τῇ ὑγιαινούσῃ διδασκαλίᾳ (1 Timothy 1:10)

How do I work out the meaning of a Greek text? How can I best understand the forms and vocabulary in this particular text?
Forum rules
This is a beginner's forum - see the Koine Greek forum for more advanced discussion of Greek texts. Please quote the Greek text you are discussing directly in your post if it is reasonably short - do not ask people to look it up.

When answering questions in this forum, keep it simple, and aim your responses to the level of the person asking the question.
Post Reply
Danny King
Posts: 35
Joined: May 22nd, 2015, 4:52 am

τῇ ὑγιαινούσῃ διδασκαλίᾳ (1 Timothy 1:10)

Post by Danny King » October 20th, 2015, 11:09 am

1 Timothy 1:10 reads:
πόρνοις, ἀρσενοκοίταις, ἀνδραποδισταῖς, ψεύσταις, ἐπιόρκοις, καὶ εἴ τι ἕτερον τῇ ὑγιαινούσῃ διδασκαλίᾳ ἀντίκειται

Why is τῇ ὑγιαινούσῃ διδασκαλίᾳ dative?

In George W. Knight III's NIGTC commentary on the Pastoral Epistles, he has a brief, cryptic note on this (page 90):
"Finally, contrary to Bouma, it is not the gospel itself that shows the opposition of these sins to sound teaching, but the sound teaching based on that gospel (cf. the dative form following the verb: "contrary to," indicating that to which it is contrary; Robertson).

Does anyone understand what the words in the parenthesis mean? Is he saying that the dative shows "contrary to", perhaps a dative of contrast? I can't find such a thing in Wallace. And Knight did not even give the page number for Robertson!

Or is the dative there because the verb requires its object to be dative? Wallace says that such verbs usually show personal relationship (page 171) and he even places them into sub-categories of trusting, obeying, serving, worshiping, thanksgiving and following (page 172). ἀντίκειται is quite the opposite of all these.
0 x



Eeli Kaikkonen
Posts: 464
Joined: June 2nd, 2011, 7:49 am
Location: Finland
Contact:

Re: τῇ ὑγιαινούσῃ διδασκαλίᾳ (1 Timothy 1:10)

Post by Eeli Kaikkonen » October 20th, 2015, 1:18 pm

Danny King wrote:1 Timothy 1:10 reads:
πόρνοις, ἀρσενοκοίταις, ἀνδραποδισταῖς, ψεύσταις, ἐπιόρκοις, καὶ εἴ τι ἕτερον τῇ ὑγιαινούσῃ διδασκαλίᾳ ἀντίκειται

Why is τῇ ὑγιαινούσῃ διδασκαλίᾳ dative?
[...]
Or is the dative there because the verb requires its object to be dative? Wallace says that such verbs usually show personal relationship (page 171) and he even places them into sub-categories of trusting, obeying, serving, worshiping, thanksgiving and following (page 172). ἀντίκειται is quite the opposite of all these.
Certainly this, cf. BAGD: "be opposed, in opposition τινί to someone". Thinking etymologically it describes physical position/location related to something, "lay opposite to", and it's easy to see why dative is used. I feel It doesn't have much to do with semantics of the words given by Wallace, or even with that category.
0 x

Stirling Bartholomew
Posts: 1062
Joined: August 9th, 2012, 4:19 pm

Re: τῇ ὑγιαινούσῃ διδασκαλίᾳ (1 Timothy 1:10)

Post by Stirling Bartholomew » October 20th, 2015, 3:58 pm

Eeli Kaikkonen wrote: Certainly this, cf. BAGD: "be opposed, in opposition τινί to someone". Thinking etymologically it describes physical position/location related to something, "lay opposite to", and it's easy to see why dative is used. I feel It doesn't have much to do with semantics of the words given by Wallace, or even with that category.
I agree with Eeli on all counts. Louw & Nida
39.1 ἀντιτάσσομαι; ἀνθίστημιa; ἀντίκειμαι; ἀντιδιατίθεμαι; ἐναντιόομαι: to oppose someone, involving not only a psychological attitude but also a corresponding behavior — ‘to oppose, to be hostile toward, to show hostility.’
These verbs generally take a dative, I may have missed an expectation. The participles of course form their own idioms.

2Tim. 2:25 ἐν πραΰτητι παιδεύοντα τοὺς ἀντιδιατιθεμένους, μήποτε δώῃ αὐτοῖς ὁ θεὸς μετάνοιαν εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθείας

Acts 18:6 ἀντιτασσομένων δὲ αὐτῶν καὶ βλασφημούντων ἐκτιναξάμενος τὰ ἱμάτια εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτούς· τὸ αἷμα ὑμῶν ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν ὑμῶν· καθαρὸς ἐγὼ ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν εἰς τὰ ἔθνη πορεύσομαι.

A point that we discussed earlier when I made the casual observation that participles and infinitives have their own argument patterns which are distinct from finite forms. Not sure why this suggestion was greeted with dismay both here and on Textkit.
0 x
C. Stirling Bartholomew

Barry Hofstetter
Posts: 1802
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm

Re: τῇ ὑγιαινούσῃ διδασκαλίᾳ (1 Timothy 1:10)

Post by Barry Hofstetter » October 21st, 2015, 10:34 am

The form is dative simply because ἀντίκειμαι takes the dative. Robertson's note is incomprehensible as it is cited -- there is nothing inherent in the dative itself as seems to be implied, but only its use in context. Wallace is also somewhat unhelpful. In his attempt to categorize the dative as used with verbs implying personal relationship, he leaves out any number of verbs that don't seem to fit the paradigm (sorry). It's better to conceptualize it as being used with verbs which don't imply literal motion toward a destination, but that categorization may find exceptions as well. I don't think there is any one overarching theory which explains the multiple uses of the case.
0 x
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
Χαίρετε ἐν κυρίῳ πάντοτε· πάλιν ἐρῶ, χαίρετε

Danny King
Posts: 35
Joined: May 22nd, 2015, 4:52 am

Re: τῇ ὑγιαινούσῃ διδασκαλίᾳ (1 Timothy 1:10)

Post by Danny King » October 21st, 2015, 11:11 am

Thank you everyone for the responses. I feel I fully understand it now. :)
0 x

Post Reply

Return to “What does this text mean?”