An Exegetical Analysis of ἀνθ’ ὧν in the New Testament
This exegetical study of An Exegetical Analysis of ἀνθ’ ὧν in the New Testament is based on a b-greek discussion. The initial inquiry concerned the precise meaning and suitable English equivalents for the Greek phrase ἀνθ’ ὧν, questioning its potential translation as “since” and its relationship to the preposition ἀντί. The discussion highlighted the apparent lack of a direct English equivalent for ἀνθ’ in this construction and identified its occurrences in several New Testament passages, specifically Luke 1:20, Luke 12:3, Luke 19:44, Acts 12:23, and 2 Thessalonians 2:10. Furthermore, the inquiry extended to the phrase ἀντὶ τούτου in Ephesians 5:31, asking whether it carries a similar causal sense, meaning “because of this,” with “this” referring to a subsequent statement.
The main exegetical issue under investigation is the semantic range and syntactical function of the prepositional phrase ἀνθ’ ὧν, and by extension, other constructions involving ἀντί with a demonstrative or relative pronoun, such as ἀντὶ τούτου. The core problem is to determine whether these phrases consistently convey a causal or consequential relationship (e.g., “since,” “because of,” “therefore”), or if they retain aspects of the more fundamental meaning of ἀντί, which includes notions of substitution, equivalence, or opposition. This analysis requires a careful examination of the preposition’s interaction with the genitive case of the relative pronoun ὧν or the demonstrative pronoun τούτου within their specific literary and theological contexts.
Greek text (Nestle 1904) for Luke 12:3:
ἀνθ’ ὧν ὅσα ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ εἴπατε, ἐν τῷ φωτὶ ἀκουσθήσεται, καὶ ὃ προσελαλήσατε εἰς τὰ ταμεῖα, κηρυχθήσεται ἐπὶ τῶν δωμάτων.
Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):
- In Luke 12:3, Nestle 1904 reads “εἰς τὰ ταμεῖα” (eis ta tameia, “into the storerooms/chambers”), whereas SBLGNT (2010) reads “ἐν τοῖς ταμείοις” (en tois tameiois, “in the storerooms/chambers”).
Textual Criticism (NA28) and Lexical Notes
The textual variant in Luke 12:3 regarding “εἰς τὰ ταμεῖα” (Nestle 1904) versus “ἐν τοῖς ταμείοις” (SBLGNT 2010) is noted by NA28 (28th edition). NA28 prefers “ἐν τοῖς ταμείοις,” supported by a strong manuscript tradition (e.g., א B L W Ξ Ψ 078 0135 f1 f13 33 579 700 892 1241 1424 2542 Byz Lect), while “εἰς τὰ ταμεῖα” has significant support (e.g., A D Θ 𝔐). The difference, though minor, subtly shifts the nuance from motion “into” to location “in.” For the phrase ἀνθ’ ὧν, there are no significant textual variants across the critical editions in the passages cited in the initial query.
Lexically, the phrase ἀνθ’ ὧν is a contraction of the preposition ἀντί and the genitive plural of the relative pronoun ὅς, ἥ, ὅ. According to BDAG (3rd ed., s.v. ἀντί), when ἀντί is used with a genitive relative pronoun (as in ἀνθ’ ὧν), it functions as a conjunction meaning “because, for this reason, therefore.” This usage is widely attested in the New Testament (e.g., Luke 1:20, 12:3, 19:44, Acts 12:23, 2 Thess 2:10) and is considered a development from its more basic meanings of “instead of” or “in return for.” The phrase ἀντὶ τούτου (Eph 5:31) likewise falls under this category, meaning “for this reason” or “therefore,” often referring to a preceding statement or concept. KITTEL (TDNT, s.v. ἀντί) elaborates that the fundamental sense of ἀντί is “over against,” implying equivalence, exchange, or substitution. From this core meaning, a causal or consequential sense emerges, where one event or state is presented “in return for” or “as a consequence of” another. Thus, ἀνθ’ ὧν signifies that the subsequent action or state is a direct result or retribution for the preceding circumstances or actions.
Translation Variants with Grammatical & Rhetorical Analysis
The phrase ἀνθ’ ὧν (anth’ hōn) is a compound construction consisting of the preposition ἀντί (anti) and the genitive plural relative pronoun ὧν (hōn). Grammatically, ἀντί always takes the genitive case, and ὧν is the genitive plural of ὅς, ἥ, ὅ. The elision of the final iota of ἀντί before the smooth breathing and initial vowel of ὧν is standard (ἀντὶ ὧν becomes ἀνθ’ ὧν due to assimilation). Functionally, this construction acts as a conjunction, introducing a causal or consequential clause. It conveys that what follows is the reason or consequence of what precedes, essentially meaning “because of which things,” “for which reason,” or “since.”
