Subjunctive, and Manner of Speech Question

[deandddd]

People,

I ran across this sentence in a video the other day, and copied it down.

"Porque no hay nada que puede haberse sin estar en Dios".

The first thing I am thingking is that I must have heard it wrong, and that the speaker must have said "pueda" because the situation seems unimaginable and because the word "pueda" come after "que". Can someone confirm this? I have lingering doubts because it begins with "no hay", which seems like a statement.

Also, the speaker says "sin estar en Dios". This is not natural to my Anglo-Saxon ears! We would always say "a part", "that is not a part of God". Could somebody confirm that this way of speaking, " ... sin estar en Dios", is typical in Spanish?

Finally, I'll comment that the speaker has found a way to express what would be "in existence" in English by employing "haberse". I would have structured the sentence around "in existence".

Thanks,

Dean

[AngelicaDeAlquezar]

The use of subjunctive is changing in daily speech, so this might be a sign of it, but you are right: grammatically, the right conjugation is "pueda".

I've heard "estar en Dios" in many religious speeches, so I guess it's a rather common expression. As I understand, it means to keep God as a motivation in your everyday actions and thoughts.
By the way, "estar con Dios", may be understood in context, but the expression usually means that the person is dead.

As for "haberse", in old Bible versions I have seen "haber" used with archaic meanings. Depending on the context it may be "existir", "tenerse", "ocurrir"...

What the sentence means to me is that there is nothing you can have if you don't have God guiding your life.

[deandddd]

Angelica,

Thank you for your timely answer.

The subjunctive is changing? Good Lord, I hope it doesn't mean that people are becoming more ignorant about their Spanish. What I have always admired about the Hispanics is that even the normal people can speak very elegantly.

Americans are not elegant in their speech.

Your explanation has been helpful. But the person was speaking about the universe in a religious context, basically saying that God created everything. So it seems the speaker was using the Bible meaning.

And to tell the truth, the sentence was a fast oral translation because the speaker was speaking Hindu English and was being translated. So the sentence might have been unusual from beginning to end.

Thanks again ...

Dean

[AngelicaDeAlquezar]

Oh, I guess you're right about the meaning. I find it strange, but it would mean that nothing can exist if it's not in God's will.

As for the subjunctive: If you ask me, I live it as a tragedy.
It's much less about using the indicative present instead of the subjunctive, but the preterite subjunctive is definitely under attack.

Situation 1: You asked someone to keep a secret, and you need to remind them before they say anything:
--Te pedí que no le digas nada a Juan. Por favor no lo hagas.

Situation 2: The person has told your secret to Juan and you're upset about it:
--¡Te pedí que no le dijeras nada a Juan! ¿Por qué lo hiciste?

New use of subjunctive: You asked someone to keep a secret, they told Juan and you're using the present subjunctive anyway:
--¡Te pedí que no le digas nada a Juan! ¿Por qué lo hiciste?

Tragedy for me, but normal evolution of language for linguists.

[ROBINDESBOIS]

As far as I'm concerned the subjunctive is not changing at all, at least in Spain. Goza de buena salud. The person who used it is probably somebody learning the language, or somebody who does,´t speak Spanish well.