From: Dave Washburn (dwashbur@nyx.net)
Date: Sun Jun 03 2001 - 12:46:41 EDT
Jeffrey wrote:
> Jim West wrote:
>
> > At 07:32 PM 6/2/01 -0400, you wrote:
> > >To all B-Greekers,
> > >
> > >Since in the original manuscripts there where no punctuation marks,the
> > >question is why not,
> > > "...AMHN SOI LEGW SHMERON, MET' EMOU ESH EN TW PARADEISW"
> > >INSTEAD OF, "...AMHN SOI LEGW, SHMERON MET' EMOU ESH EN TW PARADEISW"?
> > >
> > >Harry W. Jones
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > well you are correct. however, whichever reading you adopt- the meaning is
> > essentially the same..
> >
> > today i tell you, you will be with me in paradise
> > is the same as
> > i tell you, today you will be with me in paradise.
> >
> > either way the thief is going to go where jesus goes.
> >
>
> I beg to differ! If one feels that the SHMERON is a chronological indicator, then it
> makes a good deal of difference whether the term modifies the first or the second
> clause. For if it is the second clause, and is intended as an indicator of when the
> "thief" (what a woeful translation!) AND Jesus would be in paradise, then we have a
> contradiction between Luke's statement here and his supposition that Jesus does not
> enter "paradise" until after the resurrection.
I'm not sure where this supposition is found, but I'll bypass that for
now. It seems to me that the question is, which form of the
statement is more likely to have come out of the mouth of Jesus?
We have profuse examples of his use of AMHN LEGW SOI/hUMIN
etc as an introductory formula, and to my knowledge there is not
another example of his modifying it with SHMERON. Thus,
intrinsic probability by comparison with other use of this formula in
the gospels would suggest that SHMERON belongs with the next
clause.
> Moreover, one also has to show that the term might **not** be a chronological
> reference at all (i.e., something that denotes the day of the crucifixion), but a
> reference to the eschatological "today" (cf. Luke's other uses of this term in the
> Capernaum sermon and with the story of Zacchaeus, so that Jesus is actually saying, "I
> say to you, now that the great "today" is here, that (given your repentance, you will
> be (at no specified time) with me in paradise.
Why would one have to show this if one is arguing that SHMERON
belongs with the next clause? AFAIK, the gospels are pretty much
silent on the location of Jesus between death and resurrection, and
the eschatological suggestion seems excessively complex and
unnecessary to me. But all that is exegetical and theological
rather than linguistic, so to get back to the question of SHMERON,
another avenue of investigation might involve statistics on the
position of temporal indicators in the words of Jesus in the gospels.
Does he more commonly place them at the beginnings of clauses
or at the ends? What is the effect of one or the other, and what
effect might he have been going for here?
For myself, I'm content that the traditional rendering with
SHMERON modifying the second clause is the correct one
because I have no grammatical or theological reason to suspect
otherwise. Since Jesus is using one of his common introductory
formulae here, hanging on the cross about to die would seem an
odd place to modify it in such a nebulous way.
Dave Washburn
http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
"You just keep thinking, Butch. That's what you're good at."
---
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:36:58 EDT