From: Iver Larsen (email@example.com)
Date: Wed Apr 11 2001 - 12:04:18 EDT
I think we agree on the general thrust of what Paul is saying, but let me comment a bit
> Is it possible SUGKRINW "means" "I compare B using A" where A is the
> object in the accusative and B is the dative?
My main problem with this is that I expect "using A" to require A to be in the dative
rather than the accusative, and the direct object for KRINW I would expect to be in the
accusative. You have it the other way round.
Bauer has three different senses for SUGKRINW and suggests that all three may apply to
this verse, so it is obviously not an easy question to settle. The only other place Paul
uses the word is in 2 Cor 10:12 (twice) and both times there is an accusative object and a
dative object, as in SUGKRINONTES hEAUTOUS hEAUTOIS. I don't know if the word is always
used with two objects like this outside the GNT.
If we take the basic meaning of KRINW to be "judge, evaluate" then I could see the meaning
"evaluate A using B" where A is the accusative object and B is the dative object. An
alternative is "evaluate A from the vantage point of B". Both of these fit the context
well. Some manuscripts (Vaticanus mainly) have PNEUMATIKWS instead of PNEUMATIKOIS which
would fit with evaluating (understanding, talking about, explaining) the spiritual gifts
in a spiritual way. (I don't think this reading is original, but it indicates the
direction that the scribe was taking.)
> Here's the reason I ask:
> I noticed recently the parallelism in this sentence:
> KAI LALOUMEN
> EN DIDAKTOIS ANQRWPINHS SOFIAS
> LOGOIS (dative)
> EN DIDAKTOIS PNEUMATOS
> PNEUMATIKOIS (dative)
> PNEUMATIKA SUGKRINONTES.
> "Which things [these things freely communicated from God],
> we also speak;
> in terms of messages taught by human wisdom
> in terms of spiritual things taught by spirit;
> [that is], we compare [the two] using the spiritual things."
I am inclined to keep the comma suggested by the editors of the Greek text, because
ellipses are so common in Greek. LALOUMEN EN (one kind of) LOGOIS suggests another
(LALOUMEN) EN (another kind of) (LOGOIS), but for the second half, there is no need to
repeat LALOUMEN and LOGOIS. With such an ellipsis, the analysis is:
EN DIDAKTOIS ANQRWPINHS SOFIAS
EN DIDAKTOIS PNEUMATOS
PNEUMATIKOIS (dative) PNEUMATIKA SUGKRINONTES.
This analysis keeps the parallelism better between the two kinds of *words* used in
speaking. They are all human (Greek, for Paul here) words, but some have their source
(DIDAKTOIS) in human wisdom, others have their source in the Spirit of God. In addition,
the construction is then parallel to the accusative + dative object construction found
twice with SUGKRINW in 2 Cor 10.
That the two objects precede SUGKRINONTES is a matter of emphasis. Spiritual things/gifts
must be evaluated from a *spiritual* perspective, ie, using spiritual wisdom. The focus is
not that evaluation of spiritual gifts is needed, but what one uses in that evaluation. I
find the preceding verse (2:12) helpful as an important context for 2:13.
please note change of address from alice-iver_larsen to firstname.lastname@example.org
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [email@example.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@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 - 15:36:55 EDT