ἡγιασμένος (Perfect participle of holy/sanctified/ἁγιάζω)

Biblical Greek morphology and syntax, aspect, linguistics, discourse analysis, and related topics
Post Reply
Jacob Rhoden
Posts: 118
Joined: February 15th, 2013, 8:16 am
Location: Greenville, South Carolina
Contact:

ἡγιασμένος (Perfect participle of holy/sanctified/ἁγιάζω)

Post by Jacob Rhoden » April 12th, 2018, 8:34 pm

Much appears to be said about the fact that ἡγιασμένοις here (past action with ongoing effect) indicates that the Corinthians have the 'status' of being sanctified (positionally sanctified and set apart) in spite of the fact they struggle with sin, as demonstrated by the wider context of the text.
τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ τοῦ θεοῦ ⸉τῇ οὔσῃ ἐν Κορίνθῳ, ἡγιασμένοις ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ⸊, ... (1Cor. 1:2 )
However, 2 Timothy 2:21 uses this same form, but within a conditional future clause (ἐὰν ... ἔσται ...)
ἐὰν οὖν τις ἐκκαθάρῃ ἑαυτὸν ἀπὸ τούτων, ἔσται σκεῦος εἰς τιμήν, ἡγιασμένον, εὔχρηστον τῷ δεσπότῃ, εἰς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθὸν ἡτοιμασμένον. (2Tim. 2:21)
At the word level, it seems like this 'past action with ongoing effect' doesn't work here. Does the fact that it is used within a clause explain what is going on here, or, does this legitimately feed into a question about conceiving the perfect participle as a 'past action with ongoing effect' (i.e. Porter/Campbell), and hence challenge the typical interpretation of 1 Corinthians 1:2?
0 x



timothy_p_mcmahon
Posts: 231
Joined: June 3rd, 2011, 10:47 pm

Re: ἡγιασμένος (Perfect participle of holy/sanctified/ἁγιάζω)

Post by timothy_p_mcmahon » April 12th, 2018, 10:15 pm

I think the temporal aspect of the perfect participle is relative to the future tense main verb. The action of the participle precedes the action of the main verb. At some point in the future the action of ἡγιασμένον occurs, and at a yet subsequent point the state described by ἔσται becomes a reality.

ἡγιασμένον is effectively a future perfect, sort of a future version of the pluperfect, whose action precedes that of another verb in the past.

I don't think any of this necessarily has any impact on the interpretation of 1 Corinthians 1:2. As this forum discourages the discussion of theological issues, I'll just say that I see two distinct sanctification processes in the two texts.
0 x

Jacob Rhoden
Posts: 118
Joined: February 15th, 2013, 8:16 am
Location: Greenville, South Carolina
Contact:

Re: ἡγιασμένος (Perfect participle of holy/sanctified/ἁγιάζω)

Post by Jacob Rhoden » April 12th, 2018, 10:24 pm

Thanks, that articulates what I was suspecting the answer was going to be. Although it feels a little more clunky to say "This participle speaks of a past action with ongoing effect from the perspective of a future point in time" than what I assume Porter or Campbell (If I understand then correctly, I am not sure I do yet) would simply describe as a reference to a future state/status.

(And yes, I recognise we don't want to get side tracked into theological debates. I am including the reference to the wider context of 1 Corinthians on the basis that linguistically we probably want to consider the wider context of a particular text in our translation of a word or clause)
0 x

Barry Hofstetter
Posts: 1246
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm

Re: ἡγιασμένος (Perfect participle of holy/sanctified/ἁγιάζω)

Post by Barry Hofstetter » April 13th, 2018, 5:34 am

timothy_p_mcmahon wrote:
April 12th, 2018, 10:15 pm
I think the temporal aspect of the perfect participle is relative to the future tense main verb. The action of the participle precedes the action of the main verb. At some point in the future the action of ἡγιασμένον occurs, and at a yet subsequent point the state described by ἔσται becomes a reality.

ἡγιασμένον is effectively a future perfect, sort of a future version of the pluperfect, whose action precedes that of another verb in the past.

I don't think any of this necessarily has any impact on the interpretation of 1 Corinthians 1:2. As this forum discourages the discussion of theological issues, I'll just say that I see two distinct sanctification processes in the two texts.
I don't think that this is understood as a periphrastic future perfect, but simply the perfect participle used as it most often is as essentially an adjective. The future ἔσται is the main verb, the fulfillment of the condition expressed in the protasis. To what other future action or state would it be prior?
0 x
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
Χαίρετε ἐν κυρίῳ πάντοτε· πάλιν ἐρῶ, χαίρετε

MAubrey
Posts: 903
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 8:52 pm
Location: Washington
Contact:

Re: ἡγιασμένος (Perfect participle of holy/sanctified/ἁγιάζω)

Post by MAubrey » April 13th, 2018, 2:55 pm

Middle-passive perfect participles are just bare states 99% of the time without reference to a past event or ongoing results--hence the ease with which they lend themselves to simply adjectival semantics.

Barry is correct.
0 x
Mike Aubrey, Linguist
Koine-Greek.com

Jacob Rhoden
Posts: 118
Joined: February 15th, 2013, 8:16 am
Location: Greenville, South Carolina
Contact:

Re: ἡγιασμένος (Perfect participle of holy/sanctified/ἁγιάζω)

Post by Jacob Rhoden » April 13th, 2018, 6:51 pm

Thanks for your helpful replies.

It would seem I need to pursue the work on participles in a more advanced grammar. Thanks!
0 x

Post Reply