[B-Greek] Ephesians 2:8
Louis Sorenson
llsorenson at hotmail.com
Thu Apr 21 13:49:29 EDT 2011
Hi Robert,
I think you can take the phrase KAI TOUTO OUK EC.... as a discourse feature. So here is a larger portion of the text:
· 4 ὁ δὲ θεὸς πλούσιος ὢν ἐν ἐλέει, . . . . 5 καὶ ὄντας ἡμᾶς νεκροὺς . . . συνεζωοποίησεν τῷ Χριστῷ, - χάριτί ἐστε σεσῳσμένοι -
6 . . . . 7 ἵνα ἐνδείξηται . . . τὸ ὑπερβάλλον πλοῦτος τῆς χάριτος αὐτοῦ . . . . 8 Τῇ γὰρ χάριτί ἐστε σεσῳσμένοι διὰ πίστεως·
καὶ τοῦτο οὐκ ἐξ ὑμῶν, θεοῦ τὸ δῶρον· 9 οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων, ἵνα μή τις καυχήσηται.
· 4 hO DE QEOS PLOUSIOS WN EN ELEEI, . . . . 5 KAI ONTAS hHMAS NEKROUS . . . SUNEZWOPOIHSEN TWi CRISTWi, - CARITI ESTE SESWiSMENOI -
6 . . . . 7 hINA ENDEIXHTAI . . . TO hUPERBALLON PLOUTOS THS CARITOS AUTOU . . . . 8 THi GAR CARITI ESTE SESWiSMENOI DIA PISTEWS·
KAI TOUTO OUK EX hUMWN, QEOU TO DWRON· 9 OUK EX ERGWN, hINA MH TIS KAUCHSHTAI.
I see Paul in Ephesians 2:8 picking up on the phrase χάριτί ἐστε σεσῳσμένοι XARITI ESTE SESWiSMENOI in 2.5
and then further expands on it, hence the GAR in 2.8. I think the phrase / structure could be perhaps
seen as introducing a point/counterpoint type argument. The whole phrase vs 8-9 is perhaps in reason/result
frame introduced by the GAR in discourse grammar (I'm guessing). See Runge, Discourse Grammar of New
Testament Greek §4.3 p. 93 for point/counterpoint with ALLA. Also see §11.3 p. 237 for Reason/Result frames.
(I don't have Runge's explanation of this text in his Lexham Discourse Greek New Testament.)
Note too that TH XARITI is fronted before ESTE SESWiSMENOI in the clause. This is kind of a resumptive use
in that Paul has been talking about XARIS KAI ELEOS in the previous verses
In regards to the Agent of SESWiMENOI...
Wallace in his syntax Beyond the Basics says there are several ways that agency is expressed:
Ultimate Agent: UPO + gen by; APO + gen. by, of; PARA + gen. from, by
Intermediate Agent: DIA + gen. through, by
Impersonal Means: EN + Dat. by, with; Dative case alone with no prep by, with; EK + gen. by, of
We see all three types in this verse
IMPERSONAL MEANS: THi CARITI
Intermediate Agent: DIA PISTEWS
ULTIMATE AGENT: OUK EX UMWN (=EX QEOU) / OUK EX ERGWN [HMWN]
So Paul builds up from impersonal to intermediate to the ultimate agent. But how does he get the reader
to focus on the source (ultimate agent)? and not the mechanics of soteriology?
He Uses a point/cointerpoint frame TOUTO OUK EC....[ALLA EC...].
In this explanation the phrase KAI TOUTO OUK EC is contrasted with an unexpressed ALLA EK QEOU.
By grace through faith ... THESE came about EK QEOU. The neuter pronoun adequately handles the
abstract subject.
However, I do find the phrase QEOU TO DWRON, to be a little 'unhighlighted'. As it lays, QEOU TO DWRON
is kind of a sneaky appositive to TOUTO (The editors of the USB put a comma before QEOU TO DWRON).
- I would thought that a particle, ESTIN, etc. should have be added to make it clearer as an appositive,
or to have been written TOUTO TO DWRON EC QEOU (ESTIN) OUK EC UMWN, OUK EC ERGWN [UMHN]. I think
QEOU TO DWRON is separated by too many words to be read as TOUTO [ESTIN] TO DWRON.... "This is the gift of God."
