Eph 5:18 and Acts 1:5

Forum rules
Please quote the Greek text you are discussing directly in your post if it is reasonably short - do not ask people to look it up. This is not a beginner's forum, competence in Greek is assumed.
Post Reply
Barry Hofstetter

Eph 5:18 and Acts 1:5

Post by Barry Hofstetter »

There is, of course, a long discussion on precisely what ἐν πνεύματι means in Eph 5:18. At Acts 1:5, there is a similar usage:

ὅτι Ἰωάννης μὲν ἐβάπτισεν ὕδατι, ὑμεῖς δὲ ἐν πνεύματι βαπτισθήσεσθε ἁγίῳ οὐ μετὰ πολλὰς ταύτας ἡμέρας.

I am particularly wondering what conclusion we might draw from the use of the dative without the preposition for ὕδατι, and the use of the preposition with πνεύματι. Is there a distinction in meaning, and if so, what? And what light might this shed on the usage in Eph 5:18?
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Re: Eph 5:18 and Acts 1:5

Post by Stephen Hughes »

Barry Hofstetter wrote:I am particularly wondering what conclusion we might draw from the use of the dative without the preposition for ὕδατι, and the use of the preposition with πνεύματι. Is there a distinction in meaning, and if so, what? And what light might this shed on the usage in Eph 5:18?
Are you intimating that the dative is more like to be used with the preposition when it is with a particular noun than with others?

Given this limited data set that you want to draw a parallel from, perhaps we could also consider that it is more likely to be used with a verb in the passive voice than it is in the active voice.
Ephesians 5:18a wrote:καὶ μὴ μεθύσκεσθε οἴνῳ ἐν ᾧ ἐστιν ἀσωτία
Where the wine makes one drunk, and it think that the first ἐν was omitted so it wouldn't be clumsy Greek.
Ephesians 5:18b wrote:ἀλλὰ πληροῦσθε ἐν πνεύματι Eph.5:18b
Where πληροῦσθε is another passive, but followed by ἐν + dative rather than ὑπό + genitive in grammatical agreement or just because the personhood of the Holy Spirit had not been so clearly revealed at that time
Acts 1:5 (part thereof) wrote:ὅτι Ἰωάννης μὲν ἐβάπτισεν ὕδατι
Here the verb is in the active voice and in a narrative recounting.

I think that the fundamental distinction in this language between using ὑπό with the genitive with personal agents and the dative with impersonal agents is that the personal agent is a willing participant in the action sequence and that at the end we have two things left in mind, the result of the passive and the person that did it in a sort of referential comparision. When, however, the ἐν with dative is used, we are left with our attention on the result of the action and are not expected to be still considering the agent of that let the verb happen. Hence the grammatical / syntactic preference for using ὑπό with morally willing agents and for using ἐν with agents not capable of willing or moral choice.
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
MAubrey
Posts: 1095
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 8:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Eph 5:18 and Acts 1:5

Post by MAubrey »

Stephen Hughes wrote:Given this limited data set that you want to draw a parallel from, perhaps we could also consider that it is more likely to be used with a verb in the passive voice than it is in the active voice.
Greek doesn't have a passive voice.
Stephen Hughes wrote: Where πληροῦσθε is another passive, but followed by ἐν + dative rather than ὑπό + genitive in grammatical agreement or just because the personhood of the Holy Spirit had not been so clearly revealed at that time
Not necessarily. ἐν + dative maybe used to refer to an animate participant if that participant is conceived of as an instrument rather than a agent. Once instance where this would be the case is where the speaker views the referenced participant as an intermediary between the affected participant and the actual (unreferenced) agent. This is the case in Galatians 3:8 and Revelation 15:1.
Galatians 3:8 wrote:Ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη
Revelation 15:1 wrote:ἀγγέλους ἑπτὰ ἔχοντας πληγὰς ἑπτὰ τὰς ἐσχάτας, ὅτι ἐν αὐταῖς ἐτελέσθη ὁ θυμὸς τοῦ θεοῦ.
But I'm not saying all instances of animate participants referred to with ἐν + dative are examples of this. That's just one possible reason of why a speaker might choose ἐν + dative. Personhood is not a relevant criteria.
Stephen Hughes wrote:I think that the fundamental distinction in this language between using ὑπό with the genitive with personal agents and the dative with impersonal agents is that the personal agent is a willing participant in the action sequence and that at the end we have two things left in mind, the result of the passive and the person that did it in a sort of referential comparision.
Well, you're not wrong. But you're not right either. The prototypical function of ἐν + dative is going to be an impersonal agent, but we need to distinguish between:

