Re: hOTI in the beattitudes
Carl W. Conrad (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Sun, 24 Nov 1996 17:04:02 -0600
At 8:34 AM -0600 11/22/96, KULIKOVSKY, Andrew wrote:
>>The hOTI clause--at least when hOTI = "because, for the reason
>>that"--always explains the preceding assertion; semantically it is
>>equivalent to a postpositive GAR in the clause that indicates the clause
>>explains the previous one.
>I have just read your above post and its 9:21am here
>and I am not a morning person. Maybe I'm just thick
>but I don't really understand what your saying.
>Which clause explains which clause and HOW does
>it explain it?
>I thought that 2 clauses, A and B, separated by
>hOTI like the following:
>A hOTI B
>meant that B is the reason for A.
>Now this is the construction found in the beattitudes.
>What I am confused about is that the A clauses in
>the beattitudes appear to be the cause of the B
>clauses ie. the sense is the other way around.
>So my question is:
>Do people inherit the earth because they are meek
>which is what one would expect
>Are people meek because they inherit the earth
>which is what the hOTI suggests???
I think you are looking at the wrong part of the A clause; it is the MAKARIOS that the B clause in each instance explains: The meek are blessed--blessed because they will inherit the earth, etc. Now if you wanted to convert this into a form of Jesus' teaching about the New Righteousness, you'd make it: "If you want to be blessed (because you will in that case inherit the earth), then be meek."
Does that make any more sense. If not, ask again!