Catena in Marcum: ὥσπερ οὖν

[nathaniel j. erickson]

Here is the text from page 316, lines 26 through page 317 line 2 with the part of most interest highlighted:

“Καὶ παρεκάλει αὐτὸν πολλὰ, ἵνα μὴ ἀποστείλῃ αὐτοὺς ἔξω τῆς
“χώρας,” ἢ εἰς τὴν ἄβυσσον ἀπελθεῖν, ὥς φησιν ὁ Λουκᾶς. ἡ γὰρ
ἄβυσσος ἀναχώρησίς ἐστι τούτου τοῦ κόσμου. ἀξιοῦσι τοίνυν οἱ
δαίμονες μὴ πεμφθῆναι ἔξω τῆς γῆς, μηδὲ ὅπου οὐκ ἔστιν ἄνθρω-
πος, εἰς τὸ σκότος τὸ ἐξώτερον, τὸ ἡτοιμασμένον τῷ διαβόλῳ καὶ
τοῖς ἀγγέλοις αὐτοῦ. ὥστε ὁ Κύριος ἠδύνατο μὲν ἐπιτάξαι αὐτοῖς,
συνεχώρησε δὲ αὐτοὺς εἶναι ἐν τῇ γῇ ταύτῃ· ὥσπερ οὖν καὶ τὸν
διάβολον, ἵνα μὴ τοῦ ἀντιπάλου τῇ ἀπουσίᾳ ζημιώσῃ τὴν ἀνθρω-
πότητα τοῦ στεφάνου τῆς νίκης.

On first read I was surprised to see the phrase ὁ Κύριος ἠδύνατο ἐπιτάξαι αὐτοῖς, so I looked more closely to try to piece this together. Here are my thoughts so far:

1. The core is the two clauses joined in the μέν...δέ construction and the following ἵνα clause: ὥστε ὁ Κύριος ἠδύνατο μὲν ἐπιτάξαι αὐτοῖς, συνεχώρησε δὲ αὐτοὺς εἶναι ἐν τῇ γῇ ταύτῃ...ἵνα μὴ τοῦ ἀντιπάλου τῇ ἀπουσίᾳ ζημιώσῃ τὴν ἀνθρωπότητα τοῦ στεφάνου τῆς νίκης ("For this reason the Lord was not able to command them, but he permitted them to remain in this world...so that he did not deprive his humanity of the crown of victory by want of an opponent"). This all makes sense (or I've completely missed something).

2. I'm taking ὥσπερ οὖν καὶ τὸν διάβολον as something like "and the same also goes for the Devil", meaning "he also permitted the devil to remain in this world." I am reading reading ὥσπερ οὖν καὶ as basically a combination of particles (or at least ὥσπερ οὖν). How to handle these particles together and still make the entire sentence cohere is the hardest part, in my mind. I did not see anything on it in Denniston or any notes in the lexicons

This makes sense of the passage to me. The obvious weak spot in my reading is that I don't really have a way to explain ὥσπερ οὖν outside of just making it work. Anyone have any insight on this collocation of particles?

[Barry Hofstetter]

Well, if taken as a collocation:

ὥσπερ οὖν as really or truly, as in fact, in parenthetical phrases: εἰ δʼ ἔστιν, ὥσπερ οὖν ἔστι, θεός but if he is, as is in fact the case, a god PLAT. Phaedr. 242e; οὗτος μὲν οἴεταί τι εἰδέναι οὐκ εἰδώς, ἐγὼ δέ, ὥσπερ οὖν οὐκ οἶδα, οὐδὲ οἴομαι this man does not know, but he believes that he knows sthg., yet I do not know and I do not believe that I know PLAT. Ap. 21d etc. ‖ s.times εἰ δʼ οὖν if not, otherwise SOPH. Ant. 722 AN. Par. 1.3.2 al. Dor. and Ion. ὦν ‖ in IL. and OD. οὖν it is always accompanied by partic. as γε, γὰρ, οὔτε etc. | in HDT. it is often inserted between prep. and verb.

