ephesians 5:33

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
timothy_p_mcmahon
Posts: 259
Joined: June 3rd, 2011, 10:47 pm

ephesians 5:33

Post by timothy_p_mcmahon »

ephesians 5:33 wrote:
πλὴν καὶ ὑμεῖς οἱ καθʼ ἕνα ἕκαστος τὴν ἑαυτοῦ γυναῖκα οὕτως ἀγαπάτω ὡς ἑαυτόν, ἡ δὲ γυνὴ ἵνα φοβῆται τὸν ἄνδρα.
I'm involved in a discussion with someone who proposes to take ἡ δὲ γυνὴ ἵνα φοβῆται τὸν ἄνδρα as a subordinate clause to the main verb ἀγαπάτω. The resulting effect is something like:

Let each man love his own wife as himself, so that the wife may revere her husband.

While the concept makes sense to me, it seems that the intervening δὲ precludes taking the ἵνα clause as dependent. Am I missing something?
Robert Crowe
Posts: 108
Joined: January 8th, 2016, 11:06 am
Location: Northern Ireland

Re: ephesians 5:33

Post by Robert Crowe »

Wallace, GGBB, p.477 categorises ἵνα as imperatival here. "The parallel with the imperatival ἀγαπάτω in the first half of the verse shows the independent force of the ἵνα clause."

This renders the sense as: "The husband should love his wife, and the wife should respect her husband."
Tús maith leath na hoibre.
Barry Hofstetter
Posts: 2159
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm

Re: ephesians 5:33

Post by Barry Hofstetter »

Robert Crowe wrote:Wallace, GGBB, p.477 categorises ἵνα as imperatival here. "The parallel with the imperatival ἀγαπάτω in the first half of the verse shows the independent force of the ἵνα clause."

This renders the sense as: "The husband should love his wife, and the wife should respect her husband."
I think that's essentially correct. I've always viewed it as a substantive clause the object of an understod verb such as ἀγέτω, but it amounts to the same thing.
N.E. Barry Hofstetter, M.A., Th.M.
Ph.D. Student U of FL
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
καὶ σὺ τὸ σὸν ποιήσεις κἀγὼ τὸ ἐμόν. ἆρον τὸ σὸν καὶ ὕπαγε.
Stirling Bartholomew
Posts: 1141
Joined: August 9th, 2012, 4:19 pm

Re: ephesians 5:33

Post by Stirling Bartholomew »

(SBLG)πλὴν καὶ ὑμεῖς οἱ καθ᾽ ἕνα ἕκαστος τὴν ἑαυτοῦ γυναῖκα οὕτως ἀγαπάτω ὡς ἑαυτόν, ἡ δὲ γυνὴ ἵνα φοβῆται τὸν ἄνδρα.

(NASB-TH)Nevertheless, each individual among you also is to love his own wife even as himself, and the wife must see to it that she respects her husband.

Hoehner directly addressees the question on the top of page 783 with a foot note giving credit to Margaret D. Gibson,"Let the Woman Learn in Silence" Expository Times May 1904, p380 and S.E. Porter, Verb Aspect, 1989 p331. Hoehner offers the following word order to illustrate Margaret D. Gibson's reading.

ἵνα δὲ ἡ γυνὴ φοβῆται τὸν ἄνδρα.

Hoehner also addresses the "imperative" use of ἵνα with a long footnote full of references, ATR 330,933, 943, 994; BDF §387(3); MHT 1.179, 3.95; Winer, 396; Moule Idioms 144-145; Zerwick §415 ... C. J. Cadoux, The Imperatival use of ἵνα in NT, JTS 42 (July-Oct 1941) answered under same title by H. G. Meecham JTS 43 (July-Oct 1942), A. R. George, JTS 45 (Jan April 1944), A. P. Salom AusBR 6, (Jan 1958), Porter Verb Aspect, 1989, p331. [Notably absent, any reference to D. Wallace.]

Post Script: This thread is cross posted on Textkit.

Post Post Script: The Exegetical Commentary on Ephesians by the late H. W. Hoehner is currently the only reference work in my library by a DTS professor. I ordered it primarily because the only resources I have on Ephesians are 19th century works, Eadie, Alford, Meyer. Hoehner cites these works frequently. I used to have a monograph or two by Darrell Bock but my library is rapidly being handed over to the next generation (a code word for a designated recipient).
C. Stirling Bartholomew
Robert Crowe
Posts: 108
Joined: January 8th, 2016, 11:06 am
Location: Northern Ireland

Re: ephesians 5:33

Post by Robert Crowe »

I think the apodotic δέ is important here to remove the possible logic of 'A man should love his wife to gain respect from his wife.'

Taking 1 Cor 7:29 as a counter example: τὸ λοιπὸν, ἵνα καὶ οἱ ἔχοντες γυναῖκας ὡς μὴ ἔχοντες ὦσιν “From now on, let those who have wives be as though they don't have them." Here there is no need for such a δέ since there is no possible ambiguity.

(I refrain from discussing the apparent contradiction between the two statements, i.e. that in the first, a man should love his wife; while in the second, he should ignore her altogether.)
Tús maith leath na hoibre.
cwconrad
Posts: 2112
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:52 pm
Location: Burnsville, NC 28714
Contact:

Re: ephesians 5:33

Post by cwconrad »

Barry Hofstetter wrote:
Robert Crowe wrote:Wallace, GGBB, p.477 categorises ἵνα as imperatival here. "The parallel with the imperatival ἀγαπάτω in the first half of the verse shows the independent force of the ἵνα clause."

This renders the sense as: "The husband should love his wife, and the wife should respect her husband."
I think that's essentially correct. I've always viewed it as a substantive clause the object of an understod verb such as ἀγέτω, but it amounts to the same thing.
Here again it's worth pointing out the relevance of Margaret Sim's work, A Relevance Theoretic approach to the particle 'hina' in Koine Greek, accessible online in the original thesis (https://www.era.lib.ed.ac.uk/bitstream/ ... sAllowed=y or in print under a different title, Marking Thought and Talk in New Testament Greek http://www.wipfandstock.com/store/Marki ... ament_Gree...
οὔτοι ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς πάντα θεοὶ θνητοῖς ὑπέδειξαν,
ἀλλὰ χρόνῳ ζητέοντες ἐφευρίσκουσιν ἄμεινον. (Xenophanes, Fragment 16)

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
Robert Crowe
Posts: 108
Joined: January 8th, 2016, 11:06 am
Location: Northern Ireland

Re: ephesians 5:33

Post by Robert Crowe »

Robert Crowe wrote:I think the apodotic δέ is important here to remove the possible logic of 'A man should love his wife to gain respect from his wife.'
CORRECTION
My description of δέ as 'apodotic' is wrong. Such a δέ indicates the principal clause in a hypotactic arrangement. This isn't the case here. The structure is obviously paratactic, so δέ has to be 'continuative' with the meaning 'and'.

Very sorry 'Whaaaaagh!'

My enlightenment came following a note from Clay.
Tús maith leath na hoibre.
Post Reply

Return to “New Testament”