hWS EX ERGWN in Rom 9.32a
Dr. Dale M. Wheeler
dalemw at multnomah.edu
Sat Apr 20 15:57:11 EDT 2002
Steven Lo Vullo wrote:
>Hi all:
>
>Rom 9.32a: DIA TI? hOTI OUK EK PISTEWS ALL' hWS EX ERGWN
>
>My question concerns the use of hWS here. Accordance tags it as a subjective
>particle. If I understand this correctly, it means that hWS introduces a
>noun clause. But if so, what slot does it here fill? And can anyone give me
>some advice as to how to distinguish hWS when it is a subjective particle
>from hWS when it is a subordinating conjunction? I would have pegged the use
>in Rom 9.32 as a subordinating conjunction.
>============
>
>Steven Lo Vullo
>Madison, WI
>slovullo at mac.com
A couple of things about this (which include some comments about subsequent
posts on this issue):
1) the reason that Logos and Accordance tag this the same way is because
they are both using the Gramcord MorphGNT database, as does Gramcord for
Windows, and now Biblesoft's PC Study Bible (this is info, not an
advertisement!)
2) The Gramcord tag (which I didn't create, but am responsible for, since
I'm the editor of the text) of Particle, Subjective does in fact mean that
the hWS is introducing a noun clause here, not a subordinate clause or
adverbial modifier. I'm not sure where the quote in Accordance came from
exactly (I think is was from an email conversation that I had with one of
their associates), but it is accurate. I believe the term comes from one
of the grammars, but since I'm at home, I'm not sure which one off the top
of my head--Carl is the only one who can quote just about anything off the
top of his head!! (-:
3) Not intending to be pedantic but just explanatory...a noun clause will
fill the slot a noun or adjective would fill, thus it is usually
explanatory to some word or phrase. Thus, as a noun clause, as was pointed
out in several quotes from commentaries, the hWS etc. is NOT saying, "They
pursued it as if pursuing it by works." That would be hWS as an adverbial
modifier (= BDAG hWS I.1.).
4) As a Noun Clause it is saying, as you said (though you wanted to
classify it as adverbial):
hOTI OUK [EDIWXAN AUTON] EK PISTEWS ALL' [EDIWXAN AUTON] hWS EX ERGWN
"because [they did not pursue it] by faith, but [they pursued it] as if it
were by works" (AUTON and "it" refer to NOMON DIKAIOSUNHS from v. 31)
5) Thus, the hWS clause is providing an appositional/adjectival
explanation, *not* of how they pursued it, but rather the nature of the
NOMON DIKAIOSUNHS, ie., they thought it was a "law" which was by its nature
attainable EX' ERGWN.
6) BDAG's translation is misleading in terms of where they locate it within
the hWS article, since it sounds like they are saying that the hWS clause
explains how they pursued it (which means that it should be in category
I.1.)...but if you compare the definition for the section ("III. hWS
introduces the characteristic quality of a pers., thing, or action, etc.,
referred to in the context."; ie., a noun clause
explaining/appositional/adjectival to another word or phrase in the
context) and other two examples in the section (which are clearly
explanatory noun clauses), their explanation and translation don't fit:
> III. hWS introduces the characteristic quality of a pers., thing, or action,
> etc., referred to in the context.
>
> 3. a quality wrongly claimed, in any case objectively false EPISTOH hWS DI'
> hHMWN a letter (falsely) alleged to be from us 2 Th 2:2a (Diod. S. 33, 5, 5
> EPEMYAN hWS PARA TWN PRESBEUTWN EPISTOHN they sent a letter which purported
> to come from the emissaries; Diog. L. 10:3 falsified EPISTOLAI hWS
> EPIKOUROU). TOUS LOGIZOMENOUS hHMAS hWS KATA SARKA PERIPATOUNTAS 2 Cor 10:2
> (s. also 1c above). Cf. 11:17; 13:7. Israel wishes to become righteous
OUK EK
> PISTEWS ALL' hWS EC ERGWN not through faith but through deeds (the
latter way
> being objectively wrong) Ro 9:32 (Rdm.2 26f).
7) I think most of the translations (but who ever really knows what
translators are trying to do??!!) are trying to communicate this noun
clause idea, eg., NRSV "...they did not strive for it on the basis of
faith, but as if it were based on works."
8) There are a whole lot of other problems in this passage, eg., what kind
of "righteousness" are we talking about here...forensic, personal,
eschatological; are "works" the works of the Mosaic Law, or other "deeds"
of Pharisaic Judaism, etc., etc., etc....but I'm sure you're aware of those
things and how each conclusion on each one of those things effects your
conclusions about the others.
Hope that helps...
Blessings...
Dale M. Wheeler, Ph.D.
Editor, The GRAMCORD Morphological Greek New Testament
***********************************************************************
Dale M. Wheeler, Ph.D.
Research Prof., Biblical Languages Multnomah Bible College
8435 NE Glisan St. Portland, OR 97220
V: 503-2516416 E: dalemw at multnomah.edu
***********************************************************************
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list