“`html
body { font-family: ‘Times New Roman’, serif; line-height: 1.6; max-width: 800px; margin: auto; padding: 20px; }
h1, h2, h3 { font-family: Georgia, serif; color: #333; margin-top: 1.5em; margin-bottom: 0.8em; }
h2 { font-size: 1.8em; border-bottom: 1px solid #ccc; padding-bottom: 5px; }
h3 { font-size: 1.4em; }
p { margin-bottom: 1em; text-align: justify; }
blockquote { border-left: 4px solid #ccc; margin: 1.5em 0; padding-left: 1em; color: #555; font-style: italic; }
ul { list-style-type: disc; margin-left: 20px; margin-bottom: 1em; }
b { font-weight: bold; }
i { font-style: italic; }
.greek { font-family: “Gentium Plus”, “Palatino Linotype”, “serif”; font-size: 1.1em; }
An Exegetical Analysis of the Dative Absolute Construction in Matthew 8:1 and Related Passages
This exegetical study of An Exegetical Analysis of the Dative Absolute Construction in Matthew 8:1 and Related Passages is based on ongoing scholarly discourse concerning Matthean textual variants. The initial discussion centers on the textual variations found in Matthew 8:1, specifically concerning the grammatical construction used to describe Jesus’ descent from the mountain. While some manuscript traditions and editors opt for a standard genitive absolute construction, a significant number of witnesses and earlier editors preserve a less common dative absolute, raising questions about textual originality and scribal intervention.
The main exegetical issue under examination is the scribal tendency to normalize or “correct” grammatical constructions perceived as less polished or redundant in the New Testament text. In Matthew 8:1, and numerous other passages, the presence of a dative absolute construction followed by a dative pronoun, particularly αὐτῷ, appears to have caused “agitation” among scribes. This perceived redundancy led to various alterations, including changes to the more conventional genitive absolute, omission of the “superfluous” pronoun, or transformation into a finite verbal clause. The analysis seeks to determine the original reading based on principles of textual criticism, particularly the preference for the “harder reading,” and to understand the implications for Matthean authorship and style.
Καταβάντι δὲ αὐτῷ ἀπὸ τοῦ ὄρους ἠκολούθησαν αὐτῷ ὄχλοι πολλοί.
Matthew 8:1 (Nestle 1904)
Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):
- The SBLGNT (2010) text for Matthew 8:1 reads Καταβάντι δὲ αὐτῷ ἀπὸ τοῦ ὄρους ἠκολούθησαν αὐτῷ ὄχλοι πολλοί, which aligns with the dative absolute construction (καταβάντι δὲ αὐτῷ) favored in this analysis.
- The textual variants discussed below, particularly the shift to the genitive absolute (καταβάντος δὲ αὐτοῦ), represent manuscript readings that differ from the SBLGNT, often reflecting scribal attempts at grammatical regularization.
Textual Criticism (NA28) and Lexical Notes (KITTEL, BDAG)
The critical apparatus of NA28, like Nestle 1904 and SBLGNT 2010, supports the reading καταβάντι δὲ αὐτῷ. This dative absolute construction is attested by a broad range of significant witnesses, including ℵ* E K L M S U [V] X Γ [Δ] Π Σ Ω 047 0211 Byz f35 461. 565. 1424. 1500. 2224, and is upheld by editors such as Tischendorf. The alternative reading, καταβάντος δὲ αὐτοῦ (a genitive absolute), is found in notable manuscripts such as ℵ2 B C Nvid W [Z] Θ f1.[13] 33. 892, and is favored by editors including Bover, Greeven, Merk, Soden, and Vogels.
Scholars such as Wettstein, Griesbach, Kühnöl, Fritzsche, Bloomfield, and Meyer contend that the genitive absolute is a secondary reading, representing a scribal correction. This correction was presumably motivated by a perceived redundancy or grammatical awkwardness arising from the dative absolute construction followed by a repeated dative pronoun (αὐτῷ). Griesbach explicitly notes the intentional alteration and its recurrence in similar contexts (e.g., Matt 8:5). Kühnöl describes the pronoun αὐτῷ after ἠκολούθησαν as redundant but stylistically consistent with Hebrew idiom and not entirely alien to classical Greek. Fritzsche labels the genitive as a “wrong correction” driven by discomfort with the double dative. Meyer rejects καταβάντος δὲ αὐτοῦ as a “mere correction.”
