From: Paul S. Dixon (dixonps@juno.com)
Date: Wed Oct 28 1998 - 21:36:30 EST
On Wed, 28 Oct 1998 17:35:04 -0600 (CST) Michael Holmes
<holmic@bethel.edu> writes:
>At 04:32 PM 10/28/98 -0600, Carl Conrad responded to my note:
>
>>The problem with this is that ENANTI/WN in 1 Thess 2:15 cannot be
>a=20
>>participle--UNLESS it is a nominative sg. active of ENANTIOW; a
>participle=
>=20
>>gen. pl. of ENANTIOOMAI would be ENANTIOUMENWN. That having been
>said,=20
>>there's nothing to prevent understanding ENANT/WN here as the
>genitive=20
>>plural of the adjective ENANTIOS/A/ON with an implicit ONTWN that
>would=20
>>yield the equivalent of a participle of ENANTIOOMAI.
>>
>
>Sorry, but I do not take ENANTI/WN in 1 Th 2.15 as a participle, I
>read it
>as an adjective. My apologies for not re-writing the note a bit more
>expansively for re-use in response to Paul Dixon's query. Permit me
>to
>re-post the note with an expanded first line or two and see if that
>makes
>more sense for Carl and others.
>
>Paul's question was:
>>>>In 1 Thess 2:15 should ENANTIWN be taken as a participle
>>>>in parallel with the preceding participles APOKTEINANTWN
>>>>... EDKIWXANTWN ... ARESKONTWN?
>>>>
>>>>Or, should it be taken simply as an adjective (as BAG
>>>>has it listed under the adjective ENANTIOS, A, ON rather
>>>>than the verb ENANTIOOMAI).
>>>
>
>A revised version of my reply:
>
> Regarding the four participles in 2:15-16a [APOKTEINANTWN,
>EKDIWXANTWN,
>ARESKONTWN, KWLUONTWN],
>
>"In 2:15b=9616a there are competing structural patterns: while the
>first=
> three
>clauses of vv. 15=9616 are composed of a noun or pronoun phrase
>followed by=
> a
>participle, in the fourth clause the noun phrase is followed by an
>adjective
>("hostile", i.e., EVAVTIWN) and then a participle ("hindering", i.e.,
>KWLUONTWN). Both the NIV ("They ...
>are hostile to all men in their effort to keep us ...") and NRSV
>("they ...
>oppose everyone by hindering us ...") emphasize the adjective, as it
>immediately follows the noun clause; they treat the adjective as if it
>were
>a participle parallel to the first three, and subordinate the
>following
>participle to it. Alternatively, one may emphasize the obvious
>parallelism
>of the four participles, as does the NASB ("not pleasing to God, but
>hostile
>to all men, hindering us ..."). But the NASB treats the linking
>conjunction
>KAI as though it were a contrasting one ("but," DE or ALLA); instead
>translate "they are not pleasing to God and, hostile to humanity, are
>hindering us ..." (cf. E. J. Richard, Thessalonians, 121=96122).
Carl, Michael:
Thanks for your response and help. I'll check out your commentary,
Michael.
Both options make good sense here. I suppose ENANTIOW is not
a viable option. At least I didn't find it in the NT, LXX, or MM.
Paul Dixon
___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
--- B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-329W@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:05 EDT