Textkit Logo

Matthew 26:18

Are you learning Koine Greek, the Greek of the New Testament and most other post-classical Greek texts? Whatever your level, use this forum to discuss all things Koine, Biblical or otherwise, including grammar, textbook talk, difficult passages, and more.

Matthew 26:18

Postby Isaac Newton » Wed Jun 28, 2017 2:24 am

ὁ δὲ εἶπεν Ὑπάγετε εἰς τὴν πόλιν πρὸς τὸν δεῖνα καὶ εἴπατε αὐτῷ Ὁ Διδάσκαλος λέγει Ὁ καιρός μου ἐγγύς ἐστιν πρὸς σὲ. ποιῶ τὸ πάσχα μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν μου.


I think πρὸς σὲ goes with ἐστιν rather than with ποιῶ . So I would translate as follows:

He said, Go into the city to an acquaintance and tell him, The Teacher says, My appointment with you is near . I will observe the Passover with my disciples .


I've tried reading it the other way but it doesn't make sense to me:

He said, Go into the city to an acquaintance and tell him, The Teacher says, My hour is near. With you I will observe the Passover with my disciples .


It renders both sentences unintelligible, especially the second one. I can't honestly bring myself to translate πρὸς σὲ as "at your house/place."

Any thoughts ?
Οὐαὶ οἱ λέγοντες τὸ πονηρὸν καλὸν καὶ τὸ καλὸν πονηρόν, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ σκότος φῶς καὶ τὸ φῶς σκότος, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ πικρὸν γλυκὺ καὶ τὸ γλυκὺ πικρόν
Isaac Newton
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 925
Joined: Thu May 30, 2013 3:15 am

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby jeidsath » Wed Jun 28, 2017 7:55 pm

I almost feel like we have to read in a verb of motion. Notice the parallel to Exodus 12:48:

προσέλθῃ πρὸς ὑμᾶς ποιῆσαι τὸ πασχα

I've snipped some words -- it's talking about a proselyte coming to celebrate Passover with them.

It's interesting to me that Mark and Luke have the miraculous version of this story, while Matthew makes it into a pre-arranged meeting.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2316
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby Isaac Newton » Thu Jun 29, 2017 2:48 pm

jeidsath wrote:I almost feel like we have to read in a verb of motion. Notice the parallel to Exodus 12:48:

προσέλθῃ πρὸς ὑμᾶς ποιῆσαι τὸ πασχα

I've snipped some words -- it's talking about a proselyte coming to celebrate Passover with them.

It's interesting to me that Mark and Luke have the miraculous version of this story, while Matthew makes it into a pre-arranged meeting.


If we assume an action verb we will get the following:

Ὁ Διδάσκαλος λέγει Ὁ καιρός μου ἐγγύς ἐστιν· [προσέρχομαι] πρὸς σὲ ποιῶ τὸ πάσχα μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν μου.




It still doesn't make sense on account of ποιῶ which we would then need to change to the infinitive ( ποιῆσαι or an equivalent).
Οὐαὶ οἱ λέγοντες τὸ πονηρὸν καλὸν καὶ τὸ καλὸν πονηρόν, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ σκότος φῶς καὶ τὸ φῶς σκότος, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ πικρὸν γλυκὺ καὶ τὸ γλυκὺ πικρόν
Isaac Newton
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 925
Joined: Thu May 30, 2013 3:15 am

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby jeidsath » Thu Jun 29, 2017 3:19 pm

My thought was ἐλθὼν instead of a finite verb. I could be wrong, of course.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2316
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby mwh » Thu Jun 29, 2017 7:24 pm

No Joel you're right. It’s known as a “pregnant” construction. The motion implied by the prepositional phrase precedes the action of the main verb. Cf. e.g. Mk.13.9 εις συναγωγας δαρησεσθε.

τον δεινα is very curious.
mwh
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2674
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby Barry Hofstetter » Fri Jun 30, 2017 3:54 am

mwh wrote:No Joel you're right. It’s known as a “pregnant” construction. The motion implied by the prepositional phrase precedes the action of the main verb. Cf. e.g. Mk.13.9 εις συναγωγας δαρησεσθε.

