1 Peter 3:21

[] 1 Pet. 3:21 syntax Kimmo Huovila kimmo.huovila at helsinki.fi
Mon Jul 17 03:06:43 EDT 2006

 

[] 2 Kings 5:18 in the Greek Septuagint [] 1 Pet. 3:21 syntax What is the syntactic relationship between hO, ANTITUPON, and BAPTISMA in 1. Pet. 3:21?hO KAI hUMAS ANTITUPON NUN SWiZEI BAPTISMA, OU SARKOS APOQESIS hRUPOU ALLA SUNEIDHSEWS AGAQHS EPERWTHMA.Kimmo Huovila

 

[] 2 Kings 5:18 in the Greek Septuagint[] 1 Pet. 3:21 syntax

[] 1 Pet. 3:21 syntax George F Somsel gfsomsel at yahoo.com
Mon Jul 17 07:33:49 EDT 2006

 

[] 1 Pet. 3:21 syntax [] 1 Pet. 3:21 syntax hO is a relative neuter PN and refers back to KIBWTOU in the preceding verse BAPTISMA is the subject “which is a correspondent [ANTITUPON] to” KIBWTOU. The comparison is thus made between baptism and entering into the ark. ___________ Kimmo Huovila <kimmo.huovila at helsinki.fi> wrote: What is the syntactic relationship between hO, ANTITUPON, and BAPTISMA in 1. Pet. 3:21?hO KAI hUMAS ANTITUPON NUN SWiZEI BAPTISMA, OU SARKOS APOQESIS hRUPOU ALLA SUNEIDHSEWS AGAQHS EPERWTHMA.Kimmo Huovila— home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/georgegfsomsel_________ ———————————Yahoo! Music Unlimited – Access over 1 million songs.Try it free.

 

[] 1 Pet. 3:21 syntax[] 1 Pet. 3:21 syntax

[] 1 Pet. 3:21 syntax Kimmo Huovila kimmo.huovila at helsinki.fi
Mon Jul 17 08:33:34 EDT 2006

 

[] 1 Pet. 3:21 syntax [] 1 Pet. 3:21 syntax Are you saying that BAPTISMA is the subject of SWiZEI and ANTITUPON is a predicate of BAPTISMA?The referent of hO is not so interesting at the moment as its syntactic relationship to ANTITUPON and BAPTISMA. (It more likely refers to the whole event of the preceding verse or water, as KIBWTOS is feminine, but this is beside the question.)Kimmo HuovilaOn Monday July 17 2006 14:33, George F Somsel wrote:> hO is a relative neuter PN and refers back to KIBWTOU in the preceding verse BAPTISMA is the subject “which is a correspondent [ANTITUPON] to” KIBWTOU. The comparison is thus made between baptism and entering into the ark.> > ___________> > > Kimmo Huovila <kimmo.huovila at helsinki.fi> wrote:> What is the syntactic relationship between hO, ANTITUPON, and BAPTISMA in> 1. Pet. 3:21?> > hO KAI hUMAS ANTITUPON NUN SWiZEI BAPTISMA, OU SARKOS APOQESIS hRUPOU ALLA > SUNEIDHSEWS AGAQHS EPERWTHMA.

 

[] 1 Pet. 3:21 syntax[] 1 Pet. 3:21 syntax

[] 1 Pet. 3:21 syntax Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Mon Jul 17 09:38:24 EDT 2006

 

[] 1 Pet. 3:21 syntax [] ETA/HTA and Southern Hemisphere English For my part, I’d esplain hO as relative pronoun (but with the entire notion of coming safely through the flood-waters by the ark as its antecedent) and also the subject of SWiZEI, and BAPTISMA as appositional to hO with ANTITUPON as predicative: “which now (baptism) brings you also safely through, as a corresponding item.”BDAG has (s.v. ANTITUPOS):”In a compressed statement, with rescue through water as the dominant theme ὃ (i.e. hUDWR) KAI hUMAS ANTITUPON NUN SWiZEI BAPTISMA baptism correspondingly now saves you, i.e. the salvation of Noah and family via water (δι᾿ ὕδατος), which supported the ark, is the τύπος for the salutary function of the water {p. 91} of baptism 1 Pt 3:21. “But the text is certainly problematic, and we’ve had more than one interpretation of this text on (most recently, March 9-11, 2006: [] 1 Peter 3:20-21”). NET has: “And this prefigured baptism, which now saves you …” and in the translator’s note, explains the Greek text as “which also, [as] an antitype, now saves you, [that is] baptism.”On Jul 17, 2006, at 8:33 AM, Kimmo Huovila wrote:> Are you saying that BAPTISMA is the subject of SWiZEI and ANTITUPON > is a> predicate of BAPTISMA?> > The referent of hO is not so interesting at the moment as its > syntactic> relationship to ANTITUPON and BAPTISMA. (It more likely refers to > the whole> event of the preceding verse or water, as KIBWTOS is feminine, but > this is> beside the question.)> > Kimmo Huovila> > On Monday July 17 2006 14:33, George F Somsel wrote:>> hO is a relative neuter PN and refers back to KIBWTOU in the >> preceding verse> BAPTISMA is the subject “which is a correspondent [ANTITUPON] to” > KIBWTOU.> The comparison is thus made between baptism and entering into the ark.>> >> ___________>> >> >> Kimmo Huovila <kimmo.huovila at helsinki.fi> wrote:>> What is the syntactic relationship between hO, ANTITUPON, and >> BAPTISMA in>> 1. Pet. 3:21?>> >> hO KAI hUMAS ANTITUPON NUN SWiZEI BAPTISMA, OU SARKOS APOQESIS >> hRUPOU ALLA>> SUNEIDHSEWS AGAQHS EPERWTHMA.>> home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad2 at mac.comWWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/