Montanari, F. (2015). M. Goh & C. Schroeder (Eds.), The Brill Dictionary of Ancient Greek. Leiden; Boston: Brill.

However, I'm not sure that the writer of the Catena is using it quite so formally. It's often simply use to make an affirmation:

οὖν adv. ⓐ certainly, in fact, without doubt, really, truly, to affirm sthg.

"Just as surely also the devil..."

[nathaniel j. erickson]

Thanks for enlightening me. My suspicion that οὖν was doing something different from what it usually does in the New Testament is justified. My desire to go forth and buy Montanari's lexicon is further enflamed. After looking at LSJ again, it does mention this usage, but Montanari is so much clearer and easier to understand.

[Stirling Bartholomew]

Here is the text from page 316, lines 26 through page 317 line 2 with the part of most interest highlighted:

“Καὶ παρεκάλει αὐτὸν πολλὰ, ἵνα μὴ ἀποστείλῃ αὐτοὺς ἔξω τῆς
“χώρας,” ἢ εἰς τὴν ἄβυσσον ἀπελθεῖν, ὥς φησιν ὁ Λουκᾶς. ἡ γὰρ
ἄβυσσος ἀναχώρησίς ἐστι τούτου τοῦ κόσμου. ἀξιοῦσι τοίνυν οἱ
δαίμονες μὴ πεμφθῆναι ἔξω τῆς γῆς, μηδὲ ὅπου οὐκ ἔστιν ἄνθρω-
πος, εἰς τὸ σκότος τὸ ἐξώτερον, τὸ ἡτοιμασμένον τῷ διαβόλῳ καὶ
τοῖς ἀγγέλοις αὐτοῦ. ὥστε ὁ Κύριος ἠδύνατο μὲν ἐπιτάξαι αὐτοῖς,
συνεχώρησε δὲ αὐτοὺς εἶναι ἐν τῇ γῇ ταύτῃ· ὥσπερ οὖν καὶ τὸν
διάβολον, ἵνα μὴ τοῦ ἀντιπάλου τῇ ἀπουσίᾳ ζημιώσῃ τὴν ἀνθρω-
πότητα τοῦ στεφάνου τῆς νίκης.

On first read I was surprised to see the phrase ὁ Κύριος ἠδύνατο ἐπιτάξαι αὐτοῖς, so I looked more closely to try to piece this together.

The preceding context (blue type) includes remarkable statements which form the basis for ὥστε ὁ Κύριος ἠδύνατο μὲν ἐπιτάξαι αὐτοῖς. Where did the author come up with this idea: ἀξιοῦσι τοίνυν οἱ δαίμονες μὴ πεμφθῆναι ἔξω τῆς γῆς? It doesn't follow from ἡ γὰρ ἄβυσσος ἀναχώρησίς ἐστι τούτου τοῦ κόσμου.

[Barry Hofstetter]

Here is the text from page 316, lines 26 through page 317 line 2 with the part of most interest highlighted:

“Καὶ παρεκάλει αὐτὸν πολλὰ, ἵνα μὴ ἀποστείλῃ αὐτοὺς ἔξω τῆς
“χώρας,” ἢ εἰς τὴν ἄβυσσον ἀπελθεῖν, ὥς φησιν ὁ Λουκᾶς. ἡ γὰρ
ἄβυσσος ἀναχώρησίς ἐστι τούτου τοῦ κόσμου. ἀξιοῦσι τοίνυν οἱ
δαίμονες μὴ πεμφθῆναι ἔξω τῆς γῆς, μηδὲ ὅπου οὐκ ἔστιν ἄνθρω-
πος, εἰς τὸ σκότος τὸ ἐξώτερον, τὸ ἡτοιμασμένον τῷ διαβόλῳ καὶ
τοῖς ἀγγέλοις αὐτοῦ. ὥστε ὁ Κύριος ἠδύνατο μὲν ἐπιτάξαι αὐτοῖς,
συνεχώρησε δὲ αὐτοὺς εἶναι ἐν τῇ γῇ ταύτῃ· ὥσπερ οὖν καὶ τὸν
διάβολον, ἵνα μὴ τοῦ ἀντιπάλου τῇ ἀπουσίᾳ ζημιώσῃ τὴν ἀνθρω-
πότητα τοῦ στεφάνου τῆς νίκης.

