[B-Greek] Back to Eph. 2:8
=)
p1234567891 at gmail.com
Sun May 15 05:51:39 EDT 2011
Dear Blue Harris,
I would understand "TH CARITI" as the object of the passive verb "ESTE
SESWSMENOI", so I feel it conveys this: "you have been saved"... saved by
who/what? "the grace"... saved through what? (a further qualification as
compared to Eph 2:5) "through faith". I think that "EPEFANH GAR H CARIS TOU
QEOU H SWTHRIOS PASIN ANQRWPOIS" = "for the grace of God, the [grace] of
salvation, has appeared to all men," in Titus 2:11 supports this reading.
But if "TH CARITI" is not taken as the object of the verb, I would
understand it as "you have been saved [in] the grace" (as opposed to "you
have been saved apart from the grace").
Regards,
David Lim
On 15 May 2011 01:22, Blue Meeksbay <bluemeeksbay at yahoo.com> wrote:
> THi GAR CARITI ESTE SESWiSMENOI DIA PISTEWS KAI TOUTO OUK EX hUMWN QEOU TO
> DWRON Eph. 2:8
>
> I was reading this morning a book by Fr. Theodore Bobosh about salvation
> and in
> referencing Eph. 2:8 he said we are saved* through* grace *by* faith. I
> stopped
> and said to myself, *That is interesting. He switched *through* and *by.*
> Through, gives a nuance of medium, while by, gives a nuance of basis.
> This
> leads me to my question. How should we understand the dative CARITI in
> relationship with the preposition DIA in Eph. 2:8? Of course, DIA with
> the
> accusative carries the nuance of basis while DIA with the genitive carries
> the
> nuance of medium (at least in my mind) and in this verse we have the
> genitive.
> Does that help us decide if CARITI should be understood as a dative of
> means
> rather than a dative of cause? Is there anything in the structure that
> could
> help us decide?
>
>
> I suppose if we understood it as the dative of means, then grace would
> become
> the medium of God, and faith would become the medium of man in salvation.
> Does
> the fact that CARITI is articular give us any indication which sense of
> the
> dative the writer is trying to communicate? It seems if it was anarthrous
> one
> would understand it to be more a dative of cause, whereas with the
> articular it
> would be more likely to be understood as the dative of means.
>
>
> On the other hand, the use of ENDEIXHTAI in verse 7 seems to indicate it
> should
> be understood as a dative of cause.
>
> Is there anything in the construction and/or context that should direct the
> mind
> to one or the other?
>
>
> Blue Harris
> ---
> 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