 

[] 1 Pet. 3:21 syntax[] ETA/HTA and Southern Hemisphere English

[] 1 Peter 3:21 Liz Winter ebwinter at yahoo.com
Tue Mar 3 14:22:39 EST 2009

 

[] Titus 1:10-13 [] the rest of the question: 1 Peter 3:21 Hello, all. I Peter 3:21 explains that baptism, prefigured by Noah and the flood, is “OU SARKOS APOQESIS hRUPOU ALLA SUNEIDHSEWS AGAQHS EPERWTHMA EIS QEON.” I’m struggling with the best translation of SUNEIDHSEWS AGAQHS EPERWTHMA EIS QEON and confused by what I’m finding as I research. KJV: “the answer of a good conscience toward God.” NIV: “the pledge of a good conscience towards God” (with a note offering “response” as an alternate translation of “pledge.”) ESV: “the appeal to God for a good conscience.” As I researched the definition of EPERWTHMA,

 

[] Titus 1:10-13[] the rest of the question: 1 Peter 3:21

[] the rest of the question: 1 Peter 3:21 Liz Winter ebwinter at yahoo.com
Tue Mar 3 14:23:52 EST 2009

 

[] 1 Peter 3:21 [] 1 Peter 3:21 – for real, finished, at last Sorry about that. My computer likes to send messages while I’m still typing them. My full question — On Tue, 3/3/09, Liz Winter <ebwinter at yahoo.com> wrote:From: Liz Winter <ebwinter at yahoo.com>Subject: [] 1 Peter 3:21To: at lists.ibiblio.orgDate: Tuesday, March 3, 2009, 1:22 PMHello, all. I Peter 3:21 explains that baptism, prefigured by Noah and the flood, is”OU SARKOS APOQESIS hRUPOU ALLA SUNEIDHSEWS AGAQHS EPERWTHMA EISQEON.” I’m struggling with the best translation of SUNEIDHSEWS AGAQHS EPERWTHMAEIS QEON and confused by what I’m finding as I research. KJV: “theanswer of a good conscience toward God.” NIV: “the pledge of a goodconscience towards God” (with a note offering “response” as analternate translation of “pledge.”) ESV: “the appeal to God for agood conscience.” As I researched the definition of EPERWTHMA, — home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/

 

[] 1 Peter 3:21[] 1 Peter 3:21 – for real, finished, at last

[] 1 Peter 3:21 – for real, finished, at last Liz Winter ebwinter at yahoo.com
Tue Mar 3 14:34:30 EST 2009

 

[] the rest of the question: 1 Peter 3:21 [] 1 Peter 3:21 – for real, finished, at last Hello, all. Please forgive my multiple messages. My computer and I are not getting along. Here is my question: I Peter 3:21 explains that baptism, prefigured by Noah and the flood, is “OU SARKOS APOQESIS hRUPOU ALLA SUNEIDHSEWS AGAQHS EPERWTHMA EIS QEON.” I’m struggling with the best translation of SUNEIDHSEWS AGAQHS EPERWTHMA EIS QEON and confused by what I’m finding as I research. Sample translations – KJV: “the answer of a good conscience toward God.” NIV: “the pledge of a good conscience towards God” (with a note offering “response” as an alternate translation of “pledge.”) ESV: “the appeal to God for a good conscience.”  As I researched the definition of EPERWTHMA, everything I found was along the lines of questions, requests, appeals. My Liddell and Scott defines it as “a question.” I didn’t find the term anywhere else in the NT, so it’s hard to compare, but where EPERWTAW is used it seems to be consistently about asking, inquiring, demanding, NOT answering, responding, pledging.  However, my NT Greek lexicon gave “promise” as one of the definitions of EPERWTHMA and multiple translations have taken this route. The ESV “appeal to God for a good conscience” makes most sense to me, but clearly not to many translators. What do you think? Best,  Liz— On Tue, 3/3/09, Liz Winter <ebwinter at yahoo.com> wrote:From: Liz Winter <ebwinter at yahoo.com>Subject: [] 1 Peter 3:21To: at lists.ibiblio.orgDate: Tuesday, March 3, 2009, 1:22 PMHello, all. I Peter 3:21 explains that baptism, prefigured by Noah and the flood, is”OU SARKOS APOQESIS hRUPOU ALLA SUNEIDHSEWS AGAQHS EPERWTHMA EISQEON.” I’m struggling with the best translation of SUNEIDHSEWS AGAQHS EPERWTHMAEIS QEON and confused by what I’m finding as I research. KJV: “theanswer of a good conscience toward God.” NIV: “the pledge of a goodconscience towards God” (with a note offering “response” as analternate translation of “pledge.”) ESV: “the appeal to God for agood conscience.” As I researched the definition of EPERWTHMA, — home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/

