| 1. Linguistic Exegesis The verse begins with the narrative introduction eipen {εἶπεν | eî-pen} ‘he said,’ followed by the connective particle de {δὲ | dè}, which links this teaching to the preceding context while slightly shifting focus. The prepositional phrase pros tous mathetas autou {πρὸς τοὺς μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ | prós toús ma-thē-tás au-toû} specifies the audience as His disciples, with pros taking the accusative to indicate direction toward the hearers. The clause Anendekton estin {Ἀνένδεκτόν ἐστιν | a-nén-dek-tón é-stin} is an impersonal construction in which the neuter predicate adjective functions with the copula to state a general truth. The articular infinitive phrase tou ta skandala me elthein {τοῦ τὰ σκάνδαλα μὴ ἐλθεῖν | toû tá skán-da-la mē el-theîn} expresses the content of what is “impossible,” with the genitive article tou governing the infinitive and its object, and the negative particle me marking what cannot fail to occur. The adversative plen {πλὴν | plḗn} introduces a contrastive element, shifting from inevitability to moral warning, and the exclamation ouai {οὐαὶ | ouaí} adds a tone of lament and threat. The relative prepositional clause di hou erchetai {δι’ οὗ ἔρχεται | dí hoû ér-khe-tai} identifies the responsible agent “through whom it comes,” with the genitive relative pronoun hou governed by the preposition di, and the singular verb erchetai referring back to the neuter plural skandala treated as a collective. This syntactic movement sets side by side the certainty that causes of stumbling will arise and the severe accountability of the person who becomes their channel. |