gramm abiguity 1 pet

8/3/2019 Gramm Abiguity 1 Pet

1/7

A GRAMMATICAL AMBIGUITY IN 1 PET 1:23

From earliest Christian times, a grammatical ambiguity has troubled the

literary and theological exegesis of 1 Pet 1:2s.1 The problem bears on

the agreement of the two participles in the phrase dia logou sontos theou

kai menontos.

In NT Greek, attributive adjectives and participles may either precede

or follow the noun they modify.2 Zontos could thus modify either logou or

theou. The agreement of menontos, which is verbally separated from

zontos by one of the substantives but closely joined to it by kai, depends

on that of zontos. Both participles must be construed with the same noun.Since attributes usually modify the closest substantive, the two participles

could very well modify theou. On the other hand, if the position of kai

menontos is emphatic, they could just as well be related to logou.

Exegetical History

The early Greek commentaries3 on 1 Pet consistently construed both

participles with logou without alluding explicitly to the above-noted ambigu

ity. The relevant passages in these commentaries have not been preserved

1 Since much of the discussion in the present article refers to stylistic elements in1 Pet 1:22-23, the following structural analysis will prove helpful:

vs. 22 Tas psychos 'ymn 'gnikotesen t 'ypako tes aitheiaseis philadelphian anypokriton,

ek kardiasalllous agapsate

ektens,

vs. 23 anagegennmenoi ouk ek sporas phtharts alla aphthartou,dia logou sontos theou kai menontos

Each of the three clauses has three members. The main clause is situated betweenthe two subordinate clauses, each of which is basically composed of a perfect participle and two prepositional phrases. The first of these clauses is in the active voice;the second is passive. Such a structure, in a letter noted for its stylistic excellence,is not accidental.

2 James Hope Moulton, A Grammar of New Testament Greek. (Edinburgh: T. & T.

Clark, 1963) III, 349.3 Clement of Alexandria, PG 9, 729; Oecumenius, PG 119, 527-528; Theophylactus,PG 125, 1203-1206. The commentary of Didymus of Alexandria (PG 39, 1761)


2/7

90 T H E CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY [Vol. 36

in Greek but in Latin translations. It is possible that the ambiguity was

actually maintained in the original texts and resolved by the translators.In so acting, however, the translators would have stood in opposition to

the generality of Latin commentators,4 who related both participles directly

to theou. The apparent unanimity among Latin commentators probably

stems from the influence of the Vulgate rendering of the text as per verbum

Dei vivi et permanentis.

Calvin5 may have been the first explicitly to call attention to the ambiguity

inherent in the Greek text. He resolved the difficulty on the basis of the

parallelism between the words logou and sporas:

anagegennmenoiouk ek SPORAS phtharts alia aphthartou,dia LOGOU zontos theou kai menontos.

Since the seed is said to be incorruptible, it appears more logical to relate

zontos and menontos grammatically to logou, in quo ilia Dei perpetuitas

relucet, tamquam in vivo speculo. Bengel6 drew the same conclusion by

interpreting 1:23 in the light of 1:25, which states that verbum Dei manet

in aeternum. Among modern commentators, Johnstone,7 Bigg,8 Selwyn9 and

Spicq10

shared both the approach and the conclusion of Calvin and Bengeland related the participles to logou.

Grotius,11 on the other hand, attached both participles to theou on the

basis of a possible relationship between 1 Pet 1:23 and the Greek text of

Dan 6:27, theos zn kai menon. Estius12

came to the same conclusion but

4 Cassiodorus, PL 70, 1363-1364; Martin, PL 209, 223; Bede the Venerable, PL 93,46-47; Cajetan, Epistolae Pauli et aliorum Apostolorum (Venetiis, 1532) 177B ; Hugode Sancto Charo, Tomus Septimus, "Postilla super I Epistolam Canonicam B. Petri,"(Venetiis: Apud Nicolaum Pezzano, MDCCLIV) 326B-327A.

5 J. Calvinus, Opera quae super sunt omnia (Corpus Reformatorum, LXXXIII),Opera esegetica et homiletica (Brunsvigae: C.A. Schwetschke, 1896), 33, 228-229.

6 Bengel, Gnomon Novi Testamenti. (Tubingae: Schramm, 1742) 1007.7 R. Johnstone, Commentary on the First Epistle of Peter (Edinburgh: T. & T.

Clark, 1888) 107-108.8 C. Bigg, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistles of St. Peter and

St. Jude. (ICC, 2d ed; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1902) 123.9 E. G. Selwyn, The First Epistle of St. Peter. (2d ed.; London: Macmillan &

Co. Ltd., 1947) 151.10

C. Spicq, Les Epitres de Saint Pierre. (Sources Bibliques; Paris: Gabalda,1966) 76.

11 H. Grotius, Annotata ad Actus Apostlicos, Epstolas et Apocalypsim, siveCriticorum Sacrorum. (Londoni: J. Flasher, MDCLX), Tomus VII, c. 4509.

12


3/7

1974] SHORTER COMMUNICATIONS 91

appears to have been influenced by systematic considerations: the participles

must modify theou, since the permanence of God's word is expressed in24-25. This last argument no longer retains the attention of commentators.

Hort13

and Bishop,14

however, shared the view proposed by Grotius and

attached the participles to theou. Beare15 leaned towards the same position

but added that the two adjectives should perhaps be attached to both logou

and theou.

Among contemporary translations of the NT, the Revised Standard

Version, The Anchor Bible and the New American Bible related the

participles to logou: "through the living and abiding (NAB: enduring)

word of God." The New English Bible did the same, but proposed analternate translation: "through the word of the living and enduring God."

The Goodspeed and Knox Bibles, as well as the French editions of the

Jerusalem Bible, construed the participles with theou. The English edition

of the Jerusalem Bible combined both possibilities in a free translation:

"from the everlasting word of the living and eternal God."

Elements for a Solution

Several philological and literary considerations, coupled with the observations and principles adduced by Calvin and Bengel, indicate that this long

standing problem is open to solution. The following analysis points away

from a construction with theou and clearly favors a direct agreement with

logou.

The role of the preposition dia has definite bearing on the problem. In the

present context, dia with the genitive expresses an instrumental relationship

between anagegennmenoi and logou. The logos is thus the means, the

cause or the mediating principle through which christians have been

regenerated. Theou enters the phrase as an active genitive qualifying logou.God is thus the agent of regeneration through the word. Were the phrase

to be stated in the active voice, the participles might well be related to

theou, which would then be the subject and main substantive in its clause.

In its passive expression, however, the main substantive is clearly logou.

The normal construction would consequently relate the participles to logou

through which regeneration has been effected. A special reason would be

required to judge otherwise.

The clear parallelism between the expressions dia logou and ek sporas

13Hort, cf. Selwyn, First Epistle, p. 151 and Bigg, A Critical, p. 123.

14Eric F F Bishop "A Living and Unchanging God in I Peter 1 23 " The


4/7


provides an independent confirmation. Like the word logou, sporas repre

sents a means of regeneration. As the difference in prepositions indicates,however, the relationship of the two terms to regeneration is not identical.

The word spora is a metaphorical term drawn from plant life which

appears nowhere else in the NT. Its primary meaning is the "sowing of

seed" or the "seeding/' When it is related to a passive form of the verb,

its meaning becomes "the seed which has been sown." Many authors

translate the term as an equivalent of sperma, seed. It should be noted that

1 Pet 1:23 is the only reference given by Liddell and Scott16 for this mean

ing.

Given this contextual interpretation of the term spora, the differencebetween the prepositions ek and dia becomes highly significant. The term

spora refers to an intrinsic incorruptible (aphthartou) source of regenerated

life. The word logos, on the other hand, refers to an extrinsic principle

or instrument of regeneration. Such a relationship between the substantives

would normally imply a similar relationship between their respective

attributes. The incorruptible quality of the seed which has been sown is

thus accounted for by the living and enduring qualities of the logos. The

participles zontos and menontos share in the instrumental dynamism of the

logos and take on the nuance of "life-giving" and "conferring of permanence." The word as received (spora) is incorruptible because it reflects

the permanence of the word as given (logos) by God.

The above observations concerning the prepositional phrase dia logou

and its relationship to ek sporas in 1:23 find additional confirmation in an

analysis of the entire sentence. First, the clause we have been considering

is structurally parallel to the opening clause of the sentence. The obvious

distinction between the prepositions en and eis confirms the distinction

between ek and dia. Secondly, just as the second prepositional phrase in

1:22 is not only parallel to the first but in a way subordinate and qualifyingwith regard to it, so also must dia logou be subordinate and qualifying with

regard to ek sporas. The intentionality expressed by eis philadelphian

anypokriton refers not merely to fgnikotes but to tas psychos 'ymnegnikotes en t 'ypako tes altheias. Correspondingly, the extrinsic

causality indicated by dia logou refers not simply to anagegennmenoi but

to anagegennmenoi . . . ek sporas . . . Thirdly, just as the attribute

anypokriton corresponded dynamically to the genitive tes altheias, so also

must zontos kai menontos correspond to aphthartou. Such a correspondence

requires that zontos kai menontos modify logou just as aphthartou modifiessporas.


5/7

1974] SHORTER COMMUNICATIONS 93

The above considerations, which are based on a philological and literary

analysis of the prepositional phrase, of the clause in which it stands and ofthe entire sentence is supported by the lengthy development of dia . . .

menontos in a quotation of Isa 40:6-8 (1:24-25). The point of this quotation

is precisely that the word of the Lord endures forever (to de 'rema

kyriou menei eis ton ina). The author himself seems to have resolved

the difficulty.

Relating the participles to theou rather than logou would seem to

presuppose that the terms constitute part of a stereotyped expression and

that they have been removed from a direct relationship to the incorruptibil

ity of the seed which has been sown. The author would have expressed arelationship between the incorruptibility of the seed and the life and

permanence of God, with the implication that these qualities are communi

cated through the word. Such a stereotyped expression could perhaps be

related to Dan 6:27. There is no evidence, however, of such an expression

having become current. Further, the very structure of the phrase, in which

the words zontos and menontos are sharply separated from one another,

indicates that the usage in this text is not stereotyped. Rather, it represents

a deliberate effort at emphasis in a carefully constructed sentence. Just as

anypokriton parallels both tes altheias and ek kardias, so also does kaimenontos parallel both alia aphthartou and ektens.

A final indication stems from the position of the present participle zn

in the three cases where it is used attributively in the first major section of

the letter (1:3-2:10). In all three cases the participle follows the noun it

modifies: elpida zsan (1:3), lithon znta (2:4) and lithoi zontas (2:5).

This argument, however, is admittedly weak, since examples are few and

the author's usage does not reveal the same consistency in the case of other

adjectives and participles.

Conclusion and Implications

The convergence of grammatical, philological and literary indications

points to one conclusion: that the two participles zontos and menontos

modify logou directly and are related only indirectly to theou. The analysis

also indicates a dynamic relationship between the logos and the spora

in Christian regeneration as well as in the regenerated life which flows from

it. This emphasis on the continuing effects of regeneration is best under

stood if the unity of this part of the letter is maintained. Authors havelong pointed out that the epistle has two contexts, one of persecution and


6/7


moment of regeneration, but on how regeneration constitutes a continuing

basis for a Christian attitude. This very preoccupation seems to have been

occasioned by the persecution context. Vss. 22-25 are thus an exhortationto continued effort in spite of difficulties.

The attribution of both and menn to the logos was not foreign to

early Christian thought, as is clear from Heb 4:12 ( gar(o logos tou

theou) and 1 Jn who writes "concerning the word of life" (peri tou logou

tes zos) (1:1) and declares that "the word of God endures in you" (kai

logos tou theou en( ymin menei (2:14).

Our conclusion is consonant with the interpretation of the early Greek

commentaries and agrees with the position taken long ago by Calvin and

Bengel. A good translation is that of the New American Bible: "through

the living and enduring word of God."

EUGENE A. LAVERDIERE, S.S.S.

John Carroll University

University Heights

Cleveland, Ohio 44118


7/7

^ s

Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use

according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as

otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the

copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,

reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a

violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permissionfrom the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal

typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,

for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.

Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specificwork for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered

by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the

copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously

published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS

collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.

The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the AmericanTheological Library Association.

gramm abiguity 1 pet

Documents