Jude 1

Philip Maertens
Posts: 3
Joined: November 13th, 2011, 5:56 am

Jude 1

Post by Philip Maertens » February 24th, 2019, 3:00 pm

Dear all,

Ἰούδας Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοῦλος, ἀδελφὸς δὲ Ἰακώβου, τοῖς ἐν θεῷ πατρὶ ἠγαπημένοις καὶ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ τετηρημένοις κλητοῖς· (NA 28)

I've been struggling with the second part of this verse:
does ἐν governs only θεῷ πατρὶ or also Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ ?
What kind of dative is Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ? Is it a dative of advantage or a dative of agent?

Thanks

Philip Maertens
Algarve, Portugal
0 x



Stirling Bartholomew
Posts: 959
Joined: August 9th, 2012, 4:19 pm

Re: Jude 1

Post by Stirling Bartholomew » February 24th, 2019, 4:30 pm

Philip Maertens wrote:
February 24th, 2019, 3:00 pm
Dear all,

Ἰούδας Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοῦλος, ἀδελφὸς δὲ Ἰακώβου, τοῖς ἐν θεῷ πατρὶ ἠγαπημένοις καὶ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ τετηρημένοις κλητοῖς· (NA 28)

I've been struggling with the second part of this verse:
does ἐν governs only θεῷ πατρὶ or also Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ ?
What kind of dative is Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ? Is it a dative of advantage or a dative of agent?

Thanks

Philip Maertens
Algarve, Portugal
I generally avoid using the word "govern" since it is completely meaningless to anyone who didn't study old fashion grammars. No point in perpetuating the use of archaic terminology.

τοῖς ἐν θεῷ πατρὶ ἠγαπημένοις καὶ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ τετηρημένοις κλητοῖς·

You know, that isn't perfectly obvious. I would hazard that τοῖς introduces both sides of καὶ. ἐν may be understood (left out) after καὶ or τοῖς ἐν may have two arguments. Prepositions with two arguments joined by καὶ. Kind of leaning toward the second option.
0 x
C. Stirling Bartholomew

Barry Hofstetter
Posts: 1631
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm

Re: Jude 1

Post by Barry Hofstetter » February 25th, 2019, 10:21 am

Stirling Bartholomew wrote:
February 24th, 2019, 4:30 pm
Philip Maertens wrote:
February 24th, 2019, 3:00 pm
Dear all,

Ἰούδας Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοῦλος, ἀδελφὸς δὲ Ἰακώβου, τοῖς ἐν θεῷ πατρὶ ἠγαπημένοις καὶ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ τετηρημένοις κλητοῖς· (NA 28)

I've been struggling with the second part of this verse:
does ἐν governs only θεῷ πατρὶ or also Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ ?
What kind of dative is Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ? Is it a dative of advantage or a dative of agent?

Thanks

Philip Maertens
Algarve, Portugal
I generally avoid using the word "govern" since it is completely meaningless to anyone who didn't study old fashion grammars. No point in perpetuating the use of archaic terminology.
Since a lot of people are still using "old fashioned grammars" in their pursuit of the language, "archaic terminology" is still acceptable. The point is to understand the Greek regardless of which set of metalanguage we prefer.

I think τοῖς clearly substantizes all the dative plurals here, but it would be unusual for ἐν to be taken also with Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ. Datives of agent are sufficiently rare that they should never be a first guess, but here we have the main context point present, the use of a perfect passive participle, τετηρημένοις, so I lean in that direction. The ethical dative is certainly possible, but the similar concept in 1 Pet 1:4 is expressed using the preposition εἰς, εἰς κληρονομίαν ἄφθαρτον καὶ ἀμίαντον καὶ ἀμάραντον τετηρημένην... However, I note that BDAG reads it differently:
BDAG wrote:τοῖς Χριστῷ τετηρημένοις κλητοῖς to those who have been called and who have been kept unharmed for Christ, or, in case the ἐν before θεῷ is to be repeated, through Christ Jd 1.
Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., Bauer, W., & Gingrich, F. W. (2000). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed., p. 1002). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
0 x
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
Χαίρετε ἐν κυρίῳ πάντοτε· πάλιν ἐρῶ, χαίρετε

Stephen Carlson
Posts: 2835
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Jude 1

Post by Stephen Carlson » February 25th, 2019, 6:09 pm

Stirling Bartholomew wrote:
February 24th, 2019, 4:30 pm
I generally avoid using the word "govern" since it is completely meaningless to anyone who didn't study old fashion grammars. No point in perpetuating the use of archaic terminology.
I don't think that "govern" is that archaic. Isn't Chomsky 2.0 called "Government and Binding"? It's also, I believe, still current in Dependency Grammar.
0 x
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia

Stirling Bartholomew
Posts: 959
Joined: August 9th, 2012, 4:19 pm

Re: Jude 1

Post by Stirling Bartholomew » February 25th, 2019, 6:55 pm

Stephen Carlson wrote:
February 25th, 2019, 6:09 pm
Stirling Bartholomew wrote:
February 24th, 2019, 4:30 pm
I generally avoid using the word "govern" since it is completely meaningless to anyone who didn't study old fashion grammars. No point in perpetuating the use of archaic terminology.
I don't think that "govern" is that archaic. Isn't Chomsky 2.0 called "Government and Binding"? It's also, I believe, still current in Dependency Grammar.
I was waiting for someone to say that. Didn't Chomsky abandon "Government and Binding"? Anyway, lets all keep talking like Machen. Nobody bothered to nail me on my extended nonstandard use of "arguments."
0 x
C. Stirling Bartholomew

Philip Maertens
Posts: 3
Joined: November 13th, 2011, 5:56 am

Re: Jude 1

Post by Philip Maertens » February 27th, 2019, 1:37 pm

So, if I understand correctly, the two types of dative are possible, and grammar alone can't decide which one is to be preferred?

