An Example of the Power of Faith: Sarah, the Subject of Hebrews 11:11 Christine Mary Cos

And by faith, Sarah, herself, a barren [woman], received power faith in the book of Genesis. Sarah is characterized either by her for the purpose of depositing sperm [by Abraham], even though “barrenness” (15:2, 16:1), by her animosity toward Hagar (16:6, [at] a time of mature age, since she considered faithful the one 21:10),r o her laughter (18:12, 21:6). Yet, Sarah is mentioned as a who promised.1 —Hebrews 11:11 modelf o faith in Hebrews 11:11.5 The following meta-analysis will examine the gamut of interpretations of this verse in Hebrews in Introduction order to identify the one that best fits with the biblical text. This past week, I learned that my friend Juliana gave birth to her Interpretive challenges first child, a beautiful son, whom she and her husband named Filip. She had not broadcast her pregnancy (even I did not know Each key figure in the book of Hebrews is introduced by the about it), but for good reason, I think: She did not want to get her prominently positioned phrase “by faith” (pistei).e Th form in hopes too high. Her first child had died in uterus, strangled by Greek, known as a dative of agency, emphasizes faithful actions.6 the umbilical cord. Chapters 11 and 12, taken together, tell the story of faith “from Several years previously, a young Korean woman in our creation (11:3) to new creation (12:28), from covenant (11:8–29), to church had miscarried her first child. The sadness in her eyes new covenant (12:24).”7 Interestingly, many of those mentioned made my heart break when she told me the news. woulde b covenant mediators, just like Jesus.8 efTh faith o these Thinkingf o my own mother’s reproductive challenges, I individuals would center on the fact that the creator God, intro- choseo t tell my mother’s story to each of these hurting women, duced in verse 3, is also the covenant God. stressing the unassailable fact that I, my mother’s firstborn child, Accordingo t many commonly used Bible translations, such as was living proof of God’s mercy and my mother’s willingness to the New American Standard Bible, English Standard Bible, and trust despite her despair. New Jerusalem Bible, to name a few, the inclusion of Sarah in He- As I reflect on Genesis 3:16, “I will make your pains in child- brews 11:11, along with Rahab in 11:31, seems obvious, though there bearing very severe,”2 I realize that barrenness, miscarriage, and are other women of faith whom some of us might like to include, stillbirths are part of that curse; the ability to be “fruitful and had the Holy Spirit given us the chance to amend the author’s list! multiply” would be hindered for both genders and on many lev- However, there is a longstanding debate over who is the actual els.e Th same adjective in the Hebrew text describes the woman’s subjectf o Hebrews 11:11: Sarah or Abraham. Notable translations childbearing (3:16) and the man’s ability to produce and provide suchs a the New International Version, New Revised Standard food (3:17) as “anxious toil” (‘itsevon).3 Version, and New American Bible all translate Hebrews 11:11 with Throughout the book of Genesis, the covenant theme, which Abrahams a the subject, mentioning Sarah parenthetically.9 runs throughout the Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob narratives, con- Scholars and translators opposed to Sarah as the subject of tainsn a element of endangerment in the form of barren wives, Hebrews 11:11 primarily argue for Abraham as the subject, based where the principal wife of each of the three patriarchs is child- upon the specific use of the term katabolē sperma (depositing less for the majority of their marriage. This motif provides an op- seed/sperm). This is a technical term for begetting children and portunityo t demonstrate God’s sovereign ability to fulfill his cov- the masculine role in procreation, which corresponds to the femi- enant promise of children or descendents, namely, “seed” (zera‘). nine role hypodochē, or reception.10 Both classical and Hellenistic In addition, it creates an element of suspense as the reader eager- sources attest to the use of this idiomatic phrase.11 Other scholars, ly awaits the birth of the next recipient of the covenant promise.4 suchs. a J Harold Greenlee, Pieter van der Horst, James Thomp- In Genesis 17:17 and 18:12, both Abraham and Sarah, respec- son, and Eileen Vennum, argue for Sarah as the subject, seeing the tively, received the promise of a son, not with sobriety of faith, passages a redeeming her reputation as a model of faith.12 but with laughter. However, while Scripture mentions Abraham’s Victor Hamilton, in his commentary on Genesis, acknowl- faith specifically in 15:6, nowhere do we see Sarah associated with edges that the Lord rebukes Sarah for her laughter, but never challenges Abraham for his laughter and doubt.13 Hermann CHRISTINE MARY COS teaches and preaches at Gunkel asserts that Sarah thinks that the men (the three visitors) the First Baptist Church of Medfield, Massachu- are joking, and they subsequently become angry.14 .eF F Bruce r - setts, and is a licensed minister with the Conser- ferso t Sarah’s “bad reputation” of faith, noting that “Chrysostom vative Congregational Christian Conference. She indeed, in dealing with this difficulty, suggests that her subse- holds MAOT and M.Div. degrees from Gordon- quent denial of her laughter was ‘by faith,’ but of course it was Conwell Theological Seminary and has served as nothingf o the kind. . . .”15 Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown charac- Minister of Education at Pilgrim Church in Bev- terize Sarah’s laughter as a “silent sneer.”16 erly, Massachusetts.

