I know, like the world needs yet another translation of the Didache. But I wanted to do it, so here it is: The Didache: A Translation with Notes.

Now, I’ve worked through the text of the Didache before, and have placed a translation on my web site before. This, however, is a new translation (albeit influenced by previous work). Here’s the preface.

I've worked through the text of the Didache before (see my Phrasal Interlinear) but that work was done over one year, in fits and starts, and it shows. I wanted to work through the text again, only this time in a much shorter time period and, hopefully, with a bit more consistency. Thus, in August 2009 I once again worked through the text of the Didache.

While this translation is indebted to my earlier work on the Phrasal Interlinear, the translation is new and not a simple revision. I have consulted existing translations (Lake, Lightfoot, Holmes, Ehrman and Varner) and lexica (BDAG, Louw and Nida, LSJ, Spicq) along the way and they have been most helpful. Additionally, several notes on matters of translation, textual criticism and cross references to the New Testament have been added. Much like myself, this translation is a work in progress. It will be revised, particularly with an eye to matters of punctuation and paragraphing.

On translation philosophy, my hope is to be readable yet somewhat transparent to the underlying Greek text. Thus some places may be awkward to the reader, yet this awkwardness hopefully points to phrase, clause and discourse structures in the original. I have used [square brackets] to indicate where English words are supplied to assist in the translation. Similarly, {curly braces} indicate either an idiom or where a series of Greek words was smoothed into something not immediately transparent. In all {curly brace} instances, the underlying “literal” text is provided in a footnote.

It is my prayer that those who read this translation will find it useful, and will be able to get a glimpse into the thought and practice of those earliest days of the Christian church, and be encouraged by the steadiness and grace of our Lord.

Once again, the link: The Didache: A Translation with Notes. I’d love to know what you think about it. Interested in any other writings of the Apostolic Fathers? I’m thinking of doing the Greek portions of Polycarp to the Philippians next.

These guidelines are nearly as old as the New Testament (some who date the Didache in the 40s/50s would say older than the NT) but the thoughts behind them still ring true today. Below is the most recent form of my translation of this chapter:

1. But everyone who comes in the name of the Lord, let [him] be welcomed. And then, having tested [him], you will know him. Then you will be able to distinguish [whether he is] true or false.
2. If the one coming is a traveler, help him as much as you are able. But he shall not remain among you more than two or three days, if he has need.
3. And if he desires to stay with you, being an artisan, let him work and let him earn his keep.
4. And if he has no craft, take [this] into consideration according to your understanding, how he shall live among you [as] a Christian without [being] idle.
5. And if he does not want to act in this way, he is a Christmonger. Beware of such as these.

Basically, welcome everyone who comes, but don’t let them take advantage of you simply because they say they are a prophet or a teacher. If he wants to stay longer than a day or two, he’s gotta work. And if he’s not willing to work, then be on your guard, he is using the name of Christ to his own material advantage.

The discourse structure is fairly interesting. Verse 2 uses a μεν with the first ει and the δε in the latter half (which I translated “But”); vv. 3-5 each use δε additively, building up all of these different qualifications (hence my translation using “and” in these instances).

I think it’s obvious, but “on the one hand” for μεν in v. 2 and “on the other hand” for the following δε just would’ve been hideous. (see my earlier post on Louw & Nida and the particle μεν). Besides, it’s not an either/or option. In either case, you help. The Didachist is just using the μεν/δε structure to note the important point: Only give these guys 2-3 days of help, then cut your losses if the dude is a couch potato.

The Greek conjunction και is one of those words that seems easy to understand (it means “and”, right?) and then again not so easy (“Why is there a και here?”). From my reading and study,* και is essentially additive, and one forgets this at his peril when evaluating και in context.

Here’s a simple example from Didache 7.4 to reinforce the basic idea.

πρὸ δὲ τοῦ βαπτίσματος προνηστευσάτω ὁ βαπτίζων καὶ ὁ βαπτιζόμενος καὶ εἴ τινες ἄλλοι δύνανται· κελεύεις δὲ νηστεῦσαι τὸν βαπτιζόμενον πρὸ μιᾶς ἢ δύο.

I’ll leave other aspects of the information structure to Steve Runge (though there is some cool stuff, notably the prepositional phrase before the primary verb forming a temporal frame and also the function of δε linking to previous the previous clause indicating development). Here’s the same formatted a bit differently with translation below:

πρὸ δὲ τοῦ βαπτίσματος
And before the baptism
προνηστευσάτω
he should fast beforehand
ὁ βαπτίζων
the one baptizing
καὶ ὁ βαπτιζόμενος
and the one being baptized
καὶ εἴ τινες ἄλλοι δύνανται·
and any others who are able.

κελεύεις δὲ νηστεῦσαι τὸν βαπτιζόμενον
Call upon the one being baptized to fast
πρὸ μιᾶς ἢ δύο.
beforehand one or two days.

There is some interesting text-critical and form-critical stuff going on here, but my interest isn’t (immediately) there. Read Niederwimmer for those details. Regarding και, my interest is in simply seeing how a group is formed using και to add one group element to the existing, known group. While I translated “and” above, you could also do something like “along with” or even “and also”.** The important bit about καιʼs function here is that after the initial group element is introduced (“the one baptizing”), και is used to build that up.

If we just have και associated with the gloss “and” in our minds, we may pass the test and translate the above correctly. But has it been understood? Understanding what function words like και (and δε, and my favorite, αλλα) are up to allows us to better approach the Greek text as Greek instead of as a jumbled set of wooden, English, yoda-speak glosses that need to be decoded and smoothed over in order to be understood.

* Most helpful have been portions of Steve Runge's Discourse Grammar, Heckert's Discourse Function of Conjoiners in the Pastoral Epistles (amazon.com), and Denniston's Particles (amazon.com).

** Ehrman really scrambles the word order to work a “both … and” into it: “But both the one baptizing and the one being baptized should fast before the baptism, along with some others if they can.”

Here’s the Greek:

5 οὐκ ἔσται ὁ λόγος σου ψευδής, οὐ κενός, ἀλλὰ μεμεστωμένος πράξει.

Here’s my translation [at present]:

5 Your speech should not be false or empty, but filled with action.

The key here for me, given the presence of αλλα, is the contrast between κενός and μεμεστωμένος, which is why I translate the portion following αλλα as “filled with action”. In my view, αλλα marks contrast and also indicates the portion following the αλλα corrects or replaces the portion before it. The above is an instance of correction, what you say should be backed up by what you do.

The basic idea of μεστοω [according to BDAG, anyway], is that the speech/word is “made full” by one’s action. This is where the idea of completed/fulfilled/confirmed comes from. It’s as if one’s actions verify that his words/speech is worthy of being listened to. The idea is almost as if one’s actions verify that one’s speech it true.

Given the innate contrast, it seems better (at least to me) to play off of that contrast by using “filled” to translate μεμεστωμένος and using “with action” to translate πράξει.

Here’s how others I know of translate the verse:

Thy speech shall not be false nor vain, but completed in action. (Lake)

Thy word shall not be false or empty, but fulfilled by action. (Lightfoot)

Your word must not be false or meaningless, but confirmed by action. (Holmes)

Your word will not be false or empty, but will be fulfilled in action. (Varner, who follows the Greek text of Rordorf & Tuilier’s 1978 edition, which was republished in 1998 as part of Sources Christiennes)

Your word shall not be false or empty [but shall be fulfilled by deed]. (Niederwimmer, he sees the brackets as a later addition)

Your word must not be empty or false. (Ehrman, who apparently takes the reading of the Apostolic Confessions over Heirosolymitaunus [as does Niederwimmer, apparently]; note his Greek text is a modified version of Bihlmeyer)

These guys all have (or had while alive) more Greek in the tip of their left pinkie toe than I’ve got in the entirety of my being, but given contrast marked by αλλα and the notion of correction, I still think I like “filled with” better; though “fulfilled by” is a pretty close second (that I could actually be convinced of).

In the past 24 hours, I've been made aware of two (yes two!) groups on Yahoo! that may be of interest to readers of ye olde ricoblog.

Greek Geeks

The first is "Greek Geeks", set up by Bryan Cox who used to blog at the now apparently defunct Biblaridion. Check out a few of his older posts on minuscule handwriting (here and here). Here is Bryan's description of the Greek Geeks group:

Greek Geeks is a discussions group for those who have learned or are in the process of learning ancient Greek, classical and/or Koine, and would like a place to discuss various aspects of the language. Discussions of any type of ancient Greek works are welcomed and encouraged.

Greek Geeks will be a moderated forum in order to create as fun and educational an atmosphere as possible. Certain tangents will be allowed while others will not be allowed. Allowable tangents currently include textual criticism and palaeography (other applicable tangents will be taken into consideration).

Please have fun, but make every effort to be courteous and respectful toward other posters. If a certain topic or a certain poster frustrate you, please think twice (or more) before posting a reply. Be aware that any controversial topics will be closely watched and moderated. For everyone's sake, refrain from making repetitive posts that belabor a particular point that has already been made.

Enjoy the group! If you're new to Greek, ask questions and don't be intimidated. If you've been around Greek forever, share a bit of your knowledge and experience by helping to answer some questions. Have an idea for a topic, project, trivia, game, or whatever, then speak up and let us all hear about it!

Check the Greek Geeks page for subscription info.

Apostolic Fathers

I was made aware of the Apostolic Fathers group by a post on Dr. Jim West's (usually) eponymous blog. Here are the details:

This group is for people who would like to expand their facility in reading New Testament Greek by reading through The Apostolic Fathers, whose writings appeared a little after the completion of the New Testament.

The moderator, David McKay, is most definitely a learner, not an expert, and has only just begun to read these texts himself. He hopes that we can learn from each other.

Subscription info is here. The group is beginning with the Didache, which I've recently worked through.