From: Ben Crick (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Aug 27 1997 - 13:03:06 EDT
On Tue 26 Aug 97 (14:39:24), email@example.com wrote:
> What the hWSPER and hOUTWS do here, in my view, is to emphasize the
> parallel holding of this authority by Father and Son. It may seem a bit
> odd that the verb of the first clause is ECEI and that of the second is
> EDWKEN, but I think it is implicit in the second that hOUTWS KAI hO
> hUIOS ECEI ZWHN EN hEAUTWi.
> I've tried to keep this as short as I could. I hope you find it reasonably
Thank you Carl: it is helpful.
You are puzzled by the verb EDWKEN. To me this is a Semitism: the verb NTN,
to give, means also to place, set, appoint, make or render. So
"Just as the Father has life in Himself,
so He [the Father] *appointed* to the Son also to have life in himself."
BTW, FWIW the Hebrew New Testament (Dr David Stern) translates John 5:26
KiY Ka'aSheR La'aB YeSh ChaYYiYM Be`aTsMoW
KeN NaThaN GaM-LaBBeN LiHeYoWTh-LoW ChaYYiYM Be`aTsMoW:
What could be clearer than that? (Spaced to show the parallelism).
"For according as to the Father is Life in his inner being,
thus He appointed even to the Son to have Life in his inner being.
YeSh is an "aoristic" timeless present continuous state (TO EINAI).
LiHeYoWTh-LoW is the infinitive-construct of HYH with preposition Le, plus
the 3rd person masculine singular pronominal suffix -oW (ECEI).
"To be to..." is a periphrasis for "To have...".
NaThaN (EDWKEN) is the main verb of the whole verse.
Does this help at all?
-- Revd Ben Crick, BA Bristol, 1963 (hons in Theology) <firstname.lastname@example.org> 232 Canterbury Road, Birchington, Kent, CT7 9TD (UK)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:26 EDT