Glory Be to Jesus Christ!
🌞
Since in the work published at the link:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/02082025.html
and even earlier in others, published at the links:
https://churchandsociety.org.ua/pdf/projects/zbirnyk.pdf
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/17082024.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/27112024.html
it is written that the use of prepositions has important significance for the correct understanding of important and topical questions, particularly the question of power, I am writing comments regarding the use of precisely these prepositions. As advice regarding reading what is written — one can read the verse in translation or/and original (whoever has such possibility), and then the corresponding comment regarding prepositions here. Then it is necessary to understand which part of the verse the comment concerns, and also to consider what essential for understanding it affirms — or more rarely — denies. Such thoughtful reading helps to deepen understanding and protects from the mentioned mistakes.
I prepared an improved version of my research, the presentation of which is available at the link:
https://www.facebook.com/Oleksandr.S.Zhabenko/posts/
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/uk/commentaries/vystup-2025-hypo-genitive-Romans-XIII_1.pdf
The research material is currently being prepared for publication. I hope, God willing, to present fuller results later after the publication comes out.
I will update the list of references regarding prepositions at the links:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/02082025.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/uk/commentaries/Pryjmennyky.html
the latter — once or twice a month (in Ukrainian), to keep the text version current and up to date.
Liturgy:
1 Thessalonians I, 1 — 'ἐν θεῷ πατρὶ καὶ κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ' - 'en theo patri kai kyrio Iesou Christo' - in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ
. In Whom.
1 Thessalonians I, 4 — 'ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ' - 'hypo tou theou' - by God
. Here the preposition 'hypo' with the genitive indicates the passive voice of the participle beloved
(loved
) and points to the One who loves the faithful — the Father.
1 Thessalonians I, 5 — 'εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν λόγῳ μόνον' - 'eis hymas en logo monon' - to you in word only; to you only with word
. Different translations are possible. 'καὶ ἐν δυνάμει καὶ ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ καὶ πληροφορίᾳ πολλῇ' - 'kai en dynamei kai en pneumati hagio kai plerophoria polle' - and in power, and in the Holy Spirit, and in great assurance, conviction
. 'ἐν ὑμῖν' - 'en hymin' - in you; among you
. Where.
For more on the Epistle reading, see:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/25112024.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/06112023.html
Luke X, 22 — 'ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρός' - 'hypo tou patros' - by the Father
. Here the preposition 'hypo' with the genitive indicates the passive voice of the participle has been delivered
. The Incarnate Son of God, as man, possesses all divine gifts prepared by God for humankind — among them, He is King, Prophet, High Priest, Christ, Saviour, Redeemer, Conqueror, and so on. That is, all this has been delivered
to the Son as a human being. It should also be understood that some of these divine gifts are not precisely those which God would have desired the Son to possess when creating the world and humanity — for example, God did not wish humankind to sin when He created them, though as the All-knowing He foresaw that they would sin. Then He sent His Son to save them; and therefore, the Son of God became Saviour, Redeemer, the One who suffered for us, and so on, also receiving these gifts in view of what happened to creation, though God did not will this for creation. As written here:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/15072023.html
in Christ the divine will and divine permission coincided in a single and unique way — He is unique in this. And since suffering is not proper to God by nature, one cannot say that everything has been delivered to the Son by His human nature 'ek' the Father, or 'para' the Father, nor even 'apo' the Father. Therefore 'hypo tou patros' is used. It is more logical here to see precisely the human nature of Christ, not the God's, although the Source of godhead is the Father, for the passage concerns His relation to the world and the God's Revelation. If this referred equally or mainly to the Son according to His God's nature (which He shares with the Father and the Spirit), then it would follow that the Son also needed to be revealed — and then the logic would not hold. But here it refers specifically to the Incarnation of the Son of God.
For the parallel passage in Matthew XI, 27–30, see:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/03072025.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/DialogueOnWordsChristFear.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/08022024.html
https://facebook.com/Oleksandr.S.Zhabenko/posts/
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/29062023.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/18072024.html
See also on Matthew XIII, 10–23:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/14072025.html
For more on the Gospel reading, see:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/21102024.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/23102023.html
Glory to Thee, our God, glory to Thee!