Re: UPAKOUW + case?

From: Randy Leedy (
Date: Tue May 04 1999 - 09:01:23 EDT

John Moe wrote:
In the LXX the object of the verb UPAKOUW* is most often in the genitive
case with rare occurrences of the dative.* In the NT it is nearly always
in the dative.* In the modern Gr. (Bible translation) it is consistently
construed with EIS + accusative.* The latter is almost certainly the
result of a change in Gr. usage over time.* My question: Is the
difference in usage between the LXX and NT* due* to evolution of the
language over time also?* Or is there some other explanation?

in response to which Carl Conrad, added, among other things, the information that in modern Greek hUPAKOUW is construed mostly with EIS.

This is useful information to me. I've had in the back of my mind that I want to do some work on this question as it relates to Romans 6:17: HTE DOULOI THS hAMARTIAS, hUPHKOUSATE DE EK KARDIAS EIS hON PAREDOQHTE TUPON DIDACHS....

Perhaps I am not alone in having contributed significantly to incipient baldness by scratching my head over whether to take as the object of hUPHKOUSATE the phrase EIS hON (awkwardly rendered into English as "you obeyed from the heart which pattern of doctrine you were delivered [i.e., the pattern of doctrine which was delivered to you]") or the noun TUPON (attracted from dative to accusative), which would leave EIS hON functioning adverbially to PAREDOQHTE. This would be rendered into English as "You obeyed from the heart the pattern of doctrine unto which you were delivered." The latter has always seemed more grammatically suitable (and I have no less than CEB Cranfield with me on this one), because I've never been able to find that hUPAKOUW can express its object with EIS. But yet I've never been able to find a parallel, either, to the idea that people can be handed over to a doctrine; it's always the doctrine that's passed on to the people. Cranfield suggests that PARADIDWMI in this context relates to th
e transfer of ownership of a slave from one master to another, but it hardly seems likely to me that Paul views a pattern of doctrine as the new owner of believers. So I've been in a catch-22 over this one and have lacked the time to go exploring beyond the New Testament.

Can anyone cite the earliest instance(s) of hUPAKOUW construed unambiguously with its object expressed by EIS?

In love to God and neighbor,
Randy Leedy
Bob Jones University
Greenville, SC

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 - 15:40:25 EDT