16 • Priscilla Papers ◆ Vol. 25, No. 1 ◆ Winter 2011 Evaluation of arguments glossd (adde later by a scribe when copying the epistle), though there is no manuscript evidence to support this position.24 So, s who i the intended subject of the verb elaben (he/shee r - Accordingo t M. Black, autē Sarah steira si a Hebraic circum- ceived) in Hebrews 11:11? After evaluating the various arguments stantialr o concessive clause, subordinate to the principal clause pro and con, I believe that J. H. Greenlee offers up the best solu- of which Abraham is the subject.25 Subsequently, this phrase is tion given the existing textual evidence and its grammatical and translated parenthetically by the NIV and NRSV, as “[b]y faith, idiomatic limitations.17 [Abraham] even though he was past age—and Sarah herself was Greenlee’s highly nuanced argument best explains the gram- barren—was enabled to become a father. . . .” While this argu- marf o Hebrews 11:11. In his analysis, Sarah is the subject of the ment does overcome the difficult problem of autē Sarah steira verb elaben ([she] received power); the subject of the action of being in the nominative case (typically used for the subject of a depositing seed is not stated. Greenlee explains that most com- sentence),. J Thompson argues that the highly stylized Greek of mentaries assume that the “laying down of seed” is done by the the author does not lend itself to this kind of expression.26 subjectf o the verb. However, this is only logical when translated B. Metzger argues that autē Sarah steira eshould b taken as a withn a infinitive (as do all the translations that take Sarah as the dativef o accompaniment or association (autei Sarah steirai) based subject, e.g., the New Living Translation’s “Sarah was able to have upon the United Bible Society committee’s consensus that the iota a child”).18 n.I fact, B Gildersleeve cites numerous examples from subscripta ( tiny, shorthand form of the letter iota) was omitted classical Greek literature where a subject may be omitted, even inn a uncial script (one written in all capitals).27 This would result though there is a sudden change of subjects.19 in the translation “[b]y faith, he [Abraham], together with bar- The main verb, elaben (she received), is in the aorist indica- ren Sarah, received power. . . .” The 1996 New Living Translation tive, indicating summarized past action, similar to a photograph- takes this reading, highlighting their equivalent roles in their act ic snapshot.20 nI other words, all of the events that took place of faith, adding “Sarah together with Abraham. . . .” In addition leadingpo u t Sarah’s conception of Isaac are summarized in this to the fact that uncials did not include iota subscripts, indicating one verb. the dative singular, until the seventh century a.d., ta present there Since katabolē (depositing) is a noun and not a verb, “the areo n significant uncial manuscripts of any date that support this references i a general one, focusing on the action, not the actor. conclusion.28 . Further, J Thompson highlights the fact that the The implied actor of ‘laying down seed’ can therefore be either early church fathers, despite the obvious lexical difficulties of this Abrahamr o Sarah even though the subject of ‘received ability’ passage, never acknowledged nor proposed the datival reading.29 is Sarah.”21 nI addition, Greenlee argues for the implied sense Lastly,. W Lane also acknowledged that autē Sarah steira of purpose or result for the preposition eis (for the purpose of), coulde b taken as a dative of advantage, rendering this transla- which is recognized by many standard Greek grammars.22 tion: sy “It i b faith, to the benefit of Sarah herself, that he [Abra- As a result, the testimony of Sarah’s faith, along with Abra- ham] received power. . . .”30 sThi reading focuses on Sarah’s bar- ham’s,s i evidenced by the multitudes of descendents they would ren condition. As E. Vennum reminds us, Abraham had eight both have, genetically in the tribes of Israel and spiritually in all sonsy b three different women: Ishmael by Hagar (Gen. 16:15), those who profess faith in Christ (e.g., Gal. 3:29). The author of Isaacy b Sarah (Gen. 21:2), and six additional sons by Keturah Hebrews makes it clear that Sarah’s faith lay behind the verb that (Gen. 25:1).31 tsWhile i i true that Sarah benefits profoundly by follows (receiving power), but what was accomplished could not having “received power for the purpose of depositing the seed,” have been done without Abraham (for the depositing of