From: Iver Larsen (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sun May 27 2001 - 06:30:20 EDT
> REV 19:2c reads:
> KAI EXEDIKHSEN TO AIMA TWN DOULWN AUTOU
> EK CEIROS AUTHS.
> The phrase EK CEIROS AUTHS presents us with a EK + genitive pattern that
> appears to be semantically ambiguous. G.Beale (Rev, NIGTC page 928) points
> out that the solution to this riddle should be sought in the OT, 2Kings 9:7
> MT and Gen 4:11 LXX.
Without commenting on the main point you had, I am curious as to what ambiguity you are
referring to. Is it whether the EK phrase qualifies TO hAIMA or EXEDIKHSEN?
Since hAIMA is a common metaphor for death or as here: killing, we can assume an
underlying semantic verb "to kill". The 2 Kings 9:7 reference nicely clarifies that the EK
phrase indicates the agent or power (Hebrew: hand) behind the killing and the genitive TWN
DOULWN AUTOU would then be the object. So, one might translate "and he avenged that she
killed his servants" or "he avenged her killing of his servants"? Most English
translations do not make it clear that she was responsible for the killings. (Contemporary
English Version is an exception as it says: "But God has judged her and made her pay the
price for murdering his servants.")
How would understand the sentence?
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 - 15:36:57 EDT