Why two different Greek words for Jerusalem III?

In Magic and Paganism in Early Christianity: The World of the Acts of the Apostles by Hans-Josef Klauck and Brian McNeil, we read our 1st insight into the use of two different Greek words for Jerusalem. “Besides this, Luke employs two forms of the name of the city. He uses the indeclinable word Jerusalem, which is to be considered Biblical Greek and more strongly evokes the Old Testament Jewish horizon; he also employs a Greek version of this, the declinable noun Hierosolyma, which would suggest to a Greek reader the word hieron, i.e., the temple at the heart of the city, and perhaps even the name Solomon, the builder of that Temple.”

Luke’s use of the Greek word Ἰερουσαλήμ for Jerusalem 26 times must mean that Luke is the most Jewish of the four gospels since Matthew and Mark only use Ἰερουσαλήμ once while John does not use the Greek word Ἰερουσαλήμ for Jerusalem.

More importantly, the declinable noun Hierosolyma, which would suggest to a Greek reader the word hieron, i.e., the temple at the heart of the city, and more likely remind people not about the temple built by Solomon but of the temple built by Herod the Great. Thus when Luke uses the Greek word Ἱεροσόλυμα in verse Luke 23:7 which says “And when he learned that he belonged to Herod's jurisdiction, he sent him over to Herod, who was himself in Jerusalem at that time” he is alluding to the temple built by Herod the Great.

However Luke uses the Greek word Ἱεροσόλυμα for Jerusalem on three other occasions in his gospel for which an explanation is wanting.

This is a work in progress.

Copyrighted © 2011

Why two different words for Jerusalem II?

My earlier article did not answer the question why Luke uses four instances of the Greek word Ἱεροσόλυμα, a form which Rodney Decker says represents the “Hellenized” form of Jerusalem. Likewise, my earlier article did not discuss the occurrence of this form in the Acts of the Apostles. My research has not provided a convincing answer.

I write today to suggest that Luke used the Book of Tobit, the Greek II version, as a source for his usage of the two forms of Jerusalem. I have earlier noted that “Long prayers appear in Ezra-Nehemiah, the books of Daniel, Judith, and Tobit, as well as pseudepigraphical works like Jubilees and Pseudo-Philo.” I have also noted that in the Septuagint, the form of righteousness that will provide a ransom for sins is almsgiving, the financial outpouring of compassion on the poor. The same association of a form of righteousness with almsgiving also appears in the Greek translation of Proverbs 15:27a and 20:28. Tobit and Sirach also make this association. The Greek translation of Daniel, Proverbs, Tobit and Sirach explicitly claim that almsgiving has the power to purge sin, to atone for and redeem iniquities. Thus it seems natural to investigate the Book of Tobit a source of the two forms of Jerusalem in one book.

In the first chapter of the Book of Tobit, Ἱεροσόλυμα alternates with Ἱερούσαλημ. Tobit seems to use the two words to contrast place where the rulers and priests function with the place where the people live.

For instance we read “But I alone went often to Jerusalem Ιεροσόλυμα at the feasts” in Tobit 1:6 while in verse 7 we read “The first tenth part of all increase I gave to the sons of Aaron, who ministered at Jerusalem ῾Ιερουσαλήμ.”

In Tobit 14:4, we read “and Jerusalem ῾Ιεροσόλυμα shall be desolate, and the house of God in it shall be burned, and shall be desolate for a time.”

I suspect the Book of Tobit may explain one of the four usage of Ἱεροσόλυμα in the Gospel of Luke but I am still thinking.

This is a work in progress.

Copyrighted © 2011

Why two different Greek words for Jerusalem?

Luke uses two different Greek words for Jerusalem. Luke uses the Greek word Ἰερουσαλήμ for Jerusalem 26 times while using the Greek word Ἱεροσόλυμα only 4 times. Matthew also uses two different Greek words for Jerusalem. Matthew uses the Greek word Ἱεροσόλυμα for Jerusalem 9 times while using the Greek word Ἰερουσαλήμ only once in Matt. 23:37. Mark likewise uses the Greek word Ἱεροσόλυμα for Jerusalem 9 times while using the Greek word Ἰερουσαλήμ only once in Mark 11:1.

The BDAG Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature has three comments relevant to this discussion: “No certain conclusions can be drawn concerning the use of two forms of the name”; “Just 9 times is the form found in Mt (the sole exception 23:37 is fr. a quot.),....”; and Ἰερουσαλήμ “(predom. in the LXX; . . . .)”

Ἰερουσαλήμ is the “transliterated Hebrew” form of Jerusalem, according to Rodney Decker, while Ἱεροσόλυμα represents the “Hellenized” form of Jerusalem. Luke, like the LXX, uses the
the “transliterated Hebrew” form of Jerusalem. Ἰερουσαλήμ, “transliterated Hebrew” form of Jerusalem, appears 38 times throughout Acts while Ἱεροσόλυμα, the “Hellenized” form of Jerusalem, appears 19 times throughout Acts.

On one occasion, both Matthew and Mark, in their treatment of the extended passion narrative, use the same Greek word for Jerusalem which Luke predominantly uses.

Luke uses the word Jerusalem 30 times in his gospel, 3 times more than either Matthew or Mark uses this word. This is understandable. A third striking theme of the book of Isaiah is the motif of the city. According to Motyer, “Four Isaianic strands are woven together in the use of the city motif in which Jerusalem, Zion, mount/mountain and city are broadly interchangeable terms: divine judgment, preservation and restoration, the security of Zion (14:32; 28:16) and the centrality of the city in the divine thought and plan (footnotes omitted)” [Motyer, 17-18].

For Luke, Jerusalem is and remains throughout Luke-Acts the center of the action. Jesus tells his disciples to remain in Jerusalem. The spread of the gospel is directed from Jerusalem by the Holy Spirit. When there is a dispute, the church in Antioch sends a delegation to Jerusalem for a resolution of the problem and decision as to the proper course of action. Throughout Luke-Acts, Jerusalem is the focal point and centrality of location to which Jesus and Paul return. Matthew and Mark have not adopted the motif of the city. Their Jesus instructs his disciples to wait for him in Galilee. The animal sacrificial system having been condemned by them and the city and temple having been destroyed by the Romans, Jerusalem was no longer significant for them.

This is a work in progress.

Copyrighted © 2011