κραυγή, κραυγάζω → 898 ff.

† κρεμάννυμι (κρεμάω), † κρέμαμαι, † ἐκκρέμαμαι

Contents: 1. Mt. 18:6. 2. Gl. 3:13. 3. Mt. 22:40. 4. Lk. 19:48.

κρεμάννυμι, κρεμάω (formed from the aor. ἐκέμασα), κρεμάζω and the popular κρεμνάω, are not common in the Gk. Bible.1 The Heb. original is usually תלה or תלא. The range of meaning is the same in both Gk. and Heb. κρεμάννυμι, from the Indo-Germ. root qer, is commonly linked with the Gothic hramjan, “to crucify” (OHG rama, “frame”), though this is more likely connected with the Germanic qrom, “lattice-frame.” The word means “to hang (on or from)” (compounds with ἐπι-, ἐκ-), “to hang on the gallows,” “to be suspended.” The dep. κρέμαμαι is used intr. In the Gr. OT the ref. in Ez. 15:3 is to the hanging of all kinds of vessels, and in Cant. 4:4; Ez. 27:10, 11 to that of shields, helmets and quivers, cf. musical instruments in ψ 136:2 and amulets in Ez. 13:18 (Heb. Hexapla, not the Mas.). At Ez. 17:22 the verb is used for “to plant” in the Mas. In 1 Macc. 1:61 and 2 Macc. 6:10 the children of Jewish women who are to be executed are hung on their breasts or around their necks. Acc. to Job 26:7 the earth hangs on nothing, and 2 S. 18:9, 10 tells how Absalom was hanging in the branches (תזק) and swung between heaven and earth (נתן). The κρεμάμενος of 18:10 led to the use of κρέμαμαι for תזק and נתן in 18:9. In Ac. 28:4 the snake hangs from the hand of Paul (κρεμάμενον … ἐκ τῆς χειρός).

1. Mt. 18:6.

In the sense of “to hang from or around” the verb occurs in the NT only at Mt. 18:6 with reference to the millstone. The saying does not have in view an earthly punishment, since there is none corresponding to this in Jewish law. The basis of the idea is perhaps to be found in a foreign custom, possibly Syrian or Greek.

So Aristoph. Eq., 1363: ἐκ τοῦ λάρυγγος ἐκκρεμάσας ὑμέρβολον (weight), cf. the note of the Schol. (ed. G. Dindorf, IV, 2 [1838]): ὅτε γὰρ κατεπόντουν τινάς, βάρος ἀπὸ τῶν τραχήλων ἐκρέμων. Cf. also Suet. (Aug.) Caes., II, 67 (ed. M. Ihm [1907]): superbe avareque in provincia grassatos oneratis gravi pondere cervicibus praecipitavit in flumen. That the custom was known and occasionally practised in Galilee may be seen from Jos. Ant., 14, 450, cf. also Ap. 1, 307, where we read of the weighting with lead of those about to be drowned. Here the βυθίζειν may well have a mythical connection too: ὡς τοῦ ἡλίου ἀγανακτοῦντος ἐπὶ τῇ τούτων ζωῇ (Ap., 1, 306).

The saying in the Gospel tradition is a revelation of divine wrath. No human judge can establish by human law the fault mentioned, nor impose the corresponding punishment. It is an open question whether the out. συμφέρει and the parallel expressions in Mk. and Lk. are to be taken comparatively: it would be better for him to fall victim to this temporal destruction than to eternal damnation, or positively: it befits him8 that he should fall victim to destruction—the depth of the sea is the kingdom of Hades. In any case, the reference is probably to eternal salvation at the cost of life—the comparative understanding fits this best—just as in the following sayings about offences there is eternal salvation at the cost of a member. Those who despise the little ones that believe in Jesus can be saved only if their earthly life is destroyed.

Rabb. tradition is familiar with this thought.Thus we read in Sanh., 8, 7: The following are those who may be saved through their life: he who pursues his neighbour to kill him, or a man, or a betrothed maid. Acc. to R. Simon b. Jochai there may be added the idolater, and acc. to R. Eleazar the one who desecrates the Sabbath. Paul, too, speaks of salvation at the cost of life (1 C. 5:5), In the same connection the Rabbis raise the question whether the reference is to judicial punishment or to malediction. The latter is the case with Paul. It is so with Jesus too. Jesus uses the image of drowning, which suggests the drowning of the sinful man in the depths of the waters of death in order that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.

2. Gl. 3:13.

The verb is most commonly used in the Bible to denote judicial hanging.

