De Trinitate Translation – Part 2

I have finished my (very) rough draft translation of the work De Trinitate attributed to Didymus the Blind. Huzzah! It wasn’t as bad as I thought it would be as there were a lot of scriptural references whose Greek is much easier than the authors. The only other problem I had was working around holes in the text. Nonetheless, I plan on ironing out some of the wrinkles this weekend before I submit it to my professor for his critique. It feels good to have the majority of the work done.

De Trinitate Translation – Objective Genitive

While I was working on my translation I ran across “Didymus” quoting Romans 3:22. The text is as follows (I hope the Greek comes through):

Ῥωμ[αίοις δέ·] „δικαιοσύνη δὲ θεοῦ διὰ πίστεως ⌊Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ εἰς πάντας τοὺς⌋ πιστεύοντας“.

There is no textual variants from what is in our modern GNT. As I was going along translating, I wondered how I would translated the genitive. Is it “the righteousness of God through the faith of Jesus Christ” (subjective genitive) or “through faith in Jesus Christ” (objective). For anyone who has taken first year Greek or is minutely involved with the NPP, the issue is immediately apparent. Having only delved into the issue a little bit myself, I was stuck. How should I translate this verse? Prior to the 20th century, I would have followed Luther, et al. and affirmed the objective enitive (i.e., faith in Christ). The choice would have been easy. But now, there is so much fire (probably more light than heat) surrounding this issue, I wanted to get it right.

Then, to my amazement, I realized that “Didymus” offered an interpretation immediately following this verse.

(10.)  διὰ τῆς εἰς τὸν υἱὸν φησὶ [πίστεως δικαιοῦται] ὑπὸ θεοῦ ἕκαστος.

Which I translate as:

“He means through faith in the Son each one is justified by God.”

Whatever Paul might have actually meant by the phrase, it’s obvious that Didymus took it as an objective genitive. But of course, what could the Early Church ever teach us Christians today about Christian doctrine?

De Trinitate Translation – Part 1

So I have begun my translation of the De Trinitate attributed to Didymus the Blind (or Didymus Caecus if one wishes to spice up their speech with unnecessary Latin words). If you wish to know why I say “attributed to,” see Claudio Moreschini and Enrico Norelli, Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature: A Literary History: Volume Two- From the Council of Nicea to the Beginning of the Medieval Period, tr. by Matthew J. O’Connell (Peabody: Hendrickson, 2005), 77-78. In brief, since the text is missing the beginning and end, it is anonymous. Socrates the historian says that Didymus wrote three books on the Trinity (Hist. eccl. 4.25), so the man who discovered the text in the middle 18th century, Canon Giovanni Luigi Mingarelli, and his brother, Frederico, attributed it to Didymus. This was accepted for a time until the discovery at Tura, Egypt (1941) which revealed different interpretations of Zechariah 3:8-4:10 between De Trinitate and Dydmus’ Commentary on Zechariah. Since scholars are divided, I find it best to say “attributed to.” The text itself is probably no earlier than January 379 since it refers to Basil as being deceased (3.22).

So, back to the translation. I’ve completed almost four verses and things are going well, except for verse four which is littered with missing text. Usually I work with a nice printed version of UBS4, but now I realized just how spoiled I am. Translation is a lot easier when all the words are there. Fortunately, I’m only translating two chapters for now, so I look forward to the next few weeks.