdom come. Same in both. I guess the most interesting thing for a sermon is what the word Kingdom actually means! Royal monarchy might make sense. This term, from what I can tell, does not have a specific culturally connotation more than the word kingdom or government would today. It was a catch all phrase common in society. Worth noting is the aorist imperative nature of the verb 'come.' This again puts us back in the eschatological moment. God's kingdom comes for a moment and will fully come later (also in a moment).
It is worth noting that whatever intimacy and presence one wishes to ascribe to the idea of "hallowed is your name" one must ascribe to "your kingdom come." The Greek is the same; God's name is hallowed in the same time-dimension as the kingdom coming.
Your will be done: In Matthew, not in Luke
Daily bread: Matthew and Luke differ here. Luke makes the verb in the present: Continue to give us our daily bread day after day. Matthew leaves it in the aorist: Give us our bread for today.
Forgive us: In Luke, the verb "forgive" (αφιημι, aphieemi) when we pray is again in an aorist tense, indicating we are asking for forgiveness right now. However, the verb "forgive" is in the present tense when it comes to our own action, suggesting an on-going action! Matthew keeps both verbs the same. Perhaps Matthew encourages the one praying to forgive in that moment of prayer; Luke perhaps realizes the need of humans to forgive again and again, not simply once.
Furthermore, Luke uses the word "sin"; Matthew keeps the word "debt." I am going to walk away slowly from commentary here...
Lead us not into temptation: Same in both.
But deliver us from evil: Only in Matthew
For thine is the Kingdom, the power and the glory. Amen. This is in the Didache, around 100-110 AD...not in the oldest copies we have of Matthew's Gospel.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Colossians 1:15-28
1:15 The theological buzz word here is "eikwn" or "icon." A few things worth noting; this is a word used in Colossians, but not Ephesians. Second, Christ is the first thing mentioned, not as being made in the image, but in fact the image of God. Third thing, the word will come back into play in Col, in Chapter 3, where our minds our renewed into the image of the one who created us. One thing rather interesting is that in as much as the tension between Jew and Greek may have been solved in the book of Colossians (perhaps suggesting a later date than Paul himself!), but tension between Christ and world has not. The writer of Colossians (who I assert is Paul) continued to hold up the dramatic newness of Christ and the corresponding life in Christ.
1:17 " in him all things hold together." The Greek verb here underneath this all is "stand together." This is a rather interesting verb because it literally means "stand with." (synistehmi) "hold together" is a fair translation, but one could even make this a bit stronger -- all things stand united in him; or are even combined in him!
1:18 Great words here: arche. Jesus is the arche. As in "monarch" means one ruler, one principle...Jesus is the ruler, the root, the principle, the beginning, the origin.
1:18 We get the second time for "prototokos": First born. This time not of creation, but of the dead. (Remember the Nestorian debate over "theotokos..."
1:24 The word "my" as in "my sufferings" is not in the Greek. Paul simply says, "I rejoice in the sufferings on your behalf." It is the translators interpretation (ie NRSV and NET) that Paul here refers to rejoicing because of Christ or his sufferings. Regardless, the more difficult part of the sentence is what is meant by "sufferings 'tou' Christ" (the word for suffering and Christ here are straight forward!). The 'tou" there indicates a genitive. So we are back in a familiar place in translation -- sufferings for Christ (objective gen) or sufferings of Christ (subjective gen). The most favorable translation for Paul is that he is going to complete the lack of his suffering for Christ on behalf of the church.
1:25 I will save this for another post/year/time, but Paul says he is commissioned. The actual Greek here is that he is a servant "according to the 'oikonomia' of God." To read another way: "He is a servant according to the economy of God." That is our call, folks, the economy of God. What might this passage say about God's economy? One brief comment: Creation, Jesus, suffering, proclamation, reconcilation and see Col 3.20...a new creation!
1:17 " in him all things hold together." The Greek verb here underneath this all is "stand together." This is a rather interesting verb because it literally means "stand with." (synistehmi) "hold together" is a fair translation, but one could even make this a bit stronger -- all things stand united in him; or are even combined in him!
1:18 Great words here: arche. Jesus is the arche. As in "monarch" means one ruler, one principle...Jesus is the ruler, the root, the principle, the beginning, the origin.
1:18 We get the second time for "prototokos": First born. This time not of creation, but of the dead. (Remember the Nestorian debate over "theotokos..."
1:24 The word "my" as in "my sufferings" is not in the Greek. Paul simply says, "I rejoice in the sufferings on your behalf." It is the translators interpretation (ie NRSV and NET) that Paul here refers to rejoicing because of Christ or his sufferings. Regardless, the more difficult part of the sentence is what is meant by "sufferings 'tou' Christ" (the word for suffering and Christ here are straight forward!). The 'tou" there indicates a genitive. So we are back in a familiar place in translation -- sufferings for Christ (objective gen) or sufferings of Christ (subjective gen). The most favorable translation for Paul is that he is going to complete the lack of his suffering for Christ on behalf of the church.
1:25 I will save this for another post/year/time, but Paul says he is commissioned. The actual Greek here is that he is a servant "according to the 'oikonomia' of God." To read another way: "He is a servant according to the economy of God." That is our call, folks, the economy of God. What might this passage say about God's economy? One brief comment: Creation, Jesus, suffering, proclamation, reconcilation and see Col 3.20...a new creation!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
