Gk. δια
του αιματος του ιδιου should be translated here “by means of blood
of HIs own one”; this sense of ιδιος is
well attested in the papyri where it is “used thus as a term of endearment to
near relations, e.g. ο
δεινα τω ιδιω χαιρειν [‘So-and-so to his own (friend), greeting’]”
(J. H. Moulton, Grammar of NT Greek I [Edinburgh, 1906], p. 90). As used
here, it is the equivalent of Heb. yachid (“only”), elsewhere
represented by Gk. αγαπητος (“beloved”),
εκλεκτος (“choice”) and μονογενης (“only begotten”). In view of this, it
is unnecessary to suppose, as HOT did, that υιου (“son”) may have dropped out of the
text after ιδιου. (F.
F. Bruce, The Book of Acts [The New International Commentary on the New
Testament; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1954], 416 ν. 59)
In In Moulton and Milligan's
Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament, we read the following under ιδιου
(emphasis added):
For an “exhausted” ἴδιος in Hellenistic Greek,
equivalent to little more than the possessive pronoun, Kuhring (p. 13) cites
such passages as BGU IV. 1061 21 (B.C. 14) ἐν τῶι ἰδίωι αὐτοῦ κλήρωι, P Oxy III. 48325 (A.D. 108)
ὀ]μνύω
.
. εἶναι τὰς προκ@ειμ]ένας ἀρούρας εἰδίας μου, ib. 49433 (A.D. 156) ἐγνώρισα τὴν ἰδίαν μου σφραγῖδα, ib. 49515 (A.D.
181–9) γράψω
τῇ ἰδιᾳ μου χειρί, BGU III.8652 (ii/A.D.) ἀκολούθω@ς τῇ
ἰδ]ίᾳ
σοι (l.
σου) ἐπιστολῇ, ib. I. 1315 (A.D.
289) ἐκδικήσωμεν . . τοῖς ἰδίοις ἑαυτῶν δαπανήμασιν, P Grenf II. 8o14 (A.D.
402) ὑπὲρ ἰδιας σου κεφαλῆς. It will hardly be denied, however,
that in all these passages ἴδιος
adds
a certain emphasis, and this undoubtedly holds good of the general NT usage, as
e.g. Jn 141, 1 Cor 38, Gal 65: Heb 727,
etc.: see more particularly Proleg. p. 87 ff. (as against Deissmann BS
p. 123 f.), and cf. Souter (Lex. s.v.) where the word is rendered
“one’s own,” “belonging to one,” “private,” “personal,” without any mention of
a weaker meaning. WinerSchrniedel Gr, § 22, 17, on the other hand,
claims for the word both senses in the NT, and illustrates these in detail. It
is probably impossible to draw the line strictly, so much depends on the
special nuance of the context. Thus in the interesting papyrus in which
proceedings are instituted for the recovery of a foundling child that had been
put out to nurse, the defendant asserts that the foundling had died, and that
the child now claimed was her own child—τὸ]
ἴ@δι]όν μου τέκνον (P
Oxy I. 37ii.1—A.D.49) (= Selections, p. 51). But when in P
Goodsp Cairo 48 (ii/B.C.) (= Selections, p. 25) Polycrartes
writes to a friend introducing one Glaucias—a.πεsτάlκαμεν πρὸς σὲ Γλαυκίαν, ὄντα ἡμῶν
ἴδιον, κοινολογησόμενόν σοι,
the meaning can be little more than “who is one of ourselves”: cf. P Par 4111
(B.C. 158) οὗ <ἐν>
κατοχῇ ἰμὶ μετὰ τοῦ πρεσβυτέρου ἀδελφοῦ ἰδίου (= ἐμοῦ) Πτολεμαίου, P Tor I, 827 (B.C.119) εἰς τὰς ἰδίας αὐτῶν (= εἰς τὰς ἑαυτῶν) μετοικισθῆναι (both cited by Mayser Gr.
p. 308). This last ex. illustrates the absolute use of ὁ ἴδιος as in Jn 111,131,
etc.: cf. also P Oxy XIV. 16805 (iii/iv A.D.), where a son prays for
his father—ὑγιαίνοντί
(l.
—τά) σε ἀπολαβεῖν ἐν τοῖς ἰδίοις “that
we may receive you home in good health” (Edd.). On the principle of the ἰδία, involving a man’s personal attachment
to the house and soil of his birth, see Zulueta in Vinogradoff s Oxford
Studies in Social and Legal History i. (1909), p. 42 ff., and cf. Exp VIII.
iv. p. 487 ff., where Ramsay applies this principle in connexion with Lk 23.
In Proleg. p. 90 f. special attention is drawn to the use of ὁ ἴδιος in addressing near relations
at the beginning of a letter. Thus in P Fay 1102 (A.D. 94) Gemellus
sends greeting Ἐπαγαθῶι
τῶι ἰδίωι, Epagathus being probably a nephew, and
similarly in other letters of the same correspondence: when the son Sabinus is
addressed, the words τῷ
οιεἱῶι (= τῷ υἱῷ) are always used, as ib. 1132 (A.D.100).
If this were at all a normal use of ὁ ἴδιος it
might add something to the case for translating Ac 2028 τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ ἰδίου, “the blood of one who was
His own” (Weiss, etc.).
To Support this Blog:
