can't ὑπό be used in subordinate agency?
nicholasj.ellis wrote:I was wondering whether ὑπό ἐπιθυμίας is inherently limited to such ultimately agency; while διά would seem to my mind a more standard use for means, can't ὑπό be used in subordinate agency?
Eeli Kaikkonen wrote:The text says that it's the lust which entices.
nicholasj.ellis wrote:Eeli Kaikkonen wrote:The text says that it's the lust which entices.
I guess the point of my question is that this in point of fact is not what the text says, just how it's typically read.
What the text says, literally, is that "each one is tested (passive) 'being ruled and enticed" (passive) ὑπὸ τὴς ἐπιθυμίς.
The question is what are the range of possibilities for that final prepositional phrase (agent means, etc.). Are the options indeed limited to your paraphrase above? Or do we have a wider use of ὑπό available?
If James would have wanted to explicitly say that lust is only "intermediate agent" he could have said so by using δια. ὑπό doesn't mean intermediate agency, it means agency, but it allows "real world" intermediate agency if context says so. As does the English equivalent . . . . If we talk about the meaning of pass.+ὑπό construction, in my opinion it doesn't mean intermediate agency, but neither it means that the agency can't be intermediate in extralinguistic reality.
nicholasj.ellis wrote:James 1:14 is typically understood as emphasizing ἐπιθυμία to be primary agency: ἕκαστος δὲ πειράζεται ὑπὸ τῆς ἰδίας ἐπιθυμίας ἐξελκόμενος καὶ δελεαζόμενος· The ὑπό is taken to mean that Lust as a reified agent has baited and dragged away the ἕκαστος: each one is enticed by his own lust, with commentators going on to emphasize that no external agent (generally the Devil) is in view, but rather only James' overarching emphasis that sin rests with personal responsibility.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 3 guests