τον δεινα is very curious.


It seems to me to be the equivalent of παρὰ σοί, apud te in Latin (which is precisely how Jerome rendered it). However, I'm curious about your curiosity. Do you meant that the usage of word itself is curious, or that's its presence in the narrative is curious?
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
The Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
βρεκεκεκὲξ κοάξ κοάξ
Barry Hofstetter
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 499
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2013 12:22 pm

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby Isaac Newton » Fri Jun 30, 2017 11:11 am

jeidsath wrote:My thought was ἐλθὼν instead of a finite verb. I could be wrong, of course.


Interesting. Does Gospel of Matthew assume a participle anywhere else ? It would strengthen your case if you can show precedent.
Οὐαὶ οἱ λέγοντες τὸ πονηρὸν καλὸν καὶ τὸ καλὸν πονηρόν, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ σκότος φῶς καὶ τὸ φῶς σκότος, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ πικρὸν γλυκὺ καὶ τὸ γλυκὺ πικρόν
Isaac Newton
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 925
Joined: Thu May 30, 2013 3:15 am

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby Isaac Newton » Fri Jun 30, 2017 11:37 am

Barry Hofstetter wrote:
It seems to me to be the equivalent of παρὰ σοί, apud te in Latin (which is precisely how Jerome rendered it). However, I'm curious about your curiosity. Do you meant that the usage of word itself is curious, or that's its presence in the narrative is curious?



The difference is that in Latin that's a well attested idiom for "at your house." The same is true of the French preposition chez for example, as in "to the house of." Hence chez moi -- at my house, chez lui -- at his house, chez le boucher -- at the butcher's shop, etc.

When does the Greek πρὸς ever function like this to mean "-- house of" in the GNT, and indeed in Koine literature ?
Οὐαὶ οἱ λέγοντες τὸ πονηρὸν καλὸν καὶ τὸ καλὸν πονηρόν, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ σκότος φῶς καὶ τὸ φῶς σκότος, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ πικρὸν γλυκὺ καὶ τὸ γλυκὺ πικρόν
Isaac Newton
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 925
Joined: Thu May 30, 2013 3:15 am

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby jeidsath » Fri Jun 30, 2017 1:14 pm

Mk: καὶ τῇ πρώτῃ ἡμέρᾳ τῶν ἀζύμων
Mt: τῇ δὲ πρώτῃ τῶν ἀζύμων

Mk: ὅτε τὸ πάσχα ἔθυον
Mt: <snip>

Mk: λέγουσιν αὐτῷ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ
Mt: προσῆλθον οἱ μαθηταὶ τῷ Ἰησοῦ λέγοντες

Mk: ποῦ θέλεις ἀπελθόντες ἑτοιμάσωμεν ἵνα φάγῃς τὸ πάσχα
Mt: ποῦ θέλεις ἑτοιμάσωμέν σοι φαγεῖν τὸ πάσχα

Mk: καὶ ἀποστέλλει δύο τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ
Mt: <snip>

Mk: καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς
Mt: ὁ δὲ εἶπεν

Mk: ὑπάγετε εἰς τὴν πόλιν
Mt: ὑπάγετε εἰς τὴν πόλιν

Mk: καὶ ἀπαντήσει ὑμῖν ἄνθρωπος κεράμιον ὕδατος βαστάζων ἀκολουθήσατε αὐτῷ καὶ ὅπου ἐὰν εἰσέλθῃ
Mt: πρὸς τὸν δεῖνα

Mk: εἴπατε τῷ οἰκοδεσπότῃ
Mt: καὶ εἴπατε αὐτῷ

Mk: ὅτι ὁ διδάσκαλος λέγει
Mt: ὁ διδάσκαλος λέγει

Mk: ποῦ ἐστὶν τὸ κατάλυμά μου ὅπου τὸ πάσχα μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν μου φάγω καὶ αὐτὸς ὑμῖν δείξει ἀνάγαιον μέγα ἐστρωμένον ἕτοιμον καὶ ἐκεῖ ἑτοιμάσατε ἡμῖν
Mt: <snip>

Mk:
Mt: Ὁ καιρός μου ἐγγύς ἐστιν· πρὸς σὲ ποιῶ τὸ πάσχα μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν μου.

Mk: καὶ ἐξῆλθον οἱ μαθηταὶ καὶ ἦλθον εἰς τὴν πόλιν καὶ εὗρον καθὼς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς,
Mt: καὶ ἐποίησαν οἱ μαθηταὶ ὡς συνέταξεν αὐτοῖς ὁ Ἰησοῦς

Mk: καὶ ἡτοίμασαν τὸ πάσχα
Mt: καὶ ἡτοίμασαν τὸ πάσχα
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2316
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby Isaac Newton » Fri Jun 30, 2017 1:50 pm

jeidsath wrote:Mk: καὶ τῇ πρώτῃ ἡμέρᾳ τῶν ἀζύμων
Mt: τῇ δὲ πρώτῃ τῶν ἀζύμων

Mk: ὅτε τὸ πάσχα ἔθυον
Mt: <snip>

Mk: λέγουσιν αὐτῷ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ
Mt: προσῆλθον οἱ μαθηταὶ τῷ Ἰησοῦ λέγοντες

Mk: ποῦ θέλεις ἀπελθόντες ἑτοιμάσωμεν ἵνα φάγῃς τὸ πάσχα
Mt: ποῦ θέλεις ἑτοιμάσωμέν σοι φαγεῖν τὸ πάσχα

Mk: καὶ ἀποστέλλει δύο τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ
Mt: <snip>

Mk: καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς
Mt: ὁ δὲ εἶπεν

Mk: ὑπάγετε εἰς τὴν πόλιν
Mt: ὑπάγετε εἰς τὴν πόλιν

Mk: καὶ ἀπαντήσει ὑμῖν ἄνθρωπος κεράμιον ὕδατος βαστάζων ἀκολουθήσατε αὐτῷ καὶ ὅπου ἐὰν εἰσέλθῃ
Mt: πρὸς τὸν δεῖνα

Mk: εἴπατε τῷ οἰκοδεσπότῃ
Mt: καὶ εἴπατε αὐτῷ

Mk: ὅτι ὁ διδάσκαλος λέγει
Mt: ὁ διδάσκαλος λέγει

Mk: ποῦ ἐστὶν τὸ κατάλυμά μου ὅπου τὸ πάσχα μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν μου φάγω καὶ αὐτὸς ὑμῖν δείξει ἀνάγαιον μέγα ἐστρωμένον ἕτοιμον καὶ ἐκεῖ ἑτοιμάσατε ἡμῖν
Mt: <snip>

Mk:
Mt: Ὁ καιρός μου ἐγγύς ἐστιν· πρὸς σὲ ποιῶ τὸ πάσχα μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν μου.

Mk: καὶ ἐξῆλθον οἱ μαθηταὶ καὶ ἦλθον εἰς τὴν πόλιν καὶ εὗρον καθὼς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς,
Mt: καὶ ἐποίησαν οἱ μαθηταὶ ὡς συνέταξεν αὐτοῖς ὁ Ἰησοῦς

Mk: καὶ ἡτοίμασαν τὸ πάσχα
Mt: καὶ ἡτοίμασαν τὸ πάσχα



Should I ask what is the point of all these citations ?
Οὐαὶ οἱ λέγοντες τὸ πονηρὸν καλὸν καὶ τὸ καλὸν πονηρόν, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ σκότος φῶς καὶ τὸ φῶς σκότος, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ πικρὸν γλυκὺ καὶ τὸ γλυκὺ πικρόν
Isaac Newton
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 925
Joined: Thu May 30, 2013 3:15 am

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby jeidsath » Fri Jun 30, 2017 2:21 pm

I wouldn't call that a bunch of citations. It's the story that we're looking at now, with the parallel Mark story interleaved.

If Matthew were working from Mark here, or a similar source, then it may tell us about his thought process when he wrote down πρoϲτoνδεινα and προϲϲε.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2316
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby Isaac Newton » Fri Jun 30, 2017 2:32 pm

jeidsath wrote:I wouldn't call that a bunch of citations. It's the story that we're looking at now, with the parallel Mark story interleaved.

