From: Dan Parker (email@example.com)
Date: Fri Jan 14 2000 - 15:15:55 EST
: Thanks for all your help on KATELABEN ... [snip]
: Anyway, life. It is likely (let's take it for granted rather than go
: down the TC line) that the verse division between John 1:3 and 4 puts
: HO GEGONEN with verse 4 (references to copious articles and even a
: monograph available) to give the following HO GEGONEN EN AUTWI ZWH HN.
: It seems to me that this could be taken grammatically in this way:
: HO GEGONEN EN AUTWI - noun phrase acting as subject of clause - what has
: come to be in him
: ZWH - pre-verbal anarthrous qualitative predicate - see
: BDF/Wallace/Harner/Colwell etc. although I can't find any commentator who
: talks of ZWH as a p.v.a.q.p.
: Translation: What has come to be in him had the quality of life, (...that
: life was the light of humanity)
: This may well reflect/mirror/follow on from the earlier and much more
: famous p.v.a.q.p. in John 1:1c
: Any comments?
: Pete Phillips
This verse does raise interesting questions. I can see why you might
view it that way, and honestly, I am not sure I have decided how to
take these verses.
As you outline, hO GEGONEN EN AUTWi ZWH HN could certainly refer to that
which came into existence DI' AUTOU, but the following clause seems to
contradict this notion for this "life" is then defined with: H ZWH HN
TO FWS TWN ANQRWPWN. This FWS is TO FWS TWN ANQRWPWN and appears to
be thereby distinguished FROM mankind. (cf 1John 2:8)
The force of GINOMAI apparently signals a clear change of state or
situation, "to come to acquire ior experience a state (Louw-Nida),"
even a beginning of life which might refer back to the ARXH HN of
John 1:1. This would make the imperfect HN of John 1:1 perhaps even an
inceptive imperfect, so that hO LOGOS "came to be" EN ARXH (the when)
and the "what" he came to be was QEOS. The manner in which he is
QEOS is then further defined as relating to the fact that PANTA DI
AUTOU EGENETO and that as H ZWH he became TO FWS TWN ANQRWPWN.
GINOMAI is also used in verse 14 of John 1 as the beginning of the
existence of hO LOGOS as SARC, which might parallel the beginning of
the H ZWH of hO LOGOS as QEOS in John 1:1
I also find the close association of GINOMAI and HN to be very
interesting in the phrase hO GEGONEN EN AUTWi ZWH HN, with the
continuous state of ZWH HN having had a clear beginning signaled by the
non stative GINOMAI in hO GEGONEN.
Therefore it might be stated that what came to be in him WAS ZHW,
not merely the quality of ZWH for how can one have the quality of ZWH
without being literally alive?
--- B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [firstname.lastname@example.org] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-329W@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to email@example.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:54 EDT