abj at the-bridge.net
Mon Jul 2 23:03:31 EDT 2001
BAGD's entry on SUNERGEW seems to explain the two positions you have made
reference to pretty well. The entry also explains why some scholars take hO
QEOS as the implied subject (it actually was the express subject in some
ancient manuscripts). (That's not to say that the scholars you mentioned
did not come up with their own reasons one way or the other, of course.) I
see nothing in the sntax and grammar of the text itself [viz., the version
you cited] that suggests that PANTA cannot be understood quite naturally as
the subject of SUNERGEI, do you? Neuter plural subjects are used with third
person singular verbs often enough in the NT. I suppose some might feel the
context [the preceding "OIDAMEN DE hOTi TOIS AGAPWSI TON QEON..."], which
raises the consideration of God, requires that the understood subject of
SUNERGEI is hO QEOS and PANTA, then, is a direct object [the lexicon meaning
of SUNERGEW perhaps makes some doubt this is possible], or an accusative of
respect [or "specification" as BAGD says]. The fact that some manuscripts
had hO QEOS as a subject of the verb leads me to believe that this passage
troubled the earliest readers too. Some copyists may have added hO QEOS to
make explicit what they (and perhaps all the earliest readers)understood, or
perhaps hO QEOS was in fact the original reading and was somehow dropped
from the others. I'm only speculating and I'm not sure how significant any
difference in meaning is ultimately.
As to transitive verb or intransitive verb, I was taught (which may only
serve to date me) that a transitive verb is one which has or requires an
object to complete its meaning (in a sentence) and an intransitive verb is
one which has no such object or at least no such requirement for an object.
On direct object as opposed to accusative of respect, etc., Smyth's Grammar
may help. Sections 919, 1553, 1706.
From: Mark Wilson [mailto:emory2oo2 at hotmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2001 7:21 PM
To: Biblical Greek
Subject: [b-greek] Romans 8:28a
OIDAMEN DE hOTI TOIS AGAPWSI TON QEON PANTA SUNERGEI EIS AGAQON...
According to Schreiner, Ross, Moo, and Fitzmyer, SUNERGEI is an intransitive
verb. Yet, according to Wallace, it is either
intransitive or transitive.
How does one decide whether or not a verb is transitive, intransitive,
Schreiner indicates that although SUNERGEI is without a doubt
intransitive, PANTA could function as an Accusative of Respect
(while allowing for an implied hO QEOS to be subject).
How does an Acc. of Respect differ from a Direct Object in Greek?
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [abj at the-bridge.net]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to
To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek at franklin.oit.unc.edu
More information about the B-Greek