 

[] the rest of the question: 1 Peter 3:21[] 1 Peter 3:21 – for real, finished, at last

[] 1 Peter 3:21 – for real, finished, at last Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org
Wed Mar 4 01:10:04 EST 2009

 

[] 1 Peter 3:21 – for real, finished, at last [] Mounce/BBG: Another correction? Hi, Liz,That is a very good question. As a (non-English) bible translator myself, I don’t understand how theEnglish versions can all get it wrong. Already the KJV had it wrong, so there must be a long historyof questionable theology and tradition at play. The Vulgate has interrogatio, but I am not sure ofthe range of meanings of this word.The word EPERWTAW simply means to inquire, to ask a question, whether a real or rhetorical one.Occasionally it can mean to ask someone to do something. In that respect it is similar to theEnglish word ask. It does not refer to a demand, appeal or request (which is a demand rather than aquestion), and it certainly does not mean an answer or response or pledge.The noun EPERWTHMA is simply the question that is being asked. In 1 Pet 3:21 the content of thequestion is not given, but it seems fairly clear from context that the question Peter is answeringis “What is the meaning of baptism?” and probably also “How does one get a good conscience towardsGod (before God/in the eyes of God)?”He then says: OU SARKOS APOQESIS hRUPOU ALLA SUNEIDHSEWS AGAQHS EPERWTHMA EIS QEONDI’ ANASTASEWS IHSOU CRISTOU.It (baptism) is not removal of dirt of/from the body, but it is a matter(question=point of issue) of a goodconscience towards God through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.In my language, Danish, I can use the word “question” here and it makes perfect sense, but the sameword does not work so well in English, although my English dictionary does give “a point at issue”as a sense of “question”.A proper translation is always a question of understanding the text properly in its context. I hopeit is only a question of time before English versions are improved.In other words, baptism is connected to having a good conscience towards God, and that you get bybelieving in the resurrection of Jesus Christ (and what his death signifies.) It is difficult tosay more without running into theological controversies.Some more comments can be found in the archives for March 2002.Iver Larsen—– Original Message —– From: “Liz Winter” <ebwinter at yahoo.com>To: < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: 3. marts 2009 22:34Subject: [] 1 Peter 3:21 – for real, finished, at last> Hello, all.> > Please forgive my multiple messages. My computer and I are not getting along. Here is my question:> > I Peter 3:21 explains that baptism, prefigured by Noah and the flood, is “OU SARKOS APOQESIS> hRUPOU ALLA SUNEIDHSEWS AGAQHS EPERWTHMA EIS QEON.”> > I’m struggling with the best translation of SUNEIDHSEWS AGAQHS EPERWTHMA EIS QEON and confused by> what I’m finding as I research. Sample translations – KJV: “the answer of a good conscience toward> God.” NIV: “the pledge of a good conscience towards God” (with a note offering “response” as an> alternate translation of “pledge.”) ESV: “the appeal to God for a good conscience.”> > As I researched the definition of EPERWTHMA, everything I found was along the lines of questions,> requests, appeals. My Liddell and Scott defines it as “a question.” I didn’t find the term> anywhere else in the NT, so it’s hard to compare, but where EPERWTAW is used it seems to be> consistently about asking, inquiring, demanding, NOT answering, responding, pledging.> > However, my NT Greek lexicon gave “promise” as one of the definitions of EPERWTHMA and multiple> translations have taken this route.> > The ESV “appeal to God for a good conscience” makes most sense to me, but clearly not to many> translators. What do you think?> > Best,> > Liz

 

[] 1 Peter 3:21 – for real, finished, at last[] Mounce/BBG: Another correction?

People who read this article also liked:

[AuthorRecommendedPosts]

7 thoughts on “1 Peter 3:21

    1. In all seriousness, I read a quote from a Greek scholar the other day. I cannot remember the one, but I do know who posted it. He said there were a number of grammatical errors in Peter’s Greek. “Almost as if an unlearned fisherman had wrote it.” I try to keep in mind the hebraic customs and idioms as well as the grammar. It is a never ending task as we are so far removed from their world.

    2. Troy Day Troy Day says:

      Not much doubt there When translating Hebrews for example one can see the significant perplexity of Paul’s multiple languages. John on the other side is much more simple in the Greek Peter’s letters could have been written by Mark or another scribe For the most, what we have from Peter is his sermons recorded not actual writings but then again who am I to know

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.