On first read I was surprised to see the phrase ὁ Κύριος ἠδύνατο ἐπιτάξαι αὐτοῖς, so I looked more closely to try to piece this together.

The preceding context (blue type) includes remarkable statements which form the basis for ὥστε ὁ Κύριος ἠδύνατο μὲν ἐπιτάξαι αὐτοῖς. Where did the author come up with this idea: ἀξιοῦσι τοίνυν οἱ δαίμονες μὴ πεμφθῆναι ἔξω τῆς γῆς? It doesn't follow from ἡ γὰρ ἄβυσσος ἀναχώρησίς ἐστι τούτου τοῦ κόσμου.

Stirling, are you sure you understand this? The problem might be ἀναχώρησις. Here it means something like "an isolated place," hence "They abyss is a place isolated from this world, therefore the demons think it's not a good idea to be sent outside the earth, where there are no people, into the outer darkness..."

[Stirling Bartholomew]

I think we need to look at the paragraphs preceding what was quoted to sort out the reasoning of the author. It appears that the time has something to with the argument. Not sure how to understand ἀξιοῦσι which seems to be a critical word used both here and later** a key points in the argument.

Επειδὴ τοίνυν ἄνθρωπον αὐτὸν ὡμολόγησαν, ἦλθον οἱ δαίμονες τὴν θεότητα ἀνακηρύττοντες. καὶ οἱ τῆς θαλάσσης κυμαινούσης καὶ πάλιν ἡσυχαζούσης οὐκ ἀκούσαντες, ἤκουον τῶν δαιμόνων ταῦτα βοώντων, ἅπερ ἐκείνη διὰ τῆς γαλήνης ἔκραζεν. εἶτα ἵνα μὴ δόξῃ κολακείας τὸ πρᾶγμα εἶναι, ἀπὸ τῆς πείρας τῶν πραγμάτων βοῶσι, λέγοντες, “ ἦλθες ὧδε πρὸ καιροῦ βασανίσαι ἡμᾶς ” διὰ δὴ τὸ πρότερον ὁμολογεῖται ἡ ἔχθρα, ἵνα μὴ ὕποπτος αὐτῶν ἡ ἱκετηία γένηται. καὶ γὰρ ἐμαστίζοντο ἀοράτως πιμπράμενοι καὶ τὰ ἀνήκεστα πάσχοντες ἀπὸ τῆς παρουσίας ἐκείνης. νομίσαντες δὲ ἤδη τὴν κόλασιν αὐτοῖς ἐφεστάναι, ἔδεισαν ὡς ἤδη εἰς τιμωρίαν ἐμπεσούμενοι. διὸ καὶ ἀξιοῦσι μὴ πρὸ καιροῦ δοῦναι τὴν δίκην. ἐπειδὴ γὰρ κατέλαβεν αὐτοὺς τὰ δεινὰ ἐκεῖνα καὶ παράνομα ἐργαζομένους, καὶ τὸ πλάσμα τὸ ἑαυτοῦ παντὶ διαστρέφοντας τρόπῳ καὶ τιμωρουμένους, καὶ ἐνόμιζον αὐτὸν δι’ ὑπερβολὴν τῶν γενομένων οὐκ ἀναμενεῖν τὸν καιρὸν τῆς κολάσεως, διὰ τοῦτο παρεκάλουν καὶ ἐδέοντο. καὶ οἱ μηδὲ δεσμῶν ἀνεχόμενοι σιδηρῶν, ἔρχονται δεδεμένοι· καὶ οἱ τὰ ὄρη κατατρέχοντες, εἰς τὰ πεδία ἐξῄεσαν.

Source: http://cts.perseids.org/read/greekLit/t ... grc1/10-13

**
ἡ γὰρ
ἄβυσσος ἀναχώρησίς ἐστι τούτου τοῦ κόσμου. ἀξιοῦσι τοίνυν οἱ
δαίμονες μὴ πεμφθῆναι ἔξω τῆς γῆς, μηδὲ ὅπου οὐκ ἔστιν ἄνθρω-
πος, εἰς τὸ σκότος τὸ ἐξώτερον, τὸ ἡτοιμασμένον τῷ διαβόλῳ καὶ
τοῖς ἀγγέλοις αὐτοῦ.

[Stirling Bartholomew]

The problem might be ἀναχώρησις. Here it means something like "an isolated place," hence "They abyss is a place isolated from this world, therefore the demons think it's not a good idea to be sent outside the earth, where there are no people, into the outer darkness..."

No. That is not problem. It is unsafe to assume what someone else has not understood.

[Stirling Bartholomew]

Here is the text from page 316, lines 26 through page 317 line 2 with the part of most interest highlighted:

“Καὶ παρεκάλει αὐτὸν πολλὰ, ἵνα μὴ ἀποστείλῃ αὐτοὺς ἔξω τῆς
“χώρας,” ἢ εἰς τὴν ἄβυσσον ἀπελθεῖν, ὥς φησιν ὁ Λουκᾶς. ἡ γὰρ
ἄβυσσος ἀναχώρησίς ἐστι τούτου τοῦ κόσμου. ἀξιοῦσι τοίνυν οἱ
δαίμονες μὴ πεμφθῆναι ἔξω τῆς γῆς, μηδὲ ὅπου οὐκ ἔστιν ἄνθρω-
πος, εἰς τὸ σκότος τὸ ἐξώτερον, τὸ ἡτοιμασμένον τῷ διαβόλῳ καὶ
τοῖς ἀγγέλοις αὐτοῦ. ὥστε ὁ Κύριος ἠδύνατο μὲν ἐπιτάξαι αὐτοῖς,
συνεχώρησε δὲ αὐτοὺς εἶναι ἐν τῇ γῇ ταύτῃ· ὥσπερ οὖν καὶ τὸν
διάβολον, ἵνα μὴ τοῦ ἀντιπάλου τῇ ἀπουσίᾳ ζημιώσῃ τὴν ἀνθρω-
πότητα τοῦ στεφάνου τῆς νίκης.

On first read I was surprised to see the phrase ὁ Κύριος ἠδύνατο ἐπιτάξαι αὐτοῖς, so I looked more closely to try to piece this together.

The preceding context (blue type) includes remarkable statements which form the basis for ὥστε ὁ Κύριος ἠδύνατο μὲν ἐπιτάξαι αὐτοῖς. Where did the author come up with this idea: ἀξιοῦσι τοίνυν οἱ δαίμονες μὴ πεμφθῆναι ἔξω τῆς γῆς? It doesn't follow from ἡ γὰρ ἄβυσσος ἀναχώρησίς ἐστι τούτου τοῦ κόσμου.

I have two different tentative formulations of what the author is saying about Jesus not sending the demons to the abyss. But it's premature to talk about them. I was first inclined to go with the theory that Jesus needed to keep his enemies on hand to realize his purpose. I've tossed that theory out.

[Barry Hofstetter]

The problem might be ἀναχώρησις. Here it means something like "an isolated place," hence "They abyss is a place isolated from this world, therefore the demons think it's not a good idea to be sent outside the earth, where there are no people, into the outer darkness..."

No. That is not problem. It is unsafe to assume what someone else has not understood.

My apologies for misunderstanding you, but the way you worded the question implied to me that you didn't understand something about the text, and that you wanted to talk about it. To me the use of ἀξιόω appears quite straightforward and in line with normal usage, and it sounds better in English to transfer the negative to the verb rather than keep it with complementary clause. It might be better if you were to provide more details about what you are thinking so there's more to interact with.