sperm). nonetheless, this rendering is rejected on the unlikelihood of the The writer clearly portrays Sarah not only in view of her initial dative reading. unbelief when she received the news of her conception (cf. Gen. When the phrase autē Sarah steira si not the issue, proponents 18), but also takes into account the time it took for her to adjust of Abraham as the subject will argue that, since Abraham is the to the news and overcome her unbelief.23 subject in verses 8–10, and he is clearly the implied subject of Opposing arguments verse 12, then it logically follows that he must be the subject of verse 11 as well. Proponents on both sides have asserted their arguments in vari- As. J H. Greenlee points out, even with Sarah as the subject ous commentaries and articles. As mentioned above, the key is- of verse 11, Abraham’s faith is still in view. In fact, as a result of sues i the translation of the prepositional phrase eis katabolēn Sarah’s parallel act of faith, Abraham does become the father of a spermatos (for the purpose of depositing seed/sperm) with re- great multitude (11:12).32 Interestingly, arguments comparing He- spect to Sarah. brews’ Moses sequence (11:23–28) with this passage are not very Since this idiomatic phrase can only be used with respect to strong; Moses is clearly the main character from Exodus to Deu- a male subject, proponents of Abraham as the subject assert that teronomy; however, in the Abraham story in Genesis (ch. 12–25), there must be a textual issue concerning the phrase autē Sarah Sarah figures prominently in several scenarios (Gen. 12:10–20, steira, “Sarah, herself, the barren one.” Thus, one early explana- 16:1–6, 18:9–15, 21:1–7). tionf o the “grammatical difficulty” of Hebrews 11:11 was to con- While other scholars, in addition to Greenlee, have put forth sider the inclusion of the phrase autē Sarah steira sa a marginal argumentsn i favor of Sarah as the subject, they have generally

Priscilla Papers ◆ Vol. 25, No. 1 ◆ Winter 2011 • 17 been weak.33 However, a highly creative argument was put forth declared himself as the agent of procreation when nature refused by. P van der Horst, centering on the common belief in both Jewish to cooperate. Human agency would not be enough to fulfill God’s and Hellenistic circles that a woman also had “seminal emissions.” covenant promise (cf. Gen. 16:1–4). This is the God Sarah and Thus, eis katabolēn spermatos escould b a - Abraham considered “faithful” (pistos). cribedo t Sarah if the writer of Hebrews arah did receive the physical and Though Abraham and Sarah would was f aware o the widely current “double- Sspiritual power to become the mother eventually receive the promise of a child, seed” theory of procreation, which was of many children, natural and adopted. neither Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, nor Jacob developed and discussed in philosophical would inherit the promised land of Ca- circles throughout the Hellenistic period.34 This would allow for naan during their lifetimes (11:13), nor see a multitude of descen- the literal translation “for the purpose of depositing sperm [her- dents “as numerous as the stars” (cf. Gen. 15:5, 22:17). self].” Given the high probability that the author was an educated Application then and now individual,t i is very possible that he or she was familiar with this medical and philosophical view of procreation. However, since The Jewish Christians who comprised the initial audience of the the idiomatic phrase is attested in both classical and Hellenistic bookf o Hebrews, the literal descendents of Abraham (Heb. 2:16), sourcess a referring to the male nrole i procreation, it is highly un- were the product of Abraham and Sarah’s exemplary faith. Famil- likely that the author was referring to female “seminal emission.”35 iar with the Genesis account, these Jewish Christians would have Faith tested and proven realized that Sarah’s faith won out over her earlier despair. From the author’s point of view, it could be said that Sarah was saved These parallel acts of faith make sense in light of the Genesis text, from the danger of apostasy by her faith in a God who is faithful. especially when we take the promises of Genesis 17 and 18 to- Sarah’s perseverance in believing God, coupled with Abra- gether.e Th faith of Abraham and Sarah would require trusting in ham’s faith in leaving his home to sojourn in a land he would not the God who can bring life out of “death.”36 possess in his lifetime (Heb. 11:8–9) and willingness to sacrifice Abraham and Sarah left home