1 Corinthians 11:20

[] William D. Mounce’s Basics of Biblical Greek /Funk’s Grammar [] Matt 5:3 ff In a message dated 12/3/2003 9:43:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, thielogian at yahoo.com writes:Those who have been following the discussion on theLord’s Day/Lord’s life question in Ignatius may beinterested in the article in an early issue of AndrewsUniversity Seminary Studies (1963, by memory) thatdeals with this question in some detail. The author,as I recall is Fritz Guy. (I’m on holidays and awayfrom my sources at the moment, so I can’t be any moreprecise). For what it’s worth, I was not convinced byGuy’s arguments but he does present a useful array ofdata.If you can think of any further information regarding this, it may prove helpful. Is there a school website where it might be archived?gfsomsel

 

[] William D. Mounce’s Basics of Biblical Greek /Funk’s Grammar[] Matt 5:3 ff

[] Revelation 1:10 and Ign Mag 9 Polycarp66 at aol.com Polycarp66 at aol.com
Wed Dec 3 22:35:38 EST 2003

 

[] William D. Mounce’s Basics of Biblical Greek /Funk’s Grammar [] Matt 5:3 ff In a message dated 12/3/2003 9:43:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, thielogian at yahoo.com writes:Those who have been following the discussion on theLord’s Day/Lord’s life question in Ignatius may beinterested in the article in an early issue of AndrewsUniversity Seminary Studies (1963, by memory) thatdeals with this question in some detail. The author,as I recall is Fritz Guy. (I’m on holidays and awayfrom my sources at the moment, so I can’t be any moreprecise). For what it’s worth, I was not convinced byGuy’s arguments but he does present a useful array ofdata.If you can think of any further information regarding this, it may prove helpful. Is there a school website where it might be archived?gfsomsel

 

[] William D. Mounce’s Basics of Biblical Greek /Funk’s Grammar[] Matt 5:3 ff

What is “KURIAKOS”? Maurice A. O’Sullivan mauros at iol.ie
Fri May 21 18:20:42 EDT 1999

 

What is “KURIAKOS”? Hilfe Bitte. At 17:51 21/05/99 -0400, you wrote:>Dear ers,> >Recently I had a friend of mine tell me that our English word “church” came>from KURIAKOS. I looked it up in Perschbachers, and he has it translated as>“pertaining to the Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord’s”. So I suppose that>certainly makes sense, in that the church is the Lord’s. But do we use the>word “church” because of KURIAKOS? (He also said “church” is related to the>German word, but I don’t remember it.) I’d just never heard this before.The etymology from the Shorter Oxford may help:>> CHURCHOE cir(i)ce, cyr(i)ce = OFris. szereke, szurka, tzierka, OS kirika, kerika(Du. kerk), OHG chirihha, kiricha (G Kirche), f. WGmc f. med.Gk kurikon forkuriakon use as n. (sc. doma house) of neut. of kuriakos pertaining to theLord, f. kurios master, lord. C <<<By way of explanation, >>f. WGmc f. med.Gk << refers to WestGermanic andmedieval Greek.And if you want to read a masterful survey of the entire history of Greek,and especially the progress from classical to medieval and beyond, Irecommend :Geoffrey Horrocks, Greek: a History of the Language and its Speakers(Longman, 1997(Hope this helpsMauriceMaurice A. O’Sullivan [ Bray, Ireland ]mauros at iol.ie

 

What is “KURIAKOS”?Hilfe Bitte.

What is “KURIAKOS”? Allison Sanders allisanders at mindspring.com
Fri May 21 17:51:44 EDT 1999

 

Eph. 2:15 What is “KURIAKOS”? Dear ers,Recently I had a friend of mine tell me that our English word “church” camefrom KURIAKOS. I looked it up in Perschbachers, and he has it translated as”pertaining to the Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord’s”. So I suppose thatcertainly makes sense, in that the church is the Lord’s. But do we use theword “church” because of KURIAKOS? (He also said “church” is related to theGerman word, but I don’t remember it.) I’d just never heard this before.If this isn’t ish enough, just attack me off-list. =)Allison

 

Eph. 2:15What is “KURIAKOS”?

