Re: Matt. 3:7

From: Carl W. Conrad (cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu)
Date: Tue Dec 08 1998 - 08:58:13 EST


<x-rich>At 9:17 PM -0600 12/7/98, Terence Miller wrote:

<excerpt>My first question. Did the Pharisees and Saducees come "to" or
"for" the

baptism in Matthew 3:7? The preposition is EPI with the acc. case.
Dana

and Mantey suggest a remote meaning (p106). Zerwick and others suggest
EPI

with acc. leans towards movement. It does seem to be important to know

whether the Pharisees came to the baptism or for baptism. English

translations vary. Most of them translate EPI as "to." The NASB
translates

EPI as "for."

</excerpt>

text: IDWN DE POLLOUS TWN FARISAIWN KAI SADDOUKAIWN ERCOMENOUS EPI TO
BAPTISMA AUTOU ...

I've just gone through Louw & Nida and find a wide variety of idiomatic
usages of EPI + accusative in different expressions, but as we are
dealing here with a verb of motion (ERCOMENOUS), I'm going to fall back
upon my general sense for EPI with accusative. EPI means most literally
"down upon" or simply "upon"; an accusative used as its object
indicates the terminal point aimed at by the action. In classical
Attic, my observation has been that EPI with accusative and a verb of
motion more often than not indicates hostile intent, wherefore I've
come to think of it as a "hawk" word indicating the swooping down of a
bird of prey to pounce upon a victim. I know it's used of armies
attacking. There are probably plenty of instances of EPI + accusative
where the situation doesn't really imply hostility, but in the present
instance in Mt 3:7, I'm inclined to think it's there, especially given
the Baptist's polemical response to the Pharisees and Sadducees who
have come to him.

On the other hand ...: the object of EPI here is TO BAPTISMA AUTOU, and
the Baptist asks "who warned you to avoid the wrath ...?"; in view of
that one might suppose that they have indeed come IN ORDER TO BE
BAPTIZED. Yet BAGD in their long article upon EPI do cite EPI +
accusative and this verse as an instance of "for" in the sense of
purpose. I guess that's possible.

Upon reflection, I wonder whether there may not be a deliberate
ambiguity in this phrasing in Matthew's version: perhaps they HAVE come
to be baptized, but consider who they are! Perhaps they have come with
hostile intent, as often enough in the gospel accounts we see Pharisees
or scribes (sometimes even Scribes of Pharisees!) coming to spy upon
the behavior of Jesus and his disciples.

Luke has (3:7) ELEGEN OUN TOIS EKPOREUOMENOIS OCLOIS BAPTISQHNAI hUP'
AUTOU followed by the same GENNHMATA ECIDNWN speech that is usually
deemed a Q passage, since it is identical in Mt and Lk and not present
in Mk. Luke uses the infinitive BAPTISQHNAI evidently as a
complementary infinitive with EKPOREUOMENOIS to express purpose.

Elsewhere in Matthew, however, the phrase GENNHMATA ECIDNWN is
regularly used in passages of implicit condemnation:

Mt 12:34 GENNHMATA ECIDNWN, PWS DUNASQE AGAQA LALEIN PONHROI ONTES?

Mt 23:33 OFEIS, GENNHMATA ECIDNWN, PWS FUGHTE APO THS KRISEWS THS
GEENNHS?

To me these passages seem to weight the interpretation of EPI TO
BAPTISMA AUTOU in Mt 3:7 toward the notion of the Baptist's expectation
that these Pharisees and Sadducees have come to him hypocritically and
with hostile intent; and yet, and yet ... the alternative is plausible
enough that it deserves consideration, namely, that they DID come in
order to be baptized.

It was a good question. Moreover, it's another of those questions which
raise the translator's problem: if the Greek text is really ambiguous,
does the translator have the right to make a decision in favor of one
of the alternatives rather than the other? I suppose s/he's not to be
faulted if s/he honestly believes that s/he has chosen the more likely
interpretation to translate--BUT, IMHO, it would be more honest to use
a footnote to explain that the translator has chosen what s/he thinks
is more plausible but that an alternative understanding of the Greek is
also plausible.

Carl W. Conrad

Department of Classics/Washington University

One Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018

Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649

cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu OR cconrad@yancey.main.nc.us

WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/

</x-rich>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:09 EDT