Rom. 1:4 EN DUNAMEI adverbial or adjectival

David L. Moore dvdmoore at ix.netcom.com
Mon Jul 13 19:38:41 EDT 1998


At 02:18 PM 7/13/98 -0400, Carl W. Conrad wrote:
>At 9:29 AM -0700 7/13/98, dalmatia at eburg.com wrote:
>>Carl W. Conrad wrote:
>>
>>> (1) Paul's interpretation of the phrase which he cites from Hab 2:4 as hO
>>> DE DIKAIOS EK PISTEWS ZHSETAI--and which I think ought properly to be
>>> construed by taking EK PISTEWS with ZHSETAI--certainly appears to be
>>> understood by Paul in Rom 1:17ff in such a way that EK PISTEWS functions
>>> adjectivally with hO DIKAIOS.
>>
>>When a modifier lies between two terms like this [here between the
>>subject and the verb], I have always taken it to 'distribute' to
>>[modify] both, unless otherwise contraindicated.  Why does it have to
>>be one or the other?  The subject is united with the action of the
>>verb, and the prepositional phrase [EK PISTEWS] modifies that unity.
>>Are we imposing an understanding of either-or that is not appropriate
>>to the Greek usage?
>
>Certainly not AUTOMATICALLY. As I said earlier, in classical Attic you
>would not find a prepositional phrase qualifying hO DIKAIOS unless there
>were a hO added before the EK PISTEWS: i.e. the phrase would have to be ho
>DIKAIOS hO EK PISTEWS. BDF#255, if I understand it rightly, allows omission
>of the article only with traditional phrases--and I don't think this
>instance classifies as such.
>

	In checking Grammars on this, I found an instance in Robertson where the
prepositional phrase KAQ' hUPERBOLHN is apparently used adjectivally
(Robertson, p. 551).  The passage is 1Cor. 12:31 which reads KAI ETI KAQ'
hUPERBOLHN hODON hUMIN DEIKNUMI.  But this seems far removed from our
examples and doesn't appear to justify taking EN DUNAMEI with hUIOU QEOU in
Rom. 1:4.

David Moore


David L. Moore
Miami, Florida, USA
E-mail: dvdmoore at ix.netcom.com
Home Page: http://members.aol.com/dvdmoore

            



More information about the B-Greek mailing list