The textual critical principle of the “harder reading” strongly supports the dative absolute (καταβάντι δὲ αὐτῷ) as the original. Scribes were more likely to simplify or normalize a less common or grammatically “difficult” construction into a more standard one, rather than vice-versa. The consistent pattern of scribal agitation across various Matthean passages (Matt 8:5, 8:28, 9:28, 21:23) and their Markan/Lukan parallels (Mark 5:2, Luke 8:27) further suggests that this dative construction was a characteristic Matthean stylistic feature that scribes found problematic.
Lexically, the verb καταβαίνω (from κατά + βαίνω) signifies “to go down,” “to descend.” BDAG notes its frequent use in the NT for physical descent, often from a mountain or into a valley, as is the case here. Kittel (TDNT) would further explore its theological connotations, particularly when referring to divine actions or the movement of celestial beings. The verb ἀκολουθέω, meaning “to follow,” is likewise a common verb in the NT, frequently describing the actions of disciples or crowds following Jesus. BDAG highlights its literal and metaphorical applications. The dative form καταβάντι is the masculine dative singular participle of καταβαίνω, functioning as a dative absolute in this context, describing the circumstances concurrent with the main verb.
Translation Variants with Grammatical & Rhetorical Analysis
The grammatical choice between the dative absolute and genitive absolute profoundly impacts the nuance of translation and reveals differing rhetorical emphases:
- Dative Absolute (καταβάντι δὲ αὐτῷ): This construction, while less frequent in Koine Greek than the genitive absolute, is grammatically sound, especially within the broader context of Hellenistic Greek and potential Semitic influence. The primary rhetorical effect is a slightly more emphatic or distinctive phrasing, particularly when followed by a seemingly redundant dative pronoun (αὐτῷ) as the subject of the main clause. It highlights the temporal or circumstantial relationship: “While he was descending, crowds followed him.” The repetition of αὐτῷ can be seen as a stylistic characteristic of Matthew, possibly for emphasis or clarity regarding the identity of the person being followed, despite its perceived redundancy to some scribes.
- Genitive Absolute (καταβάντος δὲ αὐτοῦ): This is the more common and grammatically conventional absolute construction in Greek. Its adoption by scribes represents a smoothing out of the text, aiming for what was considered more elegant or grammatically correct Greek. The rhetorical effect is a more fluid and less emphatic temporal clause: “When he had descended, crowds followed him.” This variant effectively removes the perceived redundancy of the repeated dative pronoun.
- Omission of the “superfluous” dative pronoun: In some variants, scribes opted to retain the dative absolute but removed the subsequent dative pronoun (e.g., ἠκολούθησαν without αὐτῷ). This also served to alleviate the perceived redundancy, resulting in a cleaner but potentially less precise text.
- Alteration to a finite verbal form: Rare but attested (e.g., D in Matt 8:28 uses καὶ ἐξῆλθον), this variant replaces the participial construction with a conjunction and a finite verb. This radically transforms the grammatical structure and shifts the rhetorical emphasis from a circumstantial clause to a coordinated action, changing the temporal flow and stylistic character of the passage significantly.
The scholarly consensus, supported by the principle of the harder reading, suggests that Matthew intentionally used the dative absolute with its repeated pronoun. This represents a distinct authorial style, perhaps reflecting Semitic syntactic patterns or simply a stylistic preference that later scribes, operating under different grammatical sensibilities, sought to “improve.”
Conclusions and Translation Suggestions
Based on the textual evidence and internal critical principles, the dative absolute construction καταβάντι δὲ αὐτῷ is confidently affirmed as the original reading for Matthew 8:1. The scribal tendency to alter this construction across numerous Matthean passages underscores its unique character within Matthew’s style and validates the preference for the less common, harder reading. Translations should aim to capture the temporal aspect of the participle while acknowledging the stylistic implications of Matthew’s original phrasing.
- “And when he himself descended from the mountain, great crowds followed him.”
This translation emphasizes the dative absolute as a circumstantial clause, using “he himself” to implicitly acknowledge the repeated pronoun and Matthew’s focus.
- “As he was coming down from the mountain, large crowds began to follow him.”
This option renders the dative absolute as a continuous action, emphasizing the ongoing nature of his descent and the subsequent following by the crowds.
- “Upon his descent from the mountain, substantial crowds followed him.”
This translation focuses on the immediate temporal connection between Jesus’ action and the crowds’ response, reflecting the directness of the absolute construction.
“`