Gal 4:18 EN KALWi

Harry W. Jones hjbluebird at aol.com
Tue Oct 9 18:32:38 EDT 2001


Dear Carl,

I appreciate your help on this but I only was trying point out to Diana
that KALWi didn't seem to be used as a substantive for a person in the
NT Greek and so that could account for why the translators translated it
the way they did. It doesn't seem like it AGAQOS was used that way either
except possibly in Ro. 5:7 and 1Pet. 2:18. Of course theoretically KALWi
could be used as a substantive for a person but that doesn't seem to be
the case in the NT Greek text.

 At 5:09 AM -0400 10/9/01, Harry W. Jones wrote:
> >Dear Diana,
> >
> >I could find no place in the NT Greek where either KALOS or AGAQOS are
> >used as a substantive for a person. They seem to always be used as a
> >quality or characteristic.
> 
> You might want to consider the following:
> 
> Mt 19:17 hEIS ESTIN hO AGAQOS
> Rom 5:7 hUPER TOU AGAQOU TACA TIS KAI TOLMAi APOQANEIN
> 1 Pet 2:18 hOI OIKETAI hUPOTASSOMENOI EN PANTI FOBWi TOIS DESPOTAIS, OU
> MONON TOIS AGAQOIS KAI EPIEIKESIN ALLA KAI TOIS SKOLIOIS
> 
> Moreover there are several instances of the antithetical PONHROS used as a
> substantive, among them Mt 13:19, 34, 39; Lk 6:45; 1 Cor 5:13. Furthermore
> there is some question regarding whether a couple instances of substantive
> PONHROS traditionally thought neuter ought not to be considered masculine:
> 
> Mt 6:13 hRUSAI hHMAS APO TOU PONHROU.
> 2 Tj 3"3 PISTOS DE ESTIN hO KURIOS, hOS STHRIXEI hUMAS KAI FULAXEI APO TOU
> PONHROU
> 
> But in reality a host of instances of these adjectives used as neuter
> substantives wouldn't prove that KALWi in Gal 4:18 can NOT be masculine.
> 
>  >> While I'm interrupting with questions, there was one awhile back I couldn't
> >> answer for myself.  There is no article in the phrase "EN KALWi" here, so it
> >> could be masculine, as well as neuter.  The context in Galatians would
> >> certainly support a reference to human agency, rather than neuter
> >> instrumentality.  And BDF allows EN + (dative/instrumental) to be used for
> >> personal agency.   Why, then, is this phrase translated (by all versions
> >> I've checked) as "in a good cause," rather than "by a good person"?  Is
> >> there a reason in Greek grammar; or is it merely that translators feel Paul
> >> would not refer to himself as "good" or imply the opposite of other
> >> Christians, personally, by contrast, even though he has been forcefully
> >> saying these other Christians' suborning of doctrinal felonies among the
> >> Galatians was quite bad?    (Rats!  Parse that sentence!)
> >>
> >> [Dictionaries I checked may have leaned toward the (non-personal)
> >> instrumental as more usual for such phrases, but not totally clear.  Both
> >> allowed.]
> >>
> >> Diana N. Shaw
> >> dinosaur2 at prodigy.net
> >> http://pages.prodigy.net/dinosaur2
> >> http://pages.prodigy.net/dinosaur2/private/itiswrit.htm
> >
> >---
> >B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
> >You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu]
> >To unsubscribe, forward this message to
> >$subst('Email.Unsub')
> >To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek at franklin.oit.unc.edu
> 
> -- 
> 
> Carl W. Conrad
> Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)
> Most months: 1647 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
> cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu OR cwconrad at ioa.com
> WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/



More information about the B-Greek mailing list