[B-Greek] Ephesians 1:22
Timothy Lawson
tslawson1 at yahoo.com
Tue Mar 9 02:18:42 EST 2010
Mike,
Is Ephesians 4:8 such an example?... EDWKEN DOMATA TOIS ANQRWPOIS Paul then explains his words in verses 10,11.
Paul also seems to avoid/replace LXX ELABES with EDWKEN.
Or am I all wet?
Scotty
________________________________
From: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>
To: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>; b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org; Blue Meeksbay <bluemeeksbay at yahoo.com>
Sent: Mon, March 8, 2010 10:51:30 PM
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Ephesians 1:22
As I've said, if you can find for me another example of DIDWMI with a non-recipient dative, I might consider your proposal. But until that happens. I'll be sticking with the *default* sense of DIDWMI with an accusative & dative: to give something to someone. I have never seen any other place where DIDWMI has the sense of "appoint" with a dative like we have here.
Mike
http://evepheso.wordpress.com
________________________________
From: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>
To: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>; b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org; Blue Meeksbay <bluemeeksbay at yahoo.com>
Sent: Mon, March 8, 2010 9:25:12 PM
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Ephesians 1:22
I would consider τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ THi EKKLHSIAi to be a dative of respect -- He appointed him as head on behalf of all things with respect to the church.
(c) Dative of Respect
(c) Dative of Respect. The dat. of respect (e.g.
Moulton, James Hope and Nigel Turner. A Grammar of New Testament Greek, Volume 3: Syntax. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1963-, p 221.ὀνόματιby name) in NT has almost displaced the class. accus. of respect, and as in the papyri (Mayser II 2, 149f, 285) it becomes almost an adverb, and is especially used when contrast is involved, e.g. φύσει … νόμῳ, λογῳ μὲν … ἔργῳ δέ.
george
gfsomsel
… search for truth, hear truth,
learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
defend the truth till death.
- Jan Hus
_________
----- Original Message ----
From: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>
To: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org; Blue Meeksbay <bluemeeksbay at yahoo.com>
Sent: Mon, March 8, 2010 11:57:14 AM
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Ephesians 1:22
The sense "to give" requires a recipient. I'd be curious if you can find another instance of ditransitive DIDWMI with an instrumental or commitative dative. Syntactically & semantically it must be a recipient. You've got to give something to someone.
________________________________
From: Blue Meeksbay <bluemeeksbay at yahoo.com>
To: rhutchin at aol.com
Cc: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
Sent: Mon, March 8, 2010 10:50:07 AM
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Ephesians 1:22
Roger Hutchinson wrote:
>What is the purpose for THi EKKLHSIAi? Is it the object of EDWKEN?
>What idea is the writer trying to convey to the reader? The KJV translators added language to try to sort out what is being said but I get the impression that they were not sure what to do with THi EKKLHSIAi.
Eph. 1:22-23 – KAI PANTA hUPETAXEN hUPO TOUS PODAS AUTOU KAI AUTON EDWKEN KEFALHN hUPER PANTA THi EKKLHSIAi,
hHTIS ESTIN TO SWMA AUTOU, TO PLHRWMA TOU TA PANTA EN PASIN PLHROUMENOU
When one considers the body metaphor repeatedly used by Paul, it seems one should consider THi EKKLHSIAi is being used as – 1) an instrumental dative, or perhaps, 2) a comitative dative. If comitative, I guess one would have to conclude that the church receives some type of responsibility in the “giving” as well? – But more than likely, it seems number 1) would give the better understanding – “And He placed all things under his feet and gave Him as head over all things by (with) the church which is his body…”
Smyth says,
(1503) "The Greek dative, as the representative of the lost instrumental case, denotes that by which or with which an action is done or accompanied. It is of two kinds: (1) The instrumental dative proper; (2) The comitative dative.
(1504) When the idea denoted by the noun in the dative is the instrument or means, it falls under (1); if it is a person (not regarded as the instrument or means) or any other living being, or a thing regarded as a person, it belongs under (2); if an action, under (2).
Paul seems to hint at such an understanding in such verses as Rom. 8:17, and it also helps explain his metaphor in Rom. 16:20 – hO DE QEOS THS EIRHNHS SUNTRIYEI TON SATANAN hUPO TOUS PODAS hUMWN EN TACEI. hH CARIS TOU KURIOU hHMWN IHSOU MEQ' hUMWN.
This also seems to contextually tie in with his thought in Eph. 2:6, his metaphor in Eph. 5 (bride/co-regent?) and his exhortation to fight in chapter 6.
However, it worries me that I have not been able to find any version, and/or translator that have understood it in this way. That usually means I am not seeing something, although, it does seem Chrysostom saw this possible connection. He says in his homily on this passage (Hom. III) –
“Amazing again, whither hath He raised the Church? As though he were lifting it up by some engine, he hath raised it up to a vast height, and set it on yonder “throne;” for where the Head is, there is the body also. There is no interval to separate between the Head and the body; for were there a separation then were it no longer a body, then were it no longer a head. ‘Over all things,’ he says. What is meant by ‘over all things?’ He hath suffered neither angel nor Archangel nor any other being to be above Him. But not only in this way hath He honored us, in exalting that which is of ourselves, but also in that He hath prepared the whole race in common to follow Him, to cling to Him, to accompany His train.”
“…Let us reverence our Head, let us reflect of what a Head we are the body –a Head, to whom all things are put in subjection. According to this representation we ought to be better, yea, than the very angels, and greater than the Archangels, in that we have been honored above them all.”
Is there anything that would absolutely preclude such an understanding?
Sincerely,
Blue Harris
________________________________
From: "rhutchin at aol.com" <rhutchin at aol.com>
To: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
Sent: Sun, March 7, 2010 6:29:38 PM
Subject: [B-Greek] Ephesians 1:22
We read;
...KAI AUTON EDWKEN KEFALHN hUPER PANTA THi EKKLHSIAi.
How do the parts of this fit together?
Does KEFALHN hUPER PANTA modify AUTON or is it the object of EDWKEN?
What is the purpose for THi EKKLHSIAi? Is it the object of EDWKEN?
What idea is the writer trying to convey to the reader? The KJV translators added language to try to sort out what is being said but I get the impression that they were not sure what to do with THi EKKLHSIAi.
Roger Hutchinson
---
B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
B-Greek mailing list
B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
---
B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
B-Greek mailing list
B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
---
B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
B-Greek mailing list
B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
---
B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
B-Greek mailing list
B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list