From: Carl W. Conrad (email@example.com)
Date: Wed Feb 26 1997 - 23:09:12 EST
At 9:05 PM -0600 2/26/97, L. E. Brown wrote:
>Two Questions ---
>I've been working on Galatians 5:16-6:8, to determine whether or not
>this passage warns us that not only will we 'reap' a corrupt nature
>(6:8), but we will also lose our rewards in the kingdom (5:21).
>Of particular interest is the phrase, "inherit the kingdom." Thus far
>in my study it seems that "inherit the kingdom" ( = inherit eternal
>life in the Synoptics) refers to taking possession of or being
>rewarded with a share in kingdom rewards. But I don't have a lot of
>lexical resources available (only the standard stuff).
>QUESTION 1 -
>So does anyone out there have any extra-biblical references that might
>cast further light on the possible fields of meaning for KLHRONOMEW?
I leave it to others to deal with KLHRONOMEW, noting only that it is the
regular term for "inherit" in the sense of acquiring property rights to the
familial estate. I would think the fundamental metaphor in play here is
assuming at maturity the status to which a "son"--an adoptive child of
God--is then entitled.
>My question is this. In Luke 18:18 and Mark 10:17 the same form of the
>verb KLHRONOMEW is used. Yet Mark 10:17 is parsed as an aorist
>subjunctive and Luke 18:18 is parsed as a future indicative. The only
>difference b/t the two is the 'ina in Mark 10:17. ARE THERE ANY OTHER
>REASONS WHY THEY SHOULD NOT BOTH BE PARSED THE SAME WAY -- EITHER BOTH
>AORIST SUBJUNCTIVES OR FUTURE INDICATIVES?
If the only difference between the two instances of KLHRONOMHSW is that one
follows upon a hINA, that's quite enough to assure that we have an aorist
subjunctive in that instance. In Luke 18:18, however, a direct question is
put to Jesus, TI POIHSAS ZWHN AIWNION KLHRONOMHSW--that's a future
It is true that in the 1st sg. the future indicative and aorist subjunctive
active (the middle will do the same) will be spelled identically, simply
because the -W ending may represent either the W othe W/H subjunctive sign
or the regular thematic 1st sg. ending. The fact that the first-aorist stem
and the future stem are identical is no accident, since, morphologically,
the future tense derives historically from the usage of aorist subjunctive
to express sure intent.
In any case, what each of these identically-spelled forms is cannot be
doubted:the hINA requires a subjunctive, the straightforward question an
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University
One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, USA 63130
firstname.lastname@example.org OR email@example.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:07 EDT