Colossians 1:16

Col 1:16 jacob cohen cobey at directcon.net
Fri Oct 8 14:22:52 EDT 1999

 

Greetings, Thanks, etc… What is this cross? Col 1:16 hOTI EV AUTWi EKTISQH TA PANTA . . . “because everything wascreated by him . . .” should we take AUTWi as a dative of agency ormeans.This seems like an excellent candidate for agency unless AUTWi (referingto Jesus) is being used without Christs personality in veiw (GGBBWallace pg162-3).What say you?Jacob

 

Greetings, Thanks, etc…What is this cross?

Col 1:16 Garland H. Shinn ghshinn at home.com
Sat Oct 9 08:42:54 EDT 1999

 

EN of the personal agent EN of the personal agent Regularly EN with the instrumental when associated with passive voiceverbs (EKTISQH) is considered agency rather than means.Garlandjacob cohen wrote:> > Col 1:16 hOTI EV AUTWi EKTISQH TA PANTA . . . “because everything was> created by him . . .” should we take AUTWi as a dative of agency or> means.> This seems like an excellent candidate for agency unless AUTWi (refering> to Jesus) is being used without Christs personality in veiw (GGBB> Wallace pg162-3).> > What say you?> Jacob> >> home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/> You are currently subscribed to as: ghshinn at home.com> To unsubscribe, forward this message to $subst(‘Email.Unsub’)> To subscribe, send a message to subscribe- at franklin.oit.unc.edu

 

EN of the personal agentEN of the personal agent

Colossians 1:16 Michael Abernathy mabernat at cub.kcnet.org
Tue Jun 26 20:47:49 EDT 2001

 

Comparing ALLOS and hETEROS Comparing ALLOS and hETEROS I understand that in Colossians 1:16 en autw may be understood as the agent through which the action of creation is accomplished. This raises a couple of questions for me. First, when the action is performed through an intelligent being, is the one doing the action necessarily different from the agent?Second, in this case, the difference between instrumentality and agency sounds rather narrow. I know that many of the discussions on this list imply a very exact use of the language. My question then, is this, “How precisely did the average Greek speaker use the language?” I expect to find rather fine distinctions in Plato. Should I expect the same level of precision in Paul?Thank you for your help.Michael Abernathymabernat at cub.kcnet.org————– next part ————–An HTML attachment was scrubbed…URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail//attachments/20010626/ae953753/attachment.html

 

Comparing ALLOS and hETEROSComparing ALLOS and hETEROS

Colossians 1:16 Rick Stamp rickstamp at gmx.net
Wed Jun 27 00:35:03 EDT 2001

 

Comparing ALLOS and hETEROS Hebrews 1:2 > I understand that in Colossians 1:16 en autw may be understood as the> agent through which the action of creation is accomplished. This raises a> couple of questions for me. First, when the action is performed through> an intelligent being, is the one doing the action necessarily different> from the agent?> Thank you for your help.> Michael Abernathy> mabernat at cub.kcnet.org Michael,You might consider the instrumental dative at Hebrew 1:1 where the Father first speaks by the prophets and then through His Son.Regards,Rick Stamp– —————–Rick Stamprickstamp at gmx.netSent through GMX FreeMail – http://www.gmx.net————– next part ————–An HTML attachment was scrubbed…URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail//attachments/20010627/94482642/attachment.html

 

Comparing ALLOS and hETEROSHebrews 1:2

[] local dative Col 1:16 kgraham0938 at comcast.net kgraham0938 at comcast.net
Tue Dec 27 18:41:27 EST 2005

 

[] Interlinear Greek-English NT [] local dative Col 1:16 Hey I just came across something interesting in BDAG, the argue thathOTI EV AUTWi EKTISQH TA PANTA EN TOIS OURANOIS should be considered a local dative since EN AUTWi would otherwise be identical with DI AUTOS.I always took it as a instrumental dative.–Kelton Graham KGRAHAM0938 at comcast.net

 

[] Interlinear Greek-English NT[] local dative Col 1:16

[] local dative Col 1:16 Carl W. Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Tue Dec 27 19:12:58 EST 2005

 

[] local dative Col 1:16 [] local dative Col 1:16 EN does normally take a locative dative.On Tuesday, December 27, 2005, at 06:41PM, <kgraham0938 at comcast.net> wrote:>Hey I just came across something interesting in BDAG, the argue that> >hOTI EV AUTWi EKTISQH TA PANTA EN TOIS OURANOIS should be considered a local dative since EN AUTWi would otherwise be identical with DI AUTOS.Might I ask for consistent use of “N” for Nu? We seem frequently to get a hodge-podge of V and N; here we have a preponderance of N but one V.>I always took it as a instrumental dative.Do you understand the sense to be “by (means of) him?” But you don’t normally get an instrumental dative to express agent. That is, the instrumental dative normally is used of an impersonal causal factor.I think I would understand EN AUTWi in much the same way as we understand the phrase EN CRISTWi: it indicates the focal point.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad2 at mac.comWWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/

