[B-Greek] Back to Eph. 2:8
Blue Meeksbay
bluemeeksbay at yahoo.com
Sun May 15 09:33:04 EDT 2011
Lenski has this to say on this text. He states:
*the past act of rescue plus the resultant condition of safety (periphrastic
perfect) is entirely due to God (the agent in the passive) and to the grace he
used as his means. The emphasis is again on the dative. Gratiam esse docet
proram et puppim – Bengel.*
The emphasis he talks about is his statement concerning CARITI ESTE SESWiSMENOI
in verse 5 which he translates as *by means of grace you have been saved.*
And Wallace has this to say on the text.
*This use of the dative is similar to but not the same as the dative of means.
(At times, however, it is impossible to distinguish the two.) The dative of
means indicates the how; the dative of cause indicates the why; the dative of
means indicates the method; the dative of cause indicates the basis. Also, it is
not always best to translate the dative of cause as “because of.” This is due to
the fact that in English, “because” may express cause or motive. The two ideas
are similar, but not identical. Thus, occasionally it is best to translate the
dative of cause with “by “ or “on the basis of.” In Eph 2:8, for example (THi
GAR CARITI ESTE SESWiSMENOI DIA PISTEWS ), THi CARITI is the cause of our
salvation (and DIA PISTEWS expresses the means). However, it would be better to
translate it as “by grace” or “on the basis of grace” instead of “because of
grace,” since this last phrase might be construed as indicating only God’s
motive, but not the basis of our salvation.*
And Carl Conrad said this:
<These terms, like so many of our grammatical terms, have been coined more as
aids to translators than as significant indications of the way the Greek works.
I don't think that the mind thinking in Greek gives a second thought to the
difference between a "direct object" and an "adverbial accusative.">
I wonder if what Carl Conrad said is also true of our dative of cause or dative
of means, at least in this verse. I know that in some contexts only one aspect
might work, but in this context it seems both would work, (unless I am missing
something). Would a Greek reader not give a second thought between a dative of
cause or means in this particular context? Could Paul have had both nuances
concerning grace in his mind and the dative was a perfect way to express this.
Like Bengal said,( if I understood him aright), grace is the bow and the stern.
It seems in this verse it is the beginning and the end. It is both the basis and
the means of God’s saving activity. The dative, in this case, expresses both
aspects of grace.
Blue Harris
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list