[B-Greek] 1 Peter 1:15"

Charles Rempel CharlesR at mygalaxyexpress.com
Sun Jan 2 15:11:02 EST 2005


Let's take up an instance of EGENOMHN and EGENHQHN where the meaning of the
expressions in which they are found appears to be to all intents and
purposes identical:

Eph 3:6-7 ... TOU EUAGGELIOU, hOU EGENHQHN DIAKONOS KATA THN DWREAN THS
CARITOS TOU QEOU ...

Col. 1:23 ... TOU EUAGGELIOU ... hOU EGENOMHN EGW PAULOS DIAKONOS ...

Col. 1:24-5 ... hH EKKLHSIA, hHS EGENOMHN EGW DIAKONOS KATA THN OIKONOMIAN
TOU QEOU THN DOQEISAN MOI ...

Are we to say that in Eph 3:6-7 EGENHQHN DIAKONOS means "I was made (by God)
a servant" but that in Col. 1-23-5 the two expressions EGENOMHN DIAKONOS
bear a different semantic "voice" and mean something like "I came to be (of
my own accord) a servant"?

Carl W. Conrad

CDR:

OK, I'm going to let you draw me into brief observations on the middle.
Mitch Larramore was indeed correct when he said that the middle voice was
more complex than the "simplistic" reflexive.

Moulton in his grammer states that "... the middle involves the whole
subject in the verbs action and expresses the subject in some special
realtionship to himself ... there is little significance between the writers
choice of the middle and active voices ... the reflexive midle is relatively
rare ... the reciprocal middle rarer ...

Blass DeBrunner states that "NT authors in general preserve well the
distinction between the middle and passive. ... the middle is occasionally
used where active is expected."

A.T.Robertson states "The only difference between the active and middle
voice is that the middle voice calls special attention to the subject. ...
(The middle) is exxentially the voice of personal interest somewhat like a
dative case."

Gildersleeve: ... the interpretation of the difference between the active
and middle is in many cases more lexical than grammatical.

Dana & Mantey state "The indirect middle (the most common) ... is closely
related to the subject, or is related to the subject in some special and
distinctive sense which the writer wishes to emphasize. The reason for the
emphasis is to be inferred from the context.

It is interesting to note that according to the grammars the active and
middle are more closely related in meaning while the middle and passive is
referenced as haveing "distinction between" preserved.

We know that in the logic of the Greek language the author may view the same
event from different perspectives, i.e. I have been saved(aorist), I am
being saved(present), I will be saved(future) and yet all refering to the
salvation experience.

Likewise with Pauls' discussion about becoming a minister of Christ. In
Ephesians he uses the passive voice without explanation because he
acknowledges that it is not his action which causes him to be a minister.

In Colossians Paul desires to show his intense involvement on behalf of the
Colossians and uses the middle voice. However to make sure that the readers
do not misunderstand his use of the middle voice he explains that this
spiritual gift, or office, was "... according to the stewardship from God
bestowed on me for your benefit, ...".

So I would conclude that the passive and middle voices are distinctive and
their meanings should be correctly read to understand the intent of Paul.

Charles D. Rempel
30 year student
Without Portfolio






More information about the B-Greek mailing list