John 11:5-6 DE...MEN

Rbsads at aol.com Rbsads at aol.com
Mon Mar 11 07:37:35 EST 2002


In a message dated 3/11/02 2:19:07 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
glennblank at earthlink.net writes:

"anaphora, all other things being equal, tend to look for their referents not 
to the most recent antecedent, but to the antecedent that is closest to it 
*structurally* "

Dear Glenn,

Thanks for the new word "anaphora." <g>

And thanks very much for the helpful explanation of MEN and DE.  The deeper 
consideration of sentence structure is something I am just starting to begin 
to study.  (As soon as my recognition and reading of the pluperfect is a 
little better.<g>) Iver has sent some helpful information with regard to word 
order.  And thanks Iver for your comments on this question of the syntactical 
use of OUN.

Chuck had mentioned in his last post for the "learning Greek" thread, about 
thinking in Greek. I suppose that eventually I will be able to place 
subordinate thoughts in their proper place, without regard to word, phrase, 
and clause order.  It is difficult to see a word that implies consequence, 
and understand that the referent might not be close by. Right now I am still 
treating Greek as "English by another name."

Anyway, Glenn, your explanation of the passage syntax has helped.

The use of antecedents in the passage, though, has now come to the front of 
my questioning.

hAUTN hH ASQENEIA OUK ESTIV PROS QANATON ALL 'hUPER THS DOZHS TOU QEOU, hINA 
DOZASQH hO hUIOS TOU QEOU DI' AUTHS."

The final AUTHS might seem to be in the same subordinated sentence structure 
as the possible antecedent THS DOZHS, or perhaps to flow structurally as a 
subordinate to the preposition hUPER THS DOZHS.

This would support THS DOZHS as being the antecedent, it would seem to me.

I do however think that the antecedent is hH ASQENEIA.  Please consider my 
reasons to see if my thinking is acceptable given Greek grammar 
considerations.

My understanding is that, as you explained so clearly, hUPO "signals 
something more agentive (hence DOXHS TOU QEOU characterizing God's person) 
whereas DIA signals a less personal cause or instrument (hence hH ASQENEIA)."

Additionally, could it be possible that the Father's work in this 
glorification of the Son is expressed by the "divine passive" of DOZASQH? Now 
we have "the glory of God glorifying the Son of God through this illness."

The other antecedents in this passage that bring questions to me are in verse 
16.

Thomas is speaking, "AGWMEN KAI hHMEIS hIVA APAQANWMEN MET' AUTOU."

When Thomas speaks does the hMEIS include Jesus?

And when Thomas speaks does the AUTOU refer to Jesus or to Lazarus?

Thanks for your help.

Richard Smith
Chattanooga, TN

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-greek/attachments/20020311/7468f4ed/attachment.html 


More information about the B-Greek mailing list