Abstract
The aim of the present article is to establish the meaning of ὤφθη + a dative of indirect object in the light of its usage in koine Greek in general and in the LXX and related Jewish literature. Such a thorough analysis of the syntagma reveals that it is not very suitable as a proof of the factuality of the appearances of the Risen Christ. In the light of the use of the formula in koine Greek it seems much more probable that its primary function in the context of 1 Cor 15,5-8 is to announce the salvific dimension of the event as the beginning of eschatological salvation and as the present warranty of the future fulfilment of the resurrection of (all) the dead.
Highlights
RespectivelyAristoteles, Fragmenta varia 5.30.191.26; Demosthenes, Or 15 4.3; Dionysius Halicarnassensis, Antiq Rom 11.39.2.4 and 11.39.6.1
In his monograph “Die Auferstehung Jesu” Karl Heinrich Rengstorf, commenting on 1 Cor 15,3ff, observed: „Vier Aussagen folgen einander in dieser Reihenfolge: Cristo.j avpe,qanen ... evta,fh ... evgh,gertai th/| hme,ra| th/| trίtῃ ... w;fqh
Dies w;fqh wiederholt sich dann noch dreimal; darin liegt daß die Reihe der Aussagen in ihm ihren Höhepunkt und ihr Ziel erreicht.“1 The emphatic repetition of w;fqh followed by a dative of indirect object will be the subject of this presentation
Summary
Aristoteles, Fragmenta varia 5.30.191.26; Demosthenes, Or 15 4.3; Dionysius Halicarnassensis, Antiq Rom 11.39.2.4 and 11.39.6.1. Polak shows that our syntagma coincides completely with the corresponding Hebrew text: subject + the Niphal of the verb ra’ah and preposition el followed by proper name/pronoun/noun of the indirect object28 This correspondence is a strong indication that the LXX expression depends on the Hebrew original and does not derive from Hellenistic Judaism. When reduced to a simple passive (“He was seen”), it would describe Abraham’s seeing as the outcome of his own faculties exclusive of God’s intervention Philo in his comment in De Abrahamo, 79-80 explains the construction and its above mentioned double nature with perfect clarity: “But he, by reason of his love for mankind, did not reject the soul which came to him, but went forward to meet it, and showed to it his own nature as far as it was possible that he who was looking at it could see it. La Genèse (Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf 1986) 53-54
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
