Acts 17:28: Sphere of Influence (Porter) or Instrumental?

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.
klitwak
Posts: 30
Joined: November 6th, 2011, 2:03 am
Location: Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730

Acts 17:28: Sphere of Influence (Porter) or Instrumental?

Post by klitwak »

Acts 17:28a ἐν αὐτῷ γὰρ ζῶμεν καὶ κινούμεθα καὶ ἐσμέν,

Aland, B., Aland, K., Black, M., Martini, C. M., Metzger, B. M., & Wikgren, A. (1993). The Greek New Testament (4th ed.) (375). Federal Republic of Germany: United Bible Societies.

Culy and Parsons refer to Porter/s Idioms book to defend the translation 'In him" in Acts 17:28. Porter does not speak about this specific text but the pages referenced, 157, 159, discuss what Porter describes as a use of EN for sphere of influence and control, including he phrase EN CRISTW. While I am not convinced by Porter's argument for the latter well-known and much-debated phrase, I'm inclined to see EN at the start of Acts 17:28 as indicating an instrumental sense, i.e., it is by God that humans live and do what they do (Louw-Nida) and exist.

While the notion of a sphere of influence is certainly possible, in its original context, when Greek authors, perhaps mediated through Jewish apologists (so Loveday Alexander), it seems to me unlikely that they would use this text in this way when EN could suggest a Stoic sense: everyone exists as part of the Divine Logos, so in a very real sense humans live and do what they do and exist in "God," since as pantheists, they see themselves as part of God. Since the emphasis of the context has been on God's causality, he made humankind from one person, he determined the set times and boundaries of their dwelling place, and so forth, it appears to me far more plausible that Acts 17:28a denotes causality as well. It is by the ongoing actions of God as the one who not only made but sustains creation (a concept clearly present in the Scriptures of Israel) that humans live, are able to come and go, and even exists

I have not found an English translation that renders EN by "by" in this verse but then I've not found an English translation that renders EN PNEUMATI in Galatians 5 as "by the Spirit," where I'm completely confident the sense of EN mist be causal or instrumental.

Any thoughts on the sense of EN in Acts 17:28? Thanks.

Ken
Kenneth D. Litwak, Ph.D.
Reference and Instruction Librarian
Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary
Mill Valley, CA 94941
kennethlitwak@ggbts.edu
Adjunct Professor of New Testament in ExL
Asbury Theological Seminary
Wilmore, KY
Stephen Carlson
Posts: 3351
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Acts 17:28: Sphere of Influence (Porter) or Instrumental

Post by Stephen Carlson »

Interesting proposal, but it raises a lot of questions for me.

I'm having trouble understanding what it means for God to be instrument. Who's using God as an instrument to make us live and move and be? Is the thought that we use God in order live, move, and be? I'm not convinced that the idea of peopling use as God as an instrument is consistent with the author's sense of the sovereignty of God. If it's God using himself as an instrument, isn't it better to abandon the notion of instrument altogether and regard him as the cause.

As for a dative of cause, isn't that mainly used with verbs of emotion (which we don't have here)?

Finally, I don't really see any problems with a dative of sphere, which is how most translations take it. But then again, I cannot figure out how the Stoics are supposed to fit into the argument.
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia
David Lim
Posts: 901
Joined: June 6th, 2011, 6:55 am

Re: Acts 17:28: Sphere of Influence (Porter) or Instrumental

Post by David Lim »

Stephen Carlson wrote:I'm having trouble understanding what it means for God to be instrument. Who's using God as an instrument to make us live and move and be? Is the thought that we use God in order live, move, and be? I'm not convinced that the idea of peopling use as God as an instrument is consistent with the author's sense of the sovereignty of God. If it's God using himself as an instrument, isn't it better to abandon the notion of instrument altogether and regard him as the cause.
Wouldn't taking it as an instrumental dative just mean that "it is by what God gives that we live and move and are."? In other words, God has to allow it but we ultimately are the ones who live and move and are by him. I somehow think that might be closest to what whichever philosopher whom Paul might have quoted meant.
δαυιδ λιμ
Eeli Kaikkonen
Posts: 611
Joined: June 2nd, 2011, 7:49 am
Location: Finland
Contact:

