An Exegetical Examination of a Proposed Variant “εα” in Luke 8:28
This exegesis addresses a query concerning the existence and potential implications of a textual variant “εα” within Luke 8:28. The verse, which records the desperate plea of a demon-possessed man to Jesus, is textually stable in critical editions. The central exegetical challenge here is the absence of “εα” as an attested reading in major manuscript traditions. Consequently, this study will first establish the standard Greek text of Luke 8:28, compare it with contemporary critical editions, and then proceed with a hypothetical analysis of what “εα” might signify if it were a genuine, albeit unattested, variant, likely drawing from the verb ἐάω (to permit, let be). Attention will also be given to the broader philological context, including occurrences in non-biblical literature.
Τί ἐμοὶ καὶ σοί, Ἰησοῦ, υἱὲ τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ Ὑψίστου; δέομαί σου, μή με βασανίσῃς.
(Luke 8:28, Nestle 1904)
Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):
- The SBLGNT (2010) typically uses lowercase for Θεοῦ (θεοῦ) and Ὑψίστου (ὑψίστου), aligning with modern Greek orthographic conventions, while Nestle 1904 often capitalizes these terms as proper nouns.
- Minor differences in punctuation or breathing marks may occur but do not alter the semantic content of this verse.
Textual Criticism (NA28)
The textual tradition for Luke 8:28 is remarkably stable. Critical editions such as the NA28 (Novum Testamentum Graece, 28th Edition) and UBS5 (United Bible Societies Greek New Testament, 5th Edition) present the reading: “Τί ἐμοὶ καὶ σοί, Ἰησοῦ, υἱὲ τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ Ὑψίστου; δέομαί σου, μή με βασανίσῃς.” This reading is overwhelmingly supported by the earliest and most significant witnesses, including Codex Vaticanus (B), Codex Sinaiticus (א), Codex Alexandrinus (A), and numerous papyri (e.g., P75). There is no attestation of “εα” or any related form in the critical apparatus of NA28, which records all significant variants and their manuscript support. The proposed variant “εα” therefore appears to be an unattested reading in the primary manuscript traditions. While it is conceivable that an extremely rare, localized, or lost textual tradition might have once contained such a variant, current textual scholarship does not offer any evidence to support its inclusion in Luke 8:28. If “εα” were to be considered, it would most plausibly represent a highly abbreviated or unaccented form of the imperative verb ἔα, meaning “let!”, “permit!”, or “leave (alone)!”.
Lexical Notes (KITTEL, BDAG)
Given the absence of “εα” in its literal form within Lk 8:28, we will explore the lexical field of the verb ἐάω, from which a hypothetical “ἔα” (imperative) would derive. Its potential relevance is also hinted at by the query regarding magical papyri, where imperatives related to permitting or refraining are common.
-
KITTEL (Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, vol. II, pp. 320-321):
While Kittel does not specifically discuss “ἔα” in Lk 8:28, his entry for ἐάω (eaō) outlines its fundamental meaning: to let, allow, permit. It signifies non-interference, granting permission, or simply letting something be. In the New Testament, ἐάω often appears in contexts where divine or human agency allows or permits an action. For instance, in Acts 14:16, God “allowed” the nations to walk in their own ways. The imperative ἔα would convey a direct command for non-intervention: “Let (it be)!”, “Leave (alone)!”.
-
BDAG (Bauer, Danker, Arndt, Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed., p. 263):
BDAG confirms the primary meaning of ἐάω as “to let, permit, allow.” It lists various nuances including:
- To let go, release (e.g., of prisoners).
- To let something happen, permit (e.g., Lk 4:41; 22:51).
- To let someone be, leave alone (e.g., Mk 1:34).
The imperative ἔα would fall under the last category, expressing a demand for cessation of action or non-interference, akin to “Stop!” or “Leave me/us alone!”. This is particularly relevant when considering its usage in interjections or urgent pleas, as might be found in magical papyri where the imperative is used to control or dismiss entities.