If Matthew were working from Mark here, or a similar source, then it may tell us about his thought process when he wrote down πρoϲτoνδεινα and προϲϲε.


O.K...
Οὐαὶ οἱ λέγοντες τὸ πονηρὸν καλὸν καὶ τὸ καλὸν πονηρόν, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ σκότος φῶς καὶ τὸ φῶς σκότος, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ πικρὸν γλυκὺ καὶ τὸ γλυκὺ πικρόν
Isaac Newton
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 925
Joined: Thu May 30, 2013 3:15 am

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby Barry Hofstetter » Fri Jun 30, 2017 2:51 pm

jeidsath wrote:I wouldn't call that a bunch of citations. It's the story that we're looking at now, with the parallel Mark story interleaved.

If Matthew were working from Mark here, or a similar source, then it may tell us about his thought process when he wrote down πρoϲτoνδεινα and προϲϲε.


Not a bad methodology, assuming Marcan priority. Do you have any conclusions or insights derived from this so far?
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
The Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
βρεκεκεκὲξ κοάξ κοάξ
Barry Hofstetter
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 499
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2013 12:22 pm

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby mwh » Fri Jun 30, 2017 3:30 pm

Barry Hofstetter wrote:It seems to me to be the equivalent of παρὰ σοί, apud te in Latin (which is precisely how Jerome rendered it). However, I'm curious about your curiosity. Do you meant that the usage of word itself is curious, or that's its presence in the narrative is curious?
προς σέ ~ παρα σοί: yes undoubtedly but the fact that it’s the one and not the other needed to be explained.
τον δεῖνα: Both. This is probably not the best place to discuss but I trust you’ll agree it’s very odd (all the more so if Mark came first, but that's by the way). I haven’t looked up Jerome.
mwh
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2674
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby jeidsath » Fri Jun 30, 2017 4:19 pm

Could this be an outline for some early liturgy/passion play, one that would use the participant's name? (Perhaps the name of whoever was hosting the communion meal.)

But, more prosaically, what's wrong with understanding δεῖνα as a particular person that Jesus had in mind, but whose name the Gospeler did not know or choose not to report. "Go into the city, to so-and-so."
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2316
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby Barry Hofstetter » Fri Jun 30, 2017 6:51 pm

mwh wrote:προς σέ ~ παρα σοί: yes undoubtedly but the fact that it’s the one and not the other needed to be explained.

τον δεῖνα: Both. This is probably not the best place to discuss but I trust you’ll agree it’s very odd (all the more so if Mark came first, but that's by the way). I haven’t looked up Jerome.


Jerome:

At Jesus dixit: Ite in civitatem ad quemdam, et dicite ei: Magister dicit: Tempus meum prope est, apud te facio Pascha cum discipulis meis.

Not so sure that I agree, but I'd like to see you unpack it. As a general principle, although Matthew has more material overall, he tends to be more sparse in his recounting of the same events that Mark also reports, and I've always looked at this as just such an example. But if you have another explanation I'd love to hear it.
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
The Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
βρεκεκεκὲξ κοάξ κοάξ
Barry Hofstetter
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 499
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2013 12:22 pm

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby Isaac Newton » Fri Jun 30, 2017 11:32 pm

Had the author of Matthew wanted to say "I will eat the Passover meal with my disciples at your house" he would have written something along the following lines: ποιῶ τὸ πάσχα μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν μου ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ σου

ref:

οὐδὲ καίουσιν λύχνον καὶ τιθέασιν αὐτὸν ὑπὸ τὸν μόδιον, ἀλλ’ ἐπὶ τὴν λυχνίαν, καὶ λάμπει πᾶσιν τοῖς ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ.

Matthew 5:15


καὶ ἐσκανδαλίζοντο ἐν αὐτῷ. ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς Οὐκ ἔστιν προφήτης ἄτιμος εἰ μὴ ἐν τῇ πατρίδι καὶ ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ αὐτοῦ.

