1 Pet 4:2 re Adjectival Use of Prepositional Phrases

Forum rules
Please quote the Greek text you are discussing directly in your post if it is reasonably short - do not ask people to look it up. This is not a beginner's forum, competence in Greek is assumed.

1 Pet 4:2 re Adjectival Use of Prepositional Phrases

Postby Paul Thomson » November 23rd, 2012, 7:11 pm

1 Peter 4 1 Χριστοῦ οὖν παθόντος σαρκὶ καὶ ὑμεῖς τὴν αὐτὴν ἔννοιαν ὁπλίσασθε, ὅτι ὁ παθὼν σαρκὶ πέπαυται ἁμαρτίας 2 εἰς τὸ μηκέτι ἀνθρώπων ἐπιθυμίαις ἀλλὰ θελήματι θεοῦ τὸν ἐπίλοιπον ἐν σαρκὶ βιῶσαι χρόνον. 3 ἀρκετὸς γὰρ ὁ παρεληλυθὼς χρόνος τὸ βούλημα τῶν ἐθνῶν κατειργάσθαι πεπορευμένους ἐν ἀσελγείαις, ἐπιθυμίαις, οἰνοφλυγίαις, κώμοις, πότοις καὶ ἀθεμίτοις εἰδωλολατρίαις. 4 ἐν ᾧ ξενίζονται μὴ συντρεχόντων ὑμῶν εἰς τὴν αὐτὴν τῆς ἀσωτίας ἀνάχυσιν βλασφημοῦντες, 5 οἳ ἀποδώσουσιν λόγον τῷ ἑτοίμως ἔχοντι κρῖναι ζῶντας καὶ νεκρούς. 6 εἰς τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ νεκροῖς εὐηγγελίσθη, ἵνα κριθῶσι μὲν κατὰ ἀνθρώπους σαρκὶ ζῶσι δὲ κατὰ θεὸν πνεύματι.

Should we therefore read verse 1 and 2 as:

"1Pt 4:1 Forasmuch then as Christ has suffered in flesh for us, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that has suffered in flesh has ceased from sin; 2. to no longer live by the lusts of men but for the will of God in flesh for the rest of time.

Living in flesh for the rest of time? Grammatically sound? Comments.

Usually it appears to be translated as if it "in flesh" is adjectival re "time", rather than adverbial to "to live".

God bless.

Paul
Paul Thomson
 
Posts: 13
Joined: June 1st, 2011, 6:30 pm

Re: Adjectival Use of Prepositional Phrases

Postby Jason Hare » November 23rd, 2012, 10:19 pm

Paul Thomson wrote:1 Peter 4 1 Χριστοῦ οὖν παθόντος σαρκὶ καὶ ὑμεῖς τὴν αὐτὴν ἔννοιαν ὁπλίσασθε, ὅτι ὁ παθὼν σαρκὶ πέπαυται ἁμαρτίας 2 εἰς τὸ μηκέτι ἀνθρώπων ἐπιθυμίαις ἀλλὰ θελήματι θεοῦ τὸν ἐπίλοιπον ἐν σαρκὶ βιῶσαι χρόνον. 3 ἀρκετὸς γὰρ ὁ παρεληλυθὼς χρόνος τὸ βούλημα τῶν ἐθνῶν κατειργάσθαι πεπορευμένους ἐν ἀσελγείαις, ἐπιθυμίαις, οἰνοφλυγίαις, κώμοις, πότοις καὶ ἀθεμίτοις εἰδωλολατρίαις. 4 ἐν ᾧ ξενίζονται μὴ συντρεχόντων ὑμῶν εἰς τὴν αὐτὴν τῆς ἀσωτίας ἀνάχυσιν βλασφημοῦντες, 5 οἳ ἀποδώσουσιν λόγον τῷ ἑτοίμως ἔχοντι κρῖναι ζῶντας καὶ νεκρούς. 6 εἰς τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ νεκροῖς εὐηγγελίσθη, ἵνα κριθῶσι μὲν κατὰ ἀνθρώπους σαρκὶ ζῶσι δὲ κατὰ θεὸν πνεύματι.

Should we therefore read verse 1 and 2 as:

"1Pt 4:1 Forasmuch then as Christ has suffered in flesh for us, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that has suffered in flesh has ceased from sin; 2. to no longer live by the lusts of men but for the will of God in flesh for the rest of time.

Living in flesh for the rest of time? Grammatically sound? Comments.

Usually it appears to be translated as if it "in flesh" is adjectival re "time", rather than adverbial to "to live".

God bless.

Paul


No, Paul. I wouldn't read it that way.

