My rule of thumb is that if a verb is missing and it’s not in immediate parallelism with a preceding clause, try using a form of the verb εἶναι “to be.” That’s how some translations take it anyway.
Statistics: Posted by Stephen Carlson — March 12th, 2014, 1:36 am
ι figured that was the most likely option; but ι started doubting it for a second, in light of the quasi-technical sense that εὐαγγελίζω had acquired, where it’s almost exclusively used in these parts of the ντ to refer to the Christian kerygma. That we have the standard association here with ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ (that is, the Christ-inaugurated kingdom) seemed to play against it also applying to the “Law and prophets”…especially as ι‘ve found no other instances where scripture itself (or any sort of “essence” of pre-Christian religious message) is the subject of εὐαγγελίζω (although Acts 15.21 may be somewhat close, though using κηρύσσω).
But…even though it might be unique, ι think inferring from the next clause is still the best option.
All that being said – you wouldn’t happen to know any other examples that are particularly close in structure to this, would you?
Statistics: Posted by Stewart Felker — March 12th, 2014, 12:41 am
Stewart, in general, when a verb is “missing” from a clause it is inferred from the nearest clause to it unless context strongly overrules. In this case, εὐαγγελίζονται is the likely candidate, and makes perfect sense in the context.
Statistics: Posted by Barry Hofstetter — March 11th, 2014, 10:16 pm
The verse as a whole reads ὁ νόμος καὶ οἱ προφῆται μέχρι Ἰωάννου ἀπὸ τότε ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ εὐαγγελίζεται καὶ πᾶς εἰς αὐτὴν βιάζεται. Many translations have an (implied) verb – whether a simple verb of being, or something like “were proclaimed” – when translating ὁ νόμος καὶ οἱ προφῆται μέχρι Ἰωάννου. However, the parallel in Matthew 11.13 does indeed have a verb here: πάντες γὰρ οἱ προφῆται καὶ ὁ νόμος ἕως Ἰωάννου ἐπροφήτευσαν.
But could the Lukan author have reasonably expected the readers/hearers to understand what his intention was, without a verb? How do we really know what the Law and Prophets were “doing” here (and might understanding a verb of being here put one at the risk of reading supersessionism into the text?)?
Statistics: Posted by Stewart Felker — March 11th, 2014, 8:31 pm
An Exegetical Analysis of Luke 16:16: The Anarthrous Clause and the Semantics of εὐαγγελίζω
This exegetical study of An Exegetical Analysis of Luke 16:16: The Anarthrous Clause and the Semantics of εὐαγγελίζω is based on a b-greek discussion from March 11th, 2014. The initial query highlights the critical passage of Luke 16:16, specifically focusing on the first clause, ὁ νόμος καὶ οἱ προφῆται μέχρι Ἰωάννου, and the absence of an explicit verb, a feature that prompts diverse translational approaches in English versions. The discussion questions the author’s expectation of reader comprehension in the absence of a verb and raises concerns about potential theological implications, such as supersessionism, depending on the inferred verbal action.
The main exegetical issue revolves around the interpretation of the verbless initial clause in Luke 16:16. The subsequent clause, ἀπὸ τότε ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ εὐαγγελίζεται, presents a potential parallel or contrast, leading to debate over whether a verb should be supplied from the context (e.g., εἶναι, “to be,” or κηρύσσω, “to proclaim”) or directly from the subsequent verb εὐαγγελίζομαι (“to be proclaimed as good news”). This choice significantly impacts the understanding of the relationship between the Law and the Prophets and the advent of the Kingdom of God, particularly in light of the parallel in Matthew 11:13, which explicitly uses ἐπροφήτευσαν (“prophesied”). The core challenge is to determine the most grammatically and contextually appropriate verbal inference while considering the specific semantic range of εὐαγγελίζομαι in the New Testament and the theological implications of each interpretive decision.
ὁ νόμος καὶ οἱ προφῆται μέχρι Ἰωάννου· ἀπὸ τότε ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ εὐαγγελίζεται καὶ πᾶς εἰς αὐτὴν βιάζεται. (Nestle 1904)
Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):
- The SBLGNT text for Luke 16:16 is identical to the Nestle 1904 edition presented here, demonstrating textual stability in this verse across these critical editions.
Textual Criticism (NA28) and Lexical Notes (KITTEL, BDAG)
The text of Luke 16:16 is remarkably stable across major critical editions, including NA28. There are no significant textual variants that impact the grammatical structure or the lexical choices under discussion, particularly regarding the anarthrous clause or the verb εὐαγγελίζεται.
Lexical Notes:
- νόμος (Law): Refers primarily to the Torah, the Mosaic Law, encompassing the Pentateuch and its precepts. It often stands for the divine revelation given to Israel through Moses.
- προφῆται (Prophets): Designates the prophetic books of the Hebrew Bible and, by extension, the entire corpus of pre-exilic and exilic prophetic tradition. Together, “Law and Prophets” (ὁ νόμος καὶ οἱ προφῆται) is a common NT designation for the entire Hebrew Scriptures.
- μέχρι (until): A preposition indicating a temporal limit or boundary. In this context, it marks the duration of the Law and Prophets’ primary mode of operation up to John the Baptist.
- Ἰωάννου (John): Refers to John the Baptist, who serves as a pivotal transitional figure marking the end of the old dispensation and the inauguration of the new.
- εὐαγγελίζω (to proclaim good news, to preach the gospel): According to BDAG, this verb has a range of meanings, from “to bring good news” to “to proclaim good news” in a more technical sense, often related to the Christian message of salvation. KITTEL (TDNT) emphasizes its evolution from secular usage (bringing any good news) to its distinct theological application in the Septuagint (often related to God’s saving acts) and especially in the New Testament, where it becomes almost a technical term for announcing the advent of God’s saving reign through Christ, i.e., the Christian kerygma (e.g., the Kingdom of God). The active voice means “to preach the gospel,” while the passive (as here, εὐαγγελίζεται) means “to have the good news preached concerning oneself” or “to be preached as good news.” The quasi-technical sense in the NT, where it almost exclusively refers to the Christian message, is a key point of discussion for its potential application to the “Law and Prophets.”
- βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ (Kingdom of God): A central theological concept in Jesus’ teaching, referring to God’s sovereign rule, which is both present (inaugurated by Christ) and future (to be fully realized).
- βιάζεται (is forced, enters violently, is pressed into): From βιάζω, meaning “to use force, to press, to attack.” The middle/passive voice here is notoriously difficult to interpret, often rendered as “is entered by force,” “suffers violence,” or “people are pressing into it.” While significant for the verse’s latter half, it is not the primary focus of the current exegetical problem.
Translation Variants
The absence of an explicit verb in the opening clause ὁ νόμος καὶ οἱ προφῆται μέχρι Ἰωάννου presents a significant interpretive challenge. The decision regarding the implied verb profoundly shapes the theological nuance of the passage. Several main approaches emerge:
One common approach is to supply a simple verb of being, such as “were.” This reading suggests a static continuation of the Law and Prophets’ existence up to John the Baptist’s arrival. Grammatically, this is the most neutral inference for a verbless nominal clause in Greek, aligning with the “rule of thumb” of inferring εἶναι. Rhetorically, it emphasizes a temporal boundary without specifying the *activity* of the Law and Prophets during this period. Thematically, it simply states that the Law and Prophets existed or held sway until John.
A second approach, influenced by the Matthean parallel (Matthew 11:13: πάντες γὰρ οἱ προφῆται καὶ ὁ νόμος ἕως Ἰωάννου ἐπροφήτευσαν), infers a verb like “prophesied” or “spoke.” This reading directly assigns an action to the Law and Prophets, indicating that their function was to prophesy or to declare God’s will. Rhetorically, it highlights the *active role* of the scriptures in foretelling the divine plan. Thematically, it underscores the continuity of divine revelation, with the Law and Prophets pointing towards a future culmination.
