From: Iver Larsen (iver_larsen@sil.org)
Date: Wed Nov 07 2001 - 14:33:00 EST
> Just one quick thought (it's midnight here, have just come home
> after a late
> night, and can't give this more time now), but why not take hHMIN as in
> apposition to TOIS TEKNOIS, rather than closely with ANASTHSAS? This was
> the way I construed before reading on in your message to look at the
> interesting parallel passages you cite, and I acknowledge I
> haven't weighed
> their full significance for this text. (I do note that NIV, at
> least, takes hHMIN as being in apposition.) The hOTI DE ANESTHSEN AUTON
EK
> NEKRWN KTL of v34 suggests to me on first reading that here it is raising
from the dead
> that is in mind (and verse 35, too, does nothing to contradict this
> understanding of the text), rather than the 'sending forth' sense seen
> elsewhere; but I don't offer hOTI KTL as being conclusive, since the
> citation of Psalm 2:7 in 33b, hUIOS MOU EI SU, EGW SHMERON GEGENNHKA SE,
> could be taken as in parallel to the 'send forth' sense. How are
> you taking that clause? Regards,
Yes, I am aware of how most translations have interpreted it, and the main
reason for my post is to disagree with this common notion. Both are
grammatically possible, but I have presented my reasons for preferring one
to the other.
You are quite right that v. 34-37 has the topic of resurrection and for this
Luke uses either ANESTHSEN AUTON EK NEKRWN as in v. 34 or hO QEOS HGEIREN in
v. 37.
V. 30-31 also has the topic of resurrection with the expression hO QEOS
HGEIREN AUTON EK NEKRWN.
But as I have said earlier, Paul like others with a Semitic background
naturally goes in circles, so there is no problem in seeing v. 32-33 as
having a different topic from the resurrection. The overall topic of the
speech is to prove from the Scriptures that Jesus was indeed the promised
Messiah, and therefore the promise from Deut is important.
I take 33b (Ps 2:7) to refer to the incarnation of Jesus, that is God
sending forth or raising up for the sons of the forefathers Jesus as that
promised Prophet.
It is the fronted hHMIN together with the use of ANISTHMI that makes me lean
towards the interpretation I have suggested, in view of the parallels.
ANISTHMI is a common Greek verb and not a technical term for resurrection,
so it needs a phrase like EK NEKRWN to take this specific sense. That phrase
is missing in v. 33, and in addition the hHMIN is present. If hHMIN were to
be in apposition to TOIS TEKNOIS AUTWN it should have preceded it, not
followed it.
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 - 15:37:11 EDT