Matt 1:22 τοῦτο δὲ ὅλον γέγονεν, in whose voice?

Forum rules
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. This is not a beginner's forum, competence in Greek is assumed.
Post Reply
Stephen Carlson
Posts: 3351
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Matt 1:22 τοῦτο δὲ ὅλον γέγονεν, in whose voice?

Post by Stephen Carlson »

Matt 1:22 wrote:τοῦτο δὲ ὅλον γέγονεν ἵνα πληρωθῇ τὸ ῥηθὲν ὑπὸ κυρίου διὰ τοῦ προφήτου λέγοντος·
Whose voice is this statement in? The narrator's? Or the angel's (v.20)? Or in other words, where does the angel's quotation end?
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia
cwconrad
Posts: 2112
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:52 pm
Location: Burnsville, NC 28714
Contact:

Re: Matt 1:22 τοῦτο δὲ ὅλον γέγονεν, in whose voice?

Post by cwconrad »

Stephen Carlson wrote:
Matt 1:22 wrote:τοῦτο δὲ ὅλον γέγονεν ἵωα πληρωθῇ τὸ ῥηθὲν ὑπὸ κυρίου διὰ τοῦ προφήτου λέγοντος·
Whose voice is this statement in? The narrator's? Or the angel's (v.20)? Or in other words, where does the angel's quotation end?
"ἵνα" perhaps? Any more-than-casual reader of this gospel knows that this is the regular formula employed by this evangelist to indicate that an event has fulfilled a prophecy. The easy answer to the question is that this is ὂ γέγραπται, i.e., this is ἡ γραφή. I would attribute it to the narrator/evangelist, not to the angel, for the reason that it is very clearly the evangelist's recurrent formula.
οὔτοι ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς πάντα θεοὶ θνητοῖς ὑπέδειξαν,
ἀλλὰ χρόνῳ ζητέοντες ἐφευρίσκουσιν ἄμεινον. (Xenophanes, Fragment 16)

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

γέγονεν v. ἐγένετο / μέλλει γενέσθαι implications

Post by Stephen Hughes »

Stephen Carlson wrote:
Matt 1:22 wrote:τοῦτο δὲ ὅλον γέγονεν ἵνα πληρωθῇ τὸ ῥηθὲν ὑπὸ κυρίου διὰ τοῦ προφήτου λέγοντος·
Whose voice is this statement in? The narrator's? Or the angel's (v.20)? Or in other words, where does the angel's quotation end?
What relationship is possible for between this γέγονεν and the futures in what was said and the past tense in the narrative time?

Perhaps γέγονεν was used not ἐγένετο because "it has been accomplished / achieved" goes better with the idea that there is a purpose to it. and it doesn't seem to be used. If ἐγένετο had been used it would mean that the things had already been finished, and then it would be part of the narrative.

This distinction seems to be shown John 1:3 where ἐγένετο expresses the narrative perspective and γέγονεν is used like an atemporal / absolute perspective, one not put into the narrative tense system, but existing despite / outside it.

Perhaps γέγονεν was used not μέλλει γενέσθαι because the future tense verbs in verse 21 were already underway. If μέλλει γενέσθαι had been used, then perhaps Mary would not have been pregnant yet - and that is not the case.

Does the perfect have a temporal (or pseudo-temporal) reference? Maybe in some cases. Here, however, I think that γέγονεν refers to things that are happening / have happened outside the context of the dialogue between Joseph and the angel.

How does that relate to your question. I think that what the angel said is great and what the evangelist added for our understanding is great to, but as to how it happened, perhaps like this:
Matthew 1:20 (part) -23 wrote:ἄγγελος κυρίου κατ’ ὄναρ ἐφάνη αὐτῷ , λέγων , Ἰωσήφ , υἱὸς Δαυίδ , μὴ φοβηθῇς παραλαβεῖν Μαριὰμ τὴν γυναῖκά σου · τὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ γεννηθὲν ἐκ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἁγίου . 21 Τέξεται δὲ υἱόν , καὶ καλέσεις τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦν · αὐτὸς γὰρ σώσει τὸν λαὸν αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν αὐτῶν. 22 Τοῦτο δὲ ὅλον γέγονεν , ἵνα πληρωθῇ τὸ ῥηθὲν ὑπὸ τοῦ Κυρίου διὰ τοῦ προφήτου , λέγοντος , 23 Ἰδού , ἡ παρθένος ἐν γαστρὶ ἕξει καὶ τέξεται υἱόν , καὶ καλέσουσιν τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Ἐμμανουήλ , ὅ ἐστιν μεθερμηνευόμενον , Μεθ’ ἡμῶν ὁ θεός .
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
Stephen Carlson
Posts: 3351
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Matt 1:22 τοῦτο δὲ ὅλον γέγονεν, in whose voice?

Post by Stephen Carlson »

Thanks for your thoughtful responses. I am aware that the fulfilment formula is a Matthean motif, but I was wondering if he is here putting on the lips of the angel (John is a particularly flagrant example of this). My first inclination, and one I've had for a long time, is no, but it's something that is becoming less obvious to me.