A third, more complex, and contextually rich approach involves inferring the verb εὐαγγελίζομαι (or a related verb like “proclaimed”) from the subsequent clause, ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ εὐαγγελίζεται. This interpretation suggests that the Law and Prophets themselves were the subject of “good news proclamation” up to John. The challenge here is the “quasi-technical” sense of εὐαγγελίζω, which in the NT is overwhelmingly associated with the Christian kerygma and the Kingdom of God. Applying it to the Law and Prophets before John might seem anachronistic or force a strained reading, as direct scriptural proclamation *as good news* in this specific sense is rare. However, if one understands εὐαγγελίζομαι more broadly as “to be proclaimed as good news” in a general sense, then the Law and Prophets could be understood as containing and foreshadowing the good news of the Kingdom. Rhetorically, this creates a strong parallelism and potentially a theological link, suggesting that the Law and Prophets were also, in their own way, “good news,” preparing for the ultimate good news of the Kingdom. Thematically, this interpretation could counter a supersessionist reading by linking the Old Testament message to the coming Kingdom, rather than depicting it as simply ceasing or being superseded without any inherent salvific quality.
The specific issue of reading supersessionism into the text is particularly pertinent if a translation implies a stark break where the Law and Prophets simply “were” or “prophesied,” and then suddenly the Kingdom “is preached.” By inferring εὐαγγελίζομαι for the initial clause, the text could imply a continuity where the Law and Prophets *also* proclaimed good news, albeit in a preparatory fashion, before the explicit and final proclamation of the Kingdom.
Conclusions and Translation Suggestions
The most compelling exegetical approach for Luke 16:16 is to infer a verb that establishes both a temporal boundary and a thematic connection to the subsequent proclamation of the Kingdom of God. While supplying a simple “were” is grammatically defensible, it lacks the interpretive depth offered by considering the surrounding context. The Matthean parallel’s use of “prophesied” offers a strong textual precedent for an active verbal inference. However, given the Lukan emphasis and the crucial shift marked by John, the possibility of drawing a more direct connection to εὐαγγελίζεται should be carefully weighed.
Inferring a form of εὐαγγελίζω for the first clause, while semantically challenging given its technical NT usage, could be justified by understanding the Law and Prophets as the *preparatory* good news, foreshadowing the full revelation of the Kingdom. This interpretation preserves the dynamic nature of the Law and Prophets as not merely existing but actively proclaiming a divine message leading up to John.
Based on the grammatical analysis and the thematic concerns, the following translations are suggested, offering varying degrees of explicit verbal inference and theological emphasis:
- The Law and the Prophets *were proclaimed* until John; from then on, the good news of the Kingdom of God is announced, and everyone is pressing into it.
This translation infers “were proclaimed” (a passive form of κηρύσσω or a broader sense of εὐαγγελίζω), creating a subtle link to the subsequent “is announced” while respecting the temporal boundary and avoiding the full technical weight of εὐαγγελίζω for the pre-Johannine era. - The Law and the Prophets *have been announced as good news* until John; since then, the Kingdom of God itself is proclaimed as good news, and everyone is pressing into it.
This option directly infers a passive form of εὐαγγελίζω, creating a strong parallelism and continuity, suggesting that the Old Testament itself was a form of “good news” preparing for the ultimate good news of the Kingdom, thus mitigating potential supersessionism. - The Law and the Prophets *prophesied* until John; from then on, the good news of the Kingdom of God is preached, and everyone is striving to enter it.
This translation leans on the Matthean parallel, supplying “prophesied” to give a clear active function to the Law and Prophets. It emphasizes the revelatory role of the Old Testament while clearly demarcating a new phase with the preaching of the Kingdom.