Luke 22:38

Luke 22:38 - It is enough! Neal Stublen nstublen at yahoo.com Sat Oct 20 10:26:47 EDT 2001   hEPTA + KIS? Luke 22:38 - It is enough! When the disciples come up with two swords, as Jesus had just encouragedthem to do, he says to them, "IKANON ESTIN."When I read this it seems that Jesus is saying that their two swords aresufficient - they don't need to get any more. However, others I haveinteracted with suggest this is a rebuke of the disciples - Jesus has hadenough of their foolish talk - he did not mean for them to literally getswords, but he was speaking figuratively concerning the attitude they wouldneed in the coming days. (This is similar to the understanding given byNorval Geldenhuys in his commentary on Luke (NICNT), where he states thatmost expositors agree that Jesus talked of buying swords in a figurativesense.)Is this second understanding at all possible from IKANON ESTIN? Can thisphrase be issued as a way of saying, "That's enough - now be quiet!"Thanks,Neal StublenNewark, DE   hEPTA + KIS?Luke 22:38 - It is enough! Luke 22:38 - It is enough! Wayne Leman wayne_leman at sil.org Sat Oct 20 11:27:11 EDT 2001   Luke 22:38 - It is enough! Luke 22:38 - It is enough! Neal, unfortunately, this is one of those exegetical questions which cannotbe answered just by reference to the Greek. The Greek IKANON ESTIN can meaneither of the exegetical options you cited (and perhaps more). It's not aquestion of the syntax of the Greek, per se, but one of trying to figure outwhat was referred to by the language. And that is left to exegetes andcommentators. I translated this passage not too long ago, for a tribalgroup, and still don't know for sure what the Greek actually referred to inreal life.Enough! :-)Wayne-----Wayne LemanBible Translation discussion list:http://www.geocities.com/bible_translation/discuss.htm> When the disciples come up with two swords, as Jesus had just encouraged> them to do, he says to them, "IKANON ESTIN."> > When I read this it seems that Jesus is saying that their two swords are> sufficient - they don't need to get any more. However, others I have> interacted with suggest this is a rebuke of the disciples - Jesus has had> enough of their foolish talk - he did not mean for them to literally get> swords, but he was speaking figuratively concerning the attitude theywould> need in the coming days. (This is similar to the understanding given by> Norval Geldenhuys in his commentary on Luke (NICNT), where he states that> most expositors agree that Jesus talked of buying swords in a figurative> sense.)> > Is this second understanding at all possible from IKANON ESTIN? Can this> phrase be issued as a way of saying, "That's enough - now be quiet!"> > Thanks,> Neal Stublen> Newark, DE   Luke 22:38 - It is enough!Luke 22:38 - It is enough! Luke 22:38 - It is enough! Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org Sun Oct 21 03:51:36 EDT 2001   Counting PISTEUW EIS Luke 22:38 - It is enough! > on 10/20/01 9:26 AM, Neal Stublen at nstublen at yahoo.com wrote:> > > When the disciples come up with two swords, as Jesus had just encouraged> > them to do, he says to them, "IKANON ESTIN."> >> > When I read this it seems that Jesus is saying that their two swords are> > sufficient - they don't need to get any more. However, others I have> > interacted with suggest this is a rebuke of the disciples -> Jesus has had> > enough of their foolish talk - he did not mean for them to literally get> > swords, but he was speaking figuratively concerning the> attitude they would> > need in the coming days. (This is similar to the understanding given by> > Norval Geldenhuys in his commentary on Luke (NICNT), where he> states that> > most expositors agree that Jesus talked of buying swords in a figurative> > sense.)> >> > Is this second understanding at all possible from IKANON ESTIN?> Can this phrase be issued as a way of saying, "That's enough - now bequiet!"> > The swords here must be literal swords. When Jesus commands them to buy> swords in v. 36, he states as the reason in v. 37 GAR LEGW hUMIN> hOTI TOUTO> TO GEGRAMMENON DEI TELESQHNAI EN EMOI, TO* KAI META ANOMWN> ELOGISQH* KAI GAR> TO PERI EMOU TELOS ECEI ("For I tell you that this which is> written must be> fulfilled in me, 'AND HE WAS NUMBERED WITH TRANSGRESSORS'; for that which> refers to me has [its] fulfillment.") GAR explains why they should get> swords: the scripture that says he will be numbered with the transgressors> must be fulfilled, and it will be fulfilled by the disciples> having swords,> like revolutionaries (see v. 50). When told they had two swords, Jesus> responds hIKANON ESTIN ("It is sufficient."), i.e., it is sufficient to> fulfill the scripture about him being numbered with the transgressors.> --> > Steven Lo Vullo> Madison, WIYes, the two swords that Peter, and probably the Zealot, had were realswords. Peter used his sword to try to defend Jesus and he was rebuked fordoing so. Peter had still not understood that Jesus needed to be capturedand killed like a criminal is captured and hung on a cross between two"transgressors". Jesus later asked why the guards came with swords and clubsas if he was a criminal. They must have thought that he and his discipleswanted to put up an armed fight. Another indication that the guards did notunderstood who Jesus was or what he came to do. But how could they when noteven Peter understood it - yet.If Jesus had referred to the two swords and had wanted to say that twoswords were enough, it should have come out in Greek as hIKANA ESTIN (orEISIN) - they are enough.hIKANOS has various meanings in different context, but it is often used witha period of time. In Luke 23:8 we read EX hIKANWN (CRWNWN) "for some time" -the last word is textually uncertain, probably supplied by p75, but even ifnot in the original text, it is still to be understood. It is also use withLOGOI - a considerable amount of words - as in Luke 23:9. So, the neuterform here can easily be taken to mean: Enough time spent on this - enoughwords said. (There was no time to explain further, and the disciples wouldnot understand anyway until after the resurrection.)Many times when Jesus spoke in parables, the disciples misunderstood him,because they took his words literally. This place in Luke is such aninstance. The Scripture would have been fulfilled whether or not thedisciples had a sword.Iver Larsen   Counting PISTEUW EISLuke 22:38 - It is enough! Luke 22:38 - It is enough! Alex / Ali alexali at surf.net.au Sun Oct 21 06:05:35 EDT 2001   Luke 22:38 - It is enough! Luke 22:38 - It is enough! Steven Lo Vollu wrote regarding Luke 22:38,>GAR explains why they should get>swords: the scripture that says he will be numbered with the transgressors>must be fulfilled, and it will be fulfilled by the disciples having swords,>like revolutionaries (see v. 50). When told they had two swords, Jesus>responds hIKANON ESTIN ("It is sufficient."), i.e., it is sufficient to>fulfill the scripture about him being numbered with the transgressors.I found this an interesting point, Steven, and I'm going to chew it over.Just a question in regard to it: if the swords were part of the Lord's beingnumbered with the transgressors, is there any significance in this not beingraised in the accusations made against him? I would have thought that thebeing numbered with the transgressors relates to his death between twothieves.Alex HopkinsMelbourne, Australia   Luke 22:38 - It is enough!Luke 22:38 - It is enough! Luke 22:38 - It is enough! Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org Sun Oct 21 06:12:50 EDT 2001   Luke 22:38 - It is enough! Counting PISTEUW EIS Sorry, I was too quick in my earlier message and made a mistake. Oneparagraph should have been:If Jesus had referred to the two swords and had wanted to say that twoswords were enough, it should have come out in Greek as hIKANAI EISIN - they(hAI MACAIRAI DUO hAUTAI) are enough.Iver Larsen   Luke 22:38 - It is enough!Counting PISTEUW EIS Luke 22:38 - It is enough! Steven Lo Vullo doulos at merr.com Sun Oct 21 20:31:02 EDT 2001   Luke 22:38 - It is enough! Luke 22:38 - It is enough! on 10/21/01 2:51 AM, Iver Larsen at iver_larsen at sil.org wrote:> If Jesus had referred to the two swords and had wanted to say that two> swords were enough, it should have come out in Greek as hIKANA ESTIN (or> EISIN) - they are enough.No, he wouldn't necessarily use a plural nominal and verb. If he had wantedto refer specifically to the two swords he *could* have used a pluralnominal and verb. However, if he had wanted to describe the *circumstance*of the possesion of two swords, it is perfectly natural that he should use aneuter singular nominal and singular verb. The elliptical subject may verywell be a nominal clause: hOTI ECETE MACAIRAS DUO hIKANON ESTIN.-- Steven Lo VulloMadison, WI   Luke 22:38 - It is enough!Luke 22:38 - It is enough!
Luke 22:38 wrote: Οἱ δὲ εἶπον, Κύριε, ἰδού, μάχαιραι ὧδε δύο. Ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, Ἱκανόν ἐστιν.
Is the sense of Ἱκανόν ἐστιν. to say that two swords were adequate weapons, or that Jesus was suggesting that there should be no talk of bringing weapons? Statistics: Posted by Stephen Hughes — February 6th, 2017, 8:55 pm
 
