EK in James 1:13
clayton stirling bartholomew
c.s.bartholomew at worldnet.att.net
Sat Nov 28 14:17:53 EST 1998
Paul Zellmer wrote:
>
> James 1:13 says: (3:13, csb)
>
> TI/S SOFOS KAI EPISTHMWN EN hUMIN; DEICATW EK THS KALHS ANASTROFHS
> TA ERGA AUTOU EN PRAUTHTI SOFIAS.
>
> . . . asking about the EK phrase.
>
> An initial impression is that this phrase is describing the source
> of the demonstation that is commanded. If this were the case, I
> would probably handle the thought like does the NIV, supplying "it"
> after the imperative. Yet I have a bit of a problem handling the TA
> ERGA. *It* appears to be the object of the verb, i.e., *what* is
> shown. If this is the case, the EK phrase seems to be the source of
> the works. But the order of the parts of this sentence seem to go
> against this, at least in my way of thinking. I would expect to see
> the EK phrase come after ERGA AUTOU, perhaps even after SOFIAS.
>
Paul,
Another word order question? Word order questions are really slippery. I
decided to look at the Vulgate and Old Latin to see how they translated this,
I quote from J.B. Mayor's commentary on James:
*********
DEICATW EK THS KALHS ANASTROFHS
TA ERGA AUTOU EN PRAUTHTI SOFIAS.
Is rendered in the Old Latin, Corby MS:
DEMONSTRAT DE BONA CONUERSATIONE OPERA SUA IN SAPIENTIAE CLEMENTIA
in the Vulgate:
OSTENDAT EX BONA CONUERSATIONE OPERATIONEM SUAM IN MANSUETUDINEM SAPIENTIAE.
*******
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list