Post on 06-Apr-2018
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)
8/3/2019 Gramm Abiguity 1 Pet
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
8/3/2019 Gramm Abiguity 1 Pet
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
8/3/2019 Gramm Abiguity 1 Pet
4/7
92 T H E CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY [Vol. 36
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.
8/3/2019 Gramm Abiguity 1 Pet
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
8/3/2019 Gramm Abiguity 1 Pet
6/7
94 T H E CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY [Vol. 36
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
8/3/2019 Gramm Abiguity 1 Pet
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.