Matthew 13:15

“`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; }
h2 { border-bottom: 1px solid #ccc; padding-bottom: 10px; margin-top: 30px; }
h3 { color: #555; margin-top: 25px; }
p { margin-bottom: 1em; }
blockquote { border-left: 4px solid #ccc; margin: 1.5em 10px; padding: 0.5em 10px; font-style: italic; background-color: #f9f9f9; }
ul { list-style-type: disc; margin-left: 20px; }
b { font-weight: bold; }
i { font-style: italic; }

An Exegetical Analysis of Matthew 13:15 and its Septuagintal Antecedents

Introduction

This exegetical study of An Exegetical Analysis of Matthew 13:15 and its Septuagintal Antecedents is based on a b-greek discussion. The initial contribution introduced the Septuagintal (LXX) rendition of Isaiah 6:10 as a crucial parallel to Matthew 13:15, highlighting specific translational choices in the LXX that impact the interpretation of the New Testament passage. Key observations included an inconsistent Greek rendering of sequential Hebrew verbs in Isaiah 6:10, along with the translation of Hebrew imperatives into Greek indicatives and corresponding shifts in grammatical number.

The primary exegetical issue under consideration revolves around the grammatical mood of the final verb, ἰάσομαι (iasomai), in Matthew 13:15. This verb, a future indicative, appears at the culmination of a conditional clause primarily structured with a negative purpose conjunction (μήποτε, mēpote) followed by a series of aorist subjunctives (ἴδωσιν, ἀκούσωσιν, συνῶσιν, ἐπιστρέψωσιν). The central question is whether this switch in mood carries a particular semantic function, such as indicating a result, a divine promise, or an inevitable consequence, and how this choice relates to the Septuagintal source and the overall theological message.

ἐπαχύνθη γὰρ ἡ καρδία τοῦ λαοῦ τούτου, καὶ τοῖς ὠσὶν βαρέως ἤκουσαν καὶ τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς αὐτῶν ἐκάμμυσαν, μήποτε ἴδωσιν τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς καὶ τοῖς ὠσὶν ἀκούσωσιν καὶ τῇ καρδίᾳ συνῶσιν καὶ ἐπιστρέψωσιν καὶ ἰάσομαι αὐτούς.

— Greek text (Nestle 1904, Matthew 13:15)

Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):

• The SBLGNT (2010) text for Matthew 13:15 is identical in wording to the Nestle 1904 text presented above. Minor variations exist primarily in punctuation, such as the placement of commas before the second καί and before καὶ ἰάσομαι αὐτούς, serving to clarify syntactical units.

Textual Criticism (NA28) and Lexical Notes (KITTEL, BDAG)

The text of Matthew 13:15 in NA28 (Novum Testamentum Graece, 28th ed.) aligns precisely with the Nestle 1904 and SBLGNT (2010) readings for this verse, including the critical future indicative ἰάσομαι at the clause’s conclusion. No significant textual variants are noted for this passage that would alter the mood or meaning of the final verb.

Lexical notes on key terms:

• ἐπαχύνθη (epachynthē): Aorist passive indicative, from ἐπαχύνω (epachynō), meaning “to make thick, dull, or insensitive.” BDAG defines it as “to make fat, thicken” and metaphorically “to make dull or stupid.” KITTEL (TDNT) emphasizes the sense of a hardening or dulling of perception, particularly in Isaiah 6:10, where it denotes the people’s spiritual blindness and obstinacy.
• καρδία (kardia): “heart.” BDAG highlights its comprehensive metaphorical use in Greek literature and the New Testament, representing the center of physical, spiritual, intellectual, and volitional life. In this context, it signifies the seat of understanding and moral responsiveness.
• βαρέως (bareōs): An adverb meaning “heavily, with difficulty.” BDAG describes its use with verbs of hearing as “to hear with difficulty or dullness.” It emphasizes the recalcitrance of the listeners.
• ἐκάμμυσαν (ekammysan): Aorist active indicative, from καμμύω (kammyō), meaning “to close (the eyes).” BDAG confirms this definition, implying a deliberate act of closing off perception.
• μήποτε (mēpote): A negative conjunction introducing a purpose clause (“lest, in order that…not”) or an apprehension (“perhaps…not, for fear that”). BDAG notes its function in expressing a negative result or an anticipated negative outcome. Its presence signals the speaker’s intention to prevent an action or a feared consequence.
• ἰάσομαι (iasomai): First person singular future indicative, from ἰάομαι (iaomai), “to heal, cure.” BDAG clarifies its meaning as “to heal, restore to health,” often used in a spiritual sense in the New Testament. The future indicative here suggests a certainty of action on the part of the speaker (God), contingent on the preceding conditions.

