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.
Πορνείαδὲκαὶπᾶσα ἀκαθαρσίαἢπλεονεξία μηδὲ ὀνομαζέσθω ἐν ὑμῖν, καθὼς πρέπει ἁγίοις·
I can't follow the logic of the two conjunctions between the nouns here:
● Is the authour saying that two of them are equivalent - and if so which two?
● Why is μηδὲ used instead of a simple μή?
These are the questions of an alien. The RSV translates “But immorality and all impurity or covetousness must not even be named among you, …”. If you “can't follow the logic” of that, blame Paul, whose Greek doesn't take kindly to logic-chopping.
μηδε is “not even.” If you can’t understand the thrust of that, God help you.
Yes. The encoded "noun" in those brackets looks alien.
RSV wrote:must not even be named among you
Translation? Is that phrase meaningful in English? I'm glad I can read the Greek.
If read with English syntax in mind, <noun1> and <noun2> or <noun3> the first and second noun might firm a group, eg utensils; knives and forks or chairs must not be taken out of the restaurant. The construction πᾶσα ἀκαθαρσία ἢ πλεονεξία rather than πλεονεξία ἢ πᾶσα ἀκαθαρσία* suggests, however, that πᾶσα should / could also be taken together with πλεονεξία.
The most illogical thing is that this is an epistle for public reading and the authour says don't name, what was just named in the reading. Perhaps it means don't go into details - an explanation of terms as Galen says - talking about all the types of immorality.
The NIV translation sweeps away all of the little difficulties here.
“One might get one’s Greek from the very lips of Homer and Plato." "In which case they would certainly plough you for the Little-go. The German scholars have improved Greek so much.”
Πορνείαδὲκαὶπᾶσα ἀκαθαρσίαἢπλεονεξία μηδὲ ὀνομαζέσθω ἐν ὑμῖν, καθὼς πρέπει ἁγίοις·
I can't follow the logic of the two conjunctions between the nouns here:
● Is the authour saying that two of them are equivalent - and if so which two?
● Why is μηδὲ used instead of a simple μή?
You need to stop overthinking things. If anything, πλεονεξία is a specific example of ἀκαθαρσία. Why does Paul point out πλεονεξία? Remember that these are letters responding to particular issues, and I think also a partial explanation of why at times the writer's logic can be difficult to parse. If Paul wants to equate two ideas, he's perfectly capable of doing so -- Col. 3:5 καὶ τὴν πλεονεξίαν, ἥτις ἐστὶν εἰδωλολατρία...
Barry Hofstetter wrote:You need to stop overthinking things.
I overlooked the pattern till I memorised it, if over-observing is what is meant by overthinking.
Seeing as the authour uses this same pattern in the next phrase (verse 4), it seems to be a deliberate (probably intended to have significance or at least logic) pattern with a meaning.
Πορνείαδὲκαὶπᾶσα ἀκαθαρσίαἢπλεονεξία μηδὲ ὀνομαζέσθω ἐν ὑμῖν, καθὼς πρέπει ἁγίοις·
I can't follow the logic of the two conjunctions between the nouns here:
● Is the authour saying that two of them are equivalent - and if so which two?
● Why is μηδὲ used instead of a simple μή?
Moulton-Turner, BDF, don't mention Eph.5:3. Harold Hoehner (Ephesians 2002, p653, fn3) tags μηδὲ "Ascensive" with references to Wallace and A. T. Roberton p1173. Wallace [1] is followed by William J. Larkin in Baylor Handbook Ephesians.
[1]
I. Logical Conjunctions
These conjunctions relate the movement of thought from one passage to another by expressing logical relationships between the connected ideas. For the most part, coordinate conjunctions are used here.
A. Ascensive Conjunctions [even]
1. Definition
This use expresses a final addition or point of focus. It is often translated even. This classification is usually determined by the context. Conjunctions that function this way are καί, δέ, and μηδέ.
I don't see how μηδε in this passage can possibly be shoehorned into the definition of an "ascensive" conjunction, as set forth in the previous post. It applies only to the single verb ὀνομαζέσθω, and doesn't culminate the preceding series of nouns, and in fact it's used as an adverb here, not as a conjunction. "Let neither X nor Y even so much as be mentioned by name among you . . . "
Perhaps it means don't go into details - an explanation of terms as Galen says - talking about all the types of immorality.