In the OT Law this punishment is in general only a supplement to stoning. The reference is thus to the hanging of corpses.13 This is so in the basic law of Dt. 21:22, 23, which even after the loss of national independence still controls inner Jewish relationships. This may be seen from the exposition of the Law in Joseph., in which the ordinance of Dt. 21:22, 23 is given in the following form (Ant., 4, 202): ἁ δὲ βλασφημήσας θεὸν καταλευσθεὶς (stoned) κρεμάσθω διʼ ἠμέρας καὶ ἀτίμως καὶ ἀφανῶς θαπτέσθω. It is also shown by individual OT instances of the hanging of the dead acc. to the law of Israel, cf. Jos. 8:29; 10:26; 2 S. 4:12 (תלה); Jdt. 14:1, 11; 2 Macc. 15:33. To be sure, Jos. 8:29 does not say explicitly that the king of Ai was put to death first, but this is most likely in view of the usual practice and the original context. The LXX no longer makes a sharp distinction, however, between the OT law of hanging corpses and the more general practice of putting to death by hanging, impaling or crucifixion. In Jos. 8:29: τὸν βασιλέα τῆς Γαι ἐκρέμασεν ἐπὶ ξύλου διδύμου, it seems to have had crucifixion in view; this is why the διδύμου is independently added. In the translation traced back to Σ two other instances deserve mention. In Nu. 25:4 and 2 S. 21:6, 9, 13, the Mos. has the rare and difficult verb יקע. For this the LXX uses παραδειγματίζειν in Nu. but in Βας. it has ἐξηλιάζειν, “to abandon or expose to the sun.” Σ uses the present word, Ἀ has ἀναπήγνυμι in both instances. Perhaps they are confusing יקע with תקע, which means “to fasten to,” “to affix,” and which the LXX occasionally renders πήγνυμι. It thus follows that κρεμάννυμι and ἀναπήγνυμι are used as equivalents of תקע, “to affix with nails,” and both in the sense “to hang or affix on the cross,” “to impale.” Naturally, the translators could well be selecting the term which to them seemed best to fit the sense. In Nu. 25 and 2 Βασ‌. 21 neither the original nor the translations refer to the ancient Israelite punishment of exposing corpses, but to impaling as the main punishment. Σ uses the present verb for this even though it really has a different sense in the sphere of OT law. Ἀ seems to link ἀναπήγνυμι with the same conception. On Nu. 25 in Σ Thdrt. (MPG, 80, p. 396b) observes: τοῦ μέντοι λαοῦ ἡμαρτηκότος οἱ ἄρχοντες ἐκρεμάσθησαν, ὡς ὁ Σύμμαχος ἔφη, ὡς μὴ ἐξάραντες τὸ πονηρὸν ἐξ αὐτῶν. A use fixed by the astral cult seems to underlie 2 Βασ‌. 21:6; the later Gk. translators then interpret this in the light of familiar penal practice.16 In many OT passages the Heb. תלה does not refer to the supplementary Heb. punishment but to the customs of hanging, impaling and crucifixion customary elsewhere. Thus Egyptian practice underlies Gn. 40:19, 22; 41:13, and Mesopotamian practice underlies Lam. 5:12; 1 Εσδρ. 6:31 and the relevant verses in Est. In 1 Εσδρ. the translator is responsible for κρεμασθῆναι ἐπὶ ξύλου. The Mas. is זְקִיף יִתְמְחֵא, which in 2 Εσδρ. 6:11 (the later transl. of the same book) is rendered ὠρθωμένος παγήσεται. In both translations ξύλον is used for “beam,” but in this context it must be given the sense of “stake.” Thus the distinction between the Israelite and the non-Israelite practice of hanging, which is linguistically not very emphatic in the Mas., is completely obliterated in the Greek versions.

In this light one may see why it is that in the NT at Lk. 23:39 (Mt., Mk. συσταυροῦσθαι); Ac. 5:30; 10:39 (cf. 2:23 προσπήγνυμι; 2:36; 4:10 σταυρόω) the present verb is used for crucifixion (→ σταυρός), and why it is that both on the Christian and also on the Jewish side OT passages, esp. Dt. 21:23, can be adduced as material parallels in the polemical and apologetical discussion of the fact of the crucifixion.

