I recall thinking this a while back, but can't remember what I came to conclude. I should write things down more. I believe it was something along the lines of expecting υπο + gentive rather than εν + dative to indicate "by him". Though I think this was probably due to thinking about whether it was a dative of agency, or a dative of means. Statistics: Posted by S Walch — September 26th, 2016, 6:42 pm
I recall thinking this a while back, but can't remember what I came to conclude. I should write things down more. I believe it was something along the lines of expecting υπο + gentive rather than εν + dative to indicate "by him". Statistics: Posted by S Walch — September 26th, 2016, 12:50 pm
ὁ θεὸς, perhaps? Which would make it somewhat parallel to the agency of God in Hebrews 1:Stephen Carlson wrote: For me, instrumental readings are disfavored with agentive animates as they imply an agent using the instrument to perform a task. So who is using the Word as an instrument?
But in Hebrews the agency is explicit, and if agency is implied in John 1, it is not explicit. Statistics: Posted by Jonathan Robie — September 26th, 2016, 8:14 amHebrews 1 wrote: Πολυμερῶς καὶ πολυτρόπως πάλαι ὁ θεὸς λαλήσας τοῖς πατράσιν ἐν τοῖς προφήταις 2 ἐπ’ ἐσχάτου τῶν ἡμερῶν τούτων ἐλάλησεν ἡμῖν ἐν υἱῷ, ὃν ἔθηκεν κληρονόμον πάντων, δι’ οὗ καὶ ἐποίησεν τοὺς αἰῶνας· 3 ὃς ὢν ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης καὶ χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως αὐτοῦ, φέρων τε τὰ πάντα τῷ ῥήματι τῆς δυνάμεως, δι᾽ αὑτοῦ καθαρισμὸν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ποιησάμενος ἐκάθισεν ἐν δεξιᾷ τῆς μεγαλωσύνης ἐν ὑψηλοῖς, 4 τοσούτῳ κρείττων γενόμενος τῶν ἀγγέλων ὅσῳ διαφορώτερον παρ’ αὐτοὺς κεκληρονόμηκεν ὄνομα.
For me, instrumental readings are disfavored with agentive animates as they imply an agent using the instrument to perform a task. So who is using the Word as an instrument? Statistics: Posted by Stephen Carlson — September 25th, 2016, 9:08 pm
In John 1:4, could ἐν αὐτῷ be an instrumental use of ἐν, with essentially the same meaning as δι’ αὐτοῦ?
"What was created by him was life" makes sense to me here, but I don't see that interpretation listed as a possibility in the first handful of commentaries I looked at. Am I missing something? Is there a reason that instrumental use would be unlikely here? Statistics: Posted by Jonathan Robie — September 25th, 2016, 8:42 pmJohn 1:1-5 (SBLGNT) wrote: Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος. οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν θεόν. πάντα δι’ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ χωρὶς αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο οὐδὲ ἕν. ὃ γέγονεν ἐν αὐτῷ ζωὴ ἦν, καὶ ἡ ζωὴ ἦν τὸ φῶς τῶν ἀνθρώπων· καὶ τὸ φῶς ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ φαίνει, καὶ ἡ σκοτία αὐτὸ οὐ κατέλαβεν.