Matthew 5:12

The following analysis transforms an informal discussion concerning the Greek rhetorical figure of hendiadys into a formal academic biblical exegesis of Matthew 5:12. The original discourse highlighted scholarly debate regarding the application of hendiadys to verbal constructions, referencing its treatment in lexica such as BDAG and its limited acceptance in translations like the NRSV for passages such as Acts 23:6. This exegesis will apply these considerations to the imperative clause “Χαίρετε καὶ ἀγαλλιᾶσθε” in Matthew 5:12, exploring the grammatical and rhetorical implications for its interpretation and translation.

An Exegetical Analysis of Hendiadys in Matthew 5:12: “Χαίρετε καὶ ἀγαλλιᾶσθε”

The imperative construction “Χαίρετε καὶ ἀγαλλιᾶσθε” in Matthew 5:12 presents an exegetical challenge regarding the precise semantic relationship between the two coordinated verbs. Specifically, scholarly discussion often probes whether this construction constitutes a hendiadys—a figure of speech where two words connected by a conjunction express a single, often intensified, idea—or if it retains the distinct semantic force of each verb. This issue bears directly on the nuance of Jesus’ command to his persecuted followers, impacting how the call to rejoice is understood and subsequently translated into modern languages.

Nestle 1904 Greek Text (Matthew 5:12):
Χαίρετε καὶ ἀγαλλιᾶσθε, ὅτι ὁ μισθὸς ὑμῶν πολὺς ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς· οὕτως γὰρ ἐδίωξαν τοὺς προφήτας τοὺς πρὸ ὑμῶν.

Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):

• The text of Matthew 5:12 in Nestle 1904 and SBLGNT (2010) is identical. No significant textual variants affect the phrase “Χαίρετε καὶ ἀγαλλιᾶσθε”.

Textual Criticism and Lexical Notes

The textual critical apparatus of NA28 confirms the stability of Matthew 5:12, particularly the phrase “Χαίρετε καὶ ἀγαλλιᾶσθε.” There are no significant manuscript variations that alter the reading of these two imperative verbs or their conjunction καί.

Lexical Analysis:

• χαίρετε (chairete): This is the present imperative plural of χαίρω (chairō), meaning “to rejoice, be glad, be well.” BDAG (p. 1074) defines χαίρω primarily as “to be in a state of happiness, rejoice, be glad.” It is a common term for general joy or greeting.
• ἀγαλλιᾶσθε (agalliasthe): This is the present imperative plural of ἀγαλλιάω (agalliaō), meaning “to exult, rejoice greatly, be overjoyed.” BDAG (p. 6) emphasizes a stronger sense of joy, describing it as “to be overjoyed, exult, be glad.” Kittel’s Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (TDNT, vol. 1, p. 19) notes that ἀγαλλιάω often carries connotations of exuberant or demonstrative joy, frequently with an eschatological or salvific context.
• καί (kai): The coordinating conjunction “and.” In Greek, καί can simply connect two independent clauses or terms, but it can also indicate intensification, consequence, or even serve as an epexegetical (“that is”) function in certain contexts, particularly in figures of speech such as hendiadys.

The scholarly discussion, as evidenced in the original exchange, highlights the debate surrounding hendiadys, especially in its application to verbs. While examples of hendiadys with substantives are more widely acknowledged (e.g., “cup and saucer” meaning “saucer with a cup”), its presence with verbs is less universally accepted. The BDAG lexicon, for instance, provides a limited number of proposed verbal hendiadys examples (e.g., 442.16 in an earlier edition), but many are contentious. As noted in the original discussion, even a major translation like the NRSV selectively interprets constructions as hendiadys, accepting only one out of six proposed instances in BDAG. This cautious approach is exemplified by C. K. Barrett’s comment on Acts 23:6, where he suggests that “The line of argument is not greatly altered if ‘hope’ and ‘resurrection’ are distinguished,” implying that a default literal rendering of distinct terms often suffices and may even be preferable.

Translation Variants with Grammatical & Rhetorical Analysis

The phrase “Χαίρετε καὶ ἀγαλλιᾶσθε” can be analyzed in two primary ways, each with distinct translational implications:

1. Two Distinct Imperatives: This interpretation treats χαίρετε and ἀγαλλιᾶσθε as two separate, though related, commands.Grammatically, this is the most straightforward reading. The conjunction καί simply links two verbs, each retaining its full semantic range. Rhetorically, this creates a sense of escalating intensity: “rejoice” (general gladness) and “exult” (overflowing joy). The command is not merely to be happy, but to actively express and experience profound joy, particularly in the face of persecution. This parallelism adds emphasis through enumeration, urging a comprehensive response of joy.
2. Hendiadys: This interpretation views the two verbs as expressing a single, intensified concept.If construed as a hendiadys, the phrase would mean something like “rejoice with great exultation” or “rejoice exuberantly.” The grammatical construction would then serve to create a stronger, more singular command. However, as noted in the initial discussion, applying hendiadys to verbs is often debated, with many scholars preferring to maintain the distinct semantic contributions of each verb unless contextual evidence strongly mandates a hendiadys interpretation. The lack of compelling grammatical or contextual necessity here, beyond a general intensification often achieved by synonymous parallelism, argues against a definitive hendiadys reading. Furthermore, the concern raised in the original post—that distinguishing the terms might not “greatly alter” the meaning—suggests that even where hendiadys *could* be argued, a more literal rendering often preserves the meaning sufficiently, potentially with richer nuance by retaining the distinct terms.

Given the debate on verbal hendiadys and the distinct semantic ranges of χαίρω and ἀγαλλιάω, interpreting them as two related yet distinct commands, perhaps with intensifying effect, seems more robust. This allows for the full impact of both verbs to be felt, rather than collapsing them into a single concept that might dilute the specific nuance of “exulting.”

Conclusions and Translation Suggestions

The command in Matthew 5:12, “Χαίρετε καὶ ἀγαλλιᾶσθε,” while potentially understood as a hendiadys by some, is more securely interpreted as two distinct, albeit closely related and intensifying, imperatives. The academic caution regarding verbal hendiadys, as observed in major lexical works and translation practices, supports a nuanced reading that preserves the semantic distinctiveness of both χαίρω and ἀγαλλιάω. The call to believers facing persecution is thus a comprehensive and deeply felt summons to joy, encompassing both general gladness and exuberant exultation.

Here are three suggested translations for “Χαίρετε καὶ ἀγαλλιᾶσθε,” reflecting different exegetical emphases:

1. “Rejoice and exult!” This translation maintains the distinctness of the two Greek verbs, presenting them as separate, yet coordinated, commands. It highlights the dual nature of the joy enjoined upon the disciples.
2. “Rejoice greatly and be overjoyed!” This rendering attempts to capture the intensifying effect of the second verb while still treating them as distinct actions. It conveys a heightened sense of joy without collapsing the two into a single nominal idea.
3. “Rejoice with great joy!” This translation approaches the phrase from a hendiadys perspective, interpreting the two verbs as conveying a single, intensified concept of profound happiness. While grammatically plausible, this interpretation is less favored by strict grammatical analysis for verbal constructions.