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