Truly I say to you, Amen I say to you, Inferences from a Gospel manner of speech

by kepler 51 Replies latest watchtower bible

kepler

In another topic Changes in the NWT, one of the correspondents posted that
Concerning the comma in Luke 23:43, http://www.dtl.org/alt/comments/today.htmhas some interesting comments.
To summarize what was stated at this website, the translator selected a translation for Luke 23:43
And Jesus said to him, "Positively I say to you, today you will be with Me in paradise."
The author states: The "him" in the verse is, of course, the repentant thief on the cross. Someone asked me why it is the ALT puts the comma before "today" rather than after.
However, even in the NWT, every place else the phrase occurs, the comma is placed directly after "you." So the burden of proof would be on them to prove why the phrase should be punctuated differently this one time and to explain why Jesus would have changed His lifetime practice while at the point of death.
So the reason the ALT and most every other version places the comma before "today" is consistency and simple logic. There really is no reason to place the comma after "today" - unless someone is trying to uphold their pre-conceived theology.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For those who have not looked at it the ALT website, one thing mentioned is that in the 76 instances of translating the characteristic " I say to you,..." of Jesus Christ, only one time did the NWT translators elect to shift the comma from "you" to the next word. Our case in point.
To trace the use of the Greek word "lego" in the NT, in concordances it is listed under the larger unit that includes "saying, tell, said, answered, replied,...", but in a work like McReynolds' Word Study Greek English New Testament, one can pick out the instances where such phrases occur. Following the Greek and English text is a concordance appendix. The Strong number is 3004. Generally, we are looking for “amin lego imin…” or “amin amin lego imin”. I found 67 instances.
McReynolds NWT
Matthew
1 3:9 for I tell you, God is able for I say to you that God is able
2 5:18 truly I tell you, until for truly I say to you that sooner
3 5:20 for I tell you, unless your for I say to you that if your
4 5:22 but i say to you that if you however, I say to you that everyone
5 5:26 truly i tell you, I say to you for a fact, you
...
6 6:2 truly I tell you, they have truly I say to you, they are having
7 6:5 truly I tell you , they have “
8 8:10 truly I tell you, in no one in I tell you the truth, with no one in
9 10:15 truly I tell you, it will be truly I say to you, it will be more
10 10:23 truly I tell you, you will not truly I say to you, you will by
11 10:42 truly I tell you, none of these I will tell you truly, he will by no means
12 11:11 truly I tell you, among those truly I say to you, people, among those
13 13:17 truly I tell you, many prophets for I truly say to you, many prophets
14 16:18 And I tell you, you are Peter I say to you, you are Peter and on this rock mass I will
build my congregation and the gates of Hades will not overpower it
15 17:20 For truly I tell you, if you for truly I say to you, if you have faith
16 18:3 Truly I tell you, unless you Truly I say to you, unless you turn around and become
17 18:18 Truly I tell you, whatever Truly I say to you men, whatever
18 18:19 Again truly I tell you, if you Again I truly say to you, if two of you
19 19:23 Truly I tell you, it will be Truly I say to you that it will be a difficult thing
20 19:28 Truly I tell you, at the renewal Truly I say to you, in the re-creation, when the son of man
21 21:21 Truly I tell you, if you have Truly I say to you, if only you have faith
22 21:31 Truly I tell you, the tax Truly I say to you that the tax collectors and the harlots are going
Ahead of you into the kingdom of God
23 21:43 I tell you, the kingdom of God I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you
24 23:36 Truly I tell you, all this will Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation
25 24:2 Truly I tell you, not one stone Truly I say to you, by no means will a stone
26 24:34 I tell you, this generation Truly I say to you that this generation will by no means pass away
27 24:47 Truly I tell you, he will put Truly I say to you, he will appoint him over all
28 25:45 Truly I tell you, just as you Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not
29 26:13 Truly I tell you, wherever Truly I say to you, wherever this good news is preached
30 26:21 Truly I tell you, one of you Truly I say to you, one of you will betray me

Mark
31 3:28 truly I tell you, people will truly I say to you that all things will be forgiven
32 8:12 truly I tell you, no sign will Truly I say, no sign will be given
33 9:1 truly I tell you, there are Truly I say to you, there are some
34 10:29 I tell you, there is no one Truly I say to you men, no one has left
35 11:24 So I tell you, This is why I tell you, all the things

