From: Carl W. Conrad (cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu)
Date: Mon Oct 04 1999 - 06:48:37 EDT
At 12:57 AM -0700 10/4/99, Alan Simons wrote:
>I would like to explore this verse a little bit
>farther.
>
>In one of Carl Conrad's post from tht archives, he
>posted:
>
>"Re: "EF' hWi" in Rom. 5:12
>Carl W. Conrad (cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu)
>Mon, 18 Nov 1996 11:23:13 -0600 (CST)
>
> Previous message: Johnny Felker: "Re: "EF' hWi" in
>Rom. 5:12"
> In reply to: Johnny Felker: "Re: "EF' hWi" in Rom.
>5:12"
> Next in thread: Johnny Felker: "Re: "EF' hWi" in
>Rom. 5:12"
>At 11:23 AM -0600 11/18/96, Johnny Felker wrote:
>>Dear Mr. Conrad,
>>
>>I have noted and appreciate your active participation
>in the B-Greek
>>Archives. I am learning a great deal by reading the
>posts from day to day
>>for nearly a year now. In addition I have explored
>your home page and
>>enjoyed the Bible and language study links on it. I
>was hoping you might
>>comment on my recent question on B-Greek, if you have
>time and see fit. Any
>>ideas for me on this?
>>
>>Thanks for your consideration,
>>Johnny
>>
>>>Greetings to all. I could use some help on how this
>phrase might best be
>>>translated ("because"?, "whereupon?") and therefore
>how it affects the
>>>relation of the statements "death passed to all men"
>and "all sinned".
>
>Okay, I read the EF' hWi as an abbreviated version of
>EPI TOUTWi, hOTI and
>understand it fundamentally as "because": I translate
>the whole sentence thus:
>"For this reason, just as through the instrumentality
>of one human being Sin
>entered into the world and, through the
>instrumentality of Sin Death [entered
>into the world], even so Death extended to all human
>beings FOR THE REASON THAT
>all (human beings) sinned." EPI TOUTWi = "on the basis
>of this", and hOTI =
>"namely, the fact that ..." This is a common
>compression into the antecedent
>clause of the relative word introducing the
>subordinate clause. This, at any
>rate, is how I understand it. I hope that helps; if
>you still find it
>problematic, let me know what you see as particularly
>problematic.
>
>Regards, cwc "
>
>Earlier, Carl called the last aorist resultive. Here,
>he appears to caled it causative. I have no problem
>with it being a combination of the two.
>
>It appears that this understanding would require a
>sequence. i. e. Adam's sin caused two things, death to
>enter the world and all to sin which caused all to
>die.
>
>I'm a learner and not a debater, so is there a
>different way of looking at this verse or did I miss
>something.
Sorry for any misunderstanding; what I said is that I considered the aorist
as resultative in nature--NOT the clause; the clause itself is what I would
consider causal. The force of the aorist, as I see it, is "did commit sin"
and I suggested that in this instance I think the English perfect tense
would be appropriate here: "have sinned" to emphasize the resultative force
of the aorist. The clause is causal because of the EF' hWi and the
relationship of the clause to the propositions in the rest of the sentence.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics/Washington University
One Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018
Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
--- 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 - 15:40:40 EDT