Ι queried phrase TOUTO OUK EC/EK τοῦτο οὐκ ἐξ/ἐκ in the TLG database to find some external parallels.
There are about 60 which popped up - with about half of them citations of this passage. In almost all
cases, KAI TOUTO OUK EC/EK begins the start of a new clause and is set of by some form of punctuation
such as a semicolon.
Aristoteles et Corpus Aristotelicum Phil., De partibus animalium
Bekker page 657b, line 1
Τοῦ μὲν οὖν εὖ ἕνεκα λεπτὸν τὸ δέρμα τὸ περὶ τὴν κόρην
ἐστί, τῆς δὲ σωτηρίας χάριν τὰ βλέφαρα· καὶ διὰ τοῦτο
σκαρδαμύσσει τε πάντα καὶ μάλιστ' ἄνθρωπος, πάντα μὲν
ὅπως τὰ προσπίπτοντα τοῖς βλεφάροις κωλύωσι (καὶ τοῦτο
οὐκ ἐκ προαιρέσεως, ἀλλ' ἡ φύσις ἐποίησε), πλειστάκις δ'
ὁ ἄνθρωπος διὰ τὸ λεπτοδερμότατος εἶναι.
Athanasius Theol., Apologia contra Arianos sive Apologia secunda
Chapter 28, section 1, line 3
καὶ τοῦτο οὐκ ἐκ τῶν λόγων αὐτοῦ μόνον,
ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐκ τῆς ἐπιστολῆς Ἀλεξάνδρου τοῦ γενομένου ἐπισκόπου τῆς Θεσσαλονίκης
ἐδείκνυε.
Simplicius Phil., In Aristotelis physicorum libros commentaria
Volume 9, page 184, line 23 ἐπὶ δὲ τοῦ γινομένου, ὅτι τὸ γινόμενον οὐκ ἐκ
τοῦ μὴ ὄντος γίνεται, ἀλλ' ἐξ ὄντος μεταβάλλει εἰς ὂν καὶ τοῦτο οὐκ ἐκ
τοῦ τυχόντος εἰς τὸ τυχόν, ἀλλ' ἐκ τοῦ ἀντικειμένου εἰς τὸ ἀντικείμενον,
τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ποιοῦν.
Ephraem Syrus Theol., In vitam beati Abrahamii et neptis eius Mariae
Page 394, line 4 Ἡ χάρις σου, ἡ γενομένη μοι
ἐν τῷ αἰῶνι τούτῳ ἀντίληψίς μου καὶ καταφυγή μου, καύχημά τε καὶ ἔπαινος, αὕτη
με σκεπάσει ὑπὸ τὰς πτέρυγας αὐτῆς ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ φοβερᾷ καὶ φρικτῇ ἡμέρᾳ· σὺ
γὰρ γινώσκεις, ὁ ἐτάζων καρδίας καὶ νεφρούς, ὅτι ἀπὸ πολλῶν τρίβων σκολιῶν
καὶ πλήθους σκανδάλων ἐξέκλινα· σκολιὰς δὲ λέγω τρίβους τῶν φρονημάτων τῶν
αἱρετικῶν καὶ τὴν ἐξήγησιν τὴν περίεργον· καὶ τοῦτο οὐκ ἐξ ἐμοῦ, ἀλλ' ἐκ τῆς χά-
ριτός σου· ἐφώτισε γάρ μου τὴν διάνοιαν.
Louis Sorenson
From: Robert Stump <robertstump at gmail.com>
To: B-Greek <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Wed, April 20, 2011 8:52:06 PM
Subject: [B-Greek] Ephesians 2:8
Is there any reason to think that TOUTO in Ephesians 2:8 must, of
necessity, refer to PISTEWS as opposed to CARITI? Is there reason to
favor one over the other?
τη γαρ χαριτι εστε σεσωσμενοι δια πιστεως και τουτο ουκ εξ υμων θεου το δωρον
TH GAR CARITI ESTE SESWSMENOI DIA PISTEWOS KAI TOUTO OUK EX UMWN QEOU TO DWRON
Yours in Christ,
Robert Stump
Orlando, FL
Seminarian
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list