PaulFEvans: Re. 1 Cor. 3:10-17 (still!)

From: Paul F. Evans (
Date: Thu May 22 1997 - 14:25:31 EDT


I need some help on some pratical questions.

The use of EI with the future tense I take it, is a fairly std. way of
expressing a subjunctive type of action (I am not sure if I should say
condtional rather than subjunctive). Paul uses this form throughout the
middle part of this paragraph where he moves from the present tense, and
expressing the factuality of the foundation that has been laid and that
someone else is building on it. However, in the last part of the
paragraph there appears to be a slightly diferent construction; EI with
the present tense FQEIREI. Is is fair to say that what Paul expresses
here seems to be somewhat less tenuous than the EI with the future tense
might be? That is, is he expressing a certain and definite consequence
and outcome to destroying the temple by use of EI with the present,
whereas the by using the EI with the future he expresses more of a
hypothetical situation, namely building with unsuitable materials? Does
it naturally follow in general that in Greek the use of EI with the
present expresses an anticipated outcome, whereas the future with EI a

I cannot seem to figure out if HOITIVES ESTE HUMEIS is " whose you are"
or "that is what you are." I cannot find an entry in any of my lexicons
that helps me to pin it down, because the form seems to me not to fit
what I am seeing (if that even makes sense!). I think that it is the
context that settles this for me because there seems to be a
correspondance between "know you not..." and "that is what you are." In
fact, I think that I would supply "indeed" ("indeed that is what you
are"). If the grammar is more plain than I have seen please give me some

Thanks! There more to come I haven't finished with the passage yet!

Paul F. Evans
Thunder Swamp P. H. Church
Mt. Olive, NC

--------- End forwarded message ----------

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:17 EDT