Luke
36 3:8 I tell you, God is able from For I say to you that God has power to
37 4:24 I tell you, no prophet is Truly I tell you, that no prophet
38 7:9 I tell you, not even in Israel I tell you, not even in Israel
39 7:47 Therefore I tell you, her sins By virtue of this, I tell you, her sins
40 9:27 But truly I tell you, there are But I tell you truthfully, there are
41 10:12 I tell you, on that day it will be I tell you that it will be
42 10:24 For I tell you that many For I say to you, many prophets
43 11:9 So I say to you, ask and it Accordingly, I say to you, keep on asking
44 12:27 Yet I tell you, even Solomon for I tell you, not even Solomon
45 14:24 For I tell you, none of those For I say to you, people, none of those
46 15:10 I tell you, there is joy in the I tell you, joy arises quickly
47 18:8 I tell you, he will quickly I tell you, he will not
48 18:14 I tell you, this man went down I tell you, this man went down to
49 18:17 Truly I tell you, truly I say to you, whoever does not
50 21:3 He said, “Truly I tell you, he said, I tell you truthfully, this lady
51 21:32 Truly I tell you, this Truly I say to you, this generation will by no
means pass away
52 23:43 He replied, “Truly I tell you, today you And he said to him, “Truly I tell you today, you
will be with me in paradise.” will be with me in paradise.”

John
53 1:51 I tell you, you will see heaven Most truly I say to you men, you will see heaven
54 3:3 Jesus answered him, “Very truly I tell you, no one In answer Jesus said to him, “Most truly I say to you, unless
55 5:19 Jesus said to them, “Very truly, I tell you, the Jesus went on to say to them: “Most truly I say to you, the son
56 5:24 Very truly, I tell you, anyone Most truly I say to you, he that hears
57 5:25 Very truly, I tell you, the hour is coming Most truly I say to you, the hour is coming
and is now here, when the dead will hear
the voice of the son of God and those who Why not have said “ I say to you this hour, the dead will hear
hear will live. soon the voice of the son of God ….”?

58 6:32 Very truly, I tell you, Most truly I say to you,
59 8:34 truly, I tell you, everyone Most truly I say to you,
60 8:51 very truly, I tell you, whoever Most truly I say to you,

61 8:58 very truly, I tell you, before Abraham was, I am Most truly I say to you, before Abraham came into existence
(Amin, amin, lego imin prin Abraam ego eimi) I have been.
62 10:1 very truly, I tell you, anyone Most truly I say to you, he that does not enter
63 10:7 I tell you, I am the gate for Most truly I say to you, I am the door of the sheep
64 12:24 very truly, I tell you, the one Most truly I say to you, unless a grain of wheat
65 16:20 very truly, I tell you, you Most truly I say to you, you will weep and wail
66 16:23 very truly, I tell you, if you Most truly I say to you, if you ask the Father
67 21:18 very truly, I tell you, when Most truly I say to you, when you were younger

Revelations - The expression is absent

Observations

1. Luke 23:43 is definitely translated inconsistently in the NWT when compared with these other examples.
2. Some of the most significant statements among the words of the Gospel are prefaced by the expression, “…truly I tell you/ truly I say to you. An example, “this generation” expression appears amid the list of “truly I tell you” invocations.
3. Where the McReynolds text consistently uses a comma, the NWT sometimes uses the subordinating conjunction “that” to the same effect.
(Depending on the grammar of the modern language, it is possible to have both a comma and conjunction – e.g., Russian, or just a conjunction - English).
4. Occasionally, beside the second person address ( to you), “people” or “men” are addressed in the NWT. We did not find this in the Greek of Matt 18:18, Luke 14:24 and John 1:51 in the McReynolds text.
5. The conversational and narrative convention apparent in the four Gospels, including John, is absent in the Revelations of John of Patmos in which Christ speaks to the narrator in a dream or vision.
6. From one chapter to the next in the NWT, the simple phrases under discussion have variations in translations. The McReynolds text does not. In the McReynolds concordance, “amin” is translated simply as “amen”, but the sidebar interpretation was consistently “Truly I tell you from one book of the NT to the other, with “Very truly” indicating the use of “amin” twice.

