Granted! Of course I don't share Paul's (Dixon's, that is) conviction that
the logic of Ephesians (especially Ephesians) is Euclidean-Aristotelian.
Actually Paul didn't say that about Ephesians in particular but about the
logical consistency of Biblical texts in general. Ephesians has always
seemed to me to present more problems in this regard, and most of all with
respect to the way the metaphors in it are strained to the breaking point.
Nevertheless, I still do believe that the light-darkness imagery is used in
a manner parallel to that in John 3.
>>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."
>
>How about we go _all_ the way and take ELEGXOMENA as middle? Then we
>have the sense: "And all that bears reproof manifests itself under the
>influence of the Light; for everything that manifests itself is Light."
>This seems to transition more smoothly to 14(b). I think I can agree
>with the above:- at least it is gramatically/logically consistent!
Really?!!? Actually I think your wording "bears reproof" still reflects a
passive sense--and I DO think ELEGCOMENA [although I'd PREFER to use X for
Chi, I've now conditioned myself to use C for Chi and X for Xi] is PASSIVE
here rather than middle: the Light functions as both criterion and as judge
and divider between the blind and the seeing, the unenlightened and the
enlightened. I think (personally) that the puzzlement in the verse derives
from the equation here of the "enlightened" with "Light." Nevertheless, I
think that works: it seems to me that the idea here is --as in John 3 --
that those who respond to revelation (the shining of the Light) come to the
Light and thereby become "citizens" of the realm of Light so that they can
even be referred to as "light." I would guess that, historically speaking,
all this light/darkness imagery in the ancient world goes way farther back
than Plato all the way to Zoroaster.
Incidentally, while I certainly do believe that many of the NT verbs
commonly deemed deponent or passive are really middle, I've never tried to
argue that there is no passive in NT Koine. In this particular instance I
DO think ELEGCOMENA is passive and that the clear sign of that is the hUPO
agent construction.
>>> 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.
>
>Are you kidding me? ;-)
Well, yes. I didn't seriously think it was a Chomskian formula; on the
other hand, it DOES have a superficial likeness to Greek diacriticals,
don't you think?
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> The deepest and most pure humility doth not so much arise from
> the consideration of our own faults and defects as from a calm
> and quiet contemplation of the Divine purity and goodness. Our
> spots never appear so clearly as when we place them before the
> Infinite Light; and we never seem less in our own eyes than when
> we look down upon ourselves from on high.
> (Rev. Henry Scougal, _The Life of God in the Soul of Man_, 130)
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, I like this that you've cited. I find it interesting, moreover,
that it reflects the Ephesians passage here under consideration (did you
use it here for that reason?)--and also that it is loaded with
"middle/reflexive" verbs:
"consideration of our own faults and defects" = hOTAN TAS TE hAMARTIAS KAI
TAS ELLEIYEIS TAS hHMWN AUTWN SKEPTWMEQA; "appear so clearly" = SAFESTATA
FANEROUNTAI; "when we place them before the Infinite Light" = hOTAN
PROTIQWMEQA AUTAS EMPROSQEN TOU FWTOS TOU APEIROU; "when we look down upon
ourselves" = hOTAN hHMAS AUTOUS KATAQEWMEQA. It has a ring--shall we say,
an effulgence--, moreover, that is at once Platonic and Calvinist. What a
combination!
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/