Acts 19:2 aorist participle
Carl W. Conrad
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Mon Mar 12 07:09:41 EST 2001
At 9:05 PM -0800 3/11/01, dixonps at juno.com wrote:
>On Sun, 11 Mar 2001 05:51:28 -0600 "Carl W. Conrad"
><cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu> writes:
>> At 4:49 PM -0800 3/9/01, dixonps at juno.com wrote:
>
>> Paul, I may be wrong, but I frankly believe that KJV's
>> "since" here has the sense of "because" rather than
>> "more recently than."
>
>If PISTEUSANTES is causal, then Paul is assuming they had received the
>Holy Spirit and is merely asking how that happened. Their response seems
>to militate against that interpretation, "No, we have not even heard
>whether there is a Holy Spirit."
>
>Doesn't this suggest they understood Paul to be asking if they had
>received the Holy Spirit either when they believed, or since they
>believed?
Okay, upon further reflection, I think the intent of the participle is to
indicate simultaneous occurrence, but with a causal implication: EI PNEUMA
hAGION ELABETE PISTEUSANTES? "You did (of course) receive Holy Spirit when
you came to believe, didn't you (because these two matters--belief and the
coming of the Spirit) are interrelated)? I think this is still quite
different from the antecedent aorist participle indicating action prior to
the action of the main verb. It seems to me that PISTEUSANTES here
functions as would an adverbial clause phrased something like EPEI (or
better EPEIDH or still better EPEIDHPER) EPISTEUSATE, which conjunctions
could be translated either "when" or "since." No, I don't think Paul's
asking HOW it happened but rather inquiring whether their coming to faith
happened, as we Presbyterians are wont to say, "decently and in order."
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics/Washington University
Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list