Luke 19:11

An Exegetical Analysis of Luke 19:11: Grammatical Labeling of Ἱερουσαλήμ in Proximity Phrases

This exegetical study of Luke 19:11 and grammatical marking is based on a b-greek discussion from Thu Apr 18 14:50:13 EDT 2002. The initial query concerned the proper grammatical labeling of the indeclinable proper noun Ἱερουσαλήμ within the phrase “διὰ τὸ ἐγγὺς εἶναι Ἱερουσαλὴμ αὐτόν” (because he was near Jerusalem). The central question posed was: if one were to create a grammatically labeled database, which case would be assigned to Ἱερουσαλήμ in this context?

The main exegetical issue revolves around determining the implicit grammatical case of an indeclinable noun, Ἱερουσαλήμ, when it functions as the object of proximity with the adverb/improper preposition ἐγγύς. While Ἱερουσαλήμ itself does not inflect for case, its syntactic function within the sentence implies a specific grammatical relationship with ἐγγύς. This implication carries semantic weight, influencing how the spatial relationship is understood and subsequently translated, particularly considering that ἐγγύς can govern either the genitive or the dative case in Koine Greek.

Greek text (Nestle 1904)

Ἀκουόντων δὲ αὐτῶν ταῦτα προσθεὶς εἶπεν παραβολήν, διὰ τὸ ἐγγὺς εἶναι Ἱερουσαλὴμ αὐτόν, καὶ δοκεῖν αὐτοὺς ὅτι παραχρῆμα μέλλει ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ ἀναφαίνεσθαι.

Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):

• The Nestle 1904 text uses Ἱερουσαλήμ (capital Iota, rough breathing), while SBLGNT 2010 uses Ἰερουσαλήμ (capital Iota, smooth breathing, iota subscript). This is primarily an orthographical difference for the proper noun and does not represent a lexical or significant textual variant affecting the meaning or grammatical structure of the phrase under consideration.

Textual Criticism (NA28) and Lexical Notes

Regarding textual criticism, a review of the Novum Testamentum Graece (NA28) apparatus for Luke 19:11 indicates no significant textual variants that would affect the specific phrase “διὰ τὸ ἐγγὺς εἶναι Ἱερουσαλὴμ αὐτόν” or the grammatical function of Ἱερουσαλήμ. The reading is consistently attested across major manuscripts.

Lexically, the term ἐγγύς (engys) is central to this discussion. According to BDAG (Bauer, Danker, Arndt, Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature), ἐγγύς can function as an adverb meaning ‘near, close by’ or as an improper preposition meaning ‘near to’. When used as an improper preposition, it commonly takes the genitive case, signifying ‘near from’ or ‘near of’, and occasionally the dative case, indicating ‘near to’. BDAG specifically notes its use with the genitive for local functions (e.g., John 11:18, ἦν δὲ ἡ Βηθανία ἐγγὺς τῶν Ἱεροσολύμων, “Bethany was near Jerusalem”). While the dative is also possible (e.g., Acts 9:38, ἐγγὺς ἦν τῇ Ἰόππῃ, “was near Joppa”), the genitive is presented as a more frequent and primary construction for expressing proximity in spatial terms. KITTEL (Theological Dictionary of the New Testament) further supports this, highlighting that ἐγγύς with the genitive typically expresses local proximity, emphasizing the point from which closeness is measured or the general vicinity.

The noun Ἱερουσαλήμ (Hierousalem), referring to Jerusalem, is well-documented as an indeclinable proper noun in the New Testament. Its form remains constant regardless of its syntactic function, which necessitates inferring its case relationship from context, particularly when paired with words like ἐγγύς.

Translation Variants with Grammatical & Rhetorical Analysis

The phrase under scrutiny is “διὰ τὸ ἐγγὺς εἶναι Ἱερουσαλὴμ αὐτόν” (Luke 19:11b). Grammatically:

• διὰ τό + infinitive (εἶναι): This is a common construction to express cause or reason, equivalent to “because” or “on account of.”
• αὐτόν (accusative pronoun): This is the subject of the infinitive εἶναι, meaning “he” (Jesus).
• ἐγγύς: In this context, ἐγγύς functions adverbially, modifying the infinitive εἶναι (“to be near”). The noun Ἱερουσαλήμ then expresses the object *of* that proximity.

The core of the issue, as highlighted in the b-greek discussion, is the implied case of the indeclinable Ἱερουσαλήμ. While ἐγγύς can govern both genitive and dative, the consensus among scholars, supported by lexical resources like BDAG and the practice of grammatical databases like Accordance and Logos, leans towards interpreting Ἱερουσαλήμ as functioning in the genitive case here. This interpretation is based on the common prevalence of the genitive with ἐγγύς for local relations in Koine Greek, as exemplified in phrases like John 11:18 (ἐγγὺς τῶν Ἱεροσολύμων). Even when ἐγγύς is an adverb, the location it refers to is typically in the genitive case, denoting ‘near *of*’ or ‘near *from*,’ emphasizing a general proximity rather than direction ‘to’.

Rhetorically, this phrase serves to provide the immediate context and motivation for Jesus telling the parable of the minas. The close physical proximity to Jerusalem is linked directly to the disciples’ mistaken belief that the Kingdom of God would appear immediately. The grammatical construction, therefore, efficiently sets the scene and explains the urgency and spiritual misunderstanding Jesus addresses with his teaching. Interpreting Ἱερουσαλήμ as genitive emphasizes the state of being *in the vicinity of* Jerusalem, aligning with a broad, circumstantial cause for the parable.

Conclusions and Translation Suggestions

Based on the lexical evidence and common grammatical patterns in Koine Greek, particularly the frequent use of ἐγγύς with the genitive case for spatial proximity, the indeclinable Ἱερουσαλήμ in Luke 19:11 is best understood as functioning in an implicit genitive relationship. This interpretation aligns with the general scholarly consensus and the grammatical labeling found in respected digital resources. The phrase “διὰ τὸ ἐγγὺς εἶναι Ἱερουσαλὴμ αὐτόν” thus signifies the causal reason for Jesus’s parable: his physical closeness to Jerusalem.

Here are three translation suggestions for Luke 19:11b, reflecting this understanding:

1. “Because he was near Jerusalem, and they supposed that the kingdom of God was immediately about to appear.”
   This translation emphasizes the straightforward causal link between Jesus’s location and the disciples’ expectation.
2. “For he was approaching Jerusalem, and they imagined that the kingdom of God would be revealed at once.”
   This version uses “approaching” to capture the dynamic aspect of proximity and “imagined” to highlight the disciples’ incorrect belief.
3. “Since he was in the vicinity of Jerusalem, and they thought the kingdom of God would appear without delay.”
   This rendition uses “in the vicinity of” to explicitly convey the genitive sense of general proximity, and “without delay” to capture the immediacy of “παραχρῆμα“.