ἀλλὰ θελήματι θεοῦ τὸν ἐπίλοιπον ἐν σαρκὶ βιῶσαι χρόνον...

θελήματι θεοῦ tells us that it is "by the will of God."
τὸν ἐπίλοιπον... χρόνον is an accusative of time "how long," meaning "for the rest of time."
βιῶσαι is an aorist infinitive of βιῶ (βιόω), meaning "to live."
ἐν σαρκί modifies the verb βιῶσαι, "to live in the flesh" (rather than living in the spirit).

All together: But to live in the flesh for the rest of time by the will of God.

The distinction is that a believer is supposed to live θελήματι θεοῦ ("by the will of God") rather than ἀνθρώπων ἐπιθυμίαις ("by the lusts/desires of men"), but ἐν σαρκί doesn't modify χρόνον but rather βιῶσαι.
Jason A. Hare
Rehovot, Israel
Jason Hare
 
Posts: 379
Joined: June 2nd, 2011, 5:28 pm
Location: Rehovot, Israel

Re: Adjectival Use of Prepositional Phrases

Postby David Lim » November 23rd, 2012, 11:17 pm

Paul Thomson wrote:1 Peter 4 [...] 2 εἰς τὸ μηκέτι ἀνθρώπων ἐπιθυμίαις ἀλλὰ θελήματι θεοῦ τὸν ἐπίλοιπον ἐν σαρκὶ βιῶσαι χρόνον. [...]

Should we therefore read verse 1 and 2 as:

"1Pt 4:1 Forasmuch then as Christ has suffered in flesh for us, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that has suffered in flesh has ceased from sin; 2. to no longer live by the lusts of men but for the will of God in flesh for the rest of time.

Living in flesh for the rest of time? Grammatically sound? Comments.

Usually it appears to be translated as if it "in flesh" is adjectival re "time", rather than adverbial to "to live".

I didn't read it the way Jason read it. "ἐν σαρκὶ" can modify "χρόνον" adjectivally, and the noun phrase would be "τὸν ἐπίλοιπον ἐν σαρκὶ χρόνον" / "the remaining time in flesh" (multiple adjectives may occur in the syntax "T A* N"; see 1 Pet 2:2). And I am not sure if we need to take the noun phrase as an adverbial accusative; can it be taken as a direct object of "βιῶσαι"?
δαυιδ λιμ
David Lim
 
Posts: 888
Joined: June 6th, 2011, 6:55 am

Re: Adjectival Use of Prepositional Phrases

Postby Stephen Carlson » November 24th, 2012, 8:59 am

David Lim wrote:
Paul Thomson wrote:1 Peter 4 [...] 2 εἰς τὸ μηκέτι ἀνθρώπων ἐπιθυμίαις ἀλλὰ θελήματι θεοῦ τὸν ἐπίλοιπον ἐν σαρκὶ βιῶσαι χρόνον.

I didn't read it the way Jason read it. "ἐν σαρκὶ" can modify "χρόνον" adjectivally, and the noun phrase would be "τὸν ἐπίλοιπον ἐν σαρκὶ χρόνον" / "the remaining time in flesh" (multiple adjectives may occur in the syntax "T A* N"; see 1 Pet 2:2). And I am not sure if we need to take the noun phrase as an adverbial accusative; can it be taken as a direct object of "βιῶσαι"?


This is a case of hyperbaton, where part of the noun phrase is fronted before the verb and the rest remains in its post-verbal position. I'm not aware, however, of cases of hyperbaton where more than one (phonological) constituent of the noun phrase is fronted. Thus, I identify the split noun phrase as τὸν ἐπίλοιπον ... χρόνον, and ἐν σαρκί is not part of the noun phrase but modifies the verb βιῶσαι. So I tend to agree with Jason (the English translations are either ambiguous "to live the rest of the time in the flesh" or construe the PP with the NP). In this case, though, I'm not sure it makes much of a difference as to the propositional content of the sentence.
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D. (Duke, New Testament)
Stephen Carlson
 
Posts: 1978
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne

Re: Adjectival Use of Prepositional Phrases

Postby Jason Hare » November 24th, 2012, 9:01 am

David Lim wrote:I didn't read it the way Jason read it. "ἐν σαρκὶ" can modify "χρόνον" adjectivally, and the noun phrase would be "τὸν ἐπίλοιπον ἐν σαρκὶ χρόνον" / "the remaining time in flesh" (multiple adjectives may occur in the syntax "T A* N"; see 1 Pet 2:2). And I am not sure if we need to take the noun phrase as an adverbial accusative; can it be taken as a direct object of "βιῶσαι"?


