From: Micheal Palmer (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Apr 21 1997 - 00:14:40 EDT
At 4:36 PM -1000 4/20/97, Joe Hennessy wrote:
>I have lurked long enough at the fringes of this august body, fearful of
>exposing my ignorance by asking questions, though it's simple enough: no
>questions answered, no movement out of ignorance. Duh!
>In our small 3rd year NT Greek seminar we are currently dealing with 1
>Peter. I am troubled by the following in 1 Pe 1:11:
>PROMARTUROMENON TA EIS CRISTON PAQHMATA
>How am I to make EIS CRISTON into...*of* Christ...? Rather obliquely I
>can arrive at this fairly simple possessive (in most trans.) via EIS of
>reference. This is most consistent with the immediately surrounding
>context (prophecy, prediction, gospel preached by the H.S...) but EIS
>leads me through suffering *for* Christ, or *in* Christ, before I arrive
>at *of* Christ. And, vv.6-9 dwell on the significance of the Christian's
>vexation. Why is this EIS a possessive? What am I missing concerning EIS
>or is it something idiosyncratic to PASCEIN?
Can you think of TA EIS CRISTON PAQHMATA something like this:
those things which would [later] be suffering to Christ
that is, those things which from Christ's perspective would be suffering?
those sufferings which were intended *for* Christ?
The NRSV follows this last approach with "the sufferings destined for
Christ." Both of these readings make use of very normal meanings of EIS.
While students are often taught to think of EIS first as "to" or "into" and
to see all other meanings as extensions of these, this is a serious
oversimplification. EIS is frequently used as an indicator of purpose, for
example as in Romans 1:5.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:13 EDT