The Johannine passage I had in mind but could not pinpoint in my brief
earlier message on Eph 5:14 is actually Jn 3:19-21 (rather than what's in
chapter 9):
hAUTH DE ESTIN hH KRISIS hOTI TO FWS ELHLUQEN EIS TON KOSMON KAI
HGAPHSAN hOI ANQRWPOI [generic ;-) MALLON TO SKOTOS H TO FWS: HN
GAR AUTWN PONHRA TA ERGA. (20) PAS GAR hO FAULA PRASSWN MISEI TO
FWS KAI OUK ERCETAI PROS TO FWS, hINA MH ELEGCQHi TA ERGA AUTOU;
(21) hO DE POIWN THN ALHQEIAN ERCETAI PROS TO FWS, hINA FANERWQHi
AUTOU TA ERGA hOTI EN QEWi ESTIN EIRGASMENA.
I don't mean to suggest that Paul/the author of Ephesians had the Johannine
passage in mind when Eph 5:14 was composed, but rather that the symbolism
of Light and divine revelation is being used in a similar fashion: the
KRISIS, the eschatological crisis which is simultaneously a condemnation to
PAS hO FAULA PRASSWN and a life-giving to (PAS) hO POIWN THN ALHQEIAN, is
the shining of the Light in the revelation brought by Jesus.
At 11:32 AM -0400 7/11/97, Jim Beale wrote:
>On Jul 11, 9:38am, Jonathan Robie wrote:
>
>> > TA DE PANTA ELEGXOMENA hUPO TOU FWTOS FANEROUTAI,
>> > PAN GAR TO FANEROUMENON FWS ESTIN.
>> >
>> >It would be strange for FANEROUMENON to have an active sense given
>> >that FANEROUTAI is definitely passive. Light is the agent that
>> >exposes/reproves TOIS ERGOIS TOIS AKARPOIS TOU SKOTOUS.
For the reasons cited above, I still think that FANEROUMENON is
middle/reflexive rather than passive. FANEROW is a tricky verb in that it
is really a denominative causative deriving from the adjective FANEROS. It
means "to make manifest" rather than "to shine."
>> To me, though, a middle sense seems possible, since there is no explicit
>> agent for FANEROUMENON: "but all that reveals itself is light". In this
>> case, the contrast between the passive sense of FANEROUTAI and the middle
>> sense of FANEROUMENON would be central to the meaning of the verse. As I
>> pointed out in an earlier message, I think that the middle interpretation
>> also fits the context best.
>
>But the conjunction between the clauses is not 'DE' but 'GAR'.
>Therefore, "PAN TO FANEROUMENON FWS ESTIN" ought to be seen
>as giving a reason for "TA DE PANTA ELEGXOMENA hUPO TOU FWTOS
>FANEROUTAI."
>
>The translation,
>
> But everything which is reproved by the light is made
> manifest, because all that reveals itself is light.
>
>doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. I fail to see how
>your interpretation of the latter clause gives a reason for
>the former. How do you see this working? (I need more light;)
Hold your horses, Jim: "TO FWS EN THi SKOTIAi FAINEI, KAI hH SKOTIA AUTO OU
KATELABEN." Do you really think that "all that is revealed is light" makes
any MORE sense as an explanation of "But everything which is reproved by
the light is made manifest"? Is it that which is reproved by the light that
is itself light?
Let me try taking FANEROW in both clauses in the middle/reflexive sense: TA
DE PANTA ELEGCOMENA hUPO TOU FWTOS FANEROUTAI, (14) PAN GAR TO FANEROUMENON
FWS ESTIN. "And all that is put to the proof comes to illumination under
the impact of the Light, for everything that manifests itself is Light."
I do think that the Biblical NT language of light/darkness is loaded with
paradoxes, by which I do not mean that it means logically opposite things
at the same time but rather that it requires a broader appreciation of the
way that the imagery of light and darkness is being employed than a
strictly literal reading will admit. Strictly speaking, one could not
equate what is illuminated with the light that illuminates it, but the
"sleeper" of 5:14 who "rises up from the dead" and upon whom "Christ will
shine" is going to ENTER INTO THE REALM OF LIGHT and be IDENTIFIED with
that realm.
>--
> Reason #173 to fear technology...
>
> o o o o o <o <o> o> o
> .|. \|. \|/ // X \ | <| <|>
> /\ >\ /< >\ /< >\ /< >\ /<
>
> Mr. Asciihead learns the Macarena.
This is nice, Jim. Before I looked at your explanation about Mr. Asciihead,
I thought this was either (a) an outline of the "deep structure" of the
propositions of Eph 5:13-14, or (b) a chart explaining how to key the Greek
accents: circumflex, smooth + grave, etc., etc. But the third one doesn't
quite work: it can't be rough + acute because the elements are reversed.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics/Washington University
One Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018
Summer: 1647 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(704) 675-4243
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu OR cconrad@yancey.main.nc.us
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/