Re: Acts 17:28: Sphere of Influence (Porter) or Instrumental

Post by Eeli Kaikkonen »

Stephen Carlson wrote:I'm having trouble understanding what it means for God to be instrument. Who's using God as an instrument to make us live and move and be? Is the thought that we use God in order live, move, and be? I'm not convinced that the idea of peopling use as God as an instrument is consistent with the author's sense of the sovereignty of God. If it's God using himself as an instrument, isn't it better to abandon the notion of instrument altogether and regard him as the cause.
Is it possible that you are taking the modern technical term "instrumental" too literally and mixing linguistic/grammatical description with everyday language? Possible connotations of a word can't be put into a technical term. Greek didn't necessarily think they were using "instrument" when they used instrumental dative; they just chose the form most suitable for the message. Grammatical categories are always a poor, weak way to try to nail down the essence of usages. They must be interpreted as must as usages themselves.
Stephen Carlson
Posts: 3351
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Acts 17:28: Sphere of Influence (Porter) or Instrumental

Post by Stephen Carlson »

Eeli Kaikkonen wrote:Is it possible that you are taking the modern technical term "instrumental" too literally and mixing linguistic/grammatical description with everyday language? Possible connotations of a word can't be put into a technical term. Greek didn't necessarily think they were using "instrument" when they used instrumental dative; they just chose the form most suitable for the message. Grammatical categories are always a poor, weak way to try to nail down the essence of usages. They must be interpreted as must as usages themselves.
OK, let's see appropriate examples of the usage, then. I briefly consulted my resources and couldn't find any appropriate parallels to the proposal, as least under the label "instrumental"--the only instruments I could find are inanimate objects (note that Lim's rewriting replaces "God" with "what God gives" -- a clear attempt to provide an inanimate object as the instrument).
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia
cwconrad
Posts: 2112
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:52 pm
Location: Burnsville, NC 28714
Contact:

Re: Acts 17:28: Sphere of Influence (Porter) or Instrumental

Post by cwconrad »

Eeli Kaikkonen wrote:
Stephen Carlson wrote:I'm having trouble understanding what it means for God to be instrument. Who's using God as an instrument to make us live and move and be? Is the thought that we use God in order live, move, and be? I'm not convinced that the idea of peopling use as God as an instrument is consistent with the author's sense of the sovereignty of God. If it's God using himself as an instrument, isn't it better to abandon the notion of instrument altogether and regard him as the cause.
Is it possible that you are taking the modern technical term "instrumental" too literally and mixing linguistic/grammatical description with everyday language? Possible connotations of a word can't be put into a technical term. Greek didn't necessarily think they were using "instrument" when they used instrumental dative; they just chose the form most suitable for the message. Grammatical categories are always a poor, weak way to try to nail down the essence of usages. They must be interpreted as must as usages themselves.
I like very much what is said here: "Grammatical categories are always a poor, weak way to try to nail down the essence of usages. They must be interpreted as must as usages themselves." I am neither a linguist nor the son of a linguist, but I am fascinated by what I have observed in what little I know about the history of ancient Greek, namely that usages which appear at one time to have been distinct PIE "instrumental," "locative," and "dative" have all come to be 'grammticalized' (I hate that word) in case-forms that were evidently originally dative, and these usages seem in Hellenistic Greek to have fused together sufficiently that instrumental usages seem to be associated with ἑν + dative, which was originally a strictly locative usage. The most striking instance of this in the GNT is perhaps ἔν πνεύματι but perhaps ἔν Χριστῷ falls into the same category.

