From: Iver Larsen (iver_larsen@sil.org)
Date: Tue Jul 03 2001 - 04:36:04 EDT
> At 12:13 AM +0000 7/1/01, Mark Wilson wrote:
> >Romans 7:14a
> >
> >OIDAMEN GAR hOTI hO NOMOS PNEUMATIKAS ESTIN EGO DE SARKINOS EIMI...
> >
> >
> >In light of all the first persons in this chapter, I wonder if this
>
> >construct could be a MEN...DE construct:
> >
> >OIDA MEN GAR...
> >
> >For I know, on the one hand, that...
> >
> >It's really not that important, but a commentary I'm reading
> >made note of it, and really didn't seem to side one way or the other.
>
Carl responded:
> At first sight this seems plausible, but if such an antithesis is actually
> intended the MEN should follow hO, so that the text would then read:
>
> OIDAMEN GAR hOTI hO MEN NOMOS PNEUMATIKOS ESTIN, EGW DE SARKINOS EIMI ...
Did you intend OIDA GAR, since you translate with I know below?
>
> That is to say: the antithesis concerns the diametrically opposed natures
> of the Law and the speaker's self: It's not "I know... but I am." Rather it
> would seem to be: "I know that so far as the Law is concerned, it's
> spiritual, but when it comes to me, I'm flesh and blood ..."
I would agree with Carl's comment as far as I understand it, but the meaning of
MEN is often difficult to pin down, partly because there is no simple equivalent
in English to think of. Sometimes it is a clear contrast between "on the one
hand" and "on the other hand". Other times it is more towards "admittedly" or
"although". Sometimes there is no DE or other contrastive word following in
which case MEN may be more like an emphasis particle: "surely, indeed".
In the case of Rom 7:14 several options are possible. In a construction like
I/we know that a,b,c, the verb "know" is in the background for all the
individual pieces of knowledge mentioned. I think it would be possible to
understand this verse - assuming OIDA MEN GAR was intended - as something like
"For although I know that so far as the law is concerned, it's spiritual, (I
also know that - OIDA DE hOTI) when it comes to me, I am carnal." It would be
impossible to do the same with OIDAMEN GAR as it would be something like "For we
know that so far as the law is concerned, it's spiritual, (but we also know
that) when it comes to me, I am fleshly". That is why most translations who take
the OIDAMEN interpretation make a larger break than a comma after ESTIN and
suggest that only one clause is governed by hOTI: "For we know that the law is
spiritual; but I am carnal..."
This is the more difficult interpretation in the context, but I don't think this
implies that it is more likely to be correct. On the contrary.
Iver Larsen
---
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
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:00 EDT