[B-Greek] Ephesians 1:22

Steve Petty selecsteve at yahoo.com
Tue Mar 9 21:27:58 EST 2010


Wow so Paul made a mistake in quoting scripture - what happened to inspiration - I know this perhaps enters into opinion but if we through out inspiration - what's the use??

Steve Petty

--- On Tue, 3/9/10, Timothy Lawson <tslawson1 at yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Timothy Lawson <tslawson1 at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Ephesians 1:22
To: "Michael Aubrey" <mga318 at yahoo.com>, "George F Somsel" <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>, b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org, "Blue Meeksbay" <bluemeeksbay at yahoo.com>
Date: Tuesday, March 9, 2010, 4:56 PM

Mike,

  Thank you very much! I'll go sit over here in the corner for awhile and keep quiet.

Scotty




________________________________
From: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>
To: Timothy Lawson <tslawson1 at yahoo.com>; George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>; b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org; Blue Meeksbay <bluemeeksbay at yahoo.com>
Sent: Tue, March 9, 2010 1:24:38 PM
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Ephesians 1:22


 > Couldn't  "... he gave gifts [in] men." be a possible meaning for EDWKEN DOMATA TOIS ANQRWPOIS at Ephesians 4:8?

Anything is possible, but if that's what it means then it cannot be conveyed in English in that way since "he gave gifts in men" is thoroughly ungrammatical.

> At Psalm 68:18 the LXX has ELABES DOMATA EN ANQROPWi. Couldn't that indicate that Paul meant the same, with the use of 
> EN in the LXX giving a possible signal to such a meaning for TOIS ANQROPWOIS even though it is without a preposition at 
> Ephesians 4:8? 

I find that highly unlikely, its far more likely that like the church fathers quoting the New Testament, Paul is either quoting from memory and made a mistake, or simply has a different text of this verse of the LXX, or he intentionally wants to use this LXX text in a different way than it was written. You can choose which one of those you're most theologically comfortable with. In any case, your argument would have to assume that such a change (the removal of the preposition) was common enough that Paul's audience would quickly and easily recognize the correct meaning to be "in men" rather than "to men." But such a change *isn't* common at all and thus there is no way that Paul could have expected his readers to catch the meaning "in men" because the context of the clause itself defaults to the meaning "give something to someone."


> Don't Paul's words at Ephesians 4:10,11 explain what he means by EDWKEN DOMATA TOIS ANQRWPOIS at 4:8 showing that 
> the gifts in men were in the form of apostles, evangelizers, shepherds and teachers? Thus these were not gifts to men in general 
> but were gifts in men for the upbuilding of the "body of Christ."

> Thus that would make TOIS ANQRWPOIS a non-recipient dative.

Indeed, *if* such an interpretation of verses 10 & 11 is correct, then this *could* be construed as a non-recipient dative. But I could just as easily provide an interpretation of the surrounding context of this clause that would result in a recipient understanding. I won't burden you with that now though.

The bigger issue is context, as you rightly point out:

> How would one recognize a non-recipient dative anyways? Would it be by the presence or absence of a preposition? Or would it be 
> by those ever present three regulators?:  

> 1.)context 
> 2.) context 
> 3.) context
Context is, indeed, key. And yet, you've also created a false dichotomy. The presence or absence of a preposition (or a dative for that matter) doesn't, as you construe it, go against the context. Rather it is the context. Your own appeal to the broader context of verses 10-11 to substantiate your reading of verse 8 thoroughly ignores the immediate context of the clause itself. The locative reading of this *requires* a preposition. This is how polysemous verbs are differentiated. Consider this example:

(1) The commander ordered his men to stand down.
(2) The commander order his men to stand off.

(1) means that he ordered his men to stop attacking, but (2) means that he ordered he men to keep a distance. This simply is how language works. If we ignore syntactic marks for interpreting the meaning of a given clause, we the key elements for understanding meaning.

Furthermore (and less importantly), your appeal to the following verses to validate your reading of verse 8 necessitates that audience allow for a full two sentence delay, waiting until verse 11 before they draw a conclusion about the meaning of verse 8, which is, itself, highly unlikely.

You give me a choice between the context of the immediate clause and the broader context of the paragraph, which could allow for multiple interpretations for determining the meaning of a single noun phrase and I'm going to go with the immediate context of the clause every time.

Syntax and Semantics of DIDWMI:


    1. (a) Transference, Active, Ditransitive (Agent, Theme, Goal+dat), give
(b) Transference, Active, Ditransitive (Agent, Theme, [Locative+P]), give/put/appoint
    2. Effect, Active, Transitive (Agent, Patient), give forth, produce
    3. Delegation, Active, ditransitive (Agent, Event+ἵνα, Goal)give, delegate/appoint
    4. Disposition, Active, Ditransitive (Agent, Patient, Event) make, dispose

Adapted from Paul Danove, Verbs of Transference, 185 (glosses are my own -- Danove never actually uses "appoint").
Mike Aubrey
http://evepheso.wordpress.com


________________________________
From: Timothy Lawson <tslawson1 at yahoo.com>
To: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>; George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>; b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org; Blue Meeksbay <bluemeeksbay at yahoo.com>
Sent: Tue, March 9, 2010 10:46:00 AM
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Ephesians 1:22


Mike,

 Couldn't  "... he gave gifts [in] men." be a possible meaning for EDWKEN DOMATA TOIS ANQRWPOIS at Ephesians 4:8 ? 

At Psalm 68:18 the LXX has ELABES DOMATA EN ANQROPWi. Couldn't that indicate that Paul meant the same, with the use of EN in the LXX giving a possible signal to such a meaning for TOIS ANQROPWOIS even though it is without a preposition at Ephesians 4:8? 

Don't Paul's words at Ephesians 4:10,11 explain what he means by EDWKEN DOMATA TOIS ANQRWPOIS at 4:8 showing that the gifts in men were in the form of apostles, evangelizers, shepherds and teachers? Thus these were not gifts to men in general but were gifts in men for the upbuilding of the "body of Christ."

Thus that would make TOIS ANQRWPOIS a non-recipient dative.

 How would one recognize a non-recipient dative anyways? Would it be by the presence or absence of a preposition? Or would it be by those ever present three regulators?: 

1.)context 
2.) context 
3.) context

Scotty


      
---
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