Rom 12 19 Brian Sullivan navillusbpi at primus.com.au
Sat May 6 09:06:48 EDT 2000
Previous message: Rev. 14:10 Next message: 1 John Greetings to all,Please pardon what is probably a basic question.Rom 12 19 Paul advisors believers not to avenege themselves, but ‘alla dote topon th orgh.’I read that as ‘to give (or yield) place to the wrath.’ However, it is often translated ‘leave it to the wrath of God'(RSV), ‘give place unto the wrath of God’ (ASV) ‘leave a place for divine retiribution.’ Paul next quotes Deut 32:35 “Vengence is mine, I will repay, says the lord.” (Rom 12 19).tou qeou is not in the sentence. What does everyone think of the rendering ‘of God.’ Is it an acceptable reconstruction, given the context, or is my suggestion acceptable?Yours most sincerely,Brian Sullivan
Previous message: Rev. 14:10Next message: 1 John More information about the mailing list
Rom 12 19 Harold R. Holmyard III hholmyard at ont.com
Sat May 6 10:29:11 EDT 2000
Previous message: 1 John Next message: Rom 12 19 Dear Brian, You write:>Rom 12 19: Paul advises believers not to avenge themselves, but ‘alla dote>topon th orgh.’>I read that as ‘to give (or yield) place to the wrath.’>However, it is often translated ‘leave it to the wrath of God’ (RSV),>‘give place unto the wrath of God’ (ASV) ‘leave a place for divine>retribution.’ Paul next quotes Deut 32:35 “Vengence is mine, I will repay,>says the lord.” (Rom 12 19).>tou qeou is not in the sentence. What does everyone think of the rendering>‘of God.’ Is it an acceptable reconstruction, given the context, or is my>suggestion acceptable?Brian, you did not clarify what your suggestion meant. What do youunderstand the wrath to be? However, I think that adding “of God” may helpthe translation. To “give place” is a Greek expression that probably meansto “leave room for,” that is, “leave opportunity for.” If you have the LXXin Greek, you might check Sirach (Ecclesiasticus) 4:5, which also uses thisphrase “give place” to mean “give opportunity.” Since Paul has just saidthat we are not to avenge ourselves, he probably does not mean that we areto nonetheless allow place for our wrath. He has just said, in effect, notto allow a place for our wrath.So Paul is probably using “the wrath” in a technical way to refer to thedivine wrath, as his subsequent quote of Deut 32:35 would suggest. One ofthe two main meanings that BAG gives for ORGH is with reference to thewrath of God as the divine reaction against evil. “It is thought of not somuch as an emotion as in terms of the outcome of an angry frame of mind(judgment), . . .” By not avenging ourselves, we leave opportunity for Godto exercise divine judgment on the person who has sinned against us.Yours,Harold Holmyard
Previous message: 1 JohnNext message: Rom 12 19 More information about the mailing list
Rom 12 19 Wayne Leman wleman at mcn.net
Sat May 6 12:11:31 EDT 2000
Previous message: Rom 12 19 Next message: Rom 12 19 Further support for your suggestion, Harold, is the fact that when QEOS (orthe several Hebrews names for YHWH) is part of the intended meaning of theoriginal author, it is often expressed as a divine omission. This is in linewith Jewish respect for G-d, where His name is not uttered, etc.>understand the wrath to be? However, I think that adding “of God” may help>the translation. To “give place” is a Greek expression that probably means<snip>> >So Paul is probably using “the wrath” in a technical way to refer to the>divine wrath, as his subsequent quote of Deut 32:35 would suggest. One of>the two main meanings that BAG gives for ORGH is with reference to the>wrath of God as the divine reaction against evil. “It is thought of not so>much as an emotion as in terms of the outcome of an angry frame of mind>(judgment), . . .” By not avenging ourselves, we leave opportunity for God>to exercise divine judgment on the person who has sinned against us.> > Yours,> Harold HolmyardWayneBible translation discussion list: http://www.egroups.com/bible-translation
Previous message: Rom 12 19Next message: Rom 12 19 More information about the mailing list