 

[] local dative Col 1:16[] local dative Col 1:16

[] local dative Col 1:16 kgraham0938 at comcast.net kgraham0938 at comcast.net
Tue Dec 27 19:51:43 EST 2005

 

[] local dative Col 1:16 [] local dative Col 1:16 Hey Dr.Conrad, yes I normally took it to be “by means of him.” (sorry about the Nun) Here is the weird thing, BDF says on page 107 $199″The dative of place, which is already extremely limited in the classical period, is missing from the NT (apart from sterotyped KUKLWi & CAMAI;.)”Then when discussing EV on page 117, $ 219, (1) Col 1:16 EN AUTWi EKTISQH – DI AUTOU EKTISTAI originally not instrumental.What do you think BDF is refering too here in regards to what it originally was? –Kelton Graham KGRAHAM0938 at comcast.net————– Original message ————– From: “Carl W. Conrad” <cwconrad2 at mac.com> > EN does normally take a locative dative. > > On Tuesday, December 27, 2005, at 06:41PM, wrote: > > >Hey I just came across something interesting in BDAG, the argue that > > > >hOTI EV AUTWi EKTISQH TA PANTA EN TOIS OURANOIS should be considered a local > dative since EN AUTWi would otherwise be identical with DI AUTOS. > > Might I ask for consistent use of “N” for Nu? We seem frequently to get a > hodge-podge of V and N; here we have a preponderance of N but one V. > > >I always took it as a instrumental dative. > > Do you understand the sense to be “by (means of) him?” But you don’t normally > get an instrumental dative to express agent. That is, the instrumental dative > normally is used of an impersonal causal factor. > > I think I would understand EN AUTWi in much the same way as we understand the > phrase EN CRISTWi: it indicates the focal point. > > > Carl W. Conrad > Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus) > 1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243 > cwconrad2 at mac.com > WWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/ >> home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/ > mailing list > at lists.ibiblio.org > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/

 

[] local dative Col 1:16[] local dative Col 1:16

[] local dative Col 1:16 Carl W. Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Tue Dec 27 22:33:19 EST 2005

 

[] local dative Col 1:16 [] Greek-English Interlinear On Tuesday, December 27, 2005, at 07:51PM, <kgraham0938 at comcast.net> wrote:>Hey Dr.Conrad, yes I normally took it to be “by means of him.” (sorry about the Nun) Here is the weird thing, BDF says on page 107 $199> >“The dative of place, which is already extremely limited in the classical period, is missing from the NT (apart from sterotyped KUKLWi & CAMAI;.)”I think they’re speaking of the locative dative without a preposition. There can hardly be any question that EN + locative dative is common in the GNT. On the other hand, EN + instrumental dative in the sense of “by means of” does appear, albeit not so very commonly.>Then when discussing EV on page 117, $ 219, (1) Col 1:16 EN AUTWi EKTISQH – DI AUTOU EKTISTAI originally not instrumental.> >What do you think BDF is refering too here in regards to what it originally was? I’m away from my reference library now and cannot check it; all I will say at the moment is that I’m not convinced that EN AUTWI EKTISQH means “was created/established by him.”>————– Original message ————– >From: “Carl W. Conrad” <cwconrad2 at mac.com> > >> EN does normally take a locative dative. >> >> On Tuesday, December 27, 2005, at 06:41PM, wrote: >> >> >Hey I just came across something interesting in BDAG, the argue that >> > >> >hOTI EV AUTWi EKTISQH TA PANTA EN TOIS OURANOIS should be considered a local >> dative since EN AUTWi would otherwise be identical with DI AUTOS. >> >> Might I ask for consistent use of “N” for Nu? We seem frequently to get a >> hodge-podge of V and N; here we have a preponderance of N but one V. >> >> >I always took it as a instrumental dative. >> >> Do you understand the sense to be “by (means of) him?” But you don’t normally >> get an instrumental dative to express agent. That is, the instrumental dative >> normally is used of an impersonal causal factor. >> >> I think I would understand EN AUTWi in much the same way as we understand the >> phrase EN CRISTWi: it indicates the focal point. >> >> >> Carl W. Conrad >> Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus) >> 1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243 >> cwconrad2 at mac.com >> WWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/ >>>> home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/ >> mailing list >> at lists.ibiblio.org >> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/ >> home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/> > Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad2 at mac.comWWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/

 

[] local dative Col 1:16[] Greek-English Interlinear

People who read this article also liked:

[AuthorRecommendedPosts]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>