Ephesians ~ Generic Dative and Periphrastic Pefect
Bill Ross
wross at farmerstel.com
Mon Apr 26 11:21:50 EDT 1999
{Carl }
On the other hand, in the unquestionably authentic letters of Paul I've
found several good instances of the periphrastic perfect or pluperfect; here
are a few of them:
Rom 13:1, where Paul speaks of authorities to which one must be subject. OU
GAR ESTIN EXOUSIA EI MH hUPO QEOU, and those that do exist (hAI DE OUSAI),
he says, hUPO QEOU TETAGMENAI EISIN. This is a periphrastic third-plural
perfect passive.
{Bill}
Ironically, this is also an example of ESTIN as a "stand-alone" verb! This
is exactly how George wants to read this construction:
"Not ARE authorities except by God, and those that do exist, by God having
been established ARE." (or, "Are, having been established by God").
This would parallel George's reading: "In Grace you ARE, having been saved
by faith."
The other examples do prove the normalcy of the form.
{Bill}
>As to George's assertion that ESTE is a stand alone verb, in the sense of
"you exist," that is how I first read it, since the context has Paul showing
in this passage that the Church is God's new creation:
>
>Eph 2:
>10 For we are his workmanship, **created** in Christ Jesus unto good works,
which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
{Carl}
In Eph 2:10 AUTOU GAR ESMEN POIHMA. ESMEN is hardly a "stand-alone" verb, it
takes a predicate nominative, namely POIHMA AUTOU.
{Bill}
I was not citing 2:10 to show ESMEN as a "stand-alone" verb, but to show
that the context of the passage was that the Church was a miracle by God,
not an accomplishment of men. The word I was calling attention to was
KTISQENTES.
{Carl}
I hope that I have shown that.
{Bill}
Thank you for your ever diligent, patient instruction. I don't believe that
you have proven that ESTE must of necessity be linked to SESWiSMENOI, since
it can stand alone, and you have proved that ESTE can serve as a
"stand-alone" verb as George holds. Further, it does appear less frequent to
put ESTE before the verb than after. Hence, I don't see how the grammar,
which supports both readings, can preclude either one.
And both are true:
"By/In grace you have been saved through faith"
and
"By/In grace you are, having been saved through faith."
Did I miss anything that makes one conclusively incorrect??
By the way, one additional reason that I prefer the second reading is that
it does not have to be read as a parenthesis, and it contributes to the
thrust of the passage. I find the disjointed approach unnerving.
Bill Ross
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-greek/attachments/19990426/b7dbc669/attachment.html
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list