Continuing with the ALT translator's discussion:
In answer to an inquiry from a reader, the translator pointed out that he had checked over 70 Bible versions and they all used the same punctuation. He explained further.
The answer as to why the comma is directly after the first "you" is simple: The phrase "Positively, I say to you" or "Most positively, I say to you" (as it is translated in the ALT) occurs 76 times in the Gospels, always spoken by Jesus. In the other 75 occurrences, the comma is ALWAYS placed directly after the "you." Moreover, in none of these occurrences would it make any sense to include the next word before the comma.
So after punctuating the identical phrase in the identical manner 75 times, for consistency sake, it would only make sense to punctuate it the same way the 76th time.
Added to this simple grammatical explanation is the fact that it would make no sense whatsoever to include "today" in the introductory phrase. The word is completely redundant and unnecessary if punctuated that way. "Positively I say to you today, …" When else is Jesus speaking, tomorrow?
Furthermore, remember the situation: Jesus is hanging on the cross. He is struggling for every breath. Every word He speaks would be difficult. So, after a lifetime of saying "Positively, I say to you" (pause), it would make no sense for Him to now, as He is struggling for every breath, to change His lifetime pattern and add the completely unnecessary word "today" before the pause. But after the pause, it makes perfect sense. There, the word does have meaning.
Specifically, in the Greek text, the word "today" is the first word in the second phrase of Jesus words in the Greek text. In Greek usage, placing a word first in a clause is done to emphasize the word. Here, Jesus is emphasizing that immediately upon his death, the thief would be with Him in paradise.
And finally, the colloquial equivalent to "Positively, I say to you" would be something like, "Let me tell you the truth." And I don't ever see myself saying "Let me tell you the truth today (pause) ...." In other words, no one today would include the word "today" in an introductory phrase. Again, it is simply redundant and unnecessary. And I doubt very much anyone in Jesus' time did either.
Of course, there is ONE English version which does put the comma after the "today" in Luke 22:43 - the New World Translation, the "Bible" of Jehovah's Witnesses. But their reason for doing so is their preconceived theology, not grammar. JWs do not believe the righteous go directly to "paradise" after death. They believe people enter a state of non-existence at death, only to be "re-created" at the resurrection.
sir82

The standard JW response would be, "But Jesus was not 'in paradise' that day - he was in Sheol / Hades, and unconscious, until his resurrection, which was more than 24 hours away. So the criminal could not have been 'with him in paradise' on that day. Therefore, evidently Jesus must have meant something else, so it makes sense to move the comma."
kepler

The standard reply, down to the 24 hour layover in the nether world , illustrates a basic problem:
Who is setting the agenda of the story? Jesus or the organization. To the outsider like myself, everyone in the Bible appears to be held captive in a Brooklyn basement with a host of PR people distributing pamphlets continually updating their status. Unlike the grand inquisitor of Dostoevskij's Brothers Karamazov who does not allow Jesus to act further or make any further pronouncements, we have a set that alters his pronouncements past.
In any case, it is clear that except for the "translators" of the NWT, few have looked at the decision making process or evidence of Luke 23:43.
I hope someone examines Revelations for anything equivalent to "Truly I say to you..." Does Jesus, when he speaks to John the Apostle or John of Patmos - from wherever he was - lose his manner of speech? How then should we recognize him this time amid all the other dreams that Christians have had?
Bobcat

Kepler:
Very nice analytical study! And you get extra credit for using the McReynold's Interlinear. This is a personal favorite reference of mine. One of the most used in my library. Far better in usefulness than the KIT, simply for the Greek concordance in the back and putting Strong's numbering system in it to link it to the text. Here is a link to where it can be purchased if any are interested. It is actually cheaper now than when I bought it a few years ago.
Another thing I like about the Greek concordance is the page links to several other references for extended info.
I used about 2 weeks of lunch time to transfer the Strong's numbers to my copy of BDAG a couple of years ago. Now it is a hyper fast reference for me.
Since Greek is an inflected language, there is no reason or need to say that you said something "Today." The "I say to you" (Greek verb lego) already says that.
By the way, putting the comma before "Today" could be argued to support the JW viewpoint. In other words, Jesus could be encouraging the thief that, from his (the thief's) point of view, he will find himself alive in the Kingdom in no time flat. The thief would die that day (that much was already known by both Jesus and the two being put to death with him) and, to the thief, it would seem like the next moment ("today") he would be waking up in the Kingdom. Of course, he would later learn that a considerable time had actually elapsed.
Interestingly, JWs already encourage terminally ill ones with the same logic. (I.e. dying provides the fastest ticket into the new world.) But, having expended so much argument in favor of the comma after "Today," I don't think the WT has the humility to change their stance.
Incidentally, I had the Analytical-Literal NT for e-Sword until it changed to version 9. The translator says it is based on the Byzantine text. For any who know, is there any significance to that?
Take Care
Bobcat