I suspect that Porter's "sphere of influence" may be intended to refer to the very same category as all that's included in BDAG's §4 s.v. ἑν:
4. marker of close association within a limit, in
a. fig., of pers., to indicate the state of being filled w. or gripped by someth.: in someone=in one’s innermost being ἐν αὐτῷ κατοικεῖ πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα in him dwells all the fullness Col 2:9. ἐν αὐτῷ ἐκτίσθη τὰ πάντα (prob. to be understood as local, not instrumental, since ἐν αὐ. would otherwise be identical w. δι᾿ αὐ. in the same vs.) everything was created in association with him 1:16 (cp. M. Ant. 4, 23 ἐν σοὶ πάντα; Herm. Wr. 5, 10; AFeuillet, NTS 12, ’65, 1–9). ἐν τῷ θεῷ κέκρυπται ἡ ζωὴ ὑμῶν your life is hid in God 3:3; cp. 2:3. Of sin in humans Ro 7:17f; cp. κατεργάζεσθαι vs. 8. Of Christ who, as a spiritual being, fills people so as to be in charge of their lives 8:10; 2 Cor 13:5, abides J 6:56, lives Gal 2:20, and takes form 4:19 in them. Of the divine word: οὐκ ἔστιν ἐν ἡμῖν 1J 1:10; μένειν ἔν τινι J 5:38; ἐνοικεῖν Col 3:16. Of God’s spirit: οἰκεῖν (ἐνοικεῖν) ἔν τινι Ro 8:9, 11; 1 Cor 3:16; 2 Ti 1:14. Of spiritual gifts 1 Ti 4:14; 2 Ti 1:6. Of miraculous powers ἐνεργεῖν ἔν τινι be at work in someone Mt 14:2; Mk 6:14; ποιεῖν ἔν τινι εὐάρεστον Hb 13:21. The same expr. of God or evil spirits, who somehow work in people: 1 Cor 12:6; Phil 2:13; Eph 2:2 al.
b. of the whole, w. which the parts are closely joined: μένειν ἐν τῇ ἀμπέλῳ remain in the vine J 15:4. ἐν ἑνὶ σώματι μέλη πολλὰ ἔχομεν in one body we have many members Ro 12:4. κρέμασθαι ἔν τινι depend on someth. Mt 22:40.
c. esp. in Paul. or Joh. usage, to designate a close personal relation in which the referent of the ἐν-term is viewed as the controlling influence: under the control of, under the influence of, in close association with (cp. ἐν τῷ Δαυιδ εἰμί 2 Km 19:44): of Christ εἶναι, μένειν ἐν τῷ πατρί (ἐν τῷ θεῷ) J 10:38; 14:10f (difft. CGordon, ‘In’ of Predication or Equivalence: JBL 100, ’81, 612f); and of Christians 1J 3:24; 4:13, 15f; be or abide in Christ J 14:20; 15:4f; μένειν ἐν τῷ υἱῷ καὶ ἐν τῷ πατρί 1J 2:24. ἔργα ἐν θεῷ εἰργασμένα done in communion with God J 3:21 (but s. 1e above).—In Paul the relation of the individual to Christ is very oft. expressed by such phrases as ἐν Χριστῷ, ἐν κυρίῳ etc., also vice versa (FNeugebauer, NTS 4, ’57/58, {p. 328} 124–38; AWedderburn, JSNT 25, ’85, 83–97) ἐν ἐμοὶ Χριστός Gal 2:20, but here in the sense of a above.—See, e.g., Dssm., D. ntl. Formel ‘in Christo Jesu’ 1892; EWeber, D. Formel ‘in Chr. Jesu’ u. d. paul. Christusmystik: NKZ 31, 1920, 213ff; LBrun, Zur Formel ‘in Chr. Jesus’ im Phil: Symbolae Arctoae 1, 1922, 19–37; MHansen, Omkring Paulus-Formeln ‘i Kristus’: TK 4/10, 1929, 135–59; HBöhlig, Ἐν κυρίῳ: GHeinrici Festschr. 1914, 170–75; OSchmitz, D. Christusgemeinschaft d. Pls2 ’56; AWikenhauser, D. Christusmystik d. Pls2 ’56; KMittring, Heilswirklichkeit b. Pls; Beitrag z. Verständnis der unio cum Christo in d. Plsbriefen 1929; ASchweitzer, D. Mystik d. Ap. Pls 1930 (Eng. tr., WMontgomery, The Myst. of Paul the Ap., ’31); WSchmauch, In Christus ’35; BEaston, Pastoral Ep. ’47, 210f; FBüchsel, ‘In Chr.’ b. Pls: ZNW 42, ’49, 141–58. Also HKorn, D. Nachwirkungen d. Christusmystik d. Pls in den Apost. Vätern, diss. Berlin 1928; EAndrews, Interpretation 6, ’52, 162–77; H-LParisius, ZNW 49, ’58, 285–88 (10 ‘forensic’ passages); JAllan, NTS 5, ’58/59, 54–62 (Eph), ibid. 10, ’63, 115–21 (pastorals); FNeugebauer, In Christus, etc. ’61; MDahl, The Resurrection of the Body (1 Cor 15) ’62, 110–13.