[B-Greek] Article Participle Noun construction

Rob Matlack rmatlack at alexandria.cc
Sat Apr 17 16:14:24 EDT 2004


Dr. Dirkzwager,
Thank you for your reply, but I don't think it answers my question. I 
should have made my question clearer. In James 1:5 DIDONTOS is also 
active and I suggested the idea of "the giving God". Why couldn't EPI 
TON EGEIRANTA IHSOUN, recognizing that EGEIRANTA is active, be 
understood as "in the risen Jesus"? If it can, then it seems to me to 
have a different meaning than "in Him who raised Jesus". Maybe I am 
missing something really simple.

Arie Dirkzwager wrote:
> Rob,
> 
> I think the problem is mainly that you see EGEIRANTA as passive, whereas it
> is active: having awoken.
> So TON EGEIRANTA is God; IHSOUN is object of EGEIRANTA.
> 
> Arie
> 
> 
> Dr. A. Dirkzwager
> Hoeselt, Belgium
> e-mail dirkzwager at pandora.be
> 
> 
>>My question relates to the interpretation of the article participle noun
>>construction. I found 89 such constructions in the NT (if I formed my
>>search correctly). If the somewhat special constructions using the
>>participle of legw (who is called X) are left out there are about 73
>>left. (206 in OT & NT) Romans 8:34 shows up in the computer search, but
>>clearly does not fit our discussion. There may be others. In general
>>however, the construction seems to me to be of an adjectival participle
>>in an attributive position (first attributive) giving some attribute of
>>the noun. For example:
>>Mat. 2:2 POU ESTIN hOTEXQEIS BASILEUS TWN IOUDAIWN
>>Where is the born king of the Jews
>>
>>Many times these are translated with a relative clause: "Where is He who
>>is Born King of the Jews". Usually that makes little difference in
>>English. Now consider:
>>James 1:5  ... AITEITW PARA TOU DIDONTOS QEOU PASIN hAPLWS KAI OUK
>>ONEIDIZONTOS KAI DOQHSETAI AUTWi
>>What is the idea here? "Let him ask from the giving God to all
>>generously..." This is poor English, but it stress the giving attribute
>>of God which James picks up in 1:12 & 1:17.
>>
>>But now consider Romans 4:24 where there is a significant difference in
>>meaning if the relative clause translation is used. (I don't want to
>>discuss theology, just what the Greek text says.)
>>Romans 4:24 ALLA KAI DI' hHMAS OIS MELLEI LOGIZESQAI TOIS PISTEUOUSIN
>>EPI TON EGEIRANTA IHSOUN TON KURION hHMWN EK NEKROWN
>>"but also for our sakes, to whom it will certainly be inputed, to those
>>who believe on the risen Jesus our Lord from the dead." That is rough
>>English, but it is clearly different from the common translations: "but
>>for ours also. It will be counted to us who believe in him who raised
>>from the dead Jesus our Lord". In the first the belief which results in
>>imputation is in the Jesus who has the attribute of being risen and in
>>the other the belief which results in imputation is in the One who
>>raised Him.
>>
>>What say ye? Which is the meaning of the Greek text? BTW, I did search
>>the archives, but I may have missed something. Thanks in advance for
>>your insights.
>>

-- 
Rob Matlack	    rmatlack at alexandria.cc
Stilwell, OK
"I can only say that I am nothing but a poor sinner, trusting in Christ 
alone for salvation"--R. E. Lee
"It is not our task to secure the triumph of truth, but merely to fight 
on its behalf."--Blaise Pascal


---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0416-2, 04/16/2004
Tested on: 4/17/04 3:14:28 PM
avast! is copyright (c) 2000-2003 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com






More information about the B-Greek mailing list