[B-Greek] Romans 4:1

Stephen Payne spayneop at hotmail.com
Wed Jul 26 09:00:13 EDT 2006


This is clearly a case of indirect discourse.  In indirect discourse the 
dependent clause is set with its verb in the infinitive and, if different 
than the main verb, the subject in the accustive.  Now, hHNWN is genitive so 
it cannot be the subject of hEURHKENAI, which also means that the subject 
for it must be taken as the same for EROUMEN.  Since the main verb is future 
tense, the verb in indirect discourse will be future or present tense.  
Thus, "What then shall we say we find Abraham our forefather according to 
the flesh?"  But TI can also mean "why?"  So, perhaps, "Why then shall we 
say we find Abraham our forefather according to the flesh?"

Yours,
Stephen Payne


>From: Harold Holmyard <hholmyard at ont.com>
>To: B-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
>Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Romans 4:1
>Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 07:22:00 -0500
>
>Dear list,
>
> >>From: "gfsomsel at juno.com" <gfsomsel at juno.com>
> >>Date: July 26, 2006 10:35:25 AM EDT
> >>To: hholmyard at ont.com, cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
> >>Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Romans 4:1
> >>
> >>Carl,
> >>
> >>Would you please post this. My problem is still not resolved.
> >>
> >>If you take a look at Jn 1.15 it has
> >>
> >>hOUTOS HN hON EIPON
> >>
> >>The object concerning which something is said is in the acc
> >>(PROPATORA is acc so ABRAAM though indeclinable must also be
> >>considered acc).  On the other hand, in Lk 17.21 where EREW is used
> >>to introduce direct speach (after a couple of of demonstrative
> >>expressions) the quotation is in normal format with the nominative
> >>subject
> >>
> >>IDOU GAR hH BASILEIA TOU QEOU ENTOS hUMWN ESTIN
> >>
> >>It would seem that TI with a form of EIPW was used regularly to
> >>introduce a question CONCERNING something.
> >>
> >>
>
>HH: George, I take you to mean that you find the proposed translation
>unlikely:
>
>TI OUN EROUMEN hEURHKENAI ABRAAM TON PROPATORA hHMWN KATA SARKA
>
>What then shall we say, Have we found Abraham to be our forefather
>according to the flesh?
>
>
>HH: Another person on another list said that he found the translation
>impossible. I tend to find it impossible, too, Perhaps one could think
>of the words as:
>
>What then shall we say -- to have found Abraham to be our forefather
>according to the flesh?
>
>HH: But it seems very odd to me. What do people with more experience in
>Greek feel?
>
>Yours,
>Harold Holmyard
>
>---
>B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
>B-Greek mailing list
>B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek





More information about the B-Greek mailing list