Matthew 13:57

etc..
Οὐαὶ οἱ λέγοντες τὸ πονηρὸν καλὸν καὶ τὸ καλὸν πονηρόν, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ σκότος φῶς καὶ τὸ φῶς σκότος, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ πικρὸν γλυκὺ καὶ τὸ γλυκὺ πικρόν
Isaac Newton
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 925
Joined: Thu May 30, 2013 3:15 am

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby Isaac Newton » Fri Jun 30, 2017 11:53 pm

Barry Hofstetter wrote:
Jerome:

At Jesus dixit: Ite in civitatem ad quemdam, et dicite ei: Magister dicit: Tempus meum prope est, apud te facio Pascha cum discipulis meis.

Not so sure that I agree, but I'd like to see you unpack it. As a general principle, although Matthew has more material overall, he tends to be more sparse in his recounting of the same events that Mark also reports, and I've always looked at this as just such an example. But if you have another explanation I'd love to hear it.


Jerome is unreliable in matters pertaining to Greek grammar and translation. For instance even though the Latin versions of his day as a rule rendered μονογενὴς as "unicus" / "only" he translated the term as "unigenitus' / "only-begotten" only in the six verses where it refers to Jesus, retaining the Latin "unicus" for when the word does not refer to Jesus.
Οὐαὶ οἱ λέγοντες τὸ πονηρὸν καλὸν καὶ τὸ καλὸν πονηρόν, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ σκότος φῶς καὶ τὸ φῶς σκότος, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ πικρὸν γλυκὺ καὶ τὸ γλυκὺ πικρόν
Isaac Newton
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 925
Joined: Thu May 30, 2013 3:15 am

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby mwh » Sat Jul 01, 2017 1:46 am

jeidsath wrote:But, more prosaically, what's wrong with understanding δεῖνα as a particular person that Jesus had in mind, but whose name the Gospeler did not know or choose not to report. "Go into the city, to so-and-so."

The problem with that is that the Gospeler presents the words as Jesus’ own.

Jerome’s ad quemdam (thanks Barry) is fudge. It doesn’t really correspond to προς τον δεινα (it’s not προς ανθρωπόν τινα), which should mean something more like jeidsath’s “to so-and-so.” Do you have an explanation Barry?
mwh
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2674
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby Barry Hofstetter » Sat Jul 01, 2017 10:19 am

mwh wrote:
jeidsath wrote:But, more prosaically, what's wrong with understanding δεῖνα as a particular person that Jesus had in mind, but whose name the Gospeler did not know or choose not to report. "Go into the city, to so-and-so."

The problem with that is that the Gospeler presents the words as Jesus’ own.

Jerome’s ad quemdam (thanks Barry) is fudge. It doesn’t really correspond to προς τον δεινα (it’s not προς ανθρωπόν τινα), which should mean something more like jeidsath’s “to so-and-so.” Do you have an explanation Barry?


quīdam, quaedam, quoddam, and subst. quiddam, pron. indef., a certain, a certain one, somebody, something

Lewis, C. T., & Short, C. (1891). Harpers’ Latin Dictionary (p. 1511). New York; Oxford: Harper & Brothers; Clarendon Press.

δεῖνα , ὁ, ἡ, τό (Thu., Aristoph. et al.; pap, Aq., Sym.) a pers. or thing one cannot or does not wish to name, so-and-so, somebody, in our lit. only masc. a certain man Mt 26:18.

Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., & Bauer, W. (2000). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed., p. 215). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Coming up with an alternate suggestion as to how the writer might have expressed the concept does not mean that what Jerome rendered was a "fudge." It appears to me to be an adequate rendering. δεῖνα might be an Atticism, but it also appears not infrequently in the papyri.
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
The Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
βρεκεκεκὲξ κοάξ κοάξ
Barry Hofstetter
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 499
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2013 12:22 pm

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby Barry Hofstetter » Sat Jul 01, 2017 10:22 am

Isaac Newton wrote:
Barry Hofstetter wrote:
Jerome:

At Jesus dixit: Ite in civitatem ad quemdam, et dicite ei: Magister dicit: Tempus meum prope est, apud te facio Pascha cum discipulis meis.

Not so sure that I agree, but I'd like to see you unpack it. As a general principle, although Matthew has more material overall, he tends to be more sparse in his recounting of the same events that Mark also reports, and I've always looked at this as just such an example. But if you have another explanation I'd love to hear it.


