[B-Greek] FW: FW: 2 Peter 1:1 EN as "by" or "in"

Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org
Mon Sep 29 01:29:25 EDT 2008


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Nicholas Lamme" <nlamme at midamerica.edu>
To: "B-Greek" <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: 28. september 2008 01:43
Subject: [B-Greek] FW: FW: 2 Peter 1:1 EN as "by" or "in"


> Hello all,
...
> Is it significant that PISTIS and EN DIKAIOSUNHi are juxtaposed?  Why does
> Peter not place PISTIS between TOIS and LAXOUSIN?  There may be a
> grammatical reason that I am overlooking, but barring that, it would seem
> that EV DIKAIOSUNHi...(with all that follows it) logically modifies the noun
> PISTIS instead of the participle + modifiers TOIS...LAXOUSIN.  If this is
> the case, I find means/agency hard to understand in this context.

It is better to look at grammatical units in a hierarchi. Let me paste from another post:
SUMEWN PETROS DOULOS KAI APOSTOLOS IHSOU CRISTOU
TOIS ISOTIMON hMIN LACOUSIN PISTIN
    EN DIKAIOSUNH TOU QEOU hMWN KAI SWTHROS IHSOU CRISTOU.

The first line is a noun with appositions referring to the writer.
The second two lines identify the receivers and therefore has a dative participle.
Line two would be complete without the third line. TOIS implies both a demonstrative and relative 
pronoun as the article often does when combined with a participle:
"to those who have received the same precious faith as us"
The order reflects relative prominence. It would have been enough grammatically to say TOIS LAXOUSIN 
THN PISTIN.
But Peter wants to say two more things about PISTIS.
First, it is precious and shared by writer and hearers. These two words are fronted because it is 
important for Peter to establish a rapport between himself and his readers as well as pointing to 
the preciousness of their shared faith.
Second, this faith is based upon and came about by means of what Jesus did as our Saviour.
As I mentioned already EN CRISTWi in Paul's letters normally means "by means of and on the basis of 
what Christ did", and it is the same idea here.
Line three is a prepositional phrase and therefore peripheral to the verb it modifies. The verb is 
the semantic nucleus in any sentence and that is why prepositional phrases modify verbs. It answers 
the question: "What is the basis for us receiving the faith?" We were able to obtain that faith 
because of what Jesus Christ did in his death and resurrection.

>    This leads to my second question.  Granted I am wrong and Peter implies
> means/agency here, what does he mean.  I am asking for an interpretive leap
> here.  If EN DIKAIOSUNHi...CRISTOU somehow referred to ISOTIMON hHMIN (in
> other words, to the nature of quality of the faith) then it would be more
> understandable.  Through the righteousness of God, their faith is of "like
> preciousness" (I like the Spanish: igualmente preciosa que la nuestra),
> having the same cause.  But, I simply don't see how that is viable
> grammatically.  If EV DIKAOSUNHi refers rather to the receiving of faith, I
> confess that I am confused as to its implication or meaning.  How do
> believers receive faith "by means of" or "through" the righteousness of
> Jesus Christ?

The reason that this may not be clear is that people misunderstand DIKAIOSUNH here as if it referred 
to the nature or character of God. It does not describe the righteousness of God, the Father, but 
simply refers to the righteous acts of Jesus Christ as saviour. He was and is the ultimate 
"tsaddiq", that is the one who completely did the Father's will. There would be no precious faith if 
Christ had not died for us, so Christ's obedience is the foundation for our faith. It is not the 
direct cause, though. There is a close relationship between obedience and DIKAIOS, since the Greek 
(and corresponding Hebrew) word basically means to do the will of God, what is commanded by him and 
what is acceptable to him.

Iver Larsen




More information about the B-Greek mailing list