From: Iver Larsen (iver_larsen@sil.org)
Date: Sun Aug 26 2001 - 02:39:12 EDT
> on 8/25/01 4:41 AM, Iver Larsen at iver_larsen@sil.org wrote:
>
> > What about the option of "attendant circumstance" which is BDAG AIII1c
> > for DIA? They cite another instance like
> > 2 Cor 2:4 EGRAYA hUMIN DIA POLLWN DAKRUWN
> >
> > Writing with tears is quite different from writing with ink. It seems to
me
> > that Paul wants to send these people with the money accompanied by
letters
> > that explain where they come from and probably include the amount being
sent
> > to avoid any temptation.
>
Steven said:
>
> I don't have the new BDAG, but the examples given in BAGD (2nd)
> for the most
> part, IMHO, can be explained as means, although 2 Cor 2.4 is a good
> candidate for attendant circumstances. But I think it may also be
> explained
> as temporal, i.e., "I wrote to you while shedding tears the whole time"
> (although this is admittedly somewhat awkward).
I cannot see any real difference between "attendant" and "contemporal".
But note that in
> 2 Cor 2.4,
> the shedding of tears is an attendant circumstance of Paul's
> writing, i.e.,
> the attendant circumstance is on the part of the person performing the
> action of the verb. He was crying *while* writing. In 1 Cor 16.3, although
> the prepositional phrase modifies PEMYW, the bearing of the
> letters wouldn't
> really be an attendant circumstance of Paul's action of sending
> (especially
> if the sending is viewed as the mission as a whole, rather than simply the
> initial act of putting them on their way), but of the bearers. In other
> words, Paul wasn't bearing during the sending; he was not sending
> the agents
> and carrying the letters at the same time. I think it makes more
> sense, and
> better ties the prepositional phrase to *Paul's* action in PEMYW, to view
> DI' EPISTOLWN as the means by which Paul identifies and certifies the
> bearers ensuring the fulfillment of the mission, which is what is
> in view in
> PEMYW. Paul is sending them by means of the letters that will identify and
> certify them, and ensure the succuess of the "sending," i.e., the
> mission. I
> hope I have expressed this lucidly. I get the feeling I haven't!
I agree with your last comment. I have the same feeling. -:)
The DI' EPISTOLWN is, as far as I can see, connected primarily with the
sending (which implies that Paul first wrote them) and only secondarily with
the carrying, and thirdly with the implied certification. Paul is writing
these letters of recommendation that the people should carry and deliver
together with the money. The fronting of the "letters" helps to indicate the
tricky nature of sending people with a large sum of money. The letters
function as security both for the people who carry the money and the people
who receive the money.
I am quite ready to take it as a means, if we understand it as means
subordinate to the mission of getting the money safely to its destination.
The money are sent by means of these people, but they are also sent by means
of the security letters. Both are needed, and none is complete without the
other.
Iver Larsen
---
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@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 - 15:37:04 EDT