Kepler:
Concerning the use of "Amen" or "truly", here is my count based on The Englishman's Greek Concordance of the NT :
Matthew 32
Mark 15
Luke 8
John 26 (John's use is unique in that it is doubled ("Truly, truly")
Total 81
But of these, 4 times it is used as an affirmative ending ("Amen") rather than as a saying of Jesus. (Mt 28:20; Mr 16:20; Lu 24:53; Jn 21:25)
"Amen" occurs in Revelation in 1:6, 7, 18; 3:14; 5:14; 7:12 [2x]; 19:4; 22:20, 21. But never in the "truly I tell you" formula. Rather as an affirmative.
Take Care
Bobcat

Kepler:
Here is a further breakdown of "truly I say":
Matthew: 5:18, 26; 6:2, 5, 13, 16; 8:10; 10:15, 23, 42; 11:11; 13:17; 16:28; 17:20; 18:3, 13, 18; 19:23, 28; 21:21, 31; 23:36; 24:2, 34, 47; 25:12, 40, 45; 26:13, 21, 34
Mark: 3:28; 6:11; 8:12; 9:1, 41; 10:15, 29; 11:23; 12:43; 13:30; 14:9, 18, 25, 30
Luke: 4:24; 12:37; 13:35; 18:17, 29; 21:32; 23:43; 24:53
John: 1:51(52); 3:3, 5, 11; 5:19, 24, 25; 6:26, 32, 47, 53; 8:34, 51, 58; 10:1, 7; 12:24; 13:16, 20, 21, 38; 14:12; 16:20, 23; 21:18
Hope this helps with your analysis.
Take Care
kepler

Bobcat,
10:4 and thanks.
Haven't downloaded any concordances per se as of yet, but getting more acquainted with their use on line - including the Strong number.
As mentioned, Greek is inflected, but Strong number words are not necessarily. The "I say - lego" is an example. Yet earlier, while looking at the use of Babylon in Hebrew, I discovered that Babylon the city was number 0894 and Babylon(ia?) the province was 0895. So sometimes the system does allow the researcher to explore finer points.
Some details I did not check thoroughly, but might be worth examining further. Amin, amin in translation was treated as "Very truly or most truly" and a single amin as truly. Now I am not saying that words identified as strong number 3004 are entirely absent in Revelations, but I did not see any of that characteristic Gospel form, "Amen, amen I say to you,..." For four Gospels, this expression averages about 19 times per book. To me its absence in Revelations says a lot, bringing up every question ever posed about whether or not Revelations should have made it into the canonical final cut as a cross between an epistle and a gospel.
... Did Christ ever before address his apostles to write anything according to his instructions?
King Solomon

When else is Jesus speaking, tomorrow?
LOL!
On the other hand, perhaps the thief had the heavenly hope as one of the anointed?
Remember: setting aside the temporal consideration, Jesus said "with ME in Paradise". Jesus supposedly will rule from a Heavenly paradise, not from an Earthly paradise.
I've always suspected this passage was an attempt to display the principle pointed out in Jesus' parable of the owner of the vineyard, who hires workers to harvest and decides the Johnny-Come-Latelies get paid for a full-days work, just the same as those who put in a full-days worth of labor.
Amin, amin in translation was treated as "Very truly or most truly" and a single amin as truly.
My understanding is the repeating of 'amin' is done to make it more emphatic, to give the words more weight....
Leolaia

