[B-Greek] IRom 1:0

Polycarp66 at aol.com Polycarp66 at aol.com
Mon Dec 22 12:19:43 EST 2003


In a message dated 12/21/2003 7:04:21 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
bertdehaan at gosympatico.ca writes:
(According to Mounce's workbook, the following passage is from IRom 1:0 what 
ever that is.)
ASPAZOMAI EV ONOMATI IHSOU CRISTOU, hUIOU PATROS; KATA SARKA KAI PNEUMA 
hHNWMEVOIS PASHi ENTOLHi AUTOU.
I translated this as follows:"I send greetings in the name of Jesus Christ, 
Son of the Father, according to the flesh and Spirit, to all who are united in 
every one of his commandments".
The answer key has the following translation:" I send greetings in the name 
of Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, to all who are united according to 
flesh and spirit to his every command".
How does -according to flesh and spirit- belong to the recipients of the 
greetings and not to -Jesus Christ, Son of the Father-?
I understand that the Son is not the son of the Father according to the 
flesh, but I can't change my translation based on what I think it should read.

__________________

In our discussion of what the passage referenced might be (Ignatius' Epistle 
to the Romans) and Carl's discussion of the strangeness of the conception that 
one is united to the commandments

"I think that the answer to this lies in (a) the fact that such an adverbial
phrase tends to precede the verb which it governs, so: KATA SARKA KAI
PNEUMA hHNWMENOIS PASHi ENTOLHi AUTOU--it indicates "unified/united in
flesh and spirit" or I'd prefer to say "at one in body and soul ..."

"But I continue to be wonder about another feature of this excerpt that
bothered me last night when I first saw it: how is the participle
hHNWMENOIS linked syntactically to PASHi ENTOLHi AUTOU; the meaning of this
latter phrase is not in question; what I find unsatisfactory is the
suggestion in the "Answer Key" cited by Bert, that the congregation is
"united TO every one of his commandments." Isn't that an odd idea? If so it
means that PASHi ENTOLHi AUTOU is being understood as a comitative or
sociative dative and that each commandment is something TO WHICH the
congregation is unanimously bound. The verb in question here, hENOW, does
not appear in the GNT at all, but it's a good Hellenistic Greek word and
not at all uncommon in patristic literature, as indicated in BDAG's entry:"

I think we have neglected to address the question asked "How does -according 
to flesh and spirit- belong to the recipients of the greetings and not to 
-Jesus Christ, Son of the Father-?"  It should be noted that the participle 
hHNWMENOIS here is in the dative plural whereas there is no plural noun to which 
this would refer.  I would suggest that this is a case of KATA SUNESIN or 
constructio ad sensum in which the church (EKKLHSIAi) is understood as consisting of 
many members and is therefore spoken of in the plural.  This would answer the 
question regarding why it would refer to the recipients of the greetings and 
not to Jesus Christ since he could hardly be understood as a plurality.

gfsomsel



More information about the B-Greek mailing list