Hebrews 2:9

Here is the accented text to help those who are still struggling learning the language: Heb 2.8-10: 8 πάντα ὑπέταξας ὑποκάτω τῶν ποδῶν αὐτοῦ. ἐν τῷ γὰρ ὑποτάξαι [αὐτῷ] τὰ πάντα οὐδὲν ἀφῆκεν αὐτῷ ἀνυπότακτον. Νῦν δὲ οὔπω ὁρῶμεν αὐτῷ τὰ πάντα ὑποτεταγμένα· 9 τὸν δὲ βραχύ τι παρʼ ἀγγέλους ἠλαττωμένον βλέπομεν Ἰησοῦν διὰ τὸ πάθημα τοῦ θανάτου δόξῃ καὶ τιμῇ ἐστεφανωμένον, ὅπως χάριτι θεοῦ ὑπὲρ παντὸς γεύσηται θανάτου. 10 Ἔπρεπεν γὰρ αὐτῷ, διʼ ὃν τὰ πάντα καὶ διʼ οὗ τὰ πάντα, πολλοὺς υἱοὺς εἰς δόξαν ἀγαγόντα τὸν ἀρχηγὸν τῆς σωτηρίας αὐτῶν διὰ παθημάτων τελειῶσαι. Nestle, E., Nestle, E., Aland, B., Aland, K., Karavidopoulos, J., Martini, C. M., & Metzger, B. M. (1993). The Greek New Testament (27th ed.) (565). Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft. Concerning the comment
"The crowning with glory and honour must, on any natural rendering of the Greek, precede the death." (A Nairne)
The participle in the phrase δόξῃ καὶ τιμῇ ἐστεφανωμένον is perfect (= it has already happened in the writer's viewpoint and the state continues), but it's (ἐστεφανωμένον) head/referent is not τὸ πάθημα, but rather βλέπομεν Ἰησοῦν . . .ἐστεφανωμένον. "We see him who has been crowned in glory and honour." Statistics: Posted by Louis L Sorenson — January 16th, 2014, 11:07 am
 
Alan Patterson wrote: Heb 2: 8 παντα υπεταξας υποκατω των ποδων αυτου εν τω γαρ υποταξαι [αυτω] τα παντα ουδεν αφηκεν αυτω ανυποτακτον νυν δε ουπω ορωμεν αυτω τα παντα υποτεταγμενα 9 τον δε βραχυ τι παρ αγγελους ηλαττωμενον βλεπομεν ιησουν δια το παθημα του θανατου δοξη και τιμη εστεφανωμενον οπως χαριτι θεου υπερ παντος γευσηται θανατου 10 επρεπεν γαρ αυτω δι ον τα παντα και δι ου τα παντα πολλους υιους εις δοξαν αγαγοντα τον αρχηγον της σωτηριας αυτων δια παθηματων τελειωσαι What are your thoughts on the following statement? I am not sure how he sees the sequence of events in this passage, but for the glory and honor to 'precede' the death seems odd. He says, "The crowning with glory and honour must, on any natural rendering of the Greek, precede the death." (A Nairne) What options are there for the order of events here.
I don't think that there's any temporal sequence of events set forth in these verses at all. Angels, presumably, don't die and are not garlanded with glory and honor. Jesus' death is a means to the end of salvation of "many sons." Naime's interpreting the ὅπως clause as syntactically linked with ἐστεφανωμένον rather than with διὰ τὸ πάθημα τοῦ θανάτου. There is indeed a paradox here, but it isn't chronlogical but logical: that "the Son of Man" is both somewhat subordinate to the angels and also far superior to them. Statistics: Posted by cwconrad — January 16th, 2014, 9:57 am
Heb 2: 8 παντα υπεταξας υποκατω των ποδων αυτου εν τω γαρ υποταξαι [αυτω] τα παντα ουδεν αφηκεν αυτω ανυποτακτον νυν δε ουπω ορωμεν αυτω τα παντα υποτεταγμενα 9 τον δε βραχυ τι παρ αγγελους ηλαττωμενον βλεπομεν ιησουν δια το παθημα του θανατου δοξη και τιμη εστεφανωμενον οπως χαριτι θεου υπερ παντος γευσηται θανατου 10 επρεπεν γαρ αυτω δι ον τα παντα και δι ου τα παντα πολλους υιους εις δοξαν αγαγοντα τον αρχηγον της σωτηριας αυτων δια παθηματων τελειωσαι What are your thoughts on the following statement? I am not sure how he sees the sequence of events in this passage, but for the glory and honor to 'precede' the death seems odd. He says, "The crowning with glory and honour must, on any natural rendering of the Greek, precede the death." (A Nairne) What options are there for the order of events here. Statistics: Posted by Alan Patterson — January 16th, 2014, 8:38 am

People who read this article also liked:

[AuthorRecommendedPosts]