Matthew 22:36-40 -- poios

[Covenant Joel]

I heard in a class that I took that poios in "Which commandment is the greatest," should be translated "which kind of" and that there were two groups in Judaism, one that pushed the ritual aspects of the law, and another that pushed the ethical aspects. So the question was not so much which specific commandment, but which kind, ritual or ethical. Jesus responds by saying that it is neither one, but relational is the greatest.

Has anyone else heard this? Do you have any information that would indicate that this is either accurate or inaccurate?

Thanks,
Joel

 

[Contra_Mundum]

The Thayer lexicon (last updated in 1889) adheres to a classical greek definition, indicating "of what sort or nature". Today's standard greek lexicon, BAG, by now post dates the former by a century or more. While it retains as one of the meanings the classical sense, we also have the following

2. which, what?--a. w. a noun--a. in a dir. question.... ; which commandment Mt. 22:36;....

Even without the papyri discoveries of the late 19th/early 20th centuries, that gave lexographers their first extra-biblical (and LXX) look at koine, or common/vulgar greek, it is clear that translators took the context into consideration in translating this (and other) verses. Words generally possess a "semantic range" from which a particular meaning must be gathered based on particular usage in context.

I would suggest that the instructor's insight, while it may bear reflection or consideration, is less interested in the mechanics of the question posed by the lawyer, than it is in the interesting deductions to be made from considering the question as if it were asking "what kind of," and considering Jesus' reply in that light.

I do not myself think that this is the nature of the question as posed by the lawyer. For example, we do not have an "ethical" question, followed by a "ritual" question, followed by this distinguishing question, as if the goal were to find out Jesus' loyalties. No, the questioning is all about entrapment. First, to get Jesus in trouble politically, then to get tangle him religiously, and finally to test his orthodoxy (to which he replies by quoting from the fundamental religious creed of the church, the Shema), and to go further in his interpretation (expounding on the "2nd" commandment), taking the opportunity to himself instruct and educate those "authorities" who set themselves up as his "examiners" (see the corresponding passage in Mark 12, where the lawyer responds back trying to reassert his position as "examiner" and Jesus comes right back with his own--a very interesting exchange).

 

[Covenant Joel]

Thanks.