hWS EX ERGWN

Moon-Ryul Jung moon at sogang.ac.kr
Sun Apr 21 04:51:52 EDT 2002


Dale wrote:

--------
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.
---------

Dale, what is the ground that hWS EX ERGWN here is adjectival,
appositional
to AUTON? We can interpret the sentence that way. How can you avoid
the apparent symmetry between EK PISTEWS and EX ERGWN? Please see my
comments below about the examples you quoted. 
 
 
------
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:
------
The fact that hWS introduces the characteristic quality of a person,
thing,
or action does not mean that the clause hWS introduces is a "noun clause"
explaining/appositional/adjectival to another word or phrase. [By a "noun
clause", you seem to mean a relative clause. A noun clause would play the
role of the subject or the object in a sentence. A clause adjectival to
another word is a relative clause.] The phrase or clause hWS introduces
would function as adjectival or adverbial depending on the way it relates
to the rest of the sentence. It does not look different so much from
English "as".

--------
> 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).
---------


In EPISTOH hWS DI'hHMWN, hWS DI' hHMWN functions as a relative clause
modifying EPISTOLH. The role of hWS DI' hHMWN is the same as DI' hHMWN
in the phrase EPISTOLH DI' hHMWN. hWS DI' hHMWN functions as a relative
clause because DI' hHMWN alone would function as a relative clause. 

In hWS PARA TWN PRESBEUTWN EPISTOHN, hWS PARA TWN PRESBEUTWN functions
as a relative clause modifying EPISTOLHN. The same comments as above.

In LOGIZOMENOUS hHMAS hWS KATA SARKA PERIPATOUNTAS, hWS KATA SARKA
PERIPATOUNTAS functions as predicate to hHMAS. Here it does not function
as a relative clause modifying hHMAS, but as a predicate expression 
that describes hHMAS. The role of hWS KATA SARKA PERIPATOUNTAS is the
same as KATA SARKA PERIPATOUNTAS in LOGIZOMENOUS hHMAS KATA SARKA
PERIPATOUNTAS. hWS does not change the role of KATA SARKA PERIPATOUNTAS
in the sentence.  

Dale, 
Your objection to the following treatment is based on the observation that
hWS introduces an apppositional/adjectival clause. But how do you know
that is the case here?

-------------------------
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).
---------

Moon
Moon R. Jung
Sogang Univ, Seoul, Korea



More information about the B-Greek mailing list