[B-Greek] Acts 22:17 Septuagintal?
Elizabeth Kline
kline-dekooning at earthlink.net
Wed Jan 25 13:58:53 EST 2006
A few unenlightening observations about Dr. Buth's valuable
contribution:
On Jan 24, 2006, at 1:14 PM, bitan buth wrote:
> Basically, Luke NEVER uses the LXX-egeneto constructions in Acts.
...
> EGENETO [+/- time margin] with an infinitive MAIN clause (to be
> distinguished from EGENETO +/- time margin + finite verb main
> clause) occurs
> 16 times in Acts and 6 times in the gospel of Luke and NEVER in the
> LXX.
A breath taking statement. The word "NEVER" just begs for a
contradiction. However it is somewhat difficult (perhaps not
impossible) to falsify this assertion. This is not something which
you can test by building a search string for BibleWorks (or
whatever). Because you need to be able to search for the infinitive
functioning as a MAIN VERB. So falsification while theoretically
possible is going to be a lot off work. More work than most will be
willing to do.
What constitutes an LXX-egeneto construction is in fact the point
under dispute. Dr. Buth has suggested some patterns that identify LXX-
egeneto and non-LXX-egeneto constructions. If we accept the claim
that these patterns are valid criteria for separating the LXX sheep
from the non-LXX goats and we if have a means of testing this against
the entire LXX database, then perhaps we should be willing to accept
his conclusions. However both of these conditions must be met before
some of us skeptical types will be convinced.
> (This was
> noted already by Plummer in 1896, but most commentators have
> assumed the
> opposite.)
On page 45 of Luke ICC A.Plummer there is a classification scheme
showing several different forms of EGENETO clauses found in Luke's
writings. Acts 22:17 is listed under G (gamma) "that which takes
place is put in the infinitive, and this depends on EGENETO".
Plummer calls this one of the more classical forms of the EGENETO
construction.
Elizabeth Kline
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list