From: Jason A. Hare (email@example.com)
Date: Fri Jun 22 2001 - 04:12:45 EDT
I'm sorry to be "kicking a dead horse" in questioning the different
aspects of Sharp's rule and its corollaries, but I have one more question
about it (hopefully the last).
PROSDECOMENOI THN MAKARIAN ELPIDA KAI EPIFANEIAN THS DOXHS TOU MEGALOU
QEOU KAI SWTHROS hHMWN IHSOU CRISTOU
I did not find the first TSKS construction of this verse (THN... ELPIDA
KAI EPIFANEIAN) treated in Wallace's notes on Sharp's rule. However, he
_does_ comment on 2 Thess. 2.1 (_GGBB_, p.290):
2 Thess 2:1
ERWTWMEN DE hUMAS, ADELFOI, hUPER *THS PAROUSIAS* TOU KURIOU hHMWN IHSOU
CRISTOU *KAI* hHMWN *EPISUNAGWGHS* EP' AUTON.
Now we ask you, brothers, concerning the *coming* of our Lord Jesus Christ
*and* our *gathering together* with him
This text impacts the discussion in some American evangelical circles
over the time of the rapture. Many
posttribulationists/non-dispensationalists have considered the two to have
the same referent precisely because of their misunderstanding of Sharp's
rule and its specific requirements.
Since the TSKS construction involves impersonal sunstantives, the
highest degree of doubt is cast upon the probability of the terms
referring to the same event. This is especially the case since the terms
look to concrete temporal referents (the parousia and the gathering of the
saints), for the identical category is unattested for /concrete/
impersonals in the NT.
This is not to say that one could not see a posttribulational rapture
in the text, for even if the words do not have an identical referent, they
could have simultaneous ones. Our only point is that because of the
misuse of syntax by some scholars, certain approaches to the theology of
the NT have often been jettisoned without a fair hearing.
I do not intend to bring theology into the discussion by bringing up the
parousia, but I just want to ask about the grammatical stance of Titus
2.13 with reference to 2 Thess. 2.1.
If Granville Sharp's rule is not (necessarily) applicable to the 2 Thess.
passage, why does the NIV translate Titus 2.13 as "looking for the blessed
hope--the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior..." It takes
ELPIDA and EPIFANEIA to be identical through (apparently) Sharp's rule.
Would it not be in the same category as 2 Thess. 2.1? Wallace's reason
for not including that passage is that it regards "concrete temporal
referents," one of which is the parousia. I would guess that ELPIDA isn't
really a "temporal event," but it is in reference to some temporal event.
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [firstname.lastname@example.org]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@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 - 15:36:59 EDT