What is “KURIAKOS”? Maurice A. O’Sullivan mauros at iol.ie
Fri May 21 18:20:42 EDT 1999

 

What is “KURIAKOS”? Hilfe Bitte. At 17:51 21/05/99 -0400, you wrote:>Dear ers,> >Recently I had a friend of mine tell me that our English word “church” came>from KURIAKOS. I looked it up in Perschbachers, and he has it translated as>“pertaining to the Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord’s”. So I suppose that>certainly makes sense, in that the church is the Lord’s. But do we use the>word “church” because of KURIAKOS? (He also said “church” is related to the>German word, but I don’t remember it.) I’d just never heard this before.The etymology from the Shorter Oxford may help:>> CHURCHOE cir(i)ce, cyr(i)ce = OFris. szereke, szurka, tzierka, OS kirika, kerika(Du. kerk), OHG chirihha, kiricha (G Kirche), f. WGmc f. med.Gk kurikon forkuriakon use as n. (sc. doma house) of neut. of kuriakos pertaining to theLord, f. kurios master, lord. C <<<By way of explanation, >>f. WGmc f. med.Gk << refers to WestGermanic andmedieval Greek.And if you want to read a masterful survey of the entire history of Greek,and especially the progress from classical to medieval and beyond, Irecommend :Geoffrey Horrocks, Greek: a History of the Language and its Speakers(Longman, 1997(Hope this helpsMauriceMaurice A. O’Sullivan [ Bray, Ireland ]mauros at iol.ie

 

What is “KURIAKOS”?Hilfe Bitte.

What is “KURIAKOS”? Allison Sanders allisanders at mindspring.com
Fri May 21 17:51:44 EDT 1999

 

Eph. 2:15 What is “KURIAKOS”? Dear ers,Recently I had a friend of mine tell me that our English word “church” camefrom KURIAKOS. I looked it up in Perschbachers, and he has it translated as”pertaining to the Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord’s”. So I suppose thatcertainly makes sense, in that the church is the Lord’s. But do we use theword “church” because of KURIAKOS? (He also said “church” is related to theGerman word, but I don’t remember it.) I’d just never heard this before.If this isn’t ish enough, just attack me off-list. =)Allison

 

Eph. 2:15What is “KURIAKOS”?

What is “KURIAKOS”? Kevin L. Barney klbarney at yahoo.com
Sat May 22 18:33:06 EDT 1999

 

Earliest Manuscripts Comfort Pros Thank you Allison and Maurice for this interesting bit of eymology. When I think of the word KURIAKOS I immediately think of Rev. 1:10: EN PNEUMATI EN THi KURIAKHi hHMERAi, but I never would have thought to connect the Greek KURIAKOS with English “church.”Kevin L. BarneyHoffman Estates, Illinoisklbarney at yahoo.com

 

Earliest Manuscripts ComfortPros

What is “KURIAKOS”? Kevin L. Barney klbarney at yahoo.com
Sat May 22 18:33:06 EDT 1999

 

Earliest Manuscripts Comfort Pros Thank you Allison and Maurice for this interesting bit of eymology. When I think of the word KURIAKOS I immediately think of Rev. 1:10: EN PNEUMATI EN THi KURIAKHi hHMERAi, but I never would have thought to connect the Greek KURIAKOS with English “church.”Kevin L. BarneyHoffman Estates, Illinoisklbarney at yahoo.com

 

Earliest Manuscripts ComfortPros

What is “KURIAKOS”? Ben Crick ben.crick at argonet.co.uk
Sun May 23 12:58:40 EDT 1999

 

Pros PROS On Sat 22 May 99 , klbarney at yahoo.com wrote:> When I think of the word KURIAKOS I immediately think of Rev. 1:10: > EN PNEUMATI EN THi KURIAKHi hHMERAi, but I never would have thought to> connect the Greek KURIAKOS with English “church.” Kevin: The “church” is defined as hH KURIAKH EKKLHSIA, from Hebrew Q:HaL-YHWH; modern Hebrew Q:HiLaT-HaMMa$iYaCh. The English took their word Church from KURIAKH, whereas the French took their word Eglise from EKKLHSIA, Latin ecclesia. Ben– Revd Ben Crick, BA CF <ben.crick at argonet.co.uk> 232 Canterbury Road, Birchington, Kent, CT7 9TD (UK) http://www.cnetwork.co.uk/crick.htm

 

ProsPROS

What is “KURIAKOS”? Ben Crick ben.crick at argonet.co.uk
Sun May 23 12:58:40 EDT 1999

 

Pros PROS On Sat 22 May 99 , klbarney at yahoo.com wrote:> When I think of the word KURIAKOS I immediately think of Rev. 1:10: > EN PNEUMATI EN THi KURIAKHi hHMERAi, but I never would have thought to> connect the Greek KURIAKOS with English “church.” Kevin: The “church” is defined as hH KURIAKH EKKLHSIA, from Hebrew Q:HaL-YHWH; modern Hebrew Q:HiLaT-HaMMa$iYaCh. The English took their word Church from KURIAKH, whereas the French took their word Eglise from EKKLHSIA, Latin ecclesia. Ben– Revd Ben Crick, BA CF <ben.crick at argonet.co.uk> 232 Canterbury Road, Birchington, Kent, CT7 9TD (UK) http://www.cnetwork.co.uk/crick.htm

 

ProsPROS

What is “KURIAKOS”? atombomb at sirius.com atombomb at sirius.com
Sun May 23 23:26:23 EDT 1999

 

Christian booknotes Ben Crick wrote:> > The “church” is defined as hH KURIAKH EKKLHSIA, from Hebrew Q:HaL-YHWH;> modern Hebrew Q:HiLaT-HaMMa$iYaCh. The English took their word Church> from KURIAKH, whereas the French took their word Eglise from EKKLHSIA,> Latin ecclesia.That wouldn’t be quite correct. As I mentioned the other day, ourword church derives from the greek word kyriakon, which is a name forthe church building in Greek even to this day. The following note maybe found in John Ayto’s useful “Dictionary of Word Origins” (Arcade:New York, 1990): –*church* [OE] Etymologically, a *church* is the ‘Lord’s house.’ Itsultimate source is Greek *kyrios*… The adjective derived from thiswas *kyriakos*, whose use in the phrase ‘house of the Lord’ led to itsuse as a noun, *kyriakon*. The medievlal Greek form, *kyrkon* ‘houseof worship’ was borrowed into West Germanic as *kirika, producingeventually German *kirche* and English *church*. The Scots form *kirk*comes from Old Norse *kirkja*, which in turn was borrowed from Old English.–On a related usage, it’s interesting that the KYPIAKH HMEPA– our”Sunday”– originally referred to the “eighth” day of the week, not tothe Sabbath, as many suppose. Even today, in an uninterrupted usagethat persists from apostolic times, the word for Sunday in Greek is”Kyriaki”; Saturday is still “Sabbaton”; and this usage is alsoreflected in other languages as well (cf. French, Spanish, Italian,etc). For a scriptural reference to the eighth day, see Jn 20.26; forkyriakh hmera, Rv 1.10. Below my signature I will post an excerptfrom a classic in liturgical history and theology, discussing thistopic in case anyone is interested. The excerpt is from AlexanderSchmemann, Introduction To Liturgical Theology (2d ed.; Faith Press/StVladimir’s Seminary: Crestwood, NY) pp. 60-67, 119-121.Best regards and I hope this will be of interest to you!John Burnett, MA (OT)—————————

 

Christianbooknotes

What is “KURIAKOS”? atombomb at sirius.com atombomb at sirius.com
Sun May 23 23:26:23 EDT 1999

 

Christian booknotes Ben Crick wrote:> > The “church” is defined as hH KURIAKH EKKLHSIA, from Hebrew Q:HaL-YHWH;> modern Hebrew Q:HiLaT-HaMMa$iYaCh. The English took their word Church> from KURIAKH, whereas the French took their word Eglise from EKKLHSIA,> Latin ecclesia.That wouldn’t be quite correct. As I mentioned the other day, ourword church derives from the greek word kyriakon, which is a name forthe church building in Greek even to this day. The following note maybe found in John Ayto’s useful “Dictionary of Word Origins” (Arcade:New York, 1990): –*church* [OE] Etymologically, a *church* is the ‘Lord’s house.’ Itsultimate source is Greek *kyrios*… The adjective derived from thiswas *kyriakos*, whose use in the phrase ‘house of the Lord’ led to itsuse as a noun, *kyriakon*. The medievlal Greek form, *kyrkon* ‘houseof worship’ was borrowed into West Germanic as *kirika, producingeventually German *kirche* and English *church*. The Scots form *kirk*comes from Old Norse *kirkja*, which in turn was borrowed from Old English.–On a related usage, it’s interesting that the KYPIAKH HMEPA– our”Sunday”– originally referred to the “eighth” day of the week, not tothe Sabbath, as many suppose. Even today, in an uninterrupted usagethat persists from apostolic times, the word for Sunday in Greek is”Kyriaki”; Saturday is still “Sabbaton”; and this usage is alsoreflected in other languages as well (cf. French, Spanish, Italian,etc). For a scriptural reference to the eighth day, see Jn 20.26; forkyriakh hmera, Rv 1.10. Below my signature I will post an excerptfrom a classic in liturgical history and theology, discussing thistopic in case anyone is interested. The excerpt is from AlexanderSchmemann, Introduction To Liturgical Theology (2d ed.; Faith Press/StVladimir’s Seminary: Crestwood, NY) pp. 60-67, 119-121.Best regards and I hope this will be of interest to you!John Burnett, MA (OT)—————————

 

Christianbooknotes

[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU? Harold R. Holmyard III hholmyard at ont.com
Sun Sep 11 19:13:25 EDT 2005

 

[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU? [] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU? Dear Craig,>Recently I looked up either 1 Cor 11:20 or Rev 1:10 and was surprised to>find out “Lord’s” was actually KURIAKOS instead of just KURIOU. More>surprised to find it only occurred in those two places, and I don’t think>ever in LXX.> >I don’t think the entry in BAGD was that extensive. I’m wondering if anyone>else can shed some light on the significance of KURIAKOS, and how it is>distinct from simple genitive use of KURIOS? What information about this>word might be relevant to understanding Paul’s and John’s selection over>KURIOU?HH: I think the reason that it may have been chosen in Rev 1:10 is that the reference is to a day of the week. It gives the circumstances John was in when the vision started. BAGD says that this is certainly Sunday, as is the case in modern Greek. The phrase hHMERA KURIOU had a fixed prophetic meaning as indicating the climax of the age (Acts 2:20, etc.). Why this was done with 1 Cor 11:20 is not so clear to me.Yours,Harold Holmyard

 

[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU?[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU?

[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU? craig newsgroupstuff at people.net.au
Sun Sep 11 18:35:02 EDT 2005

 

[] TOU EIDENAI GNWSTON [] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU? Recently I looked up either 1 Cor 11:20 or Rev 1:10 and was surprised tofind out “Lord’s” was actually KURIAKOS instead of just KURIOU. Moresurprised to find it only occurred in those two places, and I don’t thinkever in LXX.I don’t think the entry in BAGD was that extensive. I’m wondering if anyoneelse can shed some light on the significance of KURIAKOS, and how it isdistinct from simple genitive use of KURIOS? What information about thisword might be relevant to understanding Paul’s and John’s selection overKURIOU?Thanks!–Craig JohnsonBrisbane, Australia

 

[] TOU EIDENAI GNWSTON[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU?

[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU? craig newsgroupstuff at people.net.au
Sun Sep 11 20:35:15 EDT 2005

 

[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU? [] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU? > HH: I think the reason that it may have been chosen in Rev 1:10 is > that the reference is to a day of the week. It gives the > circumstances John was in when the vision started. BAGD says that > this is certainly Sunday, as is the case in modern Greek. The phrase > hHMERA KURIOU had a fixed prophetic meaning as indicating the climax > of the age (Acts 2:20, etc.). Why this was done with 1 Cor 11:20 is > not so clear to me.> > Yours,> Harold HolmyardActually, I think another thing I read (can’t remember if BAGD or acommentary) suggested something about KURIAKOS used in relation to Caesar.This could also have something to do with the Rev 1:10 use, but not as sureabout 1 Cor 11:20…–Craig JohnsonBrisbane, Australia

 

[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU?[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU?

[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU? craig newsgroupstuff at people.net.au
Fri Sep 16 22:56:43 EDT 2005

 

[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU? [] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU? Does anyone else have any further comments on below? I’m still kurious aboutKURIAKOS :)–Craig JohnsonBrisbane, Australia > —–Original Message—–> From: -bounces at lists.ibiblio.org > [mailto:-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of craig> Sent: Monday, 12 September 2005 8:35 AM> To: at lists.ibiblio.org> Subject: [] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU?> > > Recently I looked up either 1 Cor 11:20 or Rev 1:10 and was > surprised to find out “Lord’s” was actually KURIAKOS instead > of just KURIOU. More surprised to find it only occurred in > those two places, and I don’t think ever in LXX.> > I don’t think the entry in BAGD was that extensive. I’m > wondering if anyone else can shed some light on the > significance of KURIAKOS, and how it is distinct from simple > genitive use of KURIOS? What information about this word > might be relevant to understanding Paul’s and John’s > selection over KURIOU?> > Thanks!> >> Craig Johnson> Brisbane, Australia > >> home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/>

 

[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU?[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU?

