From: Carl W. Conrad (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sun Sep 13 1998 - 17:32:01 EDT
At 9:55 AM -0500 9/12/98, Jonathan Robie wrote:
>Phil 2:2 PLHRWSATE MOU THN CARAN hINA TO AUTO FRONHTE, THN AUTHN AGAPHN
>ECONTES, SUMFUCOI, TO hEN FRONOUNTES, ...
>Is there a distinction between the phrases TO AUTO FRONHTE and TO hEN
>FRONOUNTES? I assume that FRONEW is being used in the sense of "attitude"?
>Someone suggested that TO AUTO FRONHTE can mean "to think the same things",
>"to hold the same opinions". That strikes me as strange - I thought this
>has more to do with having the same attitude. Am I off base here? What
>other plausible interpretations might this phrase have?
>Which of these are plausible interpretations of the phrase TO hEN FRONOUNTES?
>1. continually keep this one thing in mind
>2. pondering the same thing
>3. having the same attitude (which would mean the same as TO AUTO FRONHTE
>Are there other plausible meanings that I'm missing?
Here's another item that's been on the table for a day or so. I do feel
more confident about this than about the questionon 1 Cor 11:
In my judgment all these expressions in the opening of Phil 2 with FRONEW
are adverbial accusatives rather than direct objects (although I must
confess that, in the last analysis, I'm not sure that Greek-speakers would
have drawn the distinctions that we hard-headed grammarians draw betwen the
two). That is, I believe that in the expressions TO AUTO FRONEIN, TO hEN
FRONEIN, and TOUTO FRONEIN, TO AUTO, TO hEN, and TOUTO are all adverbial
with a FRONEIN that must mean "have a mind set," "have a mental stance."
Thus TO AUTO FRONEIN and TO hEN FRONEIN should mean "have the same mind
set" and "have a unitary mind set = have a unanimous attitude." All this
is introductory to and explained, I believe ("epexegeted," if you please)
by TOUTO FRONEITE EN hUMIN hO KAI EN CRISTWi IHSOU ... , where the EN hUMIN
makes it clear that the mindset to be held is a shared communal mindset
that derives from their communal existence as the body of Christ.
In terms of the alternatives suggested above (and the one suggested in
Jonathan's postscriptum of a few minutes later--that it has to do once more
with something from his chicken house), I think that #3 is about right.
If I might just add as a little lagniappe, it's often struck me that Paul
seems to strike the tone in very different terms depending on what sort of
congregation he's dealing with: in the face of a strait-jacketed stance he
urges a sort of "Christian individualism" (Galatians), while in the face of
what he feels is contentious individualism (here in Phil, in 1 Cor), he
urges unanimity. I don't think he's being contradictory so much as pastoral
in a practical way.
--- B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [email@example.com] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-329W@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:00 EDT