This is a topic that has interested me a long time. I do agree that the NWT's use of punctuation here is incorrect. But it should be recognized that it is technically permissible by the text (without hoti "that" in the sentence, the parsing of the clause is ambiguous) and the Society does provide arguments in support of their rendering. First they cite precedents for the NWT rendering in certain modern translations: "Verily I say unto thee this day: With me shalt thou be in Paradise" (Rotherham), "Truly I say to you today, You will be with me in Paradise" (Lamsa), "Verily, to you am I saying today, with Me shall you be in paradise" (Concordant Literal New Testament), "Indeed today I say you, you shall be with Me in the paradise" (Tomanek), etc. This does not amount to much, but it shows that they are not the first to render the passage that way. They also find an ancient witness for this parsing (versional support) in the Curetonian Old Syriac (fifth century AD): "Verily I say to thee to-day that with me thou shalt be in the Eden's garden". This parsing is also alluded to in a number of other sources from Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages:
(1) Macarius (fourth century AD) wrote: "How altogether vile are those who twist his words into a mere promise for the future, 'Verily I say to you today,' then punctuating, 'you shall be with me in paradise' (amèn legò soi sèmeron, heita diasteilantes, esè met' emou en paradeisò)" (Apocriticus 3.91.9); (2) (Pseudo?)-Hesychius (date uncertain, fifth century or later) similarly noted: "Some indeed read this way, 'Truly I tell you today' (amèn legò soi sèmeron), then they add (heita epipherousin), 'that you will be with me in paradise' (hoti met' emou ese en tò paradeisò)" (Quaestiones 47); (3) The Gospel of Nicodemus (sixth century AD) phrased the promise: "Today I tell you the truth that in my kingdom I should have you in paradise with me (sèmeron legò soi alètheian hoti en tè basileia mou hina se ekhò eis ton paradeison met' emou)" (10.2,1.18, recension m1), "Today I tell you, you will be with me in paradise (sèmeron legò soi met' emou esè en tò paradeisò)" (10.2,1.18, recension m1-m2); (4) A scolion in three miniscule MSS from the tenth-eleventh centuries AD states: "Others say it must be understood with a comma (dein hupostizontas anaginòskein), 'Truly I tell you today (amèn legò soi sèmeron),' and then adding the expression this way (eith' houtòs epipherein to), 'You will be with me' (met' emou esè)" (Catena in Lucam, typus B, 169.2); (5) Theophylact (twelfth century AD) also noted: "Others insist on the expression, punctuating after 'today' (stizontes eis to sèmeron) so it reads, 'Truly I tell you today,' and then 'You will be with me in paradise (amèn legò soi sèmeron, heita to, met' emou ese en tò paradeisò)" (Enarrationes in Lucam, 23.43).
The Society, following the lead of E. W. Bullinger, also finds OT support for their reading of the text. "Truly I tell you today" is reckoned to have a model in the Deuteronomistic formulae "I declare to you this day" (ha`îdotî bakem hayyôm), "I command you this day" (m e tsauka hayyôm), "I am speaking to your ears this day" (dober be'azenêkem hayyom), etc. which has a similar tone of solemnity (Deuteronomy 4:26, 40, 5:1, and some 40 other examples). In the LXX these are translated in such forms as lalò en tois òsin humòn en tè hèmera tautè "I speak to your ears this day" (5:1) and enetellomai soi sèmeron "I command you today" (6:6). Finally the Society supports their parsing by noting that Jesus could not have promised the thief that he would go to Paradise that same day if they both would be going to Hades as the same author states in Acts 2:31.
So there is some grounds to support the NWT rendering. But exegesis involves an evaluation of the preponderance of evidence to determine which interpretive option best accounts for the evidence, and the majority opinion is against the parsing found in the NWT for a number of reasons. First of all, the OT parallels are not very close since none of them utilize the verb legein or the solemnity expression amèn. It is clear that amèn (sometimes doubled) + legein + "you" is a fixed expression in the canonical gospels, occurring some 70 times elsewhere (plus a few more cases in Luke where alèthòs "truly" is used), and nowhere else does a time expression form part of the formula, much less sèmeron specifically. This suggests that the similarity with the OT formulae (which always contained hayyôm) is coincidental. In contrast, the OT expression occurs once in the NT in a form very close to what is found in Deuteronomy: "I testify to you today" (marturomai humin en tè sèmeron hèmera) in Acts 20:26 (cf. diamarturomai humin sèmeron in Deuteronomy 4:26 LXX). Some Watchtower apologists list Luke 2:11, 4:21, 5:26, 19:9, 22:61 as instances where Luke inserts hoti in order to separate sèmeron from preceding speech, but none of these are syntactically similar to Luke 23:43 (where ambiguity would result without the hoti). But there are a number of