Jerome is unreliable in matters pertaining to Greek grammar and translation. For instance even though the Latin versions of his day as a rule rendered μονογενὴς as "unicus" / "only" he translated the term as "unigenitus' / "only-begotten" only in the six verses where it refers to Jesus, retaining the Latin "unicus" for when the word does not refer to Jesus.


Did you not admit on CARM that you have never studied Latin? That we may criticize a translator at one point does not mean that he fails at all points. Jerome's translation methodology is so literal for the NT that retroverting it to the Greek he used is fairly easy. Do you have any other examples of his "unrealiability?"
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
The Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
βρεκεκεκὲξ κοάξ κοάξ
Barry Hofstetter
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 499
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2013 12:22 pm

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby Isaac Newton » Sat Jul 01, 2017 10:35 am

Barry,

I think that one example is sufficient.
Οὐαὶ οἱ λέγοντες τὸ πονηρὸν καλὸν καὶ τὸ καλὸν πονηρόν, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ σκότος φῶς καὶ τὸ φῶς σκότος, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ πικρὸν γλυκὺ καὶ τὸ γλυκὺ πικρόν
Isaac Newton
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 925
Joined: Thu May 30, 2013 3:15 am

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby Isaac Newton » Sat Jul 01, 2017 10:57 am

I searched up all of the verses where πρὸς σὲ is used in the GNT:

Matthew 14:28 , 25:39, Mark 9:17 , Luke 1:19, 7:7, 7:20,12:58,17:4,John 17:11,17:13,21:22,21:23,Acts 10:33,11:4,21:37,23:18,23:30,1 Timothy 3:14 ,Titus 3:12,


It just isn't ever an idiom for "at you home/abode/place." I wager that the same is true in the entire corpus of [standard] koine literature.
Οὐαὶ οἱ λέγοντες τὸ πονηρὸν καλὸν καὶ τὸ καλὸν πονηρόν, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ σκότος φῶς καὶ τὸ φῶς σκότος, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ πικρὸν γλυκὺ καὶ τὸ γλυκὺ πικρόν
Isaac Newton
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 925
Joined: Thu May 30, 2013 3:15 am

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby jeidsath » Sat Jul 01, 2017 11:04 am

I took so-and-so from the LSJ gloss rather than looking up the usage. To correct that, here is Aristophanes:

τίς ἔστ’ ἀνήρ σοι;
τὸν ἐμὸν ἄνδρα πυνθάνει;
τὸν δεῖνα γιγνώσκεις, τὸν ἐκ Κοθωκιδῶν;
τὸν δεῖνα; ποῖον;
ἔσθ’ ὁ δεῖν’, ὃς καί ποτε
τὸν δεῖνα τὸν τοῦ δεῖνα—
ληρεῖν μοι δοκεῖς.


If so-and-so is dismissed as a fudge, then I'd suggest that τὸν δεῖνα would make a lot more sense if the particulars of the Mark story were part of this story:

καὶ ἀπαντήσει ὑμῖν ἄνθρωπος κεράμιον ὕδατος βαστάζων ἀκολουθήσατε αὐτῷ καὶ ὅπου ἐὰν εἰσέλθῃ εἴπατε τῷ οἰκοδεσπότῃ


Wouldn't that random οἰκοδεσπότης be reasonably referred to by Jesus as ὁ δεῖνα? Either this information would have been in the Matthew story at some point and was lost in transmission, or Matthew was thinking of it when he wrote down the story (and thought that he written something that he hadn't, Goodacre's "editorial fatigue").
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2316
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby mwh » Sat Jul 01, 2017 8:31 pm

Joel, it was ad quemdam I called fudge, not so-and-so, which I approved. It suits that classic Aristoph passage well. Your two competing suggestions—transmissional defectiveness, or the writer's thinking he’d written something he hadn’t—at least serve to show up the difficulty of προς τον δεινα here. I won’t echo Kleisthenes’ ληρειν μοι δοκεις.

