[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