From: Albert B. Collver, III (Collvera@sprynet.com)
Date: Thu Dec 04 1997 - 14:35:37 EST
Hello,
Regarding Matthew 19:6. The text reads hwste ouketi eisin duo alla sarx
mia. ho oun o theos sunezeuxen anthrwpos mh chwrizetw.
The question revolves about mh chwrizetw which is mh + a third person
imperative. This construction is a negative prohibitions. Prohibitions in
the 1st person plural occurs in the present or aorist subjunctive.
Prohibitions in the 2nd or 3rd person occur with the present imperative or
the aorist subjunctive. Here we have the 3rd person, singular, present
imperative. This is simply a negative prohibition.
You wrote, "Now, my question is whether this construction indicates
entirely the opposite of what Mr. Collver suggests--namely, that if a man is
commanded not to separate what God has joined, Jesus is implicitly saying
that it is in fact possible for a man to do so."
Going strictly by the Grammar the above statement is not possible. The
mh + present imperative is a prohibition. A paraphrase of the translation
might be "Don't let it happen!"
There is nothing special in the fact that the verb is a present
imperative. This is just one of the ways in which Greek forms the negative
prohibition. mh + present imperative or mh + aorist subjunctive both refer
to "future time."
The question was also asked whether or not there were more texts than
Matt 19:6. Here Jesus is in fact Quoting Genesis 2:24 and Genesis 5:2. Also
Ephesians 5:31 may be brought in. There are various other passages that
would speak of the sanctity of marriage.
Sincerely,
Albert B. Collver, III
Attachment converted: Hard Disk:Albert Bernard Collver, III 1 (????/----) (0004B929)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:36 EDT