No, it is not the direct object of βιῶσαι. It's like saying that πέντε ὥρας is the direct object of ἐπόνησα in the sentence ἐπόνησα πέντε ὥρας. This is the accusative of time, telling us how long. I don't know how or why you would attempt to read this otherwise, and "living in the flesh" (not "according to the flesh"!) is a common thought in the New Testament, so it seems absolutely natural that ἐν σαρκὶ βιῶσαι be taken together.
Jason A. Hare
Rehovot, Israel
Jason Hare
 
Posts: 379
Joined: June 2nd, 2011, 5:28 pm
Location: Rehovot, Israel

Re: Adjectival Use of Prepositional Phrases

Postby David Lim » November 25th, 2012, 7:15 am

Jason Hare wrote:
David Lim wrote:I didn't read it the way Jason read it. "ἐν σαρκὶ" can modify "χρόνον" adjectivally, and the noun phrase would be "τὸν ἐπίλοιπον ἐν σαρκὶ χρόνον" / "the remaining time in flesh" (multiple adjectives may occur in the syntax "T A* N"; see 1 Pet 2:2). And I am not sure if we need to take the noun phrase as an adverbial accusative; can it be taken as a direct object of "βιῶσαι"?


No, it is not the direct object of βιῶσαι. It's like saying that πέντε ὥρας is the direct object of ἐπόνησα in the sentence ἐπόνησα πέντε ὥρας. This is the accusative of time, telling us how long. I don't know how or why you would attempt to read this otherwise, and "living in the flesh" (not "according to the flesh"!) is a common thought in the New Testament, so it seems absolutely natural that ἐν σαρκὶ βιῶσαι be taken together.

I don't think it must necessarily be an accusative of time, because if the noun phrase can denote the entirety of the "inherent object" of a verb, then I think it can be so. In your example, "πεντε ωρας" cannot, so it has to be adverbial. Though I don't think it is grammatically impossible, I think your reading is contextually less likely, because if "ἐν σαρκὶ" modified "βιῶσαι", it seems to be redundant. And I do know that "living in the flesh" is a common thought in the NT, but usually the phrase is used in referring to what is done while "living in the flesh", so to exhort people to "live in the flesh by the will of God" is strange. I guess the translators that took it this way may have thought so also. Anyway I agree with Stephen that it doesn't in the end affect the meaning of the sentence.
δαυιδ λιμ
David Lim
 
Posts: 888
Joined: June 6th, 2011, 6:55 am

Re: 1 Pet 4:2 re Adjectival Use of Prepositional Phrases

Postby cwconrad » November 25th, 2012, 10:08 am

So far as I can see, the verb βιῶσαι is intransitive; it won't take an object. τὸν ἐπίλοιπον χρόνον is indeed an accusative of temporal duration.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
ὁ ἀναγινώσκων νοείτω
cwconrad
 
Posts: 1393
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:52 pm
Location: Burnsville, NC 28714

Re: 1 Pet 4:2 re Adjectival Use of Prepositional Phrases

Postby David Lim » November 27th, 2012, 4:22 am

cwconrad wrote:So far as I can see, the verb βιῶσαι is intransitive; it won't take an object. τὸν ἐπίλοιπον χρόνον is indeed an accusative of temporal duration.

Carl, can I ask what is your opinion on the following?
[Gal 2:20] "ζῶ δὲ οὐκέτι ἐγώ, ζῇ δὲ ἐν ἐμοὶ Χριστός· ὃ δὲ νῦν ζῶ ἐν σαρκί, ἐν πίστει ζῶ τῇ τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ἀγαπήσαντός με καὶ παραδόντος ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ."
[Rom 6:10] "ὃ γὰρ ἀπέθανεν, τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ ἀπέθανεν ἐφάπαξ· ὃ δὲ ζῇ, ζῇ τῷ θεῷ."
Is the relative pronoun "ὃ" not the object of "ζῶ" / "ἀπέθανεν" / "ζῇ"? If not, what is it actually?
δαυιδ λιμ
David Lim
 
Posts: 888
Joined: June 6th, 2011, 6:55 am

Re: 1 Pet 4:2 re Adjectival Use of Prepositional Phrases

Postby cwconrad » November 27th, 2012, 9:00 am

David Lim wrote:
cwconrad wrote:So far as I can see, the verb βιῶσαι is intransitive; it won't take an object. τὸν ἐπίλοιπον χρόνον is indeed an accusative of temporal duration.

Carl, can I ask what is your opinion on the following?
[Gal 2:20] "ζῶ δὲ οὐκέτι ἐγώ, ζῇ δὲ ἐν ἐμοὶ Χριστός· ὃ δὲ νῦν ζῶ ἐν σαρκί, ἐν πίστει ζῶ τῇ τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ἀγαπήσαντός με καὶ παραδόντος ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ."
[Rom 6:10] "ὃ γὰρ ἀπέθανεν, τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ ἀπέθανεν ἐφάπαξ· ὃ δὲ ζῇ, ζῇ τῷ θεῷ."
Is the relative pronoun "ὃ" not the object of "ζῶ" / "ἀπέθανεν" / "ζῇ"? If not, what is it actually?


This is a good question, and I'll get to it further on down. But I'd make a couple points first: (1) I don't think that our way of Englishing it as "... the life I now live" provides the answer to your question, nor do I think that this ὃ should be understood as any sort of direct object of the verb ζῶ or of ἀπέθανον in the second example; I think it's more akin to the usage of ὅτι as a pronominal conjunction introducing substantive clauses; (2) it doesn't have any bearing on the question of the function of τὸν ἐπίλοιπον χρόνον in conjunction with βιόω; that is unquestionably an accusative of temporal extension.

I don't know of any satisfactory account of this usage of ὃ in traditional grammatical usage and I'm now away from home and unable to consult a copy of Smyth with an index (that's the disadvantage of the Perseus version of it, although I suppose one might search under pronominal usages and under accusative usages. I look forward to what the linguists may have to say to illuminate the question. All I can say at this point is that it appears to me to be a device for substantivizing a finite verb somewhat comparable to the function of ὅτι or an English that meaning "the fact that" or a Latin quod or a German dasß or a French que; each of these is in origin a relative pronoun pressed into service as a pronominal conjunction introducing a substantive clause, where the pronominal conjunction bears a meaning somewhat like English "the fact that ... " or "as for the fact that ... " or "regarding the fact that ... " That is to say, the pronoun is an accusative of respect. So, "as for the fact that I am alive," (the explanation is that) I am alive in flesh and "as for the fact that I died, (the explanation is that) I died a single time to sin." That's my tentative account of this; I gladly await what the linguists have to say about it.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
ὁ ἀναγινώσκων νοείτω
cwconrad
 
Posts: 1393
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:52 pm
Location: Burnsville, NC 28714

Re: 1 Pet 4:2 re Adjectival Use of Prepositional Phrases

Postby Iver Larsen » November 27th, 2012, 1:46 pm

[Gal 2:20] "ζῶ δὲ οὐκέτι ἐγώ, ζῇ δὲ ἐν ἐμοὶ Χριστός· ὃ δὲ νῦν ζῶ ἐν σαρκί, ἐν πίστει ζῶ τῇ τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ἀγαπήσαντός με καὶ παραδόντος ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ."
[Rom 6:10] "ὃ γὰρ ἀπέθανεν, τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ ἀπέθανεν ἐφάπαξ· ὃ δὲ ζῇ, ζῇ τῷ θεῷ."
Is the relative pronoun "ὃ" not the object of "ζῶ" / "ἀπέθανεν" / "ζῇ"? If not, what is it actually?


As a linguist I would say that some verbs are basically intransitive, but may be construed with a subject or an object that is semantically empty. For instance, in English we say "it rains", but in Amharic they say "the rain rains". In English a verb like sing is normally intransitive, but we can still say "sing a song".
My suggestion is that in these cases we have a similar phenomonen, i. e. you can "live a life" and "die a death". The relative pronoun often has an implied demonstrative, and it can refer back to a nominal idea that is clear from context but not expressed. The neuter is used since there is no explicit noun to link it to grammatically.

For Gal 2:20 it would then be "that [life] that I now live physically I live in faith
For Rom 6:10 for that [death] which he died, he died once and for all to sin, but that [life] he lives, he lives for God

To go back to 1 Pet 4:2 I would agree that the verb βιῶσαι does not have an object. A verb semantically has 1, 2 or 3 valencies filled with "arguments" that are expressed in the syntax as subject, object of indirect object. In addition to these basic and inherent semantic roles, a number of secondary roles can be attached. This is done in the syntax either by accusative or dative or a prepositional phrase. In this sentence we have an additional role of time: τὸν ἐπίλοιπον χρόνον. There is another role of manner: ἐν σαρκὶ. This does not mean "in the flesh" as opposed to "in the spirit" but it refers to the present physical life in the body as opposed to future life after death. A third secondary role of manner is described as θελήματι θεοῦ which of course is in contrast to ἀνθρώπων ἐπιθυμίαις.
Iver Larsen
 
Posts: 124
Joined: May 7th, 2011, 3:52 am

Next

Return to New Testament

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests