Hebrews 11:11 αὐτὴ Σάρρα στεῖρα

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
Michael Abernathy
Posts: 21
Joined: June 3rd, 2011, 10:49 am

Hebrews 11:11 αὐτὴ Σάρρα στεῖρα

Post by Michael Abernathy »

In Hebrews 11:11 αὐτὴ Σάρρα looks like the subject but δύναμιν εἰς καταβολὴν σπέρματος ἔλαβεν refers to a man’s part in procreation. The United Bible Society’s textual commentary suggests that καὶ αὐτὴ Σάρρα στεῖρα should be understood as a Hebraic circumstantial clause. I can accept that but it seems out of character with the excellent Greek used throughout Hebrews.
A second explanation is that the text omitted an iota subscript and it should have been understood as a dative of accompaniment. That makes sense but it calls for a slight emendation in the text.
Any suggestions for interpreting this passage that don’t alter biology, grammar, or the text?

Sincerely,
Michael Abernathy
Stephen Carlson
Posts: 3353
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Hebrews 11:11

Post by Stephen Carlson »

This question really needs the full text of the verse. Not every user of the forum has the text handy, so please be considerate of them. (Some, I believe, read this on their phones.)

So here is the NA28 text:
Heb 11:11 NA28 wrote:Πίστει καὶ αὐτὴ Σάρρα στεῖρα δύναμιν εἰς καταβολὴν σπέρματος ἔλαβεν καὶ παρὰ καιρὸν ἡλικίας, ἐπεὶ πιστὸν ἡγήσατο τὸν ἐπαγγειλάμενον.
The SBLGNT text is different, though:
Heb 11:11 SBLGNT wrote:πίστει καὶ [a]αὐτῇ Σάρρᾳ δύναμιν εἰς καταβολὴν σπέρματος ἔλαβεν καὶ παρὰ καιρὸν ἡλικίας, ἐπεὶ πιστὸν ἡγήσατο τὸν ἐπαγγειλάμενον·

a. αὐτῇ Σάρρᾳ Holmes WHmarg ] αὐτὴ Σάρρα WH Treg RP; αὐτὴ Σάρρα στεῖρα NIV
b. ἡλικίας WH Treg NIV ] + ἔτεκεν RP

The SBLGNT text prints the relevant constituents as dative, presumably because the nominatives are too difficult. This is editorial decision rather than a text-critical decision since the iota-adscript was not usually written then (and the subscript not at all). (The omission of στεῖρα / στείρᾳ reflects the editor's general text-critical preference for the shorter text.)
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia
David Lim
Posts: 901
Joined: June 6th, 2011, 6:55 am

Re: Hebrews 11:11 αὐτὴ Σάρρα στεῖρα

Post by David Lim »

Michael Abernathy wrote:In Hebrews 11:11 αὐτὴ Σάρρα looks like the subject but δύναμιν εἰς καταβολὴν σπέρματος ἔλαβεν refers to a man’s part in procreation. The United Bible Society’s textual commentary suggests that καὶ αὐτὴ Σάρρα στεῖρα should be understood as a Hebraic circumstantial clause. I can accept that but it seems out of character with the excellent Greek used throughout Hebrews.
A second explanation is that the text omitted an iota subscript and it should have been understood as a dative of accompaniment. That makes sense but it calls for a slight emendation in the text.
Any suggestions for interpreting this passage that don’t alter biology, grammar, or the text?
What if the verbal idea in "εις καταβολην σπερματος" does not have Sarah as its subject but simply refers to the event itself? For another example, Matt 3:11 records John saying "εγω μεν βαπτιζω υμας εν υδατι εις μετανοιαν", where the verbal idea in "εις μετανοιαν" does not have John as its subject. Likewise in Heb 11:11, "εις καταβολην σπερματος" could simply denote the reason for the power that Sarah received and not what she could do having it.
δαυιδ λιμ
Iver Larsen
Posts: 127
Joined: May 7th, 2011, 3:52 am

Re: Hebrews 11:11 αὐτὴ Σάρρα στεῖρα

Post by Iver Larsen »

Michael Abernathy wrote:In Hebrews 11:11 αὐτὴ Σάρρα looks like the subject but δύναμιν εἰς καταβολὴν σπέρματος ἔλαβεν refers to a man’s part in procreation. The United Bible Society’s textual commentary suggests that καὶ αὐτὴ Σάρρα στεῖρα should be understood as a Hebraic circumstantial clause. I can accept that but it seems out of character with the excellent Greek used throughout Hebrews.
A second explanation is that the text omitted an iota subscript and it should have been understood as a dative of accompaniment. That makes sense but it calls for a slight emendation in the text.
Any suggestions for interpreting this passage that don’t alter biology, grammar, or the text?

Sincerely,
Michael Abernathy
Another option is to take καταβολή in the general and basic sense as listed in BDAG:
① the act of laying someth. down, with implication of providing a base for someth., foundation. Readily connected with the idea of founding is the sense beginning

The same can be done to σπέρμα which is commonly used in the Bible simply to mean "descendants, children, posterity".

Sarah received power to become the founding mother for many descendants. (Compare Gal 4:26-27).
Post Reply

Return to “New Testament”