instances where a time expression does immediately follow legò humin/soi "I say to you" without an intervening hoti, and in each case they do not belong to the introductory formula: (1) Matthew 5:18: "For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth passes away, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished", (2) Matthew 26:64: "But I tell you, from now on you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven", (3) Luke 17:34: "I tell you, on that night there will be two in one bed, one will be taken and the other left", (4) John 21:18: "Verily verily I tell you, when you were younger you used to fasten your own belt and go wherever you wished". Morever, there are two additional examples of a time expression following the introductory formula with hoti, and in both cases the time expression does not belong with the formula: (1) Matthew 26:34: "Truly I say to you that (hoti) during this night, before the cock crows three times, you will deny me", (2) Mark 14:30: "Truly I say to you that (hoti) you today, this night, before the cock crows three times, you will deny me". So the NT usage of this formula supports strongly that sèmeron in Luke 23:43 belong with the second clause.
There are also contexutal considerations. Notice the way Luke 23:43 answers the question posed by the repentant thief: "Remember (mnèsthèti) me whenever (hotan) you may come (elthès) into your kingdom". Here (1) the verb "remember" implies the passage of some time (cf. Luke 22:61, 24:6), (2) hotan "whenever" in particular has in view an indefinite time in the future, and (3) the aorist subjunctive of elthès "you may/might come" also implies an indefinite future when used with hotan. In the reply, sèmeron "today" is the counterpoint to this indefiniteness; it won't be some vague, indefinite time in the distant future but "today". The wording of the preceding verse thus strongly supports the traditional parsing of Luke 23:43. The idea of being "with" Jesus at death also finds parallels in Paul: " Therefore we are always confident and know that as long as we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord. ...We are confident, I say, and would prefer to be away from the body and at home with the Lord (endèm è sai pros ton kurion). So we make it our goal to please him, whether we are at home in the body or away from it " (2 Corinthians 5:6-9), " If I am to go on living in the body, this will mean fruitful labor for me. Yet what shall I choose? I do not know! I am torn between the two: I desire to depart and be with Christ (sun Khristò einai), which is better by far; but it is more necessary for you that I remain in the body " (Philippians 1:22-24); cf. also 1 Thessalonians 4:17: " We who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord (sun kuriou esometha) forever". The promise to the thief would then resemble the Pauline expectation if "today" is understood as belonging to the second clause. Finally, there might be a faint OT echo in 1 Samuel 28:19. There the dead prophet Samuel prophetically declares to Saul that he would die the next day: "Tomorrow you (and your sons) will be with me" (i.e. in the underworld), and the wording in the LXX is quite reminiscent of that in Luke 23:43: aurion su kai ho huios sou met' emou. Here a promise is made about an immediate postmortem presence with the one speaking, and the time element forms part of the promise.
The most weighty objection to this parsing is the problem with the location of Jesus in Paradise at the same time he was supposed to be in Hades. Some early church fathers solved this theologically by claiming that if " all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form" in Christ (Colossians 2:9), and if " in him all things hold together" (1:17), and if " all things in heaven and on earth are united under Christ" (Ephesians 1:10), then Jesus could be in both heaven and Hades at the same time. But this is hardly what the author of Luke had in mind, and the deutero-Pauline concept has in mind Jesus' glorification through resurrection rather than his lowly status as a slave prior to his resurrection. Another solution is to locate Paradise in the realm of the dead. This has some contextual support from Luke. The saying in Luke 23:43 represents a Lukan redaction and the Parable of Rich Man and Lazarus is also uniquely Lukan material. In that story, the rich man went to a place of torment in Hades in his postmortem state while Lazarus was taken to the "bosom of Abraham", but both were in the same realm where despite being separated by a great chasm Abraham and the rich man were able to talk with each other (Luke 16:19-31). The closest parallel to this in the Book of Watchers in 1 Enoch 22, where the souls of the dead are gathered into a place at the far extremities of the earth, and the "souls of the righteous are separated by a spring of water with light upon it" from the sinners who are punished in agony "until the great day of judgment" (v. 9-12). It should be recalled that the Garden of Eden was located in the east and 