Gal 4:18 EN KALWi
Steven Lo Vullo
themelios at earthlink.net
Fri Oct 12 00:08:17 EDT 2001
on 10/11/01 9:36 PM, Harry W. Jones at hjbluebird at aol.com wrote:
> I believe made I made a mistake about hO AGAQOS being attributive. I
> believe hO AGAQOS is actually a predicate adjective with hEIS functioning
> as a substantive for hO QEOS. Therefore hEIS ESTIN hO AGAQOS would be
> equivalent to, hO QEOS ESTIN hO AGAQOS. But in any case, I believe hO QEOS
> predicates hEIS.
I think there is a bit of confusion in the above comments. hO AGAQOS is not
functioning as a predicate adjective. If it were, it would not and could not
have the article. And while hEIS has God *in view*, it is not *equivalent*
to hO QEOS, for the point is not simply that *God* is good, but that there
is only One who is good in an ultimate sense, which I believe is the force
of the article with AGAQOS. So it is not accurate to say that hEIS is
functioning as a substantive for hO QEOS, as if the two were
interchangeable, or as if hEIS were a metonym for hO QEOS. And I do not know
what you mean when you say that hO QEOS predicates hEIS. There is no hO
> I havn't seen one translation,that translates TOIS AGAQOIS as a noun but
> only as an adjective.
This is simply mistaken. When the English translations use "those who are
good" (or similar phrases), they are absolutely *not* translating TOIS
AGAQOIS as an adjective, but rather as a substantive. What they clearly say
when "those who are good" is construed with "be submissive" (which is what
is intended, otherwise no sense can be made of the sentence) is "be
submissive to ... those who are good." No noun is necessary with this
phraseology, which would not be the case with an adjective, which would be,
"be submissive to ... good." I think the mistake you are making here is to
take "good" in isolation from the larger phrase that is being used to convey
TOIS AGAQOIS. As I mentioned earlier, every translation I consulted has
punctuation between "masters" and the adjectives in question. Could you
explain to me how in that case the adjectives can possibly be contrued as
attributive adjectives with "masters?"
> Also,if it is being used as a noun then it shouldn't
> agree with TOIS DESPOTAIS in case, gender and number like it does.
Why not? I have no idea why you would make such a statement, but the fact is
that since TOIS AGAQOIS is a direct object of hUPOTASSOMENOI, it must be
dative in case, since hUPOTASSW in the middle/passive takes a dative object.
And it must be the same gender and number as DESPOTAIS since DESPOTAIS is
understood. All substantival adjectives imply a noun, whether that noun is
in the context or not. (I suggest you read the definition of a substantival
adjective from Smyth that Carl shared with us.) What other case, gender, and
number could these adjectives possibly be? You're point is a non sequitur.
Steven Lo Vullo
More information about the B-Greek