From: Eric Weiss (eweiss@gte.net)
Date: Fri Jul 03 1998 - 02:26:46 EDT
PISTEUSAI GAR DEI TON PROSERCOMENON TWi QEWi hOTI ESTIN KAI
TOIS EKZHTOUSIN AUTON MISQAPODOTHS GINETAI
This verse is usually translated as:
"For he who comes to God must believe a) that He is/exists and b) [that
He is] a rewarder of those who seek Him." -- In other words, it is
implied that there are two things it is necessary for one to believe.
I ask: Is it possible or permissible to translate it as:
"For he who comes to God must believe that He is; and He becomes a
rewarder to those who seek Him." -- That is, there is one thing one must
believe (i.e., that God is/exists), and a consequence of believing in
Him and seeking Him is that He rewards those who do this.
Neva Miller's Analytical and Exegetical Handbook to Hebrews states that
"The infinitive PISTEUSAI, prominently forefronted, becomes the
perceptual orienter to the content of faith. The content consists of two
equal propositions coordinated by KAI ("and")." I guess she is saying
that from a discourse analysis perspective, the fronted infinitive and
the coordinating KAI dictate that it should be translated as it usually
is, i.e., there are 2 things one must believe.
The UBS Handbook on Hebrews states that "The stress falls in "rewards,"
not on "God exists," a fact which Jewish, though not Greek, readers
would take for granted. RSV's repetition of "that he" misleadingly gives
equal stress to both statements." Thus UBS seems to disagree with Miller
(or vice versa), since Miller regards the two KAI-joined propositions as
being equal.
So I have two main questions: 1) Is my suggested translation
possible/preferable/allowable? and 2) What can be said about Miller's
and UBS's statements, i.e., is one right and the other wrong?
And a third question: 3) Why is "he who comes to God" in the accusative
case? Is it because it is the subject of the infinitive PISTEUSAI? I
would think that the infinitive PISTEUSAI is used as a
complementary/catenative infinitive because it completes/complements
DEI, and that the subject of the clause would be in the nominative case.
Thanks for any help.
-- "Eric S. Weiss" http://home1.gte.net/eweiss/index.htm eweiss@gte.net S.D.G.--- B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu] To unsubscribe, forward this message to unsubscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:51 EDT