Philip Maertens
Algarve
Portugal
0 x

Stirling Bartholomew
Posts: 959
Joined: August 9th, 2012, 4:19 pm

Re: Jude 1

Post by Stirling Bartholomew » February 28th, 2019, 12:53 pm

Philip Maertens wrote:
February 27th, 2019, 1:37 pm
So, if I understand correctly, the two types of dative are possible, and grammar alone can't decide which one is to be preferred?

Philip Maertens
Algarve
Portugal
Apparently there is no consensus. Bauckham calls it a dative of "advantage" translates it "for Jesus Christ" and disagrees with Mayor and Westcott about ἐν θεῷ πατρὶ ἠγαπημένοις καὶ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ, who either assume ἐν before Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ or move it there. Alford tags it a dative "commodi" and renders it "for Jesus Christ."

Subscript
My contention is the tagging process is an irrelevant obstruction in the exegetical process leading to endless and pointless discussions about what the tags mean and where they should be applied. Good commentaries avoid the tags.
0 x
C. Stirling Bartholomew

Stirling Bartholomew
Posts: 959
Joined: August 9th, 2012, 4:19 pm

Re: Jude 1

Post by Stirling Bartholomew » February 28th, 2019, 2:53 pm

I took a fresh look at this in the morning after coffee. J. B. Mayor's detailed discussion apparently isn't accessible online. I will attempt to adapt it for a contemporary audience.

τοῖς ἐν θεῷ πατρὶ ἠγαπημένοις καὶ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ τετηρημένοις κλητοῖς·

ἐν θεῷ πατρὶ employs a metaphor similar to Paul's ἐν Χριστῷ. Both sides of καὶ use the same metaphor. This assumes ἐν applies to both sides of καὶ. The metaphor uses the idea of location to express something other than location. English speaking theologians have used the word position to talk about Paul's ἐν Χριστῷ. But position is just another metaphor, a theological one.

This may not be an accurate representation of J. B. Mayor's ideas. It is my take away having read several others J. Huther, H. Alford, R. Bauckham. A whole string of objections have been raised in regard to this interpretation. Not the least is finding a Pauline idea in Jude.
0 x
C. Stirling Bartholomew

Barry Hofstetter
Posts: 1631
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm

Re: Jude 1

Post by Barry Hofstetter » February 28th, 2019, 3:50 pm

Philip Maertens wrote:
February 27th, 2019, 1:37 pm
So, if I understand correctly, the two types of dative are possible, and grammar alone can't decide which one is to be preferred?

Philip Maertens
Algarve
Portugal
One thing that you encounter when you move from the quite literally textbook perfect Greek of beginning books is that real life authors use the language in unexpected ways that seem to defy the neat categories we've learned. Do we repeat ἐν with Ἱησοῦ Χριστῷ? A number of interpreters seem to think so, but that strikes me as an unusual ellipsis, as I noted above. If that's not the case, then the second dative requires an explanation, and a number of interpreters prefer a dative of advantage (the same as an "ethical dative" or a dativus commodi). I have trouble understanding exactly what that would mean in this context. Since datives of agent may be used with perfect middle passives, and since we have some lovely perfect middle/passive participles here, that suggests a dative of agent. it also means that the two usages are not parallel, and that bothers some people (also if another type of dative is suggested). This is also an example of how little the overall meaning of the text changes even when our conceptualization of the syntax is not the same.
0 x
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
Χαίρετε ἐν κυρίῳ πάντοτε· πάλιν ἐρῶ, χαίρετε

Stirling Bartholomew
Posts: 959
Joined: August 9th, 2012, 4:19 pm

Re: Jude 1

Post by Stirling Bartholomew » February 28th, 2019, 5:06 pm

Ἰούδας Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοῦλος, ἀδελφὸς δὲ Ἰακώβου, τοῖς ἐν θεῷ πατρὶ ἠγαπημένοις καὶ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ τετηρημένοις κλητοῖς· (NA 28)

Barry Hofstetter wrote:
February 28th, 2019, 3:50 pm

Do we repeat ἐν with Ἱησοῦ Χριστῷ? A number of interpreters seem to think so, but that strikes me as an unusual ellipsis, as I noted above.
This part was difficult to understand reading the 19th century commentaries. I don't think anyone was suggesting we have ἐν ... καὶ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ τετηρημένοις form a compound prepositional constituent joined by καὶ under a single ἐν. I didn't see this late last night.

The construction in the generally accepted text suggests parallelism. But it isn't a tidy parallelism, could be improved by moving, adding or deleting words. Probably not a good idea. That's how texts get corrupted. Parallelism need not be tidy. Tons of evidence for this in the Hebrew Bible.
0 x
C. Stirling Bartholomew

Post Reply

Return to “Syntax and Grammar”