In re-reading one of my prior posts Re: Acts 2:38 I came across an error
(that is, a statement that I did not mean to say). What I wrote was:
>>But in Greek, I'm thinking that the subject of B. [for BAPTISQHTW] cannot
be hUMWN because it is gen. pl. and the subject of a 3rd pl. pass. impv. verb
must be in the nom. sing (doesn't it?).<<
What I meant was:
But in Greek, I'm thinking that the subject of B. cannot be hUMWN because it
is gen. pl. and the subject of a 3rd *sing.* pass. impv. verb must be in the
nom. sing. (doesn't it?).
The context of the sentence was:
>>I'm still hoping for a clarification of my question regarding BAPTISQHTW
hEKASTOS hUMWN. Perhaps I haven't stated my question clearly enough so let me
try again (although I'm afraid that each successive attempt just muddies the
water still more). My guess is that, in Greek, B. is 3rd sing. impv. because
the subject of the verb is the nom. sing. masc. hEKASTOS. In other words
that the shift from 2nd pers. pl. impv. (METANOHSATE) to the 3rd sing. impv.
(BAPTISQHTW) was required by Peter's shift in emphasis (from addressing the
crowd as a whole with M., to addressing the whole crowd *as individuals*).
In English, "Be baptized each of you" would still be 2nd pl. impv. (because
of the "you"). But in Greek, I'm thinking that the subject of B. cannot be
hUMWN because it is gen. pl. and the subject of a 3rd pl. pass. impv. verb
must be in the nom. sing (doesn't it?). In other words (I wish I could
express myself more succinctly) in order for Peter to address the whole crowd
*as individuals*, he had no choice but to shift the verb to 3rd sing.
The reason I'm asking is that it has been suggested that when Peter shifted
persons (from 2nd pl. to 3rd sing.) he was thereby actually addressing a
different group (namely a subset of the whole: i.e. those who obeyed the
first command and excluding those hearers who did not). I really don't think
that the text requires any such interpretation. I'm just wondering how it
all fits together in the Greek.
If any of you can give me a hand with this, I'd appreciate it<<
Sorry for the (read: my) confusion.
Rev. Craig R. Harmon
*********************
MONWi SOFWi THEWi, DIA IHSOU CRISTOU, hWi hH DOXA EIS TOUS AIWNAS TWN AIWN;
AMHN. Romans 16:27