[B-Greek] The Definite Article in Romans 9:5
Carl W.Conrad
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Tue Feb 28 19:33:50 EST 2006
On Feb 28, 2006, at 6:15 PM, Harold Holmyard wrote:
> Dear Terry,
>
>> Greetings,
>> The general questioning in regards to Romans 9:5 regards the Deity
>> of Christ but there is almost no discussion on the use of the
>> definite article TO. Many commentators (Schreiner, Piper, Dunn,
>> Cranfield, etc.) quote Blass & DeBrunner's teaching that this
>> article "strongly emphasizes limitation", and feel that is
>> sufficient and move on.
>> Is that all there is to say about the use of this definite
>> article? B&D claim "this usage is not frequent" so why hasn't more
>> been said about it? Are B&D right in their conclusion? How do they
>> know? Why a singular accusative neuter? Does the neuter imply "the
>> thing"? I'm not able to find other exact examples in the GNT nor
>> is there discussion in the grammars like Wallace, D&M, or Summers.
>> Any help understanding this usage of the definite article would be
>> appreciated.
>>
>
>
> HH: BAGD, in the treatment of the definite article (hO) lists the
> expression in Rom 9:5 under II, 6: "with an adverb or adverbial
> expression." See a similar phrase in 1 Cor 13:10: TO EK MEROUS. The
> idea
> in Rom 9:5 seems to be, as the translations have it, "with respect to
> the flesh." Insofar as his flesh was concerned, the Messiah was
> descended from the fathers. This is an interesting assertion, since it
> easily implies that with respect to some other part (His spirit), the
> Messiah was not descended from the fathers. Such an inference comports
> well with the interpretation of the verse as asserting the deity of
> the
> Messiah.
The text (it really helps to have it in front of a reader and not
have to hunt down the text: hWN hOI PATERES KAI EX hWN hO CRISTOS TO
KATA SARKA, ...
TO EK MEROUS in 1 Cor 13:10 is somewhat different: hOTAN DE ELQHi TO
TELEION, TO EK MEROUS KATARGHQHSETAI. Here the TO is required to
convert the prepositional phrase into a substantive which is the
subject of KATARGHQHSETAI.
With regard to Rom 9:5 I think there's a powerful tendency in
Hellenistic Greek to substantivize prepositional phrases and then use
them in the neuter accusative as adverbs. That's the focus especially
in BDAG 2.f. :
f. w. an adv. or adverbial expr. (1 Macc 8:3) TO EMPROSQEN Lk 19:4.
TO EXWQEN Mt 23:25. TO PERAN Mt 8:18, 28. TA ANW J 8:23; Col 3:1f. TA
KATW J 8:23. TA OPISW Mk 13:16. TA hWDE ... —Esp. w. indications
of time τό, TA NUN s. NUN 2b. TO PALIN 2 Cor 13:2. TO LOIPON 1 Cor
7:29; Phil 3:1. TO PRWTON J 10:40; 12:16; 19:39. TO PROTERON 6:62;
Gal 4:13. TO KAQ' hHMERANν daily Lk 11:3.—TO PLEISTON at the most 1
Cor 14:27.
I still remember vividly the first time I saw this as a Freshman
beginning to read Mark in Mk 2:2 KAI SUNHCQHSAN POLLOI hWSTE MHKETI
CWREIN MHDE TA PROS THN QURAN -- and wondering to myself, "why the TA
with PROS THN QURAN?" Of course it could have been MHDE PROS THN
QURAN ("not even near the doorway") but it seems this is something
that the Koine favors such expressions, maybe like the colloquial
American "like" in "not even, like, near the doorway" -- as if "near
the doorway" needed something additional to make it seem adverbial.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)
1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad2 at mac.com
WWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list