Sporadic theological and historical musings by Edgar Foster (Ph.D. in Theology and Religious Studies and one of Jehovah's Witnesses).
Thursday, September 21, 2023
Proverbs 8:22 (New Interpreter's Bible, Vol. V, Page 98)
See also pages 92-93.
14 comments:
Anonymous
said...
Those who wish to ignore this, the passive verbs and the agency construction (obvious when this occurs) used of Christ, must prove they have no significance. even "beginning" in Hebrew or Greek doesn't mean "first-cause" except in philosophy - all the examples I have been cited so far still imply a temporal distinction and not the actual cause. then you have Job 40:19 and Gen 49:3 LXX
even Barnes notes: “The word properly refers to the commencement of a thing, not its authorship, and denotes properly primacy in time, and primacy in rank, but not primacy in the sense of causing anything to exist.... the word is not, therefore, found in the sense of authorship, as denoting that one is the beginning of anything in the sense that he caused it to have an existence.” - Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, p. 1569
One other thing I'll post for now. Another source which thinks the verb in Proverbs 8:22 is ambiguous: https://www.saet.ac.uk/Christianity/CreationintheOldTestament#section2.4.1
Not sure my other comment went through. I said "sorry Edgar, I understand its listed in the BDAG as a possible meaning, but in the LXX and in the NT , it never has this meaning(as what some like to try and portray) Barnes is certainly correct for the NT and LXX"
The verbs in 23,24 & 25 seem to indicate some form of creation or birth is implied as in Psalm 90:2 “Before the mountains were born”
though in verse 25 it uses poio for creation and not ktizo - In the NT aswell poio (or a form of it) is used when something/ someone is made something (Rev 1:6) However Mark in 10:6 in a quote/ paraphrase of Genesis uses Ktizo for poio - indicating to me they were synonyms.
see in LXX + Burneys statement I cited: Gen 14:19,22 Deut 32:6
Anonymous, I agree that arche likely does not mean "source" in Revelation 3:14. Despite all of the insistence to the contrary, that denotation remains a possibility for Rev. 3:14, not a certainty.
Yes, context and similar uses elsewhere can help us to determine the likely meaning that John intended.
Regarding the "to make" versus "to create" distinction in Greek, I think context is helpful here too plus looking at the LXX examples like you're doing. It might also help to consider the Latin verb, ago, which one can translate in a variety of ways that include to do, to make, to lead.
Johns pattern should be enough - considering just 2 chapters before he used arkhon to mean "ruler" - and he never uses arkhe for first-cause
interesting observation (under "2.")
"Studying the Septuagint one realizes to what extent the Greek language, rich as it may be, lacked resources to render the Hebrew text. From the first verse of the Bible, the translators were confronted with terms and expressions that had no ready counterpart in Greek. “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” – how to render this notion of creation? The translator of Genesis at first uses simply the verb ποιέω “to make”. In chapter 14, however, where divine creation is again mentioned, he reaches for a different verb: κτίζω whose primary meaning is “to found a city”. From Gen 14 onward, this verb will be used to express the notion of creation in all the Greek Bible including the New Testament.
The translators of the Pentateuch put together a new terminology to express the strange content of their source text. Confronted with “untranslatable” words they sometimes simply transcribe them into Greek. The cherubim who guard the way to the garden of Eden become in Greek the χερουβιν. In other cases, the translators create neologisms such as ἀκροβυστία “foreskin” or θυσιαστήριον “legitimate altar.” Most often, however, they take existing Greek words and “press them into service”: Hebrew bara’ is rendered with κτίζω, and Hebrew torah “religious instruction” is rendered with νόμος “law”. A new meaning is forced upon the Greek words in each instance." (https://dev.ubs.bible/nationalbiblesocietyofireland.ie/reading-gods-word-in-translation-jan-joosten-oxford/)
Was wondering what your opinion is on the quote above?
Question: when did the Greek word come into popular use? reason I ask is it cant have been in the times of the LXX because the NT writers seem to quote from the LXX
The vulgate seems to follow a similar pattern to the LXX and the above statement (Or I am just wrong, thats also a high possibility)
The Greek word which one can be rendered as "first-created" is πρωτόκτιστος. It does not occur in the LXX or GNT. However, we find the word is Clement of Alexandria and there might be some other places: Lampe's Greek lexicon might document those occurrences, but Paul and other ancient Jews did not have access to this word.
You probably know that the LXX likely started to be translated in the 3rd century BCE and was probably completed in the 2nd century BCE. The Latin Vulgate was finished around 405 CE, but prior to the Vulgate, there was the Vetus Latina and the early church used testimonia or collections of scriptural texts.
sorry Im confused - The NT authors quoted from some form of an LXX didn't they? (Greek translation of the Hebrew)
They didn't even have access to it? ok - even if they did it would destroy the parallel statement "Firstborn of the dead" - Why isn't this "first-raised" from the dead?
To clarify, when I said Paul and other Jews didn't know the word for first-created, I was talking about first century Jews.
The LXX was published before the NT and NT authors did quote from it. I agree about the parallelism. Of course, there is a debate about Paul's choice of prototokos. Let's just say it's not accidental or unintentional
From what my research tell me (from my limited resources) most of the things we have discussed seem to be synonymous with one an other in some way shape or form
an interesting article, tho I disagree with some of the stuff stated. Stafford has dealt with majority of this before - The author ignores or bypasses burneys article.
it also states: The language in Prov 8:22–25 for Wisdom’s having been “established/installed” and “brought forth” before the creation of this world, is illuminated by parallel language in Ps 2:6–7, including, significantly, the only other biblical occurrence of the Hebrew word nsk III “install.”
However a major spanner to be thrown in here when we consider the LXX (as this article did previously) and note that the same verb is not used in Proverbs 8:23 as is used in psalm 2:6.
14 comments:
Those who wish to ignore this, the passive verbs and the agency construction (obvious when this occurs) used of Christ, must prove they have no significance.
even "beginning" in Hebrew or Greek doesn't mean "first-cause" except in philosophy - all the examples I have been cited so far still imply a temporal distinction and not the actual cause.
then you have Job 40:19 and Gen 49:3 LXX
even Barnes notes:
“The word properly refers to the commencement of a thing, not its authorship, and denotes properly primacy in time, and primacy in rank, but not primacy in the sense of causing anything to exist.... the word is not, therefore, found in the sense of authorship, as denoting that one is the beginning of anything in the sense that he caused it to have an existence.” - Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, p. 1569
Here is the BDAG entry for arche: https://fosterheologicalreflections.blogspot.com/2017/03/revelation-314-and-bdag-edited-for.html
One other thing I'll post for now. Another source which thinks the verb in Proverbs 8:22 is ambiguous: https://www.saet.ac.uk/Christianity/CreationintheOldTestament#section2.4.1
Not sure my other comment went through.
I said "sorry Edgar, I understand its listed in the BDAG as a possible meaning, but in the LXX and in the NT , it never has this meaning(as what some like to try and portray) Barnes is certainly correct for the NT and LXX"
The verbs in 23,24 & 25 seem to indicate some form of creation or birth is implied as in
Psalm 90:2
“Before the mountains were born”
though in verse 25 it uses poio for creation and not ktizo - In the NT aswell poio (or a form of it) is used when something/ someone is made something (Rev 1:6)
However Mark in 10:6 in a quote/ paraphrase of Genesis uses Ktizo for poio - indicating to me they were
synonyms.
see in LXX + Burneys statement I cited:
Gen 14:19,22
Deut 32:6
also: Matt 19:4
Anonymous, I agree that arche likely does not mean "source" in Revelation 3:14. Despite all of the insistence to the contrary, that denotation remains a possibility for Rev. 3:14, not a certainty.
