EIS TO + Infinitive

BillCombs@aol.com
Wed, 2 Jul 1997 22:27:05 -0400 (EDT)

I have a question about the EIS TO + Infinitive construction in 2 Thess 2:2
(actually two infinitives). Could (should?) not this be considered an
indirect discourse use of the infinitive after ERWTWMEN in v. 1? An
Accordance search suggests four other possible use of EIS TO followed by the
infinitive to indicate indirect discourse: Acts 13:42; 1 Thess 2:12; 1 Thess
3:10; and, possibly, Rom 4:18, though I believe this would change the normal
understanding of this verse.

Burton says that 1 Thess 2:13; 3:10, and 2 Thess 2:2 (I think I am
remembering the correct verses, I don't have him in front of me) are examples
of infinitives used in object clauses, which he seems to distinguish from his
discussion of indirect discourse. Young's was the only grammar, as far as I
could tell from a quick check, which listed EIS TO + infinitive used in
indirect discourse. He cites only 1 Thess 2:12.

I have a friend who took a course on 2 Thess some years ago from Dan Wallace.
At that time Wallace suggested that the EIS TO + infinitive construction in 2
Thess 2:2 is indirect discourse. But I notice that in his new Grammar he
lists only three uses for the EIS TO + inf construction: Purpose, Result, and
Epexegetical (I think I am quoting him correctly here). I wonder if anyone at
Dallas could confirm this. I know Charles Powell is on the list and is
probably familiar with this, given his recent article on 2 Thess in BibSac.

Bill Combs
Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary