OIDA and YINWSKW (II Cor 5:16)

Steven Lo Vullo doulos at merr.com
Fri Oct 19 00:10:08 EDT 2001


on 10/18/01 9:49 PM, David Thiele at thielogian at yahoo.com wrote:

> While reading II Corinthians I noticed Paul seems to
> use OIDA and YINWSKW interchangably in 5:16.  He had
> resolved to know (OIDA) no-one according to the flesh.
> Even if he had previously known (GINWSKW) Christ this
> way, he would no long so know (GINWSKW) him.
> 
> Is there any difference between the meaning of the two
> words?  If not, why does Paul make the switch?  Is it
> simply for stylistic variation?

I don't think any variation in meaning *or* style is intended. As for
meaning, the knowledge in view in all three clauses is knowledge of Christ
KATA SARKA, and the distinction is between *formerly* knowing Christ KATA
SARKA and *no longer* knowing Christ KATA SARKA, not between different kinds
of knowledge.

I think what happened here is this: Paul started out using OIDAMEN, which is
a verb that is perfect in form, but functions as a present. And the
pluperfect form, HiDEIN, functions as an aorist. So, in the second clause,
when he wants to switch to the perfect tense, the forms of OIDA are no
longer an option. So he switches to GINWSKW, since it has a perfect form,
which accounts for EGNWKAMEN. Then, in the third clause, he just sticks with
GINWSKW.
-- 

Steven Lo Vullo
Madison, WI
  




More information about the B-Greek mailing list