[B-Greek] The combination of prepositional phrase with conjunctions- rule or coincidence?
Blue Meeksbay
bluemeeksbay at yahoo.com
Sat Nov 7 08:06:42 EST 2009
Yes, I am sorry. I meant Phil. 1:11.
You are right, point three does not fit. Bethpage and Bethany are definitely two different things. What is interesting, though, is EIS BHQFAGH KAI BHQANIAN is preceded by EIS IEROUSALHM without a conjunction, so that follows point number one - two different things. I wish I had software that could search all possible occurrences in order to see if the pattern holds for the first two points, as the third point has already been disproved.
I was wondering about this because some think Paul, in Eph. 4:12, is referring to two identical things and other assume he is referring to two different things, and I noticed this possible pattern of prepositional phrases with/without a conjunction and wondered if it could throw any light on a what he meant.
Thanks,
B.Harris
________________________________
From: Iver Larsen <iver_larsen at sil.org>
To: Blue Meeksbay <bluemeeksbay at yahoo.com>; b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
Sent: Sat, November 7, 2009 1:21:32 AM
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] The combination of prepositional phrase with conjunctions- rule or coincidence?
----- Original Message ----- From: "Blue Meeksbay" <bluemeeksbay at yahoo.com>
To: <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: 6. november 2009 22:14
Subject: [B-Greek] The combination of prepositional phrase with conjunctions- rule or coincidence?
> I have noticed when two prepositional phrases containing EIS are written back to back “without” any connecting conjunction it generally refers to two different things (e.g. Eph. 4:12; Col. 2:2). When they are written back to back “with” a conjunction, it seems it refers to two different but related items (Eph. 5:32; II Thess. 3:5). And when EIS is used as one prepositional phrase with two objects connected by a conjunction, it refers to one thing understood through two aspects (Phil 1:1; I Tim. 6:9).
>
> Is this just a coincidence, or does some rule apply to this structure?
>
> Sincerely,
> B.Harris
You probably meant Phil 1:11. For the third option, it does not hold that the reference is to two aspects of one thing, but it does refer to two (or more) items that form some kind of unity. They may well be different, but are closely related, e.g.
Mrk 11:1 EIS BHQFAGH KAI BHQANIAN
LUK 2:34 EIS PTWSIN KAI ANASTASIN
Act 4:30 EIS IASIN KAI SHMEIA
1Co 4:6 EIS EMAUTON KAI APOLLWN
1Pe 1:7 EIS EPAINON KAI DOXAN KAI TIMHN
Iver Larsen
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list