—Paul has the most varied expressions for this new life-principle: life in Christ Ro 6:11, 23; love in Christ 8:39; grace, which is given in Christ 1 Cor 1:4; freedom in Chr. Gal 2:4; blessing in Chr. 3:14; unity in Chr. vs. 28. στήκειν ἐν κυρίῳ stand firm in the Lord Phil 4:1; εὑρεθῆναι ἐν Χ. be found in Christ 3:9; εἶναι ἐν Χ. 1 Cor 1:30; οἱ ἐν Χ. Ro 8:1.—1 Pt 5:14; κοιμᾶσθαι ἐν Χ., ἀποθνῄσκειν ἐν κυρίῳ 1 Cor 15:18.—Rv 14:13; ζῳοποιεῖσθαι 1 Cor 15:22.—The formula is esp. common w. verbs that denote a conviction, hope, etc. πεποιθέναι Gal 5:10; Phil 1:14; 2 Th 3:4. παρρησίαν ἔχειν Phlm 8. πέπεισμαι Ro 14:14. ἐλπίζειν Phil 2:19. καύχησιν ἔχειν Ro 15:17; 1 Cor 15:31. τὸ αὐτὸ φρονεῖν Phil 4:2. ὑπακούειν Eph 6:1. λαλεῖν 2 Cor 2:17; 12:19. ἀλήθειαν λέγειν Ro 9:1. λέγειν καὶ μαρτύρεσθαι Eph 4:17. But also apart fr. such verbs, in numerous pass. it is used w. verbs and nouns of the most varied sort, often without special emphasis, to indicate the scope within which someth. takes place or has taken place, or to designate someth. as being in close assoc. w. Christ, and can be rendered, variously, in connection with, in intimate association with, keeping in mind ἁγιάζεσθαι 1 Cor 1:2, or ἅγιος ἐν Χ. Phil 1:1; ἀσπάζεσθαί τινα 1 Cor 16:19. δικαιοῦσθαι Gal 2:17. κοπιᾶν Ro 16:12. παρακαλεῖν 1 Th 4:1. προσδέχεσθαί τινα Ro 16:2; Phil 2:29. χαίρειν 3:1; 4:4, 10. γαμηθῆναι ἐν κυρίῳ marry in the Lord=marry a Christian 1 Cor 7:39. προϊστάμενοι ὑμῶν ἐν κυρίῳ your Christian leaders (in the church) 1 Th 5:12 (but s. προΐστημι 1 and 2).—εὐάρεστος Col 3:20. νήπιος 1 Cor 3:1. φρόνιμος 4:10. παιδαγωγοί vs. 15. ὁδοί vs. 17. Hence used in periphrasis for ‘Christian’ οἱ ὄντες ἐν κυρίῳ Ro 16:11; ἄνθρωπος ἐν Χ. 2 Cor 12:2; αἱ ἐκκλησίαι αἱ ἐν Χ. Gal 1:22; 1 Th 2:14; νεκροὶ ἐν Χ. 4:16; ἐκλεκτός Ro 16:13. δόκιμος vs. 10. δέσμιος Eph 4:1. πιστὸς διάκονος 6:21; ἐν Χ. γεννᾶν τινα become someone’s parent in the Christian life 1 Cor 4:15. τὸ ἔργον μου ὑμεῖς ἐστε ἐν κυρίῳ 9:1.—The use of ἐν πνεύματι as a formulaic expression is sim.: ἐν πν. εἶναι be under the impulsion of the spirit, i.e. the new self, as opposed to ἐν σαρκί under the domination of the old self Ro 8:9; cp. ἐν νόμῳ 2:12. λαλεῖν speak under divine inspiration 1 Cor 12:3. ἐγενόμην ἐν πνεύματι I was in a state of inspiration Rv 1:10; 4:2; opp. ἐν ἑαυτῷ γενόμενος came to himself Ac 12:11 (cp. X., An. 1, 5, 17 et al.).—The expr. ἐν πν. εἶναι is also used to express the idea that someone is under the special infl. of a good or even an undesirable spirit: Mt 22:43; Mk 12:36; Lk 2:27; 1 Cor 12:3; Rv 17:3; 21:10. ἄνθρωπος ἐν πν. ἀκαθάρτῳ (ὤν) Mk 1:23 (s. GBjörck, ConNeot 7, ’42, 1–3).—ἐν τῷ πονηρῷ κεῖσθαι be in the power of the evil one 1J 5:19. οἱ ἐν νόμῳ those who are subject to the law Ro 3:19. ἐν τῷ Ἀδὰμ ἀποθνῄσκειν die because of a connection w. Adam 1 Cor 15:22.—On the formula ἐν ὀνόματι (Χριστοῦ) s. ὄνομα 1, esp. dγג. The OT is the source of the expr. ὀμνύναι ἔν τινι swear by someone or someth. (oft. LXX) Mt 5:34ff; 23:16, 18ff; Rv 10:6; παραγγέλλομέν σοι ἐν Ἰησοῦ Ac 19:14 v.l. The usage in ὁμολογεῖν ἔν τινι acknowledge someone Mt 10:32; Lk 12:8 (s. ὁμολογέω 4b) is Aramaic.
I'm a bit amused by the term, "sphere of influence" used here. It seems as apt as any, but the partitive genitive is sometimes referred to as "genitive of the sphere" (I've jokingly referred to it as the "genitive of the target" for verbs like τυγχάνω). At least nobody is suggesting "Aporetic Dative" -- but there's always a possibility that someone might think that a perfect appropriate term for the "whatchamacallit" whereof we are discoursing.
οὔτοι ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς πάντα θεοὶ θνητοῖς ὑπέδειξαν,
ἀλλὰ χρόνῳ ζητέοντες ἐφευρίσκουσιν ἄμεινον. (Xenophanes, Fragment 16)

