[B-Greek] 2 Peter 1:3 Subject?

Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Thu Mar 9 07:24:29 EST 2006


I've read Yancy Smith's response to this query and don't take much  
exception to it other than to note that the forms of DWREOMAI in the  
perfect participle and perfect indicative are surely middle rather  
than passive. I'd like to offer my own exploration of this entire  
structure -- if it can honestly be called a structure!

On Mar 8, 2006, at 7:33 PM, Mitch Larramore wrote:

> CARIS hUMIN KAI EIRHNH PLHQUNQEIH EN EPIGNWSEI TOU
> QEOU KAI IHSOU TOU KURIOU hHMWN
>
> hWS PANTA hHMIN THS QEIAS DUNAMEWS AUTOU TA PROS ZWHN
> KAI EUSEBEIAN DEDWRHMENHS DIA THS EPIGNWSEWS TOU
> KALESANTOS hHMAS IDIAi DOXHi KAI ARETHi
>
> DI' hWN TA TIMIA KAI MEGISTA hHMIN EPAGGELMATA
> DEDWRHTAI,...
>
>
> I hate to ask someone to talk about all of this but
> I'm trying to figure out how these verses fit
> together.
>
> Verse 3 has a Genitive Absolute (apparently). How does
> that fit into this section? What is the subject in
> verse 3? Am I right in trying to locate a finite verb
> and then tie verse 3 to that?
>
> One translation starts off "I pray..." but I think
> they are supplying that, but from where? Any help in
> as much of these 3 verses you can share would be appreciated.

It is the NET that starts off verse 2 with "I pray." The note also  
rightly indicates that the punctuation in UBS4/NA27 is just simply  
wrong: there must be a comma -- NOT a period -- following TOU KURIOUS  
hHMWN, for the reason that the subject and main verb do, in fact,  
reside in the first verse, and to be precise, in CARIS KAI EIRHNH  
PLHQUNQEIH. It's a relatively rare optative (63x in the GNT): "May  
grace and peace grow (exponentially?) in you ..." And that optative  
is the source of NET's "I can pray this because ...."

The third verse does indeed offer a basis for the initial prayer for  
the exponentially-growing efficacy of insight in the unspecified  
believers to whom the letter is addressed. And it is indeed a  
genitive absolute introduced by an explanatory hWS (BDAG §3.a.beta:  
" ... hWS foll. by the gen. abs.  2 Pt 1:3"): "inasmuch as the Divine  
Power has granted us, through the keen insight of the one who called  
us by/for his own glory and goodness, all that bears upon life and  
reverence ..."

The fourth verse hangs on the third (rather precariously, just as  
does the third on the second!); it is a relative clause evidently  
recapitulating the substance of verse 3: " ... whereby he has granted  
us precious and greatest promised things, so that through them you  
may ..." Presumably the antecedent of hWN is IDIAi DOXHi KAI ARETHi;  
perhaps that's enough to clarify the dative of those words as being  
instrumental: "has granted us BY MEANS OF his own glory and goodness."

I think you are right to find this sequence (2 Pet 1:2-4) exceedingly  
awkward. For the life of me I cannot understand why the editors would  
place a period after verse 2. Several features of this sequence seem  
strange:

(a) the subject of the genitive absolute: THS QEIAS DUNAMEWS: "the  
divine power"; I suppose this is a periphrasis for "God omnipotent"  
or the like; it reminds me of the curious Homeric phrases such as   
BIH hHRAKLEIH "Herakles' might" for "mighty Herakles," or IS ODUSHOS,  
"the strength of Odysseus" for "strong Odysseus." Is this intended as  
a rhetorical flourish?

(b) What is the antecedent of the AUTOU hanging on THS QEIAS  
DUNAMEWS? Is it TOU QEOU or is it  IHSOU TOU KURIOU hHMWN, or are  
they to be understood as one here in one of those Granville-Sharp  
conjunctions? My guess is that it's TOU QEOU, but the phrasing seems  
awkward (to me, at least). The NET translators think that the entire  
phrase TOU QEOU KAI IHSOU TOU KURIOU hHMWN refer to Christ; I'm less  
sure that's what is meant.

(c) It seems somewhat strange to me that EPIGNWSIS in verse 2 is a  
faculty of the believers addressed in this salutation and it is  
directed toward God and Christ, while in verse 3 it is the faculty of  
God whereby believers have been called. The NET translators want to  
use the phrase "rich knowledge" for EPIGNWSIS, for reasons one might  
want to scrutinize in the NET notes. On the other hand, the  
translators of CEV evidently understand EPIGNWSIS in verse 3 as the  
faculty in believers with TOU KALESANTOS as an objective genitive:  
"when we learned that he had invited us to share in his wonderful  
goodness" I see that's the understanding in the Darby version too.

I had always thought that Ephesians 1:3-14 was probably the single  
most awkward sequential Greek in the GNT inasmuch as its clauses are  
articulated together precariously, their proper interrelationship far  
from being clear. But after taking a close look at these verses, the  
sequence in Ephesians seems somewhat more "tidy." It's certainly  
interesting that translators must of necessity dismantle the  
structure of of 2 Pet 1:2-4 in order to yield any intelligible sense  
in a target language and that they don't demonstrate that much  
consensus on how some elements are to be made sense of.

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