The LXX rendering of Dt. 21:23 (κεκατηραμένος ὑπὸ θεοῦ πᾶς κρεμάμενος ἐπὶ ξύλου) is not wholly literal. Πᾶς and ἐπὶ ξύλου are not found in the Mas. and are thus marked with asterisks in the Hexapla tradition. The typologically significant addition ἐπὶ ξύλου (→ ξύλον) derives from the many passages in which it is found in the original Heb. A literal translation of the Mas. כּי קִלְלַת אֱלֹהִים תָּלוּי is given by ἈΘ: κατάρα θεοῦ κρεμάμενος. Similarly, in Gl. 3:13a Paul first uses the noun κατάρα; the ἐπικατάρατος in 13b comes from Dt. 27:26, which has been quoted just before in Gl. 3:10. Σ takes a different line: διὰ τὴν βλασφημίαν τοῦ θεοῦ ἐκρεμάσθη. This presupposes an obj. gen. and ὕβρις (mockery) θεοῦ or λοιδορία θεοῦ for קִלְלַת אֱלֹהִים, for which there are par. elsewhere.20 On the other hand Ἀ, Pl. and the Rabb. tradition (Sanh., 6, 4) take κατάρα θεοῦ as a subj. gen. The Rabb. tradition regularly applies the word תלה to Jesus. This is obviously intentional. It places Jesus under the curse of Dt. 21:23, and groups him with Haman, who was hanged,23 and with Absalom, whose fate was equivalent to hanging. It was the κρεμάννυμι of the LXX which made this understanding possible. Perhaps Gl. 3:13 shows that Paul had to meet this kind of objection from the very first. The significance of Paul’s answer is stated by Justin as follows: ἡμῶν τονοῖ τήν ἐλπίδα ἐκκρεμαμένην ἀπό τοῦ σταυρωθέντος Χριστοῦ. For Paul, and therewith for early Christianity, the curse was made a blessing, and the OT passages which refer to Christ point forward to this. Worth noting in this connection is the typology of a free rendering of נֶאֱחָז in Gn. 22:13, the story of the offering of Isaac; this refers to the ram which was caught in a thicket. Hebr. and Syr. have κρεμάμενος for it, and Melito of Sardis notes that this rendering is to be introduced: ώς σαφέστερον τυποῦν τὸν σταυρόν.

3. Mt. 22:40.

The verb is here used figuratively in the sense “to be dependent on.”

Normally a prep. (ἐξ or ἐν) is used with κρεμάννυμι in this sense, e.g., Xenoph. Sym., 8, 19: ὁ ἐκ τοῦ σώματος κρεμάμενος; Plat. Leg., VIII, 831c: ἐξ ὧν κρεμαμένη πᾶσα ψυχὴ πολίτου. A similar sense to that of Xenoph. is found in Philo Poster. C., 61, which derives the name Θαλαμειν in Nu. 13:22 from תלה, and which thus interprets κρεμάμενός τις. The following train of thought is linked with this etymology: ἀνάγκη γὰρ ψυχαῖς ταῖς φιλοσωμάτοις ἀδελφὸν μὲν νομίζεσθαι τὸ σῶμα, τὰ δὲ ἐκτὸς ἀγαθὰ διαφερόντως τετιμῆσθαι· ἅσαι δὲ τοῦτον διάκεινται τὸν τρόπον, ἀψύχων ἐκκρέμανται καὶ καθάπερ οἱ ἀνασκολοπισθέντες ἄχρι θανάτου φθαρταῖς ὕλαις προσήλωνται. In Agric., 97 Philo uses the compound: αἰσθήσεως καὶ σαρκῶν ἐκκρεμαμένης ζωῆς. In secular Gk. the present word is less common in this sense than ἀρτάω, ἀρτέω, which does not occur at all in biblical Gk. Aristot. esp. prefers ἀρτάω, cf. Metaph., III, 2, p. 1003b, 17: τὸ πρῶτον … καὶ ἐξ οὗ τὰ ἄλλα ἤρτηται (sc. problems); cf. also Plat. Leg., X, 884a: ἀκ γὰρ δὴ τοῦ τοιούτου (disregard for the rights of one’s neighbour) πάντα ἠρτημένα τά τε εἰρημένα κακὰ γέγονε καὶ ἔστι καὶ ἔσται.

Particularly important in the present connection is the well-known reference in Plut. Cons. ad Apoll., 28 (II, 116c): τὸ γνῶθι σαυτὸν καὶ τὸ μηδέν ἄγαν· ἐκ τούτων γὰρ ἤρτηται τὰ λοιπὰ πάντα. This is a material parallel to Mt. 22:40. Moral conduct is shown to be dependent on two basic presuppositions, though these naturally differ from those of the Gospel. The common feature is the attempt to achieve a unity of the human spirit in face of the divisiveness of casuistical legalism. The OT has a similar orientation to a unifying epitome of the Law. Attempts in this direction may be found in Ps. 15; Is. 33:15; Mi. 6:8; Am. 5:4; Is. 56:1; Hab. 2:4. In the Gk. OT, however, the word κρεμάννυμι is not found in this connection.

