Re: 1Thess. 4:14, what about dia?

From: John M. Sweigart (jsweiger@CSWNET.COM)
Date: Tue Oct 07 1997 - 12:35:25 EDT


Carl W. Conrad wrote:
>
> At 11:05 AM -0500 10/7/97, Jonathan Robie wrote:
> >At 10:37 AM 10/7/97 -0500, Carl W. Conrad wrote:
> >>Jonathan Robie wrote:
> >>>...but I still don't understand the interpretation "who have
> >>>fallen asleep in Jesus"
> >
> >>I'm not sure what it is that you don't understand here, Jonathan.
> >
> >I may well be missing something obvious here, but I just don't understand
> >how TOUS KOIMHQENTAS DIA TOU IHSOU can be interpreted as "those who have
> >fallen asleep in Jesus". What would be the sense of DIA that can lead to
> >that interpretation, which is used in these translations?
> >
> >KJV: For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also
> >which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.
> >
> >NIV: We believe that Jesus died and rose again and so we believe that God
> >will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him.
>
> Aha! Now I see, and now I remember that this is exactly what the KJV says:
> "those who have fallen asleep in Jesus." And I really don't see how the
> Greek text can possibly yield that meaning, which is why I said that I
> think DIA IHSOU must construe rather with AXEI in the other clause. If DIA
> IHSOU must construe with TOUS KOIMHQENTAS, perhaps the explanation offered
> for this translation is that the fact that the dead are ONLY sleeping is
> accounted for by the agency of Jesus. On the other hand, I've read
> (somewhere or other) that standard rabbinical doctrine was that ALL the
> dead "sleep" until the day of resurrection and judgment--and only AFTER
> judgment do those condemned in judgment go to their everlasting doom. I
> don't want to get into eschatological doctrine itself here; but the
> fundamental question of what DIA IHSOU can mean here does seem to me to
> depend on the sense in which DIA IHSOU could possibly modify TOUS
> KOIMHQENTAS--and that may just possibly depend on the eschatological
> assumptions underlying what Paul is here saying.
>
> I can only repeat, however, that I really don't see how DIA TOU IHSOU with
> KOIMHQENTAS can mean what either KJV or NIV conveys it to mean. I'm not
> saying that KJV and NIV are wrong, only that I don't understand how they
> can construe the Greek to mean that.
>
> Carl W. Conrad
> Department of Classics/Washington University
> One Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018
> Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649
> cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu OR cconrad@yancey.main.nc.us
> WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
Hello Carl;
In this same verse, any thoughts about the somewhat peculiar (to me at
least) usage of JESUS with the definite article. Why only the first
name?

-- 
__________________________________

Rev. John M. Sweigart Box 895 Dover, Arkansas 72837 Cumberland Presbyterian Church __________________________________



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:31 EDT