I am a little bothered about the perfect γέγονεν. It seems to be refering to events in the narrator's remote past, which challenges at least the classical meaning of the perfect. The perfect is not a narrative tense, so the function of the fulfillment formula would have be non-narrative such as commenting upon the narrative. As for the angel, the perfect is less out of place, where the conception is still an on-going result.
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia
Wes Wood
Posts: 692
Joined: September 20th, 2013, 8:18 pm

Re: Matt 1:22 τοῦτο δὲ ὅλον γέγονεν, in whose voice?

Post by Wes Wood »

Stephen Carlson wrote:It seems to be refering to events in the narrator's remote past
Would you please define what you mean by remote past? What events do believe that he is referring to? I have sometimes wondered if these passages refer to some type of source material. Not that I have any concrete reason for thinking so, but I do find it interesting that this formula occurs in 21:3-4
[3καὶ ἐάν τις ὑμῖν εἴπῃ τι, ἐρεῖτε ὅτι Ὁ κύριος αὐτῶν χρείαν ἔχει: εὐθὺς δὲ ἀποστελεῖ αὐτούς. 4Τοῦτο δὲ γέγονεν ἵνα πληρωθῇ τὸ ῥηθὲν διὰ τοῦ προφήτου λέγοντος,]

and 26:56

[56τοῦτο δὲ ὅλον γέγονεν ἵνα πληρωθῶσιν αἱ γραφαὶ τῶν προφητῶν. Τότε οἱ μαθηταὶ πάντες ἀφέντες αὐτὸν ἔφυγον]

which have contain some "minor" differences from gospel to gospel.
You might be interested to compare 26:56 to Mark 14:48-50.

[48καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, Ὡς ἐπὶ λῃστὴν ἐξήλθατε μετὰ μαχαιρῶν καὶ ξύλων συλλαβεῖν με; 49καθ' ἡμέραν ἤμην πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ διδάσκων καὶ οὐκ ἐκρατήσατέ με: ἀλλ' ἵνα πληρωθῶσιν αἱ γραφαί. 50καὶ ἀφέντες αὐτὸν ἔφυγον πάντες.]

I don't know if this will be of interest or help or not.
Ἀσπάζομαι μὲν καὶ φιλῶ, πείσομαι δὲ μᾶλλον τῷ θεῷ ἢ ὑμῖν.-Ἀπολογία Σωκράτους 29δ
Stephen Carlson
Posts: 3351
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Matt 1:22 τοῦτο δὲ ὅλον γέγονεν, in whose voice?

Post by Stephen Carlson »

Wes Wood wrote:
Stephen Carlson wrote:It seems to be refering to events in the narrator's remote past
Would you please define what you mean by remote past? What events do believe that he is referring to?
By "remote past" I basically mean something that is not part of the speaker's (extended) present. Something that is past but in the extended present is a near or recent past. A good clue (more sufficient than necessary) is whether the people involves are still alive. If they are not, then it is probably a remote past. In this case, I believe the events are those that relate to the virginal conception of Jesus. The conception would in the angel's recent past but in the author's remote past.
Wes Wood wrote:I have sometimes wondered if these passages refer to some type of source material. Not that I have any concrete reason for thinking so, but I do find it interesting that this formula occurs in 21:3-4
[3καὶ ἐάν τις ὑμῖν εἴπῃ τι, ἐρεῖτε ὅτι Ὁ κύριος αὐτῶν χρείαν ἔχει: εὐθὺς δὲ ἀποστελεῖ αὐτούς. 4Τοῦτο δὲ γέγονεν ἵνα πληρωθῇ τὸ ῥηθὲν διὰ τοῦ προφήτου λέγοντος,]
This invocation of the fulfillment formula also uses a perfect and is separated from a preceding quotation by εὐθὺς δὲ ἀποστελεῖ αὐτούς.
Wes Wood wrote:and 26:56

[56τοῦτο δὲ ὅλον γέγονεν ἵνα πληρωθῶσιν αἱ γραφαὶ τῶν προφητῶν. Τότε οἱ μαθηταὶ πάντες ἀφέντες αὐτὸν ἔφυγον]
This fulfillment formula on the other hand appears to have been placed on the lips of Jesus. Thanks.
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia
Wes Wood
Posts: 692
Joined: September 20th, 2013, 8:18 pm

Re: Matt 1:22 τοῦτο δὲ ὅλον γέγονεν, in whose voice?

Post by Wes Wood »

Thank you, Dr. Carlson. I thought that may have been what you were meaning. I did not notice the "point of departure" in the first example. It is worse when I admit I was reading Levinsohn prior to making that post. :oops:

Dr. Conrad, your post contained some information that I need to investigate. Thank you.
Ἀσπάζομαι μὲν καὶ φιλῶ, πείσομαι δὲ μᾶλλον τῷ θεῷ ἢ ὑμῖν.-Ἀπολογία Σωκράτους 29δ
Post Reply

Return to “New Testament”