Barry, Thanks for the reply. Perhaps I should have told you I know what quidam and ὁ δεῖνα mean.
And perhaps you should have been warned about Isaac Newton, who has a certain notoriety on this board. You may care to look at earlier threads. Standard practice here now is to ignore him, for to engage with him is folly. It was foolish of me to post here, which I only did for jeidsath’s sake.
mwh
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2674
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby Barry Hofstetter » Sat Jul 01, 2017 9:20 pm

mwh wrote:Joel, it was ad quemdam I called fudge, not so-and-so, which I approved. It suits that classic Aristoph passage well. Your two competing suggestions—transmissional defectiveness, or the writer's thinking he’d written something he hadn’t—at least serve to show up the difficulty of προς τον δεινα here. I won’t echo Kleisthenes’ ληρειν μοι δοκεις.

Barry, Thanks for the reply. Perhaps I should have told you I know what quidam and ὁ δεῖνα mean.
And perhaps you should have been warned about Isaac Newton, who has a certain notoriety on this board. You may care to look at earlier threads. Standard practice here now is to ignore him, for to engage with him is folly. It was foolish of me to post here, which I only did for jeidsath’s sake.


I apologize if I created the impression that I thought you didn't know what they meant. Such was not my intent. I was simply supplying the lexical information for visual comparison, toward suggesting that quidam was an adequate if not exactly precise rendering of δεῖνα. And yes, well aware of the above mentioned individuals notoriety.
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
The Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
βρεκεκεκὲξ κοάξ κοάξ
Barry Hofstetter
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 499
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2013 12:22 pm

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby Isaac Newton » Sat Jul 01, 2017 10:17 pm

Mk: καὶ ἀπαντήσει ὑμῖν ἄνθρωπος κεράμιον ὕδατος βαστάζων ἀκολουθήσατε αὐτῷ καὶ ὅπου ἐὰν εἰσέλθῃ
Mt: πρὸς τὸν δεῖνα


I don't think the man carrying the pitcher of water and the unnamed acquaintance (τὸν δεῖνα) are the same individual. Otherwise Mark 14:14 would have written αὐτῷ rather than τῷ οἰκοδεσπότῃ (bold below):

καὶ ὅπου ἐὰν εἰσέλθῃ εἴπατε τῷ οἰκοδεσπότῃ ὅτι Ὁ Διδάσκαλος λέγει Ποῦ ἐστιν τὸ κατάλυμά μου, ὅπου τὸ πάσχα μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν μου φάγω;
Οὐαὶ οἱ λέγοντες τὸ πονηρὸν καλὸν καὶ τὸ καλὸν πονηρόν, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ σκότος φῶς καὶ τὸ φῶς σκότος, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ πικρὸν γλυκὺ καὶ τὸ γλυκὺ πικρόν
Isaac Newton
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 925
Joined: Thu May 30, 2013 3:15 am

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby jeidsath » Sat Jul 01, 2017 11:47 pm

Isaac -- Yes, I agree.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2316
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby Isaac Newton » Tue Jul 04, 2017 1:29 am

I found the following to be humorous (but at the same time sad) about what passes for scholarship in some circles these days.. Concerning Matthew 26:18 this is what was written by a poster ( who shall only be identified as "J") :


I love that Spanish, like English, does not have a preposition with the meaning. Therefore, whereas in French, it says chez toi ("at your house"), in Spanish it literally says en tu casa ("at your house"). That's what has to be done in English, too. In German, it says bei dir ("at your house"). Portuguese, like Spanish and English, lacks the preposition and says na sua casa ("at your house"). I assume that Italian da te is like French chez toi (and Greek πρὸς σέ).


Alas.
Οὐαὶ οἱ λέγοντες τὸ πονηρὸν καλὸν καὶ τὸ καλὸν πονηρόν, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ σκότος φῶς καὶ τὸ φῶς σκότος, οἱ τιθέντες τὸ πικρὸν γλυκὺ καὶ τὸ γλυκὺ πικρόν
Isaac Newton
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 925
Joined: Thu May 30, 2013 3:15 am

Re: Matthew 26:18

Postby jeidsath » Tue Jul 04, 2017 2:48 am

I'm afraid that's the closing bell for this thread.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2316
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν


Return to Koine and Biblical and Medieval Greek

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Barry Hofstetter, Bernd Strauss, Google Adsense [Bot] and 20 guests