On Mon 25 Mar 2002 (22:23:32), elijahyoder@characterlink.net wrote: > I have two questions on this phrase, with the second one being the > primary one. The answer to the seond question, however, hinges on > a person's answer to the first. > > (1) Should ORGIZESQE be taken as a command -- "Be angry!" or > should it be taken as a permissive imperative? It seems to me that > grammatically it can be taken either way and that one's theology will > determine the answer given. > > (2) If ORGIZESQE is taken as a command, is the following a > grammatically possible interpretation: "Be angry! Stop this > continuing sin (of not being angry)!"? Does the Greek grammar and > context allow (or support?) this interpretation? > Dear Elijah This is a direct quotation from Psalm 4:4 LXX (4:5 in BH). In the Hebrew RiG:ZuW (be angry) is a Qal Imperative; but W:'aL-ToXo:+a'uW (and sin not) is a Prohibition with 'aL plus the Imperfect. A Prohibition is by definition a negative imperative. So yes, it's a double imperative in the LXX and Paul. Paul says it's OK to be angry, so long as you do not commit sin thereby. There is a time when one does well to be angry, and a time when one does not do well to be angry (compare Jonah 4:9). Paul goes on to expand on his quotation: do not nurse your anger of let your anger fester overnight. Get it out of your system before sundown. Jesus in the Gospels is said to have been angry: but without sinning. Jesus would be Paul's model, of course. There is such a thing as "righteous indignation". IMHO ERRWSQE Ben -- Revd Ben Crick BA CF, and Mrs Joanna (Goodwin) Crick 232 Canterbury Road, Birchington, Kent, CT7 9TD (UK) http://www.cnetwork.co.uk/crick.htm --- B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu