|
Sorry David, I figured with the
difficulty some were having trying to grasp the concept of a
simple passive voice, there wasn't much to be gained in getting too involved
with the Greek middle; I do think, however, that my example is approximate
enough to convey an elemental meaning (it is, after all, how the idea is
introduced to beginners of the language). If you think more is called for, we
can start by thinking of it in these terms: the middle voice calls
special attention to the subject, which is in some way acting in relation
to itself (see Robertson's Grammar, 804); it shows that the action
is performed with special reference to the subject, wherein the subject
intimately participates in the results of the action (see Smyth, Greek
Grammar, 390, and Young's Intermediate Greek, 134).
There, now that that is clarified :>) onto
your question. The Greek middle and passive both follow the same form;
hence context and consistency (how the author uses the form in other contexts)
are summoned when determining which of these voices is being employed.
You are correct in that this particular participle (in Heb 10.14) is not used
elsewhere in Hebrews (nor the rest of Scripture, as I stated to Kevin), but the
form itself is a favorite of its author, finding usage on
multiple occasions -- reference again the examples posted last night, not
to mention others in the perfect tense. Based upon the contexts within
which the form is elsewhere employed and upon the consistently passive
voice, especially in the present tense, which is used on those occasions, I
believe it is reasonable to conclude with confidence that this
participle is passive in its thrust (Note: every one of my lexicons and all of
my parsing guides agree with this conclusion, that hagiazomenous is a present passive accusative masculine plural participle).
However, if one were to argue to the contrary that
in the context of Hebrews 10 this word ought to be translated in the middle
voice, then it would become all the more important to convey the thrust of
its present tense, because in the middle voice it would be the subjects of the
participle, which is functioning as the accusative of the statement, who
would be performing the time and action aspects; hence the translation would
read "For by one offering he has perfected forever those who are
sanctifying themselves" (present tense middle voice). I include
"themselves" here because there is no other object to receive the action of the
verb: sanctification.
I hope this is helpful,
Bill
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2005 1:31
PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
corrector/revisor
Actually, Bill, English does not have a middle voice, so your example
below is only an approximation. I think this is important to keep in
mind, less we be overly dogmatic about how a particular
text should read.
Some homework for you: how would you be able to distinguish between
middle and passive voice in Heb. 10:14?
David M.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2005 9:31
PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
corrector/revisor
Kevin wrote: As anyone can see adding BEING changes NOT JUST the MOOD
but the whole MEANING! But that is the desired effect, just you are not
supposed to know.
No, Kevin, "being" does not affect the "MOOD"
of the verb; it affects its VOICE.
- Active voice: The subject of the statement (or
clause) performs the action of the verb; e.g., Kevin fed the
children.
- Middle voice: The subject of the statement
performs the action of the verb upon him- or her- or itself; e.g., Kevin
fed himself.
- Passive voice: Someone or something other
than the subject of the statement performs the action of the verb;
e.g. Kevin is being fed by the children.
Hagiazomenous is a participle in the present tense and the passive voice; it
functions as the accusative (or direct object) of the statement;
it is masculine and it is plural (The accusative in this verse are
those whom Christ "has perfected forever"). The present tense indicates that
the action (to sanctify) is presently taking place; the passive voice
indicates that the action is being performed by someone other than the
accusative; i.e., someone other than those who have been perfected; hence
the translation: "For by one offering He has perfected forever those
who are being sanctified."
Bill
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2005 8:34
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
corrector/revisor
Well my point was the word is at it's root Sanctify
The mood attaches a ING or ED making it sanctified or
sanctifying.
The WORD for BEING is NOT in the text, just in someones
theology!
It has been inserted in a very few of the more corrupt and newest
Translations
As anyone can see adding BEING changes NOT JUST the MOOD but the
whole MEANING! But that is the desired effect, just you are not supposed
to know.
I bet the RCC translations read this way because that would be
desirable for their theology
Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
hagiazomenous verb participle present passive accusative
masculine plural [Friberg]
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2005
5:52 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
corrector/revisor
What is the greek word in the text, that is to BE
translated into "BEING" in hebrews 10:14? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
They are not "being perfected." They are being
sanctified. I believe that "sactification" is the work of God within the
believer -- its finale is expressed [in part] in a visible difference
(holiness) between "us" and "them." In this example, we
are passively involved to the glory of God. Perfection, in this scripture, is a
done deal -- Him dying ONCE AND FOR ALL TIME
for us.
JD -----Original Message----- From:
Kevin Deegan < openairmission@yahoo.com> To:
[email protected]Sent: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 18:17:39 -0800
(PST) Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] corrector/ revisor
KJV For by one
offering he hath perfected for ever them that are
sanctified.
Copyright © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968,
1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman
Foundation For by one offering He has perfected
for all time those who are sanctified. Youngs Literal translation for by one offering
he hath perfected to the end those sanctified
ASV For by one offering he hath perfected for
ever them that are sanctified.
NKJV For by one offering He has perfected
forever those who are being sanctified.
NIV because by one sacrifice
he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.
If Christ's offering gives eternal perfection, as the
first half of the verse claims, why does the rest of the verse say
that we are BEING 'perfected'?
Dean Moore
<cd_moore@earthlink.net> wrote:
cd: see the Bottom of
page.
----- Original Message -----
To: [email protected]
Sent: 11/21/2005 10:08:48
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
corrector/revisor
Since the theme has been that
of perfection, I thought I would keep it going with a look at
Hebrews 10.14. The KJV says, "For by one offering he
hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified." A cursory
reading of this verse may leave one with the impression that the
"perfected" are those whose sanctification is
complete: they are, after all, "sanctified,"
aren't they? Well, not if one's concern is with holding
true to the "pure" word of God as set forth in
the "Received Text." In the Greek this participle is a
present tense in the passive voice. If one were desiring
to reflect that voice in his translation and thereby hold true
to the grammar and intent of the "majority text," this participle would best be translated as "those
who are being sanctified," thereby reflecting
a sanctification which is
passive (i.e.., the action is being
pe rformed by someone other than the subject) and not
yet complete. Hence according
to this, Christ has perfected forever (a completed action), not
those who are presently sanctified (also a completed action),
but those who are in the process of being sanctified: a fairly significant difference, it seems to
me. Bill
So this is an example
of how the KJV is in error
Bill?
IMO the error is with your
understanding rather than with the text of the KJV translation. You have
read something into the text that is not there and have
made a straw man to knock down. The word
sanctification does not necessarily mean an action being performed; the same word is used in 1 Cor 7:14 for an unbelieving wife
who is sanctified (set apart, consecrated) by the faith of her
husband. In this sense "sanctified" means something
entirely different from what you describe. So IOW "By one offering Jesus has
perfected for ever them that are set apart, consecrated (or
sanctified)."
I have a huge banner that says the same thing you
banner say on 1 John 2:4-I will send you a picture of it
sis :-)
judyt
He that says "I know Him" and doesn't keep His
Commandments
is a liar (1 John
2:4)
__________________________________________________
Do You
Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection
around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Yahoo!
FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.
|
