[B-Greek] John 1:18 (EKEINOS)
cwconrad2 at mac.com
Mon Feb 21 15:49:05 EST 2011
On Feb 21, 2011, at 2:57 PM, George F Somsel wrote:
> Other than in a prepositional phrase, QEON is the only accusative. I think I'd
> give that a shot.
And there really is, I think, no more that can be said about this in terms of what
the Greek text as a Greek text can clearly indicate. I don't see how any attempt
to educe implicit indications from the word QEON can avoid reliance upon
assumptions that lie outside the purview of B-Greek discussion.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
> From: Edgar Foster <edgarfoster2003 at yahoo.com>
> To: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>; b-greek list <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Sent: Mon, February 21, 2011 12:53:57 PM
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] John 1:18 (EKEINOS)
> Carl and B-Greekers,
> My apologies for asking the wrong question. I should have paid more attention
> when typing this email. Of course, you are right about the referent of EKEINOS.
> What I should have asked concerns the implicit object of EXHGHSATO in John 1:18.
> The text states that MONOGENHS QEOS "explained" [understood "him"].
> Who did the Son likely explain? Was it God in his essence (since QEON is
> anarthrous) or was it the Father more specifically? I hope my question is worded
> properly this time around.
> Thank you,
> Edgar Foster
> --- On Mon, 2/21/11, Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com> wrote:
>> From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>
>> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] John 1:18 (EKEINOS)
>> To: "Edgar Foster" <edgarfoster2003 at yahoo.com>
>> Cc: "b-greek list" <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
>> Date: Monday, February 21, 2011, 1:47 PM
>> On Feb 21, 2011, at 1:03 PM, Edgar Foster wrote:
>>> Greetings to all,
>>> The text: QEON OUDEIS hEWRAKEN PWPOTE MONOGENHS QEOS
>> hO WN EIS TON KOLPON TOU PATROS EKEINOS EXHGHSATO.
>>> Assuming that the reading above is to be preferred,
>> how would you understand the referent of EKEINOS? Is it God
>> with respect to his essence (in view of the anarthrous QEON)
>> that MONOGENHS QEOS "explained" or is it more strictly
>> speaking, the Father that was explained? It could be the
>> Father specifically since John writes about EIS TON KOLPON
>> TOU PATROS
>> I would reaffirm what I think is a standard view here, that
>> EKEINOS refers to MONOGENHS QEOS hO WN EIS TON KOLPON TOU
>> PATROS. I think this sense is pretty much that categorized
>> in BDAG s.v. EKEINOS a.β.:
>> β. referring back to and resuming a
>> word immediately preceding, oft. weakened to he, she, it
>> (X., An. 4, 3, 20; Just., D. 1, 3 al.) Mk 16:10f. Esp. oft.
>> so in J: 5:37; 8:44; 10:6; 11:29; 12:48; 13:6 v.l.; 14:21,
>> 26; 16:14 al. Hence 19:35 perh. the eyewitness (just
>> mentioned) is meant, who then, to be sure, would be vouching
>> for his own credibility and love of the truth (s.
>> aG).—Interchanging w. AUTOS (cp. Thu. 1, 32, 5; X., Cyr.
>> 4, 5, 20; Lysias 14, 28; Kühner-G. I 649) EZWGRHMENOI
>> hUP᾿ AUTOU EIS TO EKEINOU QELHMA under the spell of his
>> will 2 Ti 2:26. EKEINOS for AUTOS Lk 9:34 v.l.; 23:12 v.l.
>> Used to produce greater emphasis: EKEINON LABWN take that
>> one Mt 17:27; cp. J 5:43. THi EKEINOU CARITI by his grace
>> Tit 3:7. Sim. after a participial subj. (X., Cyr. 6, 2, 33
>> hO GAR LOGCHN AKONWN, EKEINOS KAI THN YUCHN TI PARAKONAi=the
>> one who sharpens his spear, he is the one who sharpens his
>> inner self) TO EKPOREUOMENON EKEINO KOINOI Mk 7:20. hO
>> PEMYAS EKEINOS J 1:33; cp 5:37 v.l. (for AUTOS) hO POIHSAS
>> ME hUGIH EKEINOS 5:11. hO LALWN EKEINOS ESTIN 9:37. hO
>> EISERCOMENOS EKEINOS KLEPTHS ESTIN 10:1. TWi LOGIZOMENWi . .
>> . EKEINWi KOINON Ro 14:14 al.
More information about the B-Greek