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
David Lim
Posts: 901
Joined: June 6th, 2011, 6:55 am

Re: Acts 17:28: Sphere of Influence (Porter) or Instrumental

Post by David Lim »

Stephen Carlson wrote:
Eeli Kaikkonen wrote:Is it possible that you are taking the modern technical term "instrumental" too literally and mixing linguistic/grammatical description with everyday language? Possible connotations of a word can't be put into a technical term. Greek didn't necessarily think they were using "instrument" when they used instrumental dative; they just chose the form most suitable for the message. Grammatical categories are always a poor, weak way to try to nail down the essence of usages. They must be interpreted as must as usages themselves.
OK, let's see appropriate examples of the usage, then. I briefly consulted my resources and couldn't find any appropriate parallels to the proposal, as least under the label "instrumental"--the only instruments I could find are inanimate objects (note that Lim's rewriting replaces "God" with "what God gives" -- a clear attempt to provide an inanimate object as the instrument).
Stephen,

I am not a linguist so please forgive me if I misunderstand what you are looking for. Here are some examples in the NT of "εν" denoting a non-inanimate object as an indirect agent:
[Matt 12:27] "και ει εγω εν βεελζεβουλ εκβαλλω τα δαιμονια οι υιοι υμων εν τινι εκβαλλουσιν δια τουτο αυτοι υμων εσονται κριται"
[Matt 23:22] "και ο ομοσας εν τω ουρανω ομνυει εν τω θρονω του θεου και εν τω καθημενω επανω αυτου"
[Mark 3:22] "και οι γραμματεις οι απο ιεροσολυμων καταβαντες ελεγον οτι βεελζεβουλ εχει και οτι εν τω αρχοντι των δαιμονιων εκβαλλει τα δαιμονια"
[Luke 11:19] "ει δε εγω εν βεελζεβουλ εκβαλλω τα δαιμονια οι υιοι υμων εν τινι εκβαλλουσιν δια τουτο κριται υμων αυτοι εσονται"
[Acts 4:10] "γνωστον εστω πασιν υμιν και παντι τω λαω ισραηλ οτι εν τω ονοματι ιησου χριστου του ναζωραιου ον υμεις εσταυρωσατε ον ο θεος ηγειρεν εκ νεκρων εν τουτω ουτος παρεστηκεν ενωπιον υμων υγιης" (I think the context of Acts 4:7-10 makes it clear that "εν τουτω" = "by this [one]" leaves out the implicit "inanimate object", the full meaning being "εν τω ονοματι ιησου χριστου" = "by the name (authority) of Jesus Christ", in answer to "εν ποια δυναμει η εν ποιω ονοματι ...")
[Acts 4:12] "και ουκ εστιν εν αλλω ουδενι η σωτηρια ουδε γαρ ονομα εστιν ετερον υπο τον ουρανον το δεδομενον εν ανθρωποις εν ω δει σωθηναι ημας" (Continuing from Acts 4:10, this states that it is by Jesus and by his name (authority) that men are saved.)
[Acts 13:39] "και απο παντων ων ουκ ηδυνηθητε εν τω νομω μωυσεως δικαιωθηναι εν τουτω πας ο πιστευων δικαιουται" (same as Acts 4:10,12)
[Acts 17:31] "διοτι εστησεν ημεραν εν η μελλει κρινειν την οικουμενην εν δικαιοσυνη εν ανδρι ω ωρισεν πιστιν παρασχων πασιν αναστησας αυτον εκ νεκρων"
[1 Cor 6:2] "ουκ οιδατε οτι οι αγιοι τον κοσμον κρινουσιν και ει εν υμιν κρινεται ο κοσμος αναξιοι εστε κριτηριων ελαχιστων"
[1 Cor 7:14] "ηγιασται γαρ ο ανηρ ο απιστος εν τη γυναικι και ηγιασται η γυνη η απιστος εν τω ανδρι επει αρα τα τεκνα υμων ακαθαρτα εστιν νυν δε αγια εστιν"
