[B-Greek] The two hOTAN clauses in 1 Cor 15.24

moon at sogang.ac.kr moon at sogang.ac.kr
Sat Oct 21 10:39:19 EDT 2006


On Oct 21, 2006, at 7:24 AM, moon at sogang.ac.kr wrote: 

[Moon]
> Let me ask a question about the relationsip betwee the two hOTAN 
> clauses in 
> 1 Cor 15:24: 
> 
> (1) EITA TO TELOS, 
> (2) hOTAN PARADIDWi THN BASILEIAN TWi QEWi KAI PATRI, 
> (3) hOTAN KATARGHSHi PASAN ARCHN KAI PASAN EXOUSIAN KAI DUNAMIN. 
> 
> The question is: 
> 
> (a) are the two hOTAN clauses parallel, both connected directly 
> to TO TELOS? 
> (b) or, is the second hOTAN clause (3) connected to the clause 
> of the first 
> hOTAN clause (2)? 
> 
> If (a) is right, we may translate the verse as: 
> 
> Then the end (will come), when he delivers the kingdom to the 
> God and Father, 
> that is, when he has nullified all dominion, all authority and 
> power. 
> 
> If (b) is right, we have the following structure: 
> 
> (1) EITA [ TO TELOS, 
> (2) hOTAN [ PARADIDWi THN BASILEIAN TWi QEWi KAI PATRI, 
> (3) hOTAN KATARGHSHi PASAN ARCHN KAI PASAN 
> EXOUSIAN KAI DUNAMIN ] ] 
> 
> This option is taken by NIV, and its translation is as follows: 
> 
> Then the end will come, 
> when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father 
> after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. 
> 

[CARL]: 
>  I DON'T think that you can succeed at an 
effort to subordinate the notions in the two hOTAN 
clauses one to another -- BOTH would appear to be relative adverbial 
clauses with TO TELOS as antecedent; I can see why some might suppose 
that (3) in your structural outline really needs to occur logically 
and chronologically before (2), I think it is pretty difficult here 
to force a syntactical relationship between (2) and (3). I think 
those two hOTAN clauses are parallel and that they relate temporally 
to TO TELOS rather than one of them temporally to the other of them. 


[Moon] =>
Carl, thanks for your comments. My interpretation was the same as your
interpretation mentioned above. But NIV and major commentaries I consulted
thought the otherwise. So, I thought it would be a good idea to discuss
it in b-greek list. I respect your intuition. But would you guess why NIV
takes this verse as it does? 

Moon Jung
Sogang Univ, Seoul, Korea





More information about the B-Greek mailing list