The following are the only linguistic par.: Jdt. 8:24: ἐξ ἡμῶν κρέμαται ἡ ψυχὴ αὐτῶν, and Gn. 44:30: ἡ δὲ ψυχὴ αὐτοῦ ἐκκρέμαται ἐκ τῆς τούτου ψυξῆς, Mas. קְשׁוּרָה; Ἀ: συνδεδεμένη; Σ: ἐνδέδεται. But the formula is found in the Rabb., though they do not make it clear how the 613 OT commandments can be summed up in one. Acc. to Shab., 31a Shammai refused to attempt this for a Gentile who wished to become a proselyte. Hillel, his younger contemporary, does it in the negative form of the Golden Rule. The verb תלה is found in the formula in SDt, 41 on 11:13: בתלמוד ואין תלמוד במעשׂה המעשׂה תלוי: Conduct depends on doctrine, not doctrine on conduct. A compendium of the Law is introduced by the present term in Ber., 63a in a tradition traced back to bar Qappara (c. 220): “What is the smallest section of Scripture on which all the essential provisions of the Torah depend (תלויין)?” The answer is Prv. 3:6: “In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall smooth thy paths.” A similar emphasis is sometimes placed on the commandment to love God, e.g., Ber. 9, 5a: “One owes praise in evil things as in good; for it is written, Thou shalt love Yahweh, thy God, with all thy heart and with all thy soul and with all thy might.”

In the NT the law of love is singled out by Paul as well as Jesus. In R. 13:9 the apostle writes: τὸ γὰρ οὐ μοιχεύσεις … οὐκ ἐπιθυμήσεις, καὶ εἴ τις ἑτέρα ἐντολή, ἐν τῷ λόγῳ τούτῳ ἀνακεφαλαιοῦται, and in Gl. 5:14: ἁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται, ἐν τῷ· ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίαν σου ὡς σεαυτόν. It is of no particular significance that Paul refers to love for one’s neighbour while Jesus appeals to the twofold command of love for God and one’s neighbour, or that the two commands are associated differently in the three Synoptists. Only in Lk. can one really speak of a twofold command; in Mk. the command to love one’s neighbour is second, and in Mt. the two commands are set alongside one another as equal. But these are only peculiarities of tradition, just as the concluding statement in 22:40 is found only in Mt. and is perhaps to be regarded as an addition of Mt. like the endorsement of the Golden Rule in 7:12: οὗτος γὰρ ἐστιν ὁ νόμος καὶ οἱ προφῆται.

The particular significance of Mt.’s metaphor of hanging (ἐν not ἐξ) is as follows. As objects hang on a nail, and fall if the nail does not hold, so that they are essentially dependent on it, so the details of moral conduct, or individual requirements of the Law, are dependent on the law of love. This does not mean that the Law is acknowledged to be a way of fulfilling the law of love for God and one’s neighbour.34 More particularly it does not mean that the different commandments are assessed “according to their closer or more distant relation to the two cardinal commandments.” It means rather that the love of God is seen to be the sustaining basis of all human attitudes and actions. But the love of God in men, and therewith also the love of men for God, is revealed and actualised in love for one’s neighbour.36 “God is the God of love, and he who would be a child of God must be embraced and impelled by the stream of divine love, and must reflect the love of God in his life.” The NT is not attempting a logical derivation of the many commandments from the one, or a logical reduction of the many to the one. It is recognising the basic law of all action in faith. κρέμαται, ἀνακεφα-λαιοῦται and πεπλήρωται are exact material parallels which have the same fact in view. The believer is not bound in his conduct by a multiplicity of demands. He acts in the power of love. He thus stands in the unity, purity and freedom of the children of God.

4. Lk. 19:48.

The general MS tradition has at Lk. 19:48 the compound ἐκκρεμάννυμι. Only D (and a minusc.) have the simple form. The sense is that of fixed attention, of hanging on the lips. This is in keeping with a usage attested elsewhere. Cf. Aristot. Rhet., III, 14, p. 1415a, 12: ἵνα προειδῶσι περὶ οὗ ἦν ὁ λόγος καὶ μὴ κρέμηται ἡ διάνοια. The LXX, too, occasionally uses κρέμαμαι in a similar sense, e.g., Dt. 28:66: ἔσται ἡ ζωή σου κρεμαμένη ἀπέναντι τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν σου, καὶ φοβηθήσῃ ἡμέρας καὶ νυκτὸς καὶ οὐ πιστεύσεις τῇ ζωῇ σου. And Philo Poster. C., 24 and 25 judges with respect to the life of the ἄφρων: ζωὴ κρεμαμένη, βάσιν οὐκ ἔχουσα ἀκράδαντον.

The observation of Lk. is in keeping with his historicising and psychologising style. He is depicting in this way the attitude of the people towards Jesus. With this special term he replaces the expression ἐξεπλήσσοντο (Mt. 22:33; Mk. 11:18) which is used elsewhere to sum up the impression made by Jesus on those around Him. This small trait is interwoven into a more “human” picture of Jesus.