In the context of Lk 8:28, if a hypothetical ἔα were present, it would dramatically intensify the demon’s plea, transitioning from a rhetorical question and supplication (“What have I to do with you… I beg you, do not torment me”) to an explicit command for Jesus to cease action or to leave them untouched: “Leave (us) alone!” or “Stop!”. This would be a more forceful interjection than the current text.
Translation Variants and Grammatical & Rhetorical Analysis
The standard Greek text of Luke 8:28 presents a clear, direct address from the demon-possessed man to Jesus. The rhetorical question, “Τί ἐμοὶ καὶ σοί, Ἰησοῦ, υἱὲ τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ Ὑψίστου;” (What [is there] to me and to you, Jesus, Son of the Most High God?) functions as an expression of disassociation and opposition, common in Semitic idioms. It implies “Why are you interfering with me?” or “We have nothing in common.” This is immediately followed by an earnest supplication, “δέομαί σου, μή με βασανίσῃς” (I beg you, do not torment me), where δέομαί σου (I beg of you) is a strong appeal, and μή with the aorist subjunctive (βασανίσῃς) forms a prohibition, emphasizing the urgency of the plea against immediate or future torment.
Were a hypothetical variant ἔα (imperative of ἐάω) to be present, its grammatical position and rhetorical impact would be crucial. If placed before the rhetorical question or the supplication, it would function as a stark, imperative interjection:
- If: “Ἔα! Τί ἐμοὶ καὶ σοί…”
This would translate as: “Let (us) be! What have I to do with you…” The imperative would foreground the demon’s demand for non-interference, making the subsequent rhetorical question more of a justification for the command rather than just a statement of opposition.
- If: “Τί ἐμοὶ καὶ σοί… ἔα, μή με βασανίσῃς.”
Here, “What have I to do with you… Leave (me) alone, do not torment me.” The ἔα would serve to strengthen the prohibition, acting as a preliminary command before the explicit “do not torment me.” It would elevate the tone from a plea to a more assertive demand for Jesus to withdraw his power.
The absence of such an interjection in the received text implies that the demon’s speech, while desperate, retains a semblance of a plea rather than an outright command. The grammatical structure of the standard text emphasizes the demon’s recognition of Jesus’ power (Son of the Most High God) and his subsequent submission through supplication, even while protesting. A hypothetical ἔα would introduce a more confrontational or defiant element, suggesting a stronger attempt to ward off Jesus directly rather than simply begging for leniency.
Conclusions and Translation Suggestions
The textual evidence unequivocally indicates that the variant “εα” (or its accented form ἔα) is not attested in the critical Greek New Testament for Luke 8:28. The standard text is remarkably stable, consistently presenting the demon’s plea as a rhetorical question followed by an urgent supplication against torment. Therefore, any translation must reflect this established reading.
However, for the sake of exploring the implications raised by the original query, if a hypothetical imperative ἔα were somehow present in the text, it would significantly alter the tone and nuance of the demon’s address, shifting it from a desperate plea to a more forceful command for non-interference. This hypothetical scenario highlights how even small textual variations can have profound hermeneutical consequences.
Based on the standard Greek text of Luke 8:28, the following translation suggestions are offered:
-
“What have I to do with you, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I beg you, do not torment me!”
This translation emphasizes the rhetorical question as a statement of separation and follows with a direct, urgent appeal. -
“Why do you interfere with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I plead with you, do not torture me.”
This version renders the idiomatic rhetorical question more explicitly as an accusation of interference and uses ‘plead’ and ‘torture’ to convey the intensity of the demon’s distress. -
“What is there between us, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I implore you, do not hurt me.”
This translation focuses on the relational aspect of the rhetorical question and uses ‘implore’ and ‘hurt’ for a slightly broader yet still urgent sense of the demon’s plea.
Should the hypothetical ἔα (imperative) ever be discovered as an authentic variant, a possible translation, depending on its precise placement, could be:
Hypothetical: “Leave (us) alone! What have I to do with you, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I beg you, do not torment me!”
This hypothetical rendering introduces a forceful command for Jesus to disengage, presenting the demon’s words as more assertive than merely supplicatory.