[B-Greek] John 11:4 and the Middle/Passive of DOXAZW

Mark Lightman lightmanmark at yahoo.com
Sat Feb 19 08:56:06 EST 2011


Carl wrote

<The verb DOXAZW is transitive and normally takes an object; I can  see  no 
direct-reflexive  "make himself glorious" or indirect-reflexive "make  glorious 
for his own sake" here. There's no reason to see this as  anything other than a 
passive.>

Hi, Carl,

Yes, that's part of the process of getting to the heart of voice matters, trying 
to figure out which verbs lend themselves more to an active-passive split and 
which are more murky and are comfortable slipping into and out of their middle 
dress.  I think you have used the term transparently transitive for verbs like 
APOKTEINW.  Is DOXAZW transparently transitive? 


Awhile back on a thread, we talked about the voice of SWiZW.  Since then, 
noticing it all over the place inside and outside of the Greek NT, I  find that 
it is not comfortable wearing middle clothes. It really does lend itself to pure 
passives, not middles.  Greek verbs are like people.  You have hang out with 
them in different circumstances to figure out what makes them tick. 


What will happen now, is that I will start noticing DOXAZW and will get a sense 
of how transparently transitive it may be.  We'll see, but George S's notion 
that the verb in the middle might mean "I fill myself  up with splendor" is 
intriguing.

Of course Jesus breaks the rules of grammar.  If the Greeks thought that DOXA 
came to a man and not from within him, this would not apply to Jesus. Does Jesus 
ever do anything for his own sake?  Does he ever not?   We all know that the 
gospel makes analyzing Greek voice, and Greek in general, even more tricky. 


 Mark L



FWSFOROS MARKOS




________________________________
From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>
To: Iver Larsen <iver_larsen at sil.org>
Cc: B Greek <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Sat, February 19, 2011 3:24:59 AM
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] John 11:4 and  the Middle/Passive of DOXAZW


On Feb 19, 2011, at 12:28 AM, Iver Larsen wrote:

> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryant J. Williams III" 
><bjwvmw at com-pair.net>
> To: "'B Greek'" <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Sent: 19. februar 2011 05:45
> Subject: [B-Greek] John 11:4 and the Middle/Passive of DOXAZW
> 
> 
>> Dear List,
>> 
>> I am curious about the following:
>> 
>> Ἀκούσας δὲ ὁ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν, Αὕτη ἡ ἀσθένεια οὐκ ἔστιν πρὸς θάνατον, ἀλλʼ ὑπὲρ 
>>τῆς
>> δόξης τοῦ θεοῦ, ἵνα δοξασθῇ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ διʼ αὐτῆς.
>> 
>> AKOUSAS DE hO IHSOUS EIPEN, AUTH hH ASQENEIA OUK  ESTIN PROS QANATON, ALL' 
>>hUPER
>> DOXHS TOU QEOU, hINA DOXASQHi hO hOIOS TOU QEOU DI' AUTHS.
>> 
>> My question concerns δοξασθῇ DOXASQHi. The lexicons give it as Aorist Passive
>> Subjunctive 3rd Person Singular. Thus, after hINA + Subjunctive we have a
>> purpose clause, but my question is it really a Passive or more like a
>> Middle/Passive giving it the idea of "for the purpose of the Son of God
>> glorified in Himself through it"? This may be a stretch, but with the QH 
>ending
>> I really wonder if this is not a Middle.
>> 
>> En Xristwi,
>> 
>> Rev. Bryant J. Williams III
> 
> But again, we don't have a purpose clause here. We do have the ellipsis with 
>ALL'. This particular sickness (emphasis on THIS) is not towards death. However, 
>now that is has happened, it will be for the glory of God, resulting in the Son 
>of God being  honored/raised up/glorified/seen as great through it (the 
>sickness).
> 
> I see no reason to take the verb as anything but passive. Jesus did not glorify 
>himself. It was God's intervention, so it first brings glory to God, but by 
>extension also glory to his Son.

Nor do I, and I'm pleased that, if there is to be such a "rule of 
medio-passivity" ("If it ain't clearly marked as passive, then it must be 
middle") as Mark Lightman prefers to apply in this instance, that he has adopted 
that rule as his own; I certainly don't acknowledge it as mine. The verb DOXAZW 
is transitive and normally takes an object; I can  see no direct-reflexive  
"make himself glorious" or indirect-reflexive "make glorious for his own sake" 
here. There's no reason to see this as anything other than a passive.

> CEV: "His sickness won't end in death. It will bring glory to God and his 
Son."

And I'll have to agree with Iver on this one too.  And it should be noted that 
John's usage of the verb DOXAZW is consistently with reference to the death of 
Jesus as the manifestation of God's glory. The raising of Lazarus is the 
"trigger" in the Johannine sequence leading to the crucifixion.  NET has a nice 
note here, i.e. with reference to John 11:4): "So that the Son of God may be 
glorified through it. These statements are highly ironic: For Lazarus, the 
sickness did not end in his death, because he was restored to life. But for 
Jesus himself, the miraculous sign he performed led to his own death, because it 
confirmed the authorities in their plan to kill Jesus (11:47–53). In the Gospel 
of John, Jesus’ death is consistently portrayed as his ‘glorification’ through 
which he accomplishes his return to the Father."

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)



---
B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
B-Greek mailing  list
B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek



      


More information about the B-Greek mailing list