and country for a future prom- his only son and heir (11:17–18), all at God’s command, demon- isef o land and descendents. After Abraham and Sarah take the strates that both Sarah and Abraham trusted in a God who could fulfillment of the second part of that promise into their own “raise the dead” (11:19). This farsighted faith is what the author of hands in Genesis 16, God returns to Abraham in Genesis 17 to Hebrewss wa encouraging his readers to cultivate through disci- clarify that Sarah would be the mother of the promised child pline and perseverance (Heb. 12). (17:16) and adds that kings would descend from each of them The barren-wife motif from Genesis would become evident (17:6, 16). And what is Abraham’s response? He falls on his face again in the gospel accounts, with which these second-genera- laughing (17:17). tion Christians would be familiar. In the New Testament, we see Yet, in the very next chapter, the three visitors inquire directly the same miraculous faith in Elizabeth, who was old and barren, of Sarah (18:9) and, subsequently, the Lord makes the very same and yet gave birth to a son.38 Moreover, in Luke 1:37, the angel promise in Sarah’s hearing (18:10). Up to this point in the Genesis gives Mary assurance of the miraculous nature of her concep- account, God has been speaking only to Abraham, yet it becomes tiony b telling her that “nothing is impossible with God” (cf. Gen. necessary for God to speak to Sarah’s doubts and frustration be- 18:14).e Th account of Abraham and Sarah might have served as a cause of her acute barrenness (18:11–15). reminderf o the miraculous and divine birth of Jesus Christ, their Her response is similar to Abraham’s, only she laughs to her- superior high priest in heaven (e.g., Heb. 10:12). self (18:12). G. Wenham offers a graceful explanation for Sarah’s In the context of the entire chapter, the author has “run the response, writing, “Sarah laughed not out of cocky arrogance gamutf o human experiences to show that faith can triumph in but because a life of long disappointment had taught her not to any circumstance. Those who pass through such experiences are clutcht a straws. Hopelessness, not pride, underlay her unbelief. called upon to demonstrate patient endurance.”39 eW are heirs Her self-restraint in not openly expressing her doubts and the to the same promises God made to Abraham and all of the men sadness behind them go far to explain the gentleness of the divine and women of faith in the Bible. As Paul encourages us, we are to rebuke.”37 oS God’s promise sets the date of fulfillment in a year’s “walky b faith, not by sight” (2 Cor. 5:7). Living the Christian life time (18:10, 14), which means Sarah will be pregnant soon.e H is to emulate that patient endurance. came directly to the woman whose threadbare faith had broken, Therefore, in Hebrews 11:11, we see that the text does not re- and eventually restored her faith by his faithful promise and ac- quire any emendations in order to make sense of the author’s tion (Gen. 21:6–7). meaning. Through faith and unity of purpose, God was able to Significantly, the Hebrew verb stem switches when God re- use Abraham and oSarah t bring about his grand plan of salva- iteratess hi creation mandate to Abraham. At first, God had tion, which would culminate in the miraculous birth, suffering commanded, “You will be fruitful,” (e.g., Gen. 1:22, 28; 8:17; 9:1; death, and glorious resurrection of Jesus Christ, our high priest peru using the Qal stem, denoting simple action by the subject). who sits at the right hand of God. However, in Genesis 17:6, God states, “I will make you fruitful,” The author makes it clear that Sarah’s faith lay behind God’s (wehifrethi; also in 17:20), using the Hiphil or casual stem. God actions. However, what was accomplished could not have been

18 • Priscilla Papers ◆ Vol. 25, No. 1 ◆ Winter 2011 done without Abraham, as her partner in faith. This not only Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon (Peabody, Mass.: Hen- servedsn a a encouragement to the readers of the book of He- drickson, 1999, 780–81. 