Secondary Agency

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.
Post Reply
John Brainard

Secondary Agency

Post by John Brainard »

In 1 Corinthians 8:6 we read :

[αλλ] ημιν εις θεος ο πατηρ εξ ου τα παντα και ημεις εις αυτον και εις κυριος ιησους χριστος δι ου τα παντα και ημεις δι αυτου

(NIV) yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

In this text we see that Christ is secondary agent in creation as well as In John 1"παντα δι αυτου εγενετο" . Colossians 1:16 is another text that indicates that Christ is the secondary agent in creation.

We then come to the Doxology in Romans 11:36 and it reads οτι εξ αυτου και δι αυτου και εις αυτον τα παντα αυτω η δοξα εις τους αιωνας αμην.

For from him and through him and for him are all things Here the Text seems to suggest that God is the secondary agent. How do we reconcile this? It seems as though the Christ is secondary agent in the New testament but now we see a some what different statement.

Is this a theological issue or a grammatical issue?

Thanks in advance

John
cwconrad
Posts: 2112
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:52 pm
Location: Burnsville, NC 28714
Contact:

Re: Secondary Agency

Post by cwconrad »

John Brainard wrote:In 1 Corinthians 8:6 we read :

[αλλ] ημιν εις θεος ο πατηρ εξ ου τα παντα και ημεις εις αυτον και εις κυριος ιησους χριστος δι ου τα παντα και ημεις δι αυτου

(NIV) yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

In this text we see that Christ is secondary agent in creation as well as In John 1"παντα δι αυτου εγενετο" . Colossians 1:16 is another text that indicates that Christ is the secondary agent in creation.

We then come to the Doxology in Romans 11:36 and it reads οτι εξ αυτου και δι αυτου και εις αυτον τα παντα αυτω η δοξα εις τους αιωνας αμην.

For from him and through him and for him are all things Here the Text seems to suggest that God is the secondary agent. How do we reconcile this? It seems as though the Christ is secondary agent in the New testament but now we see a some what different statement.

Is this a theological issue or a grammatical issue?

Thanks in advance

John
You ask "is this a theological issue or a grammatical issue." It is pretty clearly a theological issue. Our concern here is to clarify what each text in and of itself expresses insofar as such clarification rests upon linguistic analysis of the text itself. Context within a passage or a particular author's usage may help to clarify the usage in a particular text, but it seems that the question you're raising rests not upon how the Greek texts you've cited are formulated in Greek but rather upon how the texts themselves, whether in the original Greek or in translation -- as your citation of these texts in both original and a translation demonstrates --, can be reconciled with each other in their theological implications. That kind of discussion doesn't belong in this forum.
οὔτοι ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς πάντα θεοὶ θνητοῖς ὑπέδειξαν,
ἀλλὰ χρόνῳ ζητέοντες ἐφευρίσκουσιν ἄμεινον. (Xenophanes, Fragment 16)

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
Jonathan Robie
Posts: 4226
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Re: Secondary Agency

Post by Jonathan Robie »

If it's a grammatical issue, you can phrase it using terms like aorist or aspect or imperfect or other terms that you find in a grammar book. My Greek books don't list secondary agency in the index.
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
John Brainard

Re: Secondary Agency

Post by John Brainard »

Jonathan Robie wrote:If it's a grammatical issue, you can phrase it using terms like aorist or aspect or imperfect or other terms that you find in a grammar book. My Greek books don't list secondary agency in the index.
My Apologies, I probably should have used the term "Intermediate agency " or simply "agency" I must have picked this habit up in a discussion with other posters . I will be more careful in the future. :oops:

Thank you for your time on this issue.

John
Jonathan Robie
Posts: 4226
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Re: Secondary Agency

Post by Jonathan Robie »

Maybe we can keep refining your questions until they turn into questions about the Greek? I think some of us come from backgrounds where we spend so much time thinking theologically that it takes time to figure out how to phrase a Greek question.

Here, if you asked about specific Greek words or phrases, such as the prepositions used in these verses in the Greek, it would become a question about the Greek. Please don't quote an English translation and ask what phrases in that translation mean. This isn't B-English.

And on B-Greek, we don't really ask how to reconcile something in our theology. That may seem odd, but that tends to lead to debates about theology instead of careful attention to the text itself, and debates among people with different theological framework. So that kind of discussion tends to happen in private email instead.

For what it's worth, I don't think the Greek helps you with this particular puzzle, the puzzle is there. In fact, I think there's a tension not only between the texts, but also within some of these - οτι εξ αυτου και δι αυτου και εις αυτον τα παντα. What does that all mean? Paul raises the question, but doesn't answer it for us. You won't get a simple answer just by looking more closely at the Greek.
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
Post Reply

Return to “New Testament”