In Luke 12:3, the phrase introduces the reason for the future revelation of hidden words: “ἀνθ’ ὧν ὅσα ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ εἴπατε, ἐν τῷ φωτὶ ἀκουσθήσεται…” The rhetorical function is to establish a direct causal link between people’s secret actions/words and their eventual public exposure. It underscores divine justice and the principle that nothing remains hidden from God. The hidden words spoken “in the dark” (ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ) and “in the storerooms” (ἐν τοῖς ταμείοις / εἰς τὰ ταμεῖα) will be revealed “in the light” (ἐν τῷ φωτὶ) and “on the housetops” (ἐπὶ τῶν δωμάτων), indicating a complete reversal and public disclosure. The phrase ἀνθ’ ὧν powerfully introduces this consequence, emphasizing the accountability for one’s speech.
Conclusions and Translation Suggestions
The analysis confirms that the phrase ἀνθ’ ὧν primarily functions as a causal or consequential conjunction in the New Testament. Its semantic range, while rooted in the basic “in return for” or “instead of” meaning of ἀντί, has evolved to express “because of which,” “for which reason,” or simply “since” or “therefore.” This interpretation is consistently supported by lexical resources like BDAG and the broader usage patterns observed in the cited passages. Similarly, ἀντὶ τούτου in Ephesians 5:31 carries this same causal sense, introducing a consequence or reason for what precedes, specifically “for this reason” or “therefore.” The initial query regarding “since” is largely affirmed, particularly in contexts where the phrase introduces the justification or cause for an action or state.
Below are three suggested translations for Luke 12:3, reflecting the nuanced causal and consequential implications of ἀνθ’ ὧν:
- “Because of this, whatever you have said in the dark will be heard in the light, and what you have whispered in the inner rooms will be proclaimed from the housetops.” This translation directly conveys the causal link, emphasizing that the revelation is a direct consequence of the secret speech.
- “Therefore, whatever you have said in the dark will be heard in the light, and what you have whispered in the inner rooms will be proclaimed from the housetops.” This option highlights the logical consequence of the previous statement, presenting the revelation as a natural outcome.
- “For this reason, whatever you have said in the dark will be heard in the light, and what you have whispered in the inner rooms will be proclaimed from the housetops.” This more general causal translation connects the secret acts to their public disclosure, implying both cause and consequence.
As with most words in any language, there is not ONE equivalent word in another language else we would be able to simply program our computers to do a little substitution for us and have a translation of any writing — wait, that’s been tried. Have you ever checked a machine translation of some documents on the internet? They can be quite humorous and even meaningless. This is no doubt due to the phenomenon I mentioned first that there is no one equivalent for a particular word in any language. In the case of ἀνθʼ ὧν ANQ’ hWN which you raise, there are a number of uses for ἁ̓ντί ANTI which you would be well advised to examine.In fact, I would recommend that you sell your first-born child and buy a copy of BDAG (Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich and Danker _A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature_). ACCEPT NO SUBSTITUTE for there is no substitute. BDAG lists five main uses of ἀντί ANTI (Examples are taken from BDAG): 1. Replacement by another = “instead of” or “in place of”. See Mt 2.22 2. Equivalence to another = “in place of”. Mt 5.38 3. Intervention = “on behalf of”. See Mt 17.27 4. Reason for something = “because of” or “for the purpose of”. See Eph 5.31 5. Result = “wherefore” or “therefore”. See Lk 12.3 Context will determine the usage.
george gfsomsel
… search for truth, hear truth, learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, defend the truth till death.
– Jan Hus _________
________________________________ Sent: Sat, April 9, 2011 2:20:25 AM
Dear all,
Does “anq wn” mean “since”? I thought “anti” is a preposition, but there does not seem to be any English “equivalent” for “anq” in this phrase, is there? It occurs in Luke 1:20, Luke 12:3, Luke 19:44, Acts 12:23 and 2 Thes 2:10. Is “anti toutou” in Eph 5:31 also similar? Does it mean “because of this:” (“this” referring to what comes next)?
Thanks! David Lim
Dear George,
Yes I was not looking for word-for-word equivalents, so that is why I excluded occurrences of the first three usages you listed; I was wondering why the relative pronoun was used and if “anq wn” is something like a standard phrase for “since”. But how do we know that Luke 12:3 does not mean “but there is nothing which has been covered that will not be revealed and nothing hidden that will not be known, since whatever you said in the darkness will be heard in the light and …”? How would a hearer determine that “since” was not intended?
David Lim
href=”mailto:[email protected]”>[email protected]
LSJ has this to say:
“3. to denote exchange, at the price of, in return for…—hence ἀνθʼ ὥν wherefore, A.Pr.31, S.OT264, Th.6.83, Ev.Luc.12.3; ἀντὶ τούτου therefore, Ep.Eph.5.31; but ἀνθʼ ὧν also for ἀντὶ τούτων ὅτι .., because,”
BDAG says: “④ … W. attraction of the rel. ἀνθʼ ὧν in return for which=because (Soph., Ant. 1068; X., An. 1, 3, 4; OGI 90, 35 [196 B.C.]; PLeid D I, 21; LXX; AscIs 2:14; Jos., Ant. 17, 201; SibOr 5, 68; B-D-F §294, 4) Lk 1:20; 19:44; Ac 12:23; 2 Th 2:10.”
ANQ’ hWN is a fixed phrase that means “in return for which” or “as a consequence of which”. So, if we have A ANQ’ hWN B, then in most cases event A has happened or will happen as a consequence of event B, but sometimes the idea is: A has happened. As a consequence of event A, B will also happen.
That event A is a consequence of event B is clear enough in the BDAG NT citations above, but note that they list all occurrences of the expression except the one in Luke 12:3 under sense 4. For this verse LSJ suggests “wherefore”, and BDAG lists Lk 12:3 under the next sense:
⑤ indicating result, w. implication of being a replacement for someth., wherefore, therefore, so then (Aeschyl., Prom. 31; Thu. 6, 83, 1; 4 Macc 18:3; Jdth 9:3; Jos., Ant. 4, 318) Lk 12:3
Although A is usually the consequence of B, B may be a consequence of A. That seems to be the case in Jdth 9:3 and 4 Macc 18:3 (I have not checked the others.) In these cases there is a full stop after the triggering event A. As a consequence of A, then B has happened or will happen.
Let me quote the full text, since we need the context:
οὐδὲν δὲ συγκεκαλυμμένον ἐστὶν ὃ οὐκ ἀποκαλυφθήσεται καὶ κρυπτὸν ὃ οὐ γνωσθήσεται. v 3 ἀνθ᾽ ὧν ὅσα ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ εἴπατε ἐν τῷ φωτὶ ἀκουσθήσεται
OUDEN DE SUGKEKALUMMENON ESTIN hO OUK APOKALUFQHSETAI KAI KRUPTON hO OU GNWSQHSETAI. ANQ’ hWN hOSA EN THi SKOTIAi EIPATE EN TWi QWTI AKUSQHSETAI
Nothing can be so completely covered up that it will not be uncovered and nothing is so hidden that it will not become known(.) ANQ’ hWN whatever you have said in the darkness will be heard in the light.
The speech starts with a warning to the disciples about not becoming hypocrites like the Pharisees. Then comes a comment about a future judgment and there seems to be a general principle that “whatever is done under the cover of darkness will be heard in the light”. As a consequence of this general principle, nothing can be covered up or hidden forever. But it is also possible to turn it around and say that here B is a consequence of A. In that case, the first sentence would give the general principle and the second the consequence of the principle. Because the two statements are saying more or the less the same thing, it is difficult to decide on which is the better interpretation. Because of the hOSA, I think it is most likely that LSJ and BDAG are correct in interpreting these verses as: First A. As a consequence of A, then B. NA has a full stop before ANQ’ hWN here in Luk 12:3, but not in any of the other places. This agrees with KJV, RSV, ESV (therefore), NASB (accordingly) and NET, GNB (so then).
Iver Larsen
As with most words in any language, there is not ONE equivalent word in another language else we would be able to simply program our computers to do a little substitution for us and have a translation of any writing — wait, that’s been tried. Have you ever checked a machine translation of some documents on the internet? They can be quite humorous and even meaningless. This is no doubt due to the phenomenon I mentioned first that there is no one equivalent for a particular word in any language. In the case of ἀνθʼ ὧν ANQ’ hWN which you raise, there are a number of uses for ἁ̓ντί ANTI which you would be well advised to examine.In fact, I would recommend that you sell your first-born child and buy a copy of BDAG (Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich and Danker _A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature_). ACCEPT NO SUBSTITUTE for there is no substitute. BDAG lists five main uses of ἀντί ANTI (Examples are taken from BDAG): 1. Replacement by another = “instead of” or “in place of”. See Mt 2.22 2. Equivalence to another = “in place of”. Mt 5.38 3. Intervention = “on behalf of”. See Mt 17.27 4. Reason for something = “because of” or “for the purpose of”. See Eph 5.31 5. Result = “wherefore” or “therefore”. See Lk 12.3 Context will determine the usage.
george gfsomsel
… search for truth, hear truth, learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, defend the truth till death.
– Jan Hus _________
________________________________ Sent: Sat, April 9, 2011 2:20:25 AM
Dear all,
Does “anq wn” mean “since”? I thought “anti” is a preposition, but there does not seem to be any English “equivalent” for “anq” in this phrase, is there? It occurs in Luke 1:20, Luke 12:3, Luke 19:44, Acts 12:23 and 2 Thes 2:10. Is “anti toutou” in Eph 5:31 also similar? Does it mean “because of this:” (“this” referring to what comes next)?
Thanks! David Lim
Dear George,
Yes I was not looking for word-for-word equivalents, so that is why I excluded occurrences of the first three usages you listed; I was wondering why the relative pronoun was used and if “anq wn” is something like a standard phrase for “since”. But how do we know that Luke 12:3 does not mean “but there is nothing which has been covered that will not be revealed and nothing hidden that will not be known, since whatever you said in the darkness will be heard in the light and …”? How would a hearer determine that “since” was not intended?
David Lim
href=”mailto:[email protected]”>[email protected]
LSJ has this to say:
“3. to denote exchange, at the price of, in return for…—hence ἀνθʼ ὥν wherefore, A.Pr.31, S.OT264, Th.6.83, Ev.Luc.12.3; ἀντὶ τούτου therefore, Ep.Eph.5.31; but ἀνθʼ ὧν also for ἀντὶ τούτων ὅτι .., because,”
BDAG says: “④ … W. attraction of the rel. ἀνθʼ ὧν in return for which=because (Soph., Ant. 1068; X., An. 1, 3, 4; OGI 90, 35 [196 B.C.]; PLeid D I, 21; LXX; AscIs 2:14; Jos., Ant. 17, 201; SibOr 5, 68; B-D-F §294, 4) Lk 1:20; 19:44; Ac 12:23; 2 Th 2:10.”
ANQ’ hWN is a fixed phrase that means “in return for which” or “as a consequence of which”. So, if we have A ANQ’ hWN B, then in most cases event A has happened or will happen as a consequence of event B, but sometimes the idea is: A has happened. As a consequence of event A, B will also happen.
That event A is a consequence of event B is clear enough in the BDAG NT citations above, but note that they list all occurrences of the expression except the one in Luke 12:3 under sense 4. For this verse LSJ suggests “wherefore”, and BDAG lists Lk 12:3 under the next sense:
⑤ indicating result, w. implication of being a replacement for someth., wherefore, therefore, so then (Aeschyl., Prom. 31; Thu. 6, 83, 1; 4 Macc 18:3; Jdth 9:3; Jos., Ant. 4, 318) Lk 12:3
Although A is usually the consequence of B, B may be a consequence of A. That seems to be the case in Jdth 9:3 and 4 Macc 18:3 (I have not checked the others.) In these cases there is a full stop after the triggering event A. As a consequence of A, then B has happened or will happen.
Let me quote the full text, since we need the context:
οὐδὲν δὲ συγκεκαλυμμένον ἐστὶν ὃ οὐκ ἀποκαλυφθήσεται καὶ κρυπτὸν ὃ οὐ γνωσθήσεται. v 3 ἀνθ᾽ ὧν ὅσα ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ εἴπατε ἐν τῷ φωτὶ ἀκουσθήσεται
OUDEN DE SUGKEKALUMMENON ESTIN hO OUK APOKALUFQHSETAI KAI KRUPTON hO OU GNWSQHSETAI. ANQ’ hWN hOSA EN THi SKOTIAi EIPATE EN TWi QWTI AKUSQHSETAI
Nothing can be so completely covered up that it will not be uncovered and nothing is so hidden that it will not become known(.) ANQ’ hWN whatever you have said in the darkness will be heard in the light.
The speech starts with a warning to the disciples about not becoming hypocrites like the Pharisees. Then comes a comment about a future judgment and there seems to be a general principle that “whatever is done under the cover of darkness will be heard in the light”. As a consequence of this general principle, nothing can be covered up or hidden forever. But it is also possible to turn it around and say that here B is a consequence of A. In that case, the first sentence would give the general principle and the second the consequence of the principle. Because the two statements are saying more or the less the same thing, it is difficult to decide on which is the better interpretation. Because of the hOSA, I think it is most likely that LSJ and BDAG are correct in interpreting these verses as: First A. As a consequence of A, then B. NA has a full stop before ANQ’ hWN here in Luk 12:3, but not in any of the other places. This agrees with KJV, RSV, ESV (therefore), NASB (accordingly) and NET, GNB (so then).
Iver Larsen