Assessing the REV Note for Ephesians 4:30

I read the REV every now and again. For those interested in learning more, the REV website explains just what this Bible version tries to accomplish:

The Revised English Version® (REV®) is the New Testament version by Spirit & Truth Fellowship International®. We call it the REV because we are presenting a revised version of earlier English versions, primarily the American Standard Version of 1901 (ASV), which we have used as the base text for our work.

 For more information on the REV, see https://www.stfonline.org/rev

The purpose of this blog entry is to examine Ephesians 4:30 (REV) and to make some comments about the rendering of this text.

"And do not grieve the holy spirit of God with which you were sealed until the day of redemption."

I now want to focus on some aspects of the relative clause, "with which you were sealed . . ." The REV note informs us that this portion of Ephesians 4:30 grammatically could be translated “by whom you were sealed,” or “with which you were sealed.” However, REV maintains that one difficulty with using "by whom" is that ἐν ᾧ ἐσφραγίσθητε would then be a dative of agency. Yet, the REV claims that is an unlikely way for Greeks to express agency.

The REV note for Ephesians 4:30 quotes Daniel Wallace (GGBB, page 164), who explains that Greek customarily expresses agency by employing ὑπὸ + the genitive case or διὰ + the genitive (see Acts 4:25); on the other hand, it does not seem that ἐν + the dative expresses agency: Wallace apparently calls such usage, rare or nonexistent in Greek (GGBB, page 373). So if ἐν + the dative does not express agency, then REV argues that Ephesians 4:30 is not saying God (the Holy Spirit) is the agent "by whom" Christians are sealed, but rather, one should opt for the translation, “the holy spirit with which you were sealed,” thereby making the construction an instrumental dative "and that is quite common in the New Testament" (REV note). Furthermore, REV contends that Holy Spirit refers to God whereas holy spirit (lower case) signifies the gift of God.

As Wallace continues his discussion of how the GNT expresses agency, some other points he makes are that the only clear examples of datival agency occur with a perfect passive verb form (page 165). Wallace's remarks on pages 165-166 about the spirit of God illuminate his view of progressive revelation and GNT pneumatology: they are worthy of deep consideration.

What may we conclude from the REV note that discusses the relative clause in Ephesians 4:30? The REV is correct that Wallace thinks ἐν + the dative expressing agency is "a rare or nonexistent category, " but Wallace equally maintains this use of the Greek preposition ἐν likely conveys "the idea of means"; in other words, ἐν + the dative may express how a personal agent wields a non-personal instrument. Hence, Wallace contends that ἐν + the dative commonly occurs with persons in view although they may be conceived as impersonal (i.e., used as instruments by someone else). See GGBB, page 373. An example Wallace gives is parents being used by God to discipline a child. In this case, the parents would be personal instruments of God or the means by which God disciplines the child: but since they're instruments, Wallace contends they are conceived as being impersonal.

Could this line of reasoning affect one's understanding and treatment of Ephesians 4:30? Might ἐν ᾧ ἐσφραγίσθητε be applied to a personal agent, who uses means to achieve a certain effect? I will post future entries dealing with this subject.

Addendum: Murray J. Harris believes that  ἐν + the dative expresses agency in Matthew 9:34 (ἐν τω̨̃ ἄρχοντι): he repeats this claims more than once in his work, Prepositions and Theology in the GNT. Mark Strauss similarly categorizes Mark 3:22 as a dative of agency: ἐν τῷ ἄρχοντι. But Wallace views Matthew 9:34 as a genitive of subordination (GGBB, page 103 and a 'clear example' at that! Yet he does not mention on the page, far as I can tell.