[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU? Jeff Smelser jeffsmelser at ntgreek.net
Sat Sep 17 00:38:52 EDT 2005

 

[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU? [] TOU EIDENAI GNWSTON craig wrote: Does anyone else have any further comments on below? I’m still kurious about KURIAKOS 🙂 — Craig Johnson Brisbane, AustraliaKute!Well, I can ramble a bit and talk about what others have said…Smyth noted that many denominatives (i.e., adjectives formed from a noun stem or adverb; a.k.a. “secondary,” which is the term Smyth will use below) formed by the addition of the suffix KO, AKO, or IKO (add the final sigma for the masculine nom. sing.) “denote relation, many others fitness or ability.” (858.6)Metzger mentions specifically the 3rd of these and characterizes such adjectives as meaning “belonging to,” “pertaining to,” or “with the characteristics of.” He gives examples in -IKOS, including BASIL-IKOS (“belonging to a king, kingly, royal”), PNEUMAT-IKOS (“pertaining to the spirit, with the characteristics of the spirit, spiritual”), SARK-IKOS (“fleshly, carnal”), and SOMAT-IKOS (“pertaining to the body, bodily”).I think of KURIAKOS as being similar. But Smyth mentioned KURIAKOS specifically in section 864.1 – “IAKO: secondary, in KUR-IAKO-S of the Lord.” He treated the suffix as including the iota, apparently reckoning the adjective to be derived from the noun KUROS rather than from its heir, KURIOS. I had guessed the adj. is from KURIOS and the suffix is -AKOS rather than -IAKOS. But then one of my guesses and several dollars will get you a gallon of gasoline. Go with Smyth. (But I’d still like to hear Carl’s thoughts on that point.)In any event, to me it seems safe to say the suffix indicates a relational idea similar to that seen in adjectives in -IKOS, and the “pertaining to” or “belonging to” idea seems to work especially well for KURIAKOS.As to why the choice of KURIAKOS rather than a genitive construction using the noun KURIOU, I’d suggest that even though there is some latitude in interpreting the significance of the adjectival suffix, the relationship is somewhat more specifically characterized thereby than by the genitive case form, which is used for ideas as widely divergent as kind, source, possession, etc. Hence the adjective was well suited to designate a day that was specially the Lord’s, and to designate the supper particularly pertaining to the Lord and eaten on that day.Jeff Smelserwww.ntgreek.netwww.centrevillechurchofchrist.org> > >>—–Original Message—–>>From: -bounces at lists.ibiblio.org >>[mailto:-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of craig>>Sent: Monday, 12 September 2005 8:35 AM>>To: at lists.ibiblio.org>>Subject: [] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU?>> >> >>Recently I looked up either 1 Cor 11:20 or Rev 1:10 and was >>surprised to find out “Lord’s” was actually KURIAKOS instead >>of just KURIOU. More surprised to find it only occurred in >>those two places, and I don’t think ever in LXX.>> >>I don’t think the entry in BAGD was that extensive. I’m >>wondering if anyone else can shed some light on the >>significance of KURIAKOS, and how it is distinct from simple >>genitive use of KURIOS? What information about this word >>might be relevant to understanding Paul’s and John’s >>selection over KURIOU?>> >>Thanks!>> >>>>Craig Johnson>>Brisbane, Australia >> >>>> home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/>> mailing list>> at lists.ibiblio.org >>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/>> >> >> > >> home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/> > > > >

 

[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU?[] TOU EIDENAI GNWSTON

[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU? Barbara D. Colt babc2 at comcast.net
Sat Sep 17 00:25:46 EDT 2005

 

[] A Tale of Two Translation Theories [] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU? On 17 Sep 2005 at 12:56, craig wrote:> Does anyone else have any further comments on below? I’m still kurious about> KURIAKOS 🙂> Maybe I’m being stupid, but I’m not getting the problem. KURIAKOS is an adjective; KURIOU is a noun in the genitive. What am I not seeing?Barbara D. Colt, mailto:babc2 at comcast.netSt John the Evangelist, San Francisco>From envy, hatred, and malice and all uncharitablenessGood Lord, deliver us.

 

[] A Tale of Two Translation