[B-Greek] Luke 17: 20-21

rhutchin at aol.com rhutchin at aol.com
Thu Sep 17 08:38:55 EDT 2009


 Apparently, this verse has engendered more discussion over the years that I was aware of.  I don't think a grammatical analysis resolves the issue or, at least, not to everyone's satisfaction.  A lot of people argue against your position. 

I was referred to a comment that Dr. Conrad made back in 1998 on this when he wrote, "I just did a check of the Perseus LSJ on ENTOS and find it regularly
used with a partitive genitive of the boundaries within which X is
located, including in particular TEIXEWN (calculations,) HUMWN (our
Lucan passage), MAQHMATWN (learning), GRAMMATWN (literature). Most of
these are not instances of a group of persons, so that I don't know
that it would be the normal way to say "among", but to be very precise
about the sense of a partitive genitive, I'd think it is not so
terribly different from epi + genitive = "somewhere within the
boundaries of X" -- so ENTOS + genitive = "at some point within the
boundaries of X."

Roger Hutchinson


 


 

-----Original Message-----
From: Iver Larsen <iver_larsen at sil.org>
To: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org; rhutchin at aol.com
Sent: Wed, Sep 16, 2009 4:23 am
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Luke 17: 20-21









----- Original Message ----- 
From: <rhutchin at aol.com> 

To: <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org> 

Sent: 15. september 2009 21:50 

Subject: [B-Greek] Luke 17: 20-21 
 


> Luke 17:20-21 

> 

> 20 EPERWTHQEIS DE hUPO TWN FARISAIWN POTE ERXETAI hH BASILEIA TOU QEOU 
> APEKRIQH AUTOIS KAI EIPEN OUK
 ERXETAI hH BASILEIA TOU QEOU META PARATHRHSEWS 
> 21 OUDE EROUSIN IDOU hWDE H EKEI IDOU GAR hH BASILEIA TOU QEOU ENTOS hUMWN 
> ESTIN 

> 

> One person says, " The verb eimi is in the present tense indicative which 
> conveys 

> a simple statement of fact – in the present. Since we agree that Jesus 

> was addressing the Pharisees, then the kingdom is existing within them 

> at the time Jesus is speaking. There is no room for equivocation. The 

> text is clear." 

> 

> The second person says, "I don't see Jesus telling the Pharisees that the 
> kingdom of God is 

> actually within them but that they would have to look inwardly and not 

> outwardly to find it." 
 

A third person may say: "Why do you talk about "within you"? All other 
occurrences of ENTOS in the LXX and the GNT are followed by a singular noun, but 
here we have the plural "you-all". It seems to be the same principle as with EN. 
If EN is followed by hUMIN, it often means "among you-all". Because it is 
plural, the form is ambiguous as to the meaning "in" and "among". The choice 
depends on context, and in this context, ENTOS has to be "in their midst" since 
it could not be (with)in the Pharisees. 
 

Since Jesus represents the Kingdom of God, but in a way they could not observe 
as they had expected, that Kingdom has arrived and is in their midst, if only 
they could see it. 
 

> Can 
appeal to grammar resolve the issue? Or is it a matter of one's exegesis 
> (or eisegesis). 

> 

> Roger Hutchinson 

> 

> PS: Given the recent discussion about GAR, we find it here where it seems to 
> introduce a contrast. 
 

No, GAR never introduces a contrast. It is explanatory and elaborates on why 
they should not look "here or there" in the future. It is already present in 
their midst. 
 

Iver Larsen 


 




More information about the B-Greek mailing list