Re: 1 Thess 2:15 ENANTIWN

From: Paul S. Dixon (
Date: Wed Oct 28 1998 - 21:36:30 EST

On Wed, 28 Oct 1998 17:35:04 -0600 (CST) Michael Holmes
<> writes:
>At 04:32 PM 10/28/98 -0600, Carl Conrad responded to my note:
>>The problem with this is that ENANTI/WN in 1 Thess 2:15 cannot be
>>participle--UNLESS it is a nominative sg. active of ENANTIOW; a
>>gen. pl. of ENANTIOOMAI would be ENANTIOUMENWN. That having been
>>there's nothing to prevent understanding ENANT/WN here as the
>>plural of the adjective ENANTIOS/A/ON with an implicit ONTWN that
>>yield the equivalent of a participle of ENANTIOOMAI.
>Sorry, but I do not take ENANTI/WN in 1 Th 2.15 as a participle, I
>read it
>as an adjective. My apologies for not re-writing the note a bit more
>expansively for re-use in response to Paul Dixon's query. Permit me
>re-post the note with an expanded first line or two and see if that
>more sense for Carl and others.
>Paul's question was:
>>>>In 1 Thess 2:15 should ENANTIWN be taken as a participle
>>>>in parallel with the preceding participles APOKTEINANTWN
>>>>Or, should it be taken simply as an adjective (as BAG
>>>>has it listed under the adjective ENANTIOS, A, ON rather
>>>>than the verb ENANTIOOMAI).
>A revised version of my reply:
> Regarding the four participles in 2:15-16a [APOKTEINANTWN,
>"In 2:15b=9616a there are competing structural patterns: while the
> three
>clauses of vv. 15=9616 are composed of a noun or pronoun phrase
>followed by=
> a
>participle, in the fourth clause the noun phrase is followed by an
>("hostile", i.e., EVAVTIWN) and then a participle ("hindering", i.e.,
>KWLUONTWN). Both the NIV ("They ...
>are hostile to all men in their effort to keep us ...") and NRSV
>("they ...
>oppose everyone by hindering us ...") emphasize the adjective, as it
>immediately follows the noun clause; they treat the adjective as if it
>a participle parallel to the first three, and subordinate the
>participle to it. Alternatively, one may emphasize the obvious
>of the four participles, as does the NASB ("not pleasing to God, but
>to all men, hindering us ..."). But the NASB treats the linking
>KAI as though it were a contrasting one ("but," DE or ALLA); instead
>translate "they are not pleasing to God and, hostile to humanity, are
>hindering us ..." (cf. E. J. Richard, Thessalonians, 121=96122).

Carl, Michael:

Thanks for your response and help. I'll check out your commentary,

Both options make good sense here. I suppose ENANTIOW is not
a viable option. At least I didn't find it in the NT, LXX, or MM.

Paul Dixon

You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

B-Greek home page:
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: []
To unsubscribe, forward this message to
To subscribe, send a message to

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:05 EDT