Rom 12 19 Polycarp66 at aol.com Polycarp66 at aol.com
Sat May 6 12:56:04 EDT 2000
Previous message: Rom 12 19 Next message: Rom 12 19 (Wayne Leman) In a message dated 5/6/2000 7:07:55 AM Central Standard Time, navillusbpi at primus.com.au writes:<< Rom 12 19 Paul advisors believers not to avenege themselves, but ‘alla dote topon th orgh.’ I read that as ‘to give (or yield) place to the wrath.’ However, it is often translated ‘leave it to the wrath of God'(RSV), ‘give place unto the wrath of God’ (ASV) ‘leave a place for divine retiribution.’ Paul next quotes Deut 32:35 “Vengence is mine, I will repay, says the lord.” (Rom 12 19). tou qeou is not in the sentence. What does everyone think of the rendering ‘of God.’ Is it an acceptable reconstruction, given the context, or is my suggestion acceptable? >>I am disinclined to supply words clearly not in the text nor part of a known idiom or citation. I would suggest that DOS TOPON might be understood in the sense of “to yield” or “to not resist.” I would think that DIDWMI + TOPOS would be the contrary of LAMBANW + TOPOS. If this is so then Acts 1.24, 25 might provide some insight. KAI PROSEUCAMENOI EIPAN: SU KURIE KARDIOGNWSTA PANTWN, ANADEICON hON ECELECW EK TOUTWN TWN DUO hENALABEIN TON TOPON THS DIAKONIAS TAUTHS KAI APOSTOLHS AF’ hS IOUDAS PREQHNAI EIS TON TOPON TON IDION.When they prayed they said, “You Lord who know the hearts of all, indicate whom you have chosen of these twoto receive the office of this service and apostleship from which Judas apostasized to his own place.The idea would be “don’t resist evil.”gfsomsel
Previous message: Rom 12 19Next message: Rom 12 19 (Wayne Leman) More information about the mailing list
Rom 12 19 (Wayne Leman) Theodore H Mann thmann at juno.com
Sat May 6 14:59:24 EDT 2000
Previous message: Rom 12 19 Next message: Rom 12 19 Wayne:I for one would like to know more about what you call “divine omission,”and I’ll bet some others are interested as well. Exactly how is thisused in the NT, and what are some examples? Thanks.TedDr. Theodore “Ted” H. Mann / thmann at juno.comFax and Voice Mail: 1-562-750-5242http://www.homestead.com/ChristianResourcesLinks/index.htmlhttp://www.homestead.com/eLOGOS/index.htmlhttp://www.homestead.com/eIXQUS/index.htmlOn Sat, 6 May 2000 10:11:31 -0600 “Wayne Leman” <wleman at mcn.net> writes:> Further support for your suggestion, Harold, is the fact that when > QEOS (or> the several Hebrews names for YHWH) is part of the intended meaning > of the> original author, it is often expressed as a divine omission. This is > in line> with Jewish respect for G-d, where His name is not uttered, etc.> > >understand the wrath to be? However, I think that adding “of God” > may help> >the translation. To “give place” is a Greek expression that > probably means> > <snip>> >> >So Paul is probably using “the wrath” in a technical way to refer > to the> >divine wrath, as his subsequent quote of Deut 32:35 would suggest. > One of> >the two main meanings that BAG gives for ORGH is with reference to > the> >wrath of God as the divine reaction against evil. “It is thought of > not so> >much as an emotion as in terms of the outcome of an angry frame of > mind> >(judgment), . . .” By not avenging ourselves, we leave opportunity > for God> >to exercise divine judgment on the person who has sinned against > us.> >> > Yours,> > Harold Holmyard> > > Wayne> Bible translation discussion list: > http://www.egroups.com/bible-translation> > > > —> home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/> You are currently subscribed to as: thmann at juno.com> To unsubscribe, forward this message to > $subst(‘Email.Unsub’)> To subscribe, send a message to > subscribe- at franklin.oit.unc.edu> > ________________________________________________________________YOU’RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!Try it today – there’s no risk! For your FREE software, visit:http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
Previous message: Rom 12 19 Next message: Rom 12 19 More information about the mailing list
Rom 12 19 clayton stirling bartholomew c.s.bartholomew at worldnet.att.net
Sat May 6 15:11:57 EDT 2000
Previous message: Rom 12 19 (Wayne Leman) Next message: Rom 12 19 on 05/06/00 9:56 AM, Polycarp66 at aol.com wrote:> I am disinclined to supply words clearly not in the text nor part of a known> idiom or citation.I took a look in whatever* was close at hand to see if any scholar in mylibrary would NOT read THi ORGHi in Rom. 12:19 as the wrath of God. I failedto find a single dissenting voice. These scholars* represent a broadspectrum of ecclesiastical and theological perspective.Based on Pauline usage of hH ORGH without further specification in Rom. 5:9(this is the best example) as well as Rom. 3:5, 9:22 and 1Thess. 2:16 we canwithout difficulty conclude that Paul simply did not need to fully specifyTHi ORGHi in this context.According to J. Murray (NICNT, 1959) the only possible exception to thispattern is Rom. 13:5. I took a look at Rom. 13:1-5 and THN ORGHN in 13:5does not look like an exception to me but I have not given it a lot of timeso I will take Murray’s word for it that there is some room for doubt here.What makes all of these scholars* agree that THi ORGHi in Rom. 12:19 is thewrath of God? Primarily it is the immediately following use of Deut. 32:35in Paul’s argument.– Clayton Stirling BartholomewThree Tree PointP.O. Box 255 Seahurst WA 98062*C.E.B. Cranfield, Sandy & Hedlam, F. Godet, H.A.W. Meyer, J. Murray,L. Morris, C. Hodge, H. Alford and a few others.
Previous message: Rom 12 19 (Wayne Leman)Next message: Rom 12 19 More information about the mailing list
Rom 12 19 Wayne Leman wleman at mcn.net
Sat May 6 15:33:25 EDT 2000
Previous message: Rom 12 19 Next message: Rom 12 19 >Wayne:> >I for one would like to know more about what you call “divine omission,”Ted, I just made up the term on the spot, to refer to the Jewish practice ofnot uttering the name of G_d (YHWH), out of reverence for him. Although QEOS(a word borrowed from Greek religious language, not Jewish) is freely usedin the text as a name for God in the NT, there are still remnants of Jewishavoidance of saying or using God’s name reflected in the NT. One good placeto look for this euphemistic avoidance is in direct quotes and monologues.Referring to “heaven” is sometimes metonymy for reference to God in the NT.Many scholars regard “Kingdom of heaven” as a (avoidance) euphemism for”Kingdom of God”, altho, of course, there are others who believe these twoterms have different semantic function.Sometimes a substantive is used to refer to God, instead of saying his name,e.g. The Almighty, or The Mighty One (HO DYNATOS, Luke 1:49).Perhaps you or others on the list can come up with other examples.WayneBible translation discussion list: http://www.egroups.com/bible-translation
Previous message: Rom 12 19 Next message: Rom 12 19 More information about the mailing list
Rom 12 19 Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Sat May 6 16:48:50 EDT 2000
Previous message: Rom 12 19 Next message: Rom 12 19 At 1:33 PM -0600 5/6/00, Wayne Leman wrote:>>Wayne:>> >>I for one would like to know more about what you call “divine omission,”> >Ted, I just made up the term on the spot, to refer to the Jewish practice of>not uttering the name of G_d (YHWH), out of reverence for him.Aw shucks, Wayne–just as I was about ask Carlton and Jonathan whether theyfelt that it was reasonable to have a thread on “divine omission” on! I mean–after all, we keep insisting that the focus of discussion ought to be what’s IN the text (no matter whether any individualaccepts the proposition that God wrote it directly or inspired it or ahuman author wrote it), we just simply cannot carry on a discussion aboutwhat’s NOT in the Greek text.But then you go on to invite alternative suggestions, and I say, if “divineomission” won’t do, then how about “omission of the divine”? But then wewould be faced with the grammatical question: in this phrase ought we tounderstand “of the divine” as a SUBJECTIVE or an OBJECTIVE GENITIVE? Well,then, if that’s too ambiguous, how about “omitting the divine”? The problemthere, I fear, is that although it’s intelligible, it’s not really standardEnglish: I don’t think we much care for gerunds that take direct objects,whether they serve as the subject of such a sentence as “Omitting thedivine is a perilous thing to do” or “Religious people are not in favor ofomitting the divine.”Actually, I think the phenomenon involved here is sometimes termed”hypostatization,” the substitution of a noun referring to a majorattribute of God for the divine name itself. Perhaps this is native totraditional Hebrew/Aramaic idiom, I don’t really know; I’ve always supposedit was distinctly Hellenistic and represented Greek influence: “Wisdom” =”God’s Wisdom” and although there’s a peril, I suppose, of supposing that”Wisdom” is not really identical with God, I think that she is thought ofas identical with God in Proverbs 8 even where she is spoken ofallegorically. And the next step is hO LOGOS; we can add TOU QEOU if wefeel so inclined, but we don’t really feel any necessity to make thatclarification.Perilous waters, these. Parmenides once said we can only carry onintelligent conversation about hO TI ESTIN, that there’s no talking at allabout hO TI OUK ESTIN.– Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics/Washington UniversityOne Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649cwconrad at artsci.wustl.eduWWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
Previous message: Rom 12 19 Next message: Rom 12 19 More information about the mailing list
Rom 12 19 Wayne Leman wleman at mcn.net
Sat May 6 17:02:50 EDT 2000
Previous message: Rom 12 19 Next message: Rom 12 19 Carl reparteed:>allegorically. And the next step is hO LOGOS; we can add TOU QEOU if we>feel so inclined, but we don’t really feel any necessity to make that>clarification.> >Perilous waters, these. Parmenides once said we can only carry on>intelligent conversation about hO TI ESTIN, that there’s no talking at all>about hO TI OUK ESTIN.True, my empiricist friend, but if you want to be one of the blessed:MAKARIOI HOI MH IDONTES KAI PISTEUSANTES (John 20.29)and PISTIS, well, you know that it’s:PRAGMATWN ELEGXOS OU BLEPOMENWN (Heb. 11.1)<G>Wayne,who also finds it very hard to believe in what he hasn’t seen
Previous message: Rom 12 19Next message: Rom 12 19 More information about the mailing list
Rom 12 19 Maurice A. O’Sullivan mauros at iol.ie
Sat May 6 17:24:23 EDT 2000
Previous message: Rom 12 19 Next message: Rom 12 19 At 22:02 06/05/00, Wayne Leman wrote:>Wayne,>who also finds it very hard to believe in what he hasn’t seenWayne:Don’t worry; It’s not the hard-headed but the hard-hearted who come off worst in the GospelsMauriceMaurice A. O’Sullivan [ Bray, Ireland ]mauros at iol.ie
Previous message: Rom 12 19Next message: Rom 12 19 More information about the mailing list
Rom 12 19 Harold R. Holmyard III hholmyard at ont.com
Sat May 6 19:16:15 EDT 2000
Previous message: Rom 12 19 Next message: TOU GNWNAI AUTON Phillipians 3 9 Dear Polycarp, You suggest the following contrast regarding Rom 12:19:>I am disinclined to supply words clearly not in the text nor part of a>known idiom or citation. I would suggest that DOS TOPON might be>understood in the sense of “to yield” or “to not resist.” I would think>that DIDWMI + TOPOS would be the contrary of LAMBANW + TOPOS. If this is>so then Acts 1.24, 25might provide some insight.>KAI PROSEUCAMENOI EIPAN: SU KURIE KARDIOGNWSTA PANTWN, ANADEICON hON>ECELECW EK TOUTWN TWN DUO hENA>LABEIN TON TOPON THS DIAKONIAS TAUTHS KAI APOSTOLHS AF’ hS IOUDAS PREQHNAI>EIS TON TOPON TON IDION.>When they prayed they said, “You Lord who know the hearts of all, indicate>whom you have chosen of these two to receive the office of this service>and apostleship from which Judas apostasized to his own place.>The idea would be “don’t resist evil.”The difference between LABEIN TON TOPON in Acts 1:25 and DOS TOPON in Rom12:19 seems to be the definite article. In Acts 25:16 the phrase TOPON TEAPOLOGIAS LABOI means “and he receives an opportunity of defence.” We see aphrase like that in Rom 12:19 in Eph 4:27: MHDE DIDOTE TOPON TWi DIABOLWi.It reads: “And do not give an opportunity to the devil.” BAG has otherreferences, including Wisd 12:10 and Sir 19:17.I can understand how you reach your translation, but we seem to be dealingwith an idiom.Yours,Harold Holmyard
Previous message: Rom 12 19Next message: TOU GNWNAI AUTON Phillipians 3 9 More information about the mailing list
Rom 12 19 Polycarp66 at aol.com Polycarp66 at aol.com
Sat May 6 21:33:31 EDT 2000
Previous message: TOU GNWNAI AUTON Phillipians 3 9 Next message: TOU GNWNAI AUTON Phillipians 3 9 In a message dated 5/6/2000 5:15:51 PM Central Standard Time, hholmyard at ont.com writes:<< I can understand how you reach your translation, but we seem to be dealing with an idiom. >>But not one involving the necessity of supplying QEOU to complete the thought. In fact, I would say that it is not God’s wrath that is envisioned but rather that of those who would do ill to Paul’s readers (most immediately the Roman Christians). Without having analyzed too thoroughly the structure of the passage, it appears that we have here a parallelismus membrorum MH hEAUTOUS EKDIKOUNTES, AGAPHTOI,ALLA DOTE ORGHiGEGRAPTAI GAR: EMOI EKDIKHSIS,EGW ANTAPODWSW, LEGEI KURIOS.gfsomsel
Previous message: TOU GNWNAI AUTON Phillipians 3 9Next message: TOU GNWNAI AUTON Phillipians 3 9 More information about the mailing list
Rom 12 19 Steven R. Lo Vullo sundoulos1 at netzero.net
Sat May 6 22:47:35 EDT 2000
Previous message: TOU GNWNAI AUTON Phillipians 3 9 Next message: TOU GNWNAI AUTON pILLIPIANS 3 9 Hi ers,What many people seem to miss when discussing this passage is that the themeof revenge/wrath is carried into chapter 13. I think the chapter division inthis case prevents people from making the connection between what Pauldiscusses at the end of chapter 12, and the continuation of that theme inchapter 13.In 12:19 Paul says, MH hEAUTOUS EKDIKOUNTES…ALLA DOTE TOPON THi ORGHi,GEGRAPTAI GAR: EMOI EKDIKHSIS…. This sets the stage for Paul’s discussionof the role of civil authority in meting out vengeance in God’s behalf. Theverbal parallels are unmistakable. Note the words EKDIKEW, ORGHi, andEKDIKHSIS in 12:19, compared with EKDIKOS and ORGHN in 13:4 and ORGHN againin 13:5. Here Paul says that the civil authority that exists does so as aDIAKONOS (servant) of God, an EKDIKOS (avenger; cf. EKDIKEW and EKDIKHSIS in12:19) to execute ORGHN (wrath; cf. ORGHi in 12:19) on evildoers (TWi TOKAKON PRASSONTI; cf. 12:17, 21). Paul’s point in all this (though obviouslynot his only point) is that Christians should not take their own revenge,but should yield (DOTE TOPON) to God, trusting that he will take appropriateaction by dealing out vengeful wrath to the wicked. He goes on in chapter 13to explain further that one of the ways God deals out wrath to the wicked isby the agency of civil servants whom he in his providence has authorized towreak vengeance on evildoers. The fact that this passage follows on theheels of the comments made at the end of chapter 12 and illustrates one ofthe ways God executes wrath on evildoers suggests very strongly that what isin view in 12:19 is not the withholding of wrath on the part of Christians(although that is obviously true), but the execution of wrath God deals outin avenging his people.Further evidence for this view can be found in similar commands found in thebook of Sirach. In 19:17 the writer says, “Question your neighbor before youthreaten him, and defer (DOS TOPON) to the Law of the Most High.” Here theidea seems to be much the same as that of Rom 12:19: Don’t take matters intoyour own hands, but defer to God and his duly instituted authority forredress.” In 38:12 we read, “And give place (DOS TOPON) to the physician,for the Lord created him.” Here again the idea seems to be to yield to thosewhom the Lord by his providence has established to take care of certainmaladies. The first example is obviously closer to the matter of Rom 12:19,but the second carries much the same idea, which is yielding to otherauthorities for a solution to the problem, rather than taking matters intoone’s own hands. The idea is not to acquiesce to the abuse or malady(although for a Christian this may be necessary at times with regard topersecution), but to yield to God and those established by him for redressof the problem.Steve Lo Vullo—– Original Message —–From: <Polycarp66 at aol.com>To: “Biblical Greek” < at franklin.oit.unc.edu>Sent: Saturday, May 06, 2000 8:33 PMSubject: Re: Rom 12 19> In a message dated 5/6/2000 5:15:51 PM Central Standard Time,> hholmyard at ont.com writes:> > <<> I can understand how you reach your translation, but we seem to bedealing> with an idiom.> >>> > But not one involving the necessity of supplying QEOU to complete the> thought. In fact, I would say that it is not God’s wrath that isenvisioned> but rather that of those who would do ill to Paul’s readers (mostimmediately> the Roman Christians). Without having analyzed too thoroughly thestructure> of the passage, it appears that we have here a parallelismus membrorum> > MH hEAUTOUS EKDIKOUNTES, AGAPHTOI,> ALLA DOTE ORGHi> > GEGRAPTAI GAR: EMOI EKDIKHSIS,> EGW ANTAPODWSW, LEGEI KURIOS.> > gfsomsel> > —> home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/> You are currently subscribed to as: sundoulos1 at netzero.net> To unsubscribe, forward this message to$subst(‘Email.Unsub’)> To subscribe, send a message to subscribe- at franklin.oit.unc.edu> > > _____________________________________________NetZero – Defenders of the Free WorldClick here for FREE Internet Access and Emailhttp://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
Previous message: TOU GNWNAI AUTON Phillipians 3 9Next message: TOU GNWNAI AUTON pILLIPIANS 3 9 More information about the mailing list
Rom 12 19 Polycarp66 at aol.com Polycarp66 at aol.com
Sun May 7 02:03:48 EDT 2000
Previous message: TOU GNWNAI AUTON pILLIPIANS 3 9 Next message: Cabelese & Rom. 12:19 In a message dated 5/6/2000 8:44:09 PM Central Standard Time, sundoulos1 at netzero.net writes:<< Further evidence for this view can be found in similar commands found in the book of Sirach. In 19:17 the writer says, “Question your neighbor before you threaten him, and defer (DOS TOPON) to the Law of the Most High.” Here the idea seems to be much the same as that of Rom 12:19: Don’t take matters into your own hands, but defer to God and his duly instituted authority for redress.” In 38:12 we read, “And give place (DOS TOPON) to the physician, for the Lord created him.” Here again the idea seems to be to yield to those whom the Lord by his providence has established to take care of certain maladies. The first example is obviously closer to the matter of Rom 12:19, but the second carries much the same idea, which is yielding to other authorities for a solution to the problem, rather than taking matters into one’s own hands. The idea is not to acquiesce to the abuse or malady (although for a Christian this may be necessary at times with regard to persecution), but to yield to God and those established by him for redress of the problem. >>Thank you for finding this. I had not thought to include the apocrypha in my search. It confirms that we are indeed dealing with an idiom which does not require the addition of QEOU. Also, I like your translation of DOS TOPON as “defer.” gfsomsel
Previous message: TOU GNWNAI AUTON pILLIPIANS 3 9Next message: Cabelese & Rom. 12:19 More information about the mailing list
Cabelese & Rom. 12:19 clayton stirling bartholomew c.s.bartholomew at worldnet.att.net
Sun May 7 02:28:21 EDT 2000
Previous message: Rom 12 19 Next message: Cabelese & Rom. 12:19 In the early 20’s Ernest Hemingway sent his dispatches from Paris to theHearst’s news service in a language called cabelese. “Cabelese was anexercise in omitting everything that can be taken for granted.”* This was anartificial language that lacked information redundancy. The purpose was tocut down of the cost of sending a cable which unlike e-mail was not free(about $3 per word in 1920’s currency).
Previous message: Rom 12 19Next message: Cabelese & Rom. 12:19 More information about the mailing list