Yes, context and similar uses elsewhere can help us to determine the likely meaning that John intended.
Regarding the "to make" versus "to create" distinction in Greek, I think context is helpful here too plus looking at the LXX examples like you're doing. It might also help to consider the Latin verb, ago, which one can translate in a variety of ways that include to do, to make, to lead.
Johns pattern should be enough - considering just 2 chapters before he used arkhon to mean "ruler" - and he never uses arkhe for first-cause
interesting observation (under "2.")
"Studying the Septuagint one realizes to what extent the Greek language, rich as it may be, lacked resources to render the Hebrew text. From the first verse of the Bible, the translators were confronted with terms and expressions that had no ready counterpart in Greek. “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” – how to render this notion of creation? The translator of Genesis at first uses simply the verb ποιέω “to make”. In chapter 14, however, where divine creation is again mentioned, he reaches for a different verb: κτίζω whose primary meaning is “to found a city”. From Gen 14 onward, this verb will be used to express the notion of creation in all the Greek Bible including the New Testament.
The translators of the Pentateuch put together a new terminology to express the strange content of their source text. Confronted with “untranslatable” words they sometimes simply transcribe them into Greek. The cherubim who guard the way to the garden of Eden become in Greek the χερουβιν. In other cases, the translators create neologisms such as ἀκροβυστία “foreskin” or θυσιαστήριον “legitimate altar.” Most often, however, they take existing Greek words and “press them into service”: Hebrew bara’ is rendered with κτίζω, and Hebrew torah “religious instruction” is rendered with νόμος “law”. A new meaning is forced upon the Greek words in each instance."
(https://dev.ubs.bible/nationalbiblesocietyofireland.ie/reading-gods-word-in-translation-jan-joosten-oxford/)
Was wondering what your opinion is on the quote above?
Question: when did the Greek word come into popular use?
reason I ask is it cant have been in the times of the LXX because the NT writers seem to quote from the LXX
The vulgate seems to follow a similar pattern to the LXX and the above statement (Or I am just wrong, thats also a high possibility)
Greek word *for First-created
The Greek word which one can be rendered as "first-created" is πρωτόκτιστος. It does not occur in the LXX or GNT. However, we find the word is Clement of Alexandria and there might be some other places: Lampe's Greek lexicon might document those occurrences, but Paul and other ancient Jews did not have access to this word.
You probably know that the LXX likely started to be translated in the 3rd century BCE and was probably completed in the 2nd century BCE. The Latin Vulgate was finished around 405 CE, but prior to the Vulgate, there was the Vetus Latina and the early church used testimonia or collections of scriptural texts.
sorry Im confused - The NT authors quoted from some form of an LXX didn't they? (Greek translation of the Hebrew)
They didn't even have access to it? ok - even if they did it would destroy the parallel statement "Firstborn of the dead" - Why isn't this "first-raised" from the dead?
To clarify, when I said Paul and other Jews didn't know the word for first-created, I was talking about first century Jews.
The LXX was published before the NT and NT authors did quote from it. I agree about the parallelism. Of course, there is a debate about Paul's choice of prototokos. Let's just say it's not accidental or unintentional
From what my research tell me (from my limited resources) most of the things we have discussed seem to be synonymous with one an other in some way shape or form
https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1180&context=jats
an interesting article, tho I disagree with some of the stuff stated. Stafford has dealt with majority of this before - The author ignores or bypasses burneys article.
it also states:
The language in Prov 8:22–25 for Wisdom’s having been “established/installed” and “brought forth” before the creation of this world, is illuminated by parallel language in Ps 2:6–7, including, significantly, the
only other biblical occurrence of the Hebrew word nsk III “install.”
However a major spanner to be thrown in here when we consider the LXX (as this article did previously) and note that the same verb is not used in Proverbs 8:23 as is used in psalm 2:6.
Post a Comment