(1) Prototypical meaning and fundamental meaning.
The latter is a stronger claim, too strong in this case. "Fundamental" implies a hard and fast distinction. "Prototype" inherently assumes that there are divergences...and there are.

(2) The linguistic world and the external world.
When a speaker makes a choice to present a participant with a particular linguistic expression, in this case ἐν + dative, that speaker chooses a particular linguistic conceptualization. Whether that particular conceptualization has anything remotely like a direct correspondence to what exists in the external ("real") world is dependent upon the communicative needs of that speaker in that particular discourse context.

Here are a couple more examples...
1 Corinthians 1:5 wrote:ἐν παντὶ ἐπλουτίσθητε ἐν αὐτῷ ἐν παντὶ λόγῳ καὶ πάσῃ γνώσει
1 Corinthians 6:2 wrote:ἢ οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι οἱ ἅγιοι τὸν κόσμον κρινοῦσιν; καὶ εἰ ἐν ὑμῖν κρίνεται ὁ κόσμος, ἀνάξιοί ἐστε κριτηρίων ἐλαχίστων;
Mike Aubrey, Linguist
SIL International
Koine-Greek.com
Barry Hofstetter

Re: Eph 5:18 and Acts 1:5

Post by Barry Hofstetter »

Stephen Hughes wrote: Are you intimating that the dative is more like to be used with the preposition when it is with a particular noun than with others?
No. I'm asking a question about a construction found in these verses, but certainly not limited to them. There is no argument hidden in the question.
Given this limited data set that you want to draw a parallel from, perhaps we could also consider that it is more likely to be used with a verb in the passive voice than it is in the active voice.
Here it is with the active voice:

Mark 1:8 ἐγὼ ἐβάπτισα ὑμᾶς ὕδατι, αὐτὸς δὲ βαπτίσει ὑμᾶς ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ.

Of the 33 uses of ἐν πνεύματι turned up for me by Logos, the majority appear to be with an active verb. Note that Mark 1:8 also has the same contrast between water and Spirit, and that water similarly does not use the preposition.
Ephesians 5:18a wrote:καὶ μὴ μεθύσκεσθε οἴνῳ ἐν ᾧ ἐστιν ἀσωτία

Where the wine makes one drunk, and it think that the first ἐν was omitted so it wouldn't be clumsy Greek.
So you are suggesting that it's a stylistic choice, and that ἐν should really be understood with οἴνῳ? Thinking... To me, οἴνῳ without the preposition makes perfect sense as a dative of means, so it wouldn't even enter my admittedly sometimes thick skull that a preposition would be required.
Ephesians 5:18b wrote:ἀλλὰ πληροῦσθε ἐν πνεύματι Eph.5:18b

Where πληροῦσθε is another passive, but followed by ἐν + dative rather than ὑπό + genitive in grammatical agreement or just because the personhood of the Holy Spirit had not been so clearly revealed at that time
Thinking... thinking... The problem with this is that ἐν is not normally used of agency. It's true that BDAG says "⑥ marker of agency: with the help of.." But that doesn't seem to fit the context here, and I think the examples that BDAG lists are themselves debatable.
Post Reply

Return to “New Testament”