Re: 1 Pet. 2:5

From: Carl W. Conrad (
Date: Fri Feb 02 1996 - 12:44:58 EST

I don't know whether Tim meant for this to go to the list, but I'll assume
so and forward it with my own response, now that I see Carlton has had some
input into it as well.

Let me add another question to Carlton: would you explain the sentence from
Acts that I've cited below any differently from the way you'd explain the 1
Pet 2:5 construction? It seems to me that the construction is the same
whether we take OIKODOMEISQE to be indicative or imperative.

>Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 10:48:22 -0600
>To: (Tim McLay)
>From: (Carl W. Conrad)
>Subject: Re: 1 Pet. 2:5
>On 2/2/96, Tim McLay wrote:
>> Carl,
>> >Actually I think these versions are all reasonable; I would understand
>> >OIKOS PNEUMATIKOS as a predicate nominative rather than as a nominative in
>> >apposition to the subject, i.e., ADVERBIALLY to the verb OIKODOMEISQE. I'm
>> >more used to explaining this type of construction in Latin, but it strikes
>> >me that in classical Attic KAQISTASQAI is used much the same way as FIERI
>> >in Latin:
>> Thank you for an explanation. However, 2 points: without checking each
>> occurrence, LSJ indicates OIKODOMEISQE is followed by an accusative(tho I
>> only have an old 6th ed. at home); it is strange that such a construction
>> has not even garnered a single comment in any of the secondary sources that
>> I have checked. Off hand, I can't think of anything similar in the NT.
>I've just looked at LSJ; I think I can safely say that the accusative is
>quite proper with an ACTIVE form of the verb, whereas here we clearly have
>a PASSIVE (I don't see any indication of a usage in the middle voice,
>although that might reasonably be used with an accusative in the sense,
>"build oneself (a house)."
>I frankly think it hasn't been commented on because it's not really
>exceptional (I say this while very well aware that the commentaries always
>answer the questions that it occurs to the commentators to ask and all too
>rarely answer the question that I ask!); I was looking for an example of a
>comparable construction in the NT. Here's one:
>I think that the last clause is a reasonable parallel to your passage; and
>I think that there are actually several other verbs like KALEW that could
>be used in a passive with a predicate nominative readily.

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University
One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, USA 63130
(314) 935-4018 OR

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:37 EDT