Cool. I like it. But shouldn’t it be μὴ ἀφῇς (or μὴ ἀφίει?)
I guess Marcion’s idea is μὴ ἀφῇς ἡμᾶς εἰσενεχθῆναι ὑπὸ τοῦ Πονηροῦ εἰς πειρασμόν.
It’s a back-translation from Tertullian: non sinet nos deduci in temptationem. The aorist imperative is just as good as the subjunctive aorist, and Jesus had used it in the preceding sentence. Harnack gives:
(καὶ) ἄφες ἡμῖν τὰς ἁμαρτίας (ἡμῶν)…(καὶ) μὴ ἄφες ἡμᾶς εἰςενεχθῆναι εἰς πειρασμόν
I thought prohibitions were formed with either μή plus the aorist subjunctive or μή plus the present imperative, but never (or per Smyth rarely and only in verse) with μή plus the aorist imperative. (and never at all with μή plus the present subjunctive.)
I wasn’t aware of that. I would trust Smyth, assuming that there aren’t koine counterexamples.
Bits and pieces of it. Ed Krentz cited Raymond Brown’s eschatological reading.
[1]See Jeffrey Gibson’s response, (the links in his post don’t work):
http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2099&start=10#p12198
Yes, I think this is what Jesus meant. μὴ ἕλξῃς ἡμᾶς εἰς ἐξέτασιν, ἀλλὰ σῶσον ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ Πονηροποιοῦ.
Some people would say that μὴ εἰσφέρε ἡμᾶς εἰς πειρασμόν would mean παῦσαι πειράζων ἡμᾶς.
If πονηρός here has more of ethical force, the sense might be something like ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ ποιῆσαι πονηρίαν.
The second possibility would result in something like καὶ μὴ εἰσενέγκῃς ἡμᾶς εἰς τὴν δοκιμασίαν, ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ ταύτης τῆς πονηρῆς δοκιμασίας.
It’s certainly true that μὴ εἰσενέγκῃς ἡμᾶς εἰς X is another way of saying ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ X. One wonders if Jesus had said καὶ μὴ εἰσενέγκῃς ἡμᾶς εἰς τὸν πονηρόν, ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ πειρασμοῦ would the Pope still have theological objections.
Apparently, Gibson found another version which supports Francis’ change.
Why ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ and not ἐκ τοῦ πονηροῦ?
That sounds much better to me.
Why ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ and not ἐκ τοῦ πονηροῦ?
ἀπό and ἐκ are both used regularly with ῥύομαι, and there appears to be very little to distinguish them.
A more semitic rendering might be καὶ μὴ δῷς ἡμᾶς ἐμπεσεῖν εἰς πειρασμόν, creating a symmetry with δὸς ἡμῖν σήμερον τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον.
Agreed. To paraphrase Edward Sapir, all formal distinctions leak. But if there is a distinction, ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ might mean σῶσον ἡμᾶς ὄντας ἐγγὺς τοῦ Διαβόλου whereas ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἐκ τοῦ πονηροῦ might mean σῶσον ἡμᾶς ὄντας ἐν τῷ Διαβόλῳ. In the latter case, it might be too late.
Maybe something similar. Going πρὸς τὸν Διάβολον is bad enough, but going εἰς τὸν Διάβολον is unthinkable. The prepositions build a type of fence around the Devil.