4. Victor H. Matthews, Old Testament Themes (St. Louis, Mo.: Chal- brews, but encourages every Christian to persevere in faith— ice, 2000), 12. first, because God is faithful, and, second, because nothing is 5. James Thompson, “Was Sarah a Believer? Reflections on Hebrews impossible for him to accomplish, if it is his will. 11:11,” in Essays on Women in Earliest Christianity, vol. 2, ed. C. D. Osburn So, for those who have experienced the grief and pain of mis- (Joplin, Mo.: College Press, 1995), 317–18. carriager o infertility, Sarah stands as a model of faith in the face 6. . Daniel B Wallace, Greek Grammar: Beyond the Basics (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1996), 163–65. of despair. Whatever the individual circumstances or outcome, 7.. N. T Wright, Hebrews for Everyone (Louisville, Ky.: Westminster Gods i faithful. Sarah did receive the physical and spiritual power John Knox, 2003), 128. to become the mother of many children, natural and adopted. 8. Noah enters a covenant with God in Gen. 9:1ff, Abraham in Gen. 15:7ff (renewed with Isaac in Gen. 26:3–5 and with Jacob in Gen. 28:13– Epilogue: my mother’s story 15), Moses in Exod. 20:1ff, and David in 2 Sam. 7. 9. Paul Ellingsworth, The Epistle to the Hebrews, New International The f story o Sarah in Genesis 18 and significance of her faith hits Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1993), close to home for me as a woman and a child. 586. According to Ellingsworth, scholars from Chrysostom, Oecumen- My parents married later in life. Like most married couples ius, Theophylact, and Calvin, to more contemporary scholars such as Delitzsch, Westcott, Peake, Moffatt, Spicq, Theodorico, Montefiore, etc., of their generation, and perhaps especially because of their age, supported the traditional view, taking Sarah as the subject. Scholars ar- they wanted to start a family right away. y For m parents, and guing for Abraham as subject include Attridge, Bruce, Metzger, Lane, particularly my mother, this would prove to be a heartbreaking and Ellingsworth, among others. emotional, physical, and spiritual challenge. 10.. W Bauer, F. W. Danker, W. F. Arndt, and F. W. Gingrich, A Greek- Though able to conceive, due to a particular hormone imbal- English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Litera- ture, d3r ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000 [hereafter ance,y m mother’s body was not able to form the placenta, which BDAG]), 515. Cf. Thompson, “Was Sarah a Believer?” 319. allows the fetus to remain within the uterus. Subsequently, my 11. Classical and Hellenistic sources referenced in BDAG and J. mother miscarried five times, consecutively. While her sixth preg- Thompson include Philo, De Op. Mund., 132; De Eb., 211; De Cher., 49; nancy did progress, the child, a boy, was stillborn prematurely. Plut., Mor. 320b; Ps-Lucian, Amor. 19; Galen, Aphorism 4, 1, XVII/2, 653 K; and Epictetus, Diss. 1.13.3. My mother recalls being at the altar rail, receiving commu- 12. Articles by J. Harold Greenlee, Pieter Van der Horst, James nion one Sunday shortly after this traumatic event. She told me Thompson, and Eileen Vennum are among those found among contem- that s she wa so sad and depressed that she was unable to get up porary scholarship of the past 20 years. Each will take a different tack, and walk, experiencing a type of psychosomatic paralysis. She which is discussed within this article. felts a though God were punishing her. My own mother’s thread 13. . Victor P Hamilton, The Book of Genesis: Chapters 18–50 (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1995), 13. F. F. Bruce makes the same observa- of hope and faith was about to snap! tion in n. 95 in The Epistle to the Hebrews,rev. ed., New International Providentially, my mother’s obstetrician was not only a man Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, of faith, but on the vanguard of reproductive medicine. She re- 1990), 294–95. calls him asking her: “Do you think God is punishing you?” 14. Hermann Gunkel, Genesis, trans. M. Biddle (Macon, Ga.: Mercer University Press, 1997), 197. Sadly,y m mother responded, “Yes.” Not only did her obstetrician 15. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews, 294. Bruce cites Chrysostom’s disavow her of this lie, but he continued to encourage her when Homilies on Hebrews, xxiii, ed. Philip Schaff, A Select Library of the she found herself pregnant yet again! He was able to provide my Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, vol.4 1 (Pea- mother with the hormone therapy needed so that her body could body, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1995), 471. 