Re: OTI in Eph. 2:18

Carl W. Conrad (
Wed, 31 Jul 1996 19:39:18 -0400

At 3:01 PM -0400 7/31/96, L. Mark Bruffey wrote:
>Is it possible that in Eph. 2:18 OTI is to be understood emphatically,
>rather than as a causal subordinator or relative? Can anyone cite for me
>several examples of OTI in such a usage, both from biblical texts and from
>non-biblical hellenistic texts?

As I have no resources ready to hand for extra-biblical Greek in my
mountain hideaway, I can't cite such instances. I am, however, one of those
who think Ephesians is stylistically different from the undisputably
Pauline letters in several ways. I think that hOTI is indeed emphatic here,
but I would not be inclined to argue that it is extraordinary. Had DI'
AUTOU GAR EXOMEN ... been written instead of hOTI DI' AUTOU EXOMEN ... the
essential sense would not be significantly different but the rhetorical
emphasis would be weaker. I think hOTI is emphatic enough here that it
would be appropriate to translate this verse as: "The reason is that ... "

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University
One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, USA 63130
(314) 935-4018 OR