Ephesians 2:18

[bible passage=”Ephesians 2:18″]

People who read this article also liked:

[AuthorRecommendedPosts]

4 thoughts on “Ephesians 2:18

  1. ProBible says:

    Is it possible that in Eph. 2:18 OTI is to be understood emphatically, rather than as a causal subordinator or relative? Can anyone cite for me several examples of OTI in such a usage, both from biblical texts and from non-biblical hellenistic texts?

    Thank you,

    Mark Bruffey L. Mark Bruffey CBTS Library 1380 S Valley Forge Rd. Lansdale PA 19446

  2. ProBible says:

    As I have no resources ready to hand for extra-biblical Greek in my mountain hideaway, I can’t cite such instances. I am, however, one of those who think Ephesians is stylistically different from the undisputably Pauline letters in several ways. I think that hOTI is indeed emphatic here, but I would not be inclined to argue that it is extraordinary. Had DI’ AUTOU GAR EXOMEN … been written instead of hOTI DI’ AUTOU EXOMEN … the essential sense would not be significantly different but the rhetorical emphasis would be weaker. I think hOTI is emphatic enough here that it would be appropriate to translate this verse as: “The reason is that … ”

    Carl W. Conrad Department of Classics, Washington University One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, USA 63130 (314) 935-4018 cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu OR cwc@oui.com WWW:http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/ http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/%7Ecwconrad/

  3. ProBible says:

    Is it possible that in Eph. 2:18 OTI is to be understood emphatically, rather than as a causal subordinator or relative? Can anyone cite for me several examples of OTI in such a usage, both from biblical texts and from non-biblical hellenistic texts?

    Thank you,

    Mark Bruffey L. Mark Bruffey CBTS Library 1380 S Valley Forge Rd. Lansdale PA 19446

  4. ProBible says:

    As I have no resources ready to hand for extra-biblical Greek in my mountain hideaway, I can’t cite such instances. I am, however, one of those who think Ephesians is stylistically different from the undisputably Pauline letters in several ways. I think that hOTI is indeed emphatic here, but I would not be inclined to argue that it is extraordinary. Had DI’ AUTOU GAR EXOMEN … been written instead of hOTI DI’ AUTOU EXOMEN … the essential sense would not be significantly different but the rhetorical emphasis would be weaker. I think hOTI is emphatic enough here that it would be appropriate to translate this verse as: “The reason is that … ”

    Carl W. Conrad Department of Classics, Washington University One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, USA 63130 (314) 935-4018 cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu OR cwc@oui.com WWW:http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/ http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/%7Ecwconrad/

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>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.