[2 Cor 10:15] "ουκ εις τα αμετρα καυχωμενοι εν αλλοτριοις κοποις ελπιδα δε εχοντες αυξανομενης της πιστεως υμων εν υμιν μεγαλυνθηναι κατα τον κανονα ημων εις περισσειαν"
[Heb 1:1] "πολυμερως και πολυτροπως παλαι ο θεος λαλησας τοις πατρασιν εν τοις προφηταις επ εσχατου των ημερων τουτων ελαλησεν ημιν εν υιω"

Acts 17:31 and 1 Cor 6:2, 7:14 are the clearest instances to me. This is why, besides the fact that the Greek philosophers certainly had the concept that everyone is indebted to Zeus for everything, I think that the phrase in Acts 17:28 does readily imply that the manner that "we live by him" is "by what he gives". Alternatively: "in dependence upon him we live and move and are."

David
δαυιδ λιμ
Stephen Carlson
Posts: 3351
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Acts 17:28: Sphere of Influence (Porter) or Instrumental

Post by Stephen Carlson »

David Lim wrote:I am not a linguist so please forgive me if I misunderstand what you are looking for. Here are some examples in the NT of "εν" denoting a non-inanimate object as an indirect agent:
I'm not sure that indirect agency is the proposal of the original poster for Acts 17:28. What does it mean for God to be the indirect agent of our living, moving, and being? If God is the indirect agent, who's the ultimate agent? Us? Is Luke/Paul's point in this speech really that we tell God what to do, as we do to any other indirect agent?

I'm a little concerned that the locative / sphere of influence interpretation is given such short shrift in this thread. It is, after all, how the translations render it in Acts 17:28 and as far as I can tell it is completely unproblemmatic. I think the burden belongs on the one challenging the standard, unproblemmatic reading. Note that it can be sometimes difficult to distinguish locative and instrumental readings, as A. T. Robertson points out:
Robertson 590 wrote:The blending of the instrumental with the locative in form facilitated this [instrumental] usage beyond a doubt, and the tendency to use prepositions abundantly helped also. But even so one must observe that all the N. T. examples of ἐν can be explained from the point of view of the locative. The possibility of this point of view is the reason why ἐν was so used in the beginning. I pass by examples like βαττίζων ἐν ὕδατι, βαπτίσει ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ καὶ πυρί (Mt. 3:11) as probably not being instances of the instrumental usage at all. But there are real instances enough. Take Lu. 22:49 εἰ πατάξομεν ἐν μαχαίρῃ; Here the smiting can be regarded as located in the sword. To be sure, in English, we translate the resultant idea by 'with,' but ἐν in itself does not mean 'with.' That resultant idea can only come in the proper context. So ἐν τῷ Βεεζεβοὺλ ἄρχοντι τῶν δαιμονίων ἐκβάλλει (Mt. 12:24). Here the casting out is located in the prince of demons. Cf. κρίνω ἐν ἀνδρί (Ac. 17:31), ἐν βραχίονι (Lu. 1:51), ἐν δόλῳ (Mk. 14:1), ἐν φόνῳ μαχαίρης (Heb. 11:37).
Here, Robertson tends toward locative understandings (including some of the verses you cited), and I lean the same way.

I suspect that what lurking behind the proposal is the sentiment of Phil 4:13 πάντα ἰσχύω ἐν τῷ ἐνδυναμοῦντί με, but I see this too as locative, in the sphere of Christ's influence. To be sure, there is a notion of agency in this verse, but it comes from the lexical meaning of ἐνδυναμοῦντι, not from the preposition ἐν. Unfortunately, Acts 17:28 only has the preposition, and I would need a better reason than a prepositional coincidence to read the collocated agency of Phil 4:13 into Acts 17:28.
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia
David Lim
Posts: 901
Joined: June 6th, 2011, 6:55 am

Re: Acts 17:28: Sphere of Influence (Porter) or Instrumental

Post by David Lim »

Stephen Carlson wrote:
David Lim wrote:I am not a linguist so please forgive me if I misunderstand what you are looking for. Here are some examples in the NT of "εν" denoting a non-inanimate object as an indirect agent:
I'm not sure that indirect agency is the proposal of the original poster for Acts 17:28. What does it mean for God to be the indirect agent of our living, moving, and being? If God is the indirect agent, who's the ultimate agent? Us? Is Luke/Paul's point in this speech really that we tell God what to do, as we do to any other indirect agent?
According to the context, which I believe does include the philosophical background of such a statement, the phrase itself simply is talking about everything we do, and that all these things are in dependence upon God. Whether we live or move or simply "be" in the first place, it is by God that we really can do all these. That is the point of that portion; to underscore that whatever we do, it depends on God to allow it. I don't quite care whether the linguistic term for it is "the instrumental dative", because it does not really tell the whole picture. In the examples I gave the datives cannot all be understood as instruments. Instrumental indeed, not instruments.
Stephen Carlson wrote:I'm a little concerned that the locative / sphere of influence interpretation is given such short shrift in this thread. It is, after all, how the translations render it in Acts 17:28 and as far as I can tell it is completely unproblemmatic. I think the burden belongs on the one challenging the standard, unproblemmatic reading. Note that it can be sometimes difficult to distinguish locative and instrumental readings, as A. T. Robertson points out:

[...]
I don't see anything wrong in the English translations, as it is common enough to use "in" to mean "by". For example, if I "come in someone's name", I "come by his authority". If I "write in one finger", I "write by using one finger". Likewise Jesus said: "If I by the finger of God ...". There is no connotation of location at all. However it appears to me that such use of "in" seems to be restricted to idiomatic expressions because it no longer has that meaning in general.
δαυιδ λιμ
Stephen Carlson
Posts: 3351
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Acts 17:28: Sphere of Influence (Porter) or Instrumental

Post by Stephen Carlson »

David Lim wrote:According to the context, which I believe does include the philosophical background of such a statement, the phrase itself simply is talking about everything we do, and that all these things are in dependence upon God. Whether we live or move or simply "be" in the first place, it is by God that we really can do all these. That is the point of that portion; to underscore that whatever we do, it depends on God to allow it. I don't quite care whether the linguistic term for it is "the instrumental dative", because it does not really tell the whole picture. In the examples I gave the datives cannot all be understood as instruments. Instrumental indeed, not instruments.
If we're going to argue context, I'm perfectly happy with the common locative (sphere of influence) understanding of ἐν in Acts 17:28. Look at, for example, the immediately preceding clause καί γε οὐ μακρὰν ἀπὸ ἑνὸς ἑκάστου ἡμῶν ὑπάρχοντα ("though he is not far from each us"). Verse 26, about the locations of where people live, is also locative.

Now, I don't deny the theological premise that of course God is going to be in control in his sphere of influence, but in terms of semantics I see no need to read a more specific instrumental sense into the meaning of ἐν in Acts 17:28, when the usual locative meaning with an animate noun is sufficient and ably fits the context.
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia
Post Reply

Return to “New Testament”