16.. R Jamieson, A.R. Fausset, and D. Brown, A Commentary, Criti- form the placenta. Her doctor was as invested in her success as cal, Experimental, and Practical on the Old and New Testaments, vol. 1 she and my father were and monitored her pregnancy carefully. (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1993), 156. Despite the added trial of severe toxemia and months of bed- 17.. J Harold Greenlee, “Hebrews 11:11—Sarah’s Faith or Abraham’s?” rest, eventually, my mother was able to bring her first child to Notes on Translation 4, no. 1 (1990): 37–42. Greenlee rejects the United 27 term: a daughter—me! She was thirty-six, considerably older Bible Society committee’s decision to retain steira Ain the N biblical text.e H believes it to be a scribal emendation to make it clear why it than most mothers in the early 1960s. was by faith that Sarah could conceive. The participle ousa sdwa adde Im a certain God was present when they decided to name latero t make a smoother reading. See Greenlee, “Hebrews 11:11,” 40–1. me after our Lord Jesus and shi mother: Christine Mary. Subse- Either way, Greenlee’s overall conclusion best addresses the grammatical quently,y m parents were blessed to witness the birth of two more structure of the entire verse. 18. Greenlee, “Hebrews 11:11,” 40. Translations that make Sarah the children, both of them sons—a reflection of the Trinity, indeed. subject include the ASV, ESV, KJV, NASB, NJB, NKJV, NLT, and RSV, To God be the glory! where the phrase eis katabolēn spermatos means that Sarah received the power “to conceive.” Notes 19. Basil L. Gildersleeve, Syntax of Classical Greek from Homer to 1. Author’s translation. Desmothenes: First Part, the Syntax of the Simple Sentence Embracing the 2., NIV emphasis added. Doctrine of the Moods and Tenses (New York, N.Y.: American Book Co., meaning “to hurt, pain, 1900), 36. Gildersleeve cites passages from Antiphon, Xenophon, and ,(עצב) the s root i the verb ‘tsb-­ ̣עָצּבוֹן .3 grieve.” Clearly, from a parent’s point of view, the miscarriage of a child Thucydides, among others. He states, “So free is the Greek in its omis- or the inability to have children can be a great source of grief. See The sionf o the subject that there is often a sudden change of subject without further warning.”

Priscilla Papers ◆ Vol. 25, No. 1 ◆ Winter 2011 • 19 20. Wallace, Greek Grammar, 555. 29. Thompson, “Was Sarah a Believer?” 328. 21. Greenlee, “Hebrews 11:11,” 40. Greenlee cites Lightfoot as the 30. William L. Lane, Hebrews 9-13, Word Biblical Commentary only commentator to make the same proposal. This is predicated on tak- (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1991), 345, citing P. Andriessen, En lisant l’Épître aux ing the meaning of the preposition eis sa “with reference/respect to.” This Hébreux: Lettre au R.P.A. Vanhoye, Professeur à l’Institute Biblique Ponti- would then allow Abraham to be the subject of “laying down seed.” Neil fical sur l’interprétation controversée de certain passages(Vaals: Abbey St. R. Lightfoot, Jesus Christ Today: A Commentary on the Book of Hebrews Benedictusberg, 1977), 50–52. (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 1976), 224. 31. Eileen Vennum, “Is She or Isn’t She? Sarah as a Hero of Faith,” 22. For example, see Wallace, Greek Grammar, 555, and A. T. Rob- Daughters of Sarah 13, no. 1 (1987): 6. ertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical 32. Greenlee, “Hebrews 11:11,” 38. Research (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1919), 594–95. And so Green- 33. (1) Eis katabolēn spermatos means that Sarah received the power lee proposes the following “interpretative paraphrase”: “(Not only did “to conceive.” This translation (with slight variation in vocabulary) is Abrahamt ac by faith, but) by faith even Sarah herself received ability used in the ASV, ESV, KJV, NASB, NJB, NKJV, NLT, and RSV. Accord- with respect to the laying down of seed (in her body by Abraham) even ingo t Lane, this presupposes that this idiom is an abbreviation for the though she was beyond the normal age (for child bearing), since she phrase eis sullēpsin katabeblēmenon spermatos, which means “for the considered that he (God) who had promised was faithful.” Greenlee, receptionf o the semen which has been deposited.” Thompson asserts “Hebrews 11:11,” 41. that s this wa the predominant traditional understanding of the ancient 23. Lightfoot, Jesus Christ Today, 211.t I has been noted above that church. However, grammatically, translating this phrase with an infini- the use of the aorist indicative gives a “snapshot” of past action. tive does not fit the grammar, since the phrase eis katabolēn spermatos 24.s Thi i a turn-of-the-century idea offered by F. Field, Notes on consistsf o a preposition and two nouns and is a stock idiom describ- Translation of the NT (Cambridge: University Press, 1899), 232, as well ing the male role in procreation (Lane, Hebrews 9–13, 345). Lane cites as H. Windisch, Der Hebräerbrief, HNT (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1931), J. Moffatt, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the 101, and G. Zuntz, The Text of the Epistles: A Disquisition upon the ‘Cor- Hebrews, CCI (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1924), 171, and C. Spicq, L’Épître pus Paulinum,’ Schweich Lectures, 1946 (London: The British Academy, aux Hébreux (Paris: Gabalda, 1952–53), 2:349. Also noted by Thompson, 1953), 16, 170. “Was Sarah a Believer?” 319. (2) Eis katabolēn spermatos means that Sar- 25. Matthew Black, “Critical and Exegetical Notes on Three New ah received the power “for the establishment/foundation of posterity.” Testament Texts, Hebrews xi.11, Jude 5, James i.27,” in Apophoreta; Fest- This reading, unfortunately, attributes a misleading usage of a stock Hel- schrift für Ernst Haenshen (Berlin: A. Töpelmann, 1964), 41ff. lenistic idiom, which would be uncharacteristic for such a skilled rheto- 26. Thompson, “Was Sarah a Believer?” 328. See also n. 20. riticians a the author of Hebrews. Interestingly, this translation is not 27. Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Tes- found in any modern translations currently in print. However, it should tament, 2nd ed. (New York, N.Y.: United Bible Society, 1994), 602. be noted that the “depositing of sperm/seed” (the idiomatic translation) 28. James H. Moulton and Wilbert F. Howard, A Grammar of New does “establish posterity.” Lane, Hebrews 9–13, 345. (3) Given the plethora Testament Greek, vol. 2 (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1920), 84. By the Hel- of bold metaphors used throughout Hebrews 11 alone (e.g., Abel “still lenistic period, the iota subscript had become a device of Byzantine and speaks,” 11:5; Noah warned about “things to come,” 11:7; Moses suffered medieval orthography to distinguish between the nominative and dative “the afflictions of Christ, 11:26), Thompson argues that, in the same way, singular. This forms the basis for the United Bible Society committee’s “Sarah metaphorically “received the power to deposit seed.” Thus, eis conclusion. However, as no manuscripts are yet available with the dative katabolēn spermatos si used metaphorically of Sarah’s ability for “the es- case (autei Sarah steirai), s this i currently an argument from silence; the tablishment of posterity” (as noted above in #2). Thompson notes that external evidence does not support this reading. katabolē si used elsewhere in Hebrews (4:3, 9:26) to mean “foundation.” Thompson’s argument has merit, since an idiom can be used metaphori- cally. However, his argument does not adequately explain the grammar of the text. Thompson, “Was Sarah a Believer?” 328. 34. Pieter W. van der Horst, “Did Sarah Have A Seminal Emission?” Bible Review 8, no. 1 (1992): 39. According to van der Horst, the “tradi- tional theory” was that the woman was simply a receptacle for the off- spring the male would beget; she contributed nothing to the makeup of the embryo. By the third century b.c., the discovery of the ovary al- tered the theory of procreation to where they were “regarded as recep- tacles,r o containers, for the female sperm and were called testes!” The “double-seed” or “double-emission” theory helped to explain the issue of heredity, which the traditional theory did not (p. 36, citing Needham and Hughes, History of Embryology [London: Abelard-Schuman, 1959]). In addition, these theories were not discussed in medical circles alone, but in philosophical circles as well. See van der Horst’s discussion on pp. 36–37. Based on his analysis, the rabbinic view was heavily influenced by the Hellenistic theory (via their cultural milieu), not by exegetical analysis of the biblical text (p. 39). 35. n For a extensive discussion and analysis of authorship, see El- lingsworth, The Epistle to the Hebrews, 3–21. 36.s Thi i not only a reference to the birth of Isaac despite Sarah’s barrenness (Gen. 18:10–15, 21:1–7), but the faith and trust of Abraham in offering up Isaac in obedience to God (Gen. 22:1–18, Heb. 11:17–19). 37. Gordon Wenham, Genesis: 16–50, Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 2 (Dallas, Tex.: Word, 1994), 48. 38. Luke 1:36–37, 57–66. 39.. J Dwight Pentecost, A Faith that Endures: The Book of Hebrews Ap- plied to the Real Issues of Life (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Discovery, 1992), 207.

20 • Priscilla Papers ◆ Vol. 25, No. 1 ◆ Winter 2011