Luke 20:18 wrote: Πᾶς ὁ πεσὼν ἐπ’ ἐκεῖνον τὸν λίθον, συνθλασθήσεται· ἐφ’ ὃν δ’ ἂν πέσῃ, λικμήσει αὐτόν.
Matthew 21:44 is almost identical to this, so in effect συνθλάω is word with a New Testament frequency of two, but a usage of one. This is not really a question, but let me throw up my thinking on the board for comment. If we accept the very strong gloss of συνθλάω, the I find that this imagery quite counterintuitive. Falling onto a stone is not such a serious thing, but συνθλάω seems to be glossed as quite a strong word. "Crush" or "dash to pieces" is extreme imagery. With just one's own body weight, somebody would be roughed up and bruised (perhaps mildly, and perhaps severely), but would be unlikely to be "crushed into pieces". In other circumstances, it might be that the specific gravity (density) of an obect or how brittle it is may cause a more devastating result from falling onto it, but people's bodies generally quite well-padded and fairly resilient or hardy. In their entry for θλαστός the idea of being "able to be crushed or bruised" is juxtaposed with θραυστός "frangible", "brittle". If θλάω (take a look at the LSJ entry) were taken in the sense of "bruise" rather than "crush", it would make more sense. The συν- could mean "in or from contact with". The change in tense from the future, to the less likely subjunctive suggests that there may have been a "wow!"-contrast intended in this saying. Something like, "Run (jog) into a truck and you'll hurt your pride, but if a truck ever ran into somebody, then they'd be GAME OVER." If that's the case then a milder word in the first phrase might suit it better. Statistics: Posted by Stephen Hughes — December 23rd, 2016, 6:21 am

People who read this article also liked:

[AuthorRecommendedPosts]