From: DavidWPerk@aol.com
Date: Thu Jul 17 1997 - 12:37:35 EDT
Dear Carl,
In a message dated 7/12/97 2:16:43 PM, you wrote:
<<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.>>
I am on vacation and away fr/my office and have gotten behind on email. I
posted a note earlier today in response to the original question about this
verse prior to having read your responses.
I treat Ephesians as an early deuteroPauline piece that explicates themes
prevelant esp. in Colossians (wh/ I treat as authentic) in a fashion one
might expect that Paul would have explicated them himself.
I heartily agree w/ your linking of Eph 5:14 w/ the Johannine concept of
enlightment. Paul appears to be working with a very similar conceptual range
in 2 Cor 3-4. Perhaps a journal article would be in order that explored the
semantic fields of fws/fotizein/fanerow/exlegxein, etc.
Apologies for posting after you w/out having seen your posts and thus
creating duplication.
David Perkins
Episcopal Ch of the Good Shepherd
Vidalia, LA
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:23 EDT