A bit off the focus of this blog on biblical studies and technology, but this question was recently addressed to me, and it caught me off guard. (To keep an attribution trail, I heard this from someone who thinks he heard it initially from the author and theologian, Marva Dawn.) Not quite sure where else to get some help on the matter, and I'm hoping someone of you might know more.
In the 4th article of the Apostles' Creed, all the traditional English versions [a number of English versions posted on Wikipedia] state that Jesus "suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried." >>> Isn't the point that Jesus suffered and was crucified under Pontius Pilate? (NOT that he suffered under Pilate and was crucified)
>>> This kind of phrasing question makes me wonder about underlying punctuation that may or may not be present in original manuscripts and word order matters that are different for Greek/Latin as compared to English.
Here are the original Latin and subsequent Greek of the phrase in question (texts from CCEL):
- passus sub Pontio Pilato, crucifixus, mortuus, et sepultus;
- παθόντα ἐπὶ Ποντίου Πιλάτου, σταυρωθέντα, θανόντα, καὶ ταφέντα
- Are the verbs "to suffer" or "to crucify" regularly used with sub / epi?
The best indicator of usage I can find in the Latin is the Nicene Creed! (Text and parallel table here):
- crucifixus etiam pro nobis sub Pontio Pilato, passus et sepultus est
- and crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, suffered and was buried
Another relevant indicator I found for understanding these phrases is involved in the complicated history of the Apostles' Creed. For convenience, here is a clip from the helpful parallel tables provided at CCEL.
This chart appears to indicate that the earlier formulations focused on "crucified under Pontius Pilate." The sub Pontio Pilato phrase does appear before crucifixus. The passus was added later. I suspect, therefore, that it is only in these later editions that the phrasing became "suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified..."
Note that I am not proposing to change the Apostles' Creed! Since Jesus did indeed both suffer and was crucified under Pilate's authority, it is not really a big deal, and perhaps the location of the prepositional phrase between the two verbs even suggests this concept.
What I might suggest is a relocation of the comma in the English versions >>>
- ... suffered , under Pontius Pilate was crucified, died, and was buried...
Any other suggestions, comments, evidence, corrections...?
UPDATE (2009.02.01): Thanks for the comments which largely are supporting a broader reading of suffering in general (including crucifixion) and understanding the "under" as "in the time of." One more comparison to consider is the Nicene Creed. The 325 version just uses suffering which must include Jesus' crucifixion. The 381 version reads, σταυρωθέντα τε ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἐπὶ Ποντίου Πιλάτου, καὶ παθόντα, καὶ ταφέντα, = "having been crucified for us 'under' Pontius Pilate, and having suffered, and having been buried..."
a) Here is a clear statement that the "under Pilate" goes with the "having been crucified."
b) The 'having been crucified' and 'having suffered' are clearly taken together. (In contrast to the Apostles' Creed which could be read as suffered 'then' crucified.)