Translation Variants and Grammatical & Rhetorical Analysis

The passage in Matthew 13:15 closely quotes Isaiah 6:10 LXX, where the prophet is commanded to make the people’s heart dull. However, the Matthean context reinterprets this as a description of the people’s existing condition. The structure, μήποτε followed by a series of aorist subjunctives (ἴδωσιν, ἀκούσωσιν, συνῶσιν, ἐπιστρέψωσιν), clearly expresses a negative purpose: lest they should see, hear, understand, and turn. This construction describes the intentional spiritual resistance of the people, preventing themselves from engaging with the divine message.

The grammatical shift to the future indicative ἰάσομαι (“I will heal”) at the end of the clause is the crux of the exegetical challenge. In the Septuagintal Isaiah 6:10 (Ziegler), the corresponding clause often appears as a sequence of aorist subjunctive and future indicative, or, as noted in some manuscripts like Sinaiticus, two futures. The original Hebrew presented a sequence of waw-prefixed suffix-conjugation verbs, which some interpret as a command (“and heal them”). The Septuagintal translator’s choice of mood is therefore significant. The discussion notes that the LXX rendering of Hebrew imperatives as Greek indicatives (e.g., ἐπαχύνθη, ἐκάμμυσαν, and βαρέως), coupled with the pluralization of verbs that were singular in Hebrew due to λαός being a collective noun, suggests the translator understood these actions as descriptive of the people’s state rather than direct divine commands for hardening.

In Matthew 13:15, the use of the future indicative ἰάσομαι following the subjunctive chain introduces a distinct rhetorical effect. If the preceding subjunctives delineate what the people actively avoid (seeing, hearing, understanding, turning), then the future indicative can signify what would *certainly* happen if they were to overcome their obstinacy and turn. It functions as a statement of divine intent or a guaranteed outcome. The future indicative, unlike a subjunctive (e.g., *I might heal* or *I should heal*), expresses a categorical promise or declaration. Therefore, the phrase can be interpreted as “lest they should see… and turn, and [then] I would heal them,” implying that their current state prevents a certain divine action. Alternatively, it could emphasize the stark consequence of their resistance: they willfully avoid understanding, thereby also preventing the divine healing that would otherwise ensue. The switch in mood underscores the divine prerogative and the certainty of healing contingent upon genuine repentance, which the people are actively rejecting.

Conclusions and Translation Suggestions

The grammatical structure of Matthew 13:15, particularly the transition from the negative purpose clause with subjunctives to a final future indicative, underscores a profound theological message. The people’s deliberate refusal to perceive and respond to the divine message directly prevents the promised divine healing. The future indicative ἰάσομαι functions not as a continuation of the purpose/apprehension but as a statement of divine certainty or consequence, marking what would unequivocally transpire if the preceding conditions were met.

Here are three suggested translations, emphasizing different nuances:

1. “For the heart of this people has become dull, and with their ears they have heard with difficulty, and their eyes they have closed, lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears and understand with their heart and turn, and then I will heal them.”
   This translation emphasizes the conditional nature of divine healing, presenting it as a certain outcome if the people were to repent.
2. “For the heart of this people has grown callous, and their ears they have heard obtusely, and their eyes they have deliberately shut, so that they might not see with their eyes or hear with their ears or understand with their heart or turn, and thus prevent me from healing them.”
   This rendering highlights the people’s active resistance as the cause for the absence of divine healing, interpreting the future indicative as a prevented consequence.
3. “For this people’s heart has become dull, and they have heard dully with their ears, and their eyes they have closed, lest they should ever see with their eyes, or hear with their ears, or understand with their heart, or turn; and (if they did) I would surely heal them.”
   This option stresses the divine intention and certainty of healing, implying it is the people’s obduracy that makes this potential healing an unrealized outcome.

“`