1 Enoch (likely under influence from the Epic of Gilgamesh and Greek conceptions of Hades) locates Eden and the entrance to the underworld at the extremities of the world (where the sun sets and rises and where it must pass through the underworld in order to rise the next day in the east). A later notion was that Paradise was located in heaven, specifically "third heaven" (cf. the Greek Life of Adam and Eve, 2 Enoch 8:1-3, and 2 Corinthians 12:2). It was indeed at the same extremities of the earth where the gates to heaven are located. "And beyond these mountains is a place, the edge of the great earth, where the heavens come to an end, and I saw a great chasm among pillars of heavenly fire .... beyond this chasm I saw a place where there was neither firmament of heaven above, nor firmly founded earth beneath it" (18:10-12), "From there I proceeded to the west, at the ends of the earth, and I saw there three gates of heaven open, as I saw in the east, the same number of gates and the same number of outlets" (35:1). It was at this place at the extremities where the underworld and heaven are mutually accessible, and it was the garden of Eden "wherein the elect and the righteous ones dwell" (60:8). The proximity between Paradise and Hades is apparent in a number of texts. In the Greek Life of Adam and Eve, when Adam dies, his soul washes up at the Acheron (a river in Hades) and Michael the archangel then takes him "back to Paradise which is in third heaven" (48:40), where "the flowers of Paradise with their sweet fragrance" are still to be found (v. 2). Similarly, in the Testament of Abraham, Michael the archangel takes Abraham "toward the east, to the first gate of heaven" (11:1), and there are two portals there, one leading the righteous into Paradise and the other leading the sinners to eternal punishment (v. 10-11). The same book also states that in Paradise "there are the tents of my righteous ones and where the mansions of my holy ones, Isaac and Jacob are in his [Abraham's] bosom" (20:14), this language very closely parallels what is found in the Parable of Rich Man and Lazarus in Luke. The proximity of Hades and Paradise is also apparent from 2 Enoch, where both are located in third heaven. First, Enoch was set down in Paradise (8:1-8), and then he was taken "to the northern region and they showed me there a very frightful place, and all kinds of torture and torments are in that place, cruel darkness and lightless gloom" (10:1-2), and this is where the wicked dead are tortured. Both places are lower than fourth heaven, which is where the sun and moon rise and set on chariots placed on celestial tracks (ch. 11). So when we examine how the cosmology of world was conceptualized in early Judaism, which had both heaven and the underworld meeting together at the ends of the earth, the problem discussed above is more apparent than real.
Finally, there is the matter of the early interpreters. The readings found or referenced in the Curetonian Syriac, Macarius, (Pseudo?)-Hesychius , the Gospel of Nicodemus, etc. are exegetically motivated by the very issue discussed in the last paragraph: How can Jesus be in both Hades and Paradise after he dies? The cosmology that allows this (discussed in the last paragraph) co-existed with others that strictly envisioned earth as intervening between heaven above and Hades below, without any grey areas. That these readings were exegetically motivated was sometimes remarked upon. With regard to the reading given above, (Pseudo?)-Hesychius noted that it eased the following problem: "How can the Lord immediately fulfill his promise to the thief, 'Today you will be with me in paradise', if indeed after his crucifixion Christ was in Hades setting free the dead?" It is also apparent from the patristic references that the NWT-like parsing was a minority position and not generally accepted. The readings in the Gospel of Nicodemus are also problematic because other recensions of the same book lack the reordering of sèmeron, e.g. amèn legò soi s è meron met' emou es è en t ò paradeis ò (10.2,1.18, 26.1.16, recension m3). One may easily cite other citations of the passage in the church fathers that parse the text in accordance with the majority position: (1) amèn legò soi (labe kai su to am è n, h ò l è sta, ho s è meron l è st è s), s è meron met' emou es è en t ò paradeis ò (John Chrysostom, In Sancta et Magna Parasceve 50.816.18), (2) amèn am è n gar legò soi hoti s è meron met' emou es è en t ò paradeis ò (Hesychius, Homilia in Sancta Pascha, 1.3.4.6-7), (3) amèn am è n gar legò soi, ph è si, s è meron met' emou es è en t ò paradeis ò (Cyril of Alexandria, Commentarii in Joannem 1.684.4, De Adoratione et Cultu in Spiritu et Veritate 68.245.5), etc. And of course in modern translations, the versions cited by the Society are clearly in the minority.
Bobcat

Thanks Leolaia!
I'm heading to work, but looking forward to when I get back to go over your post.
Take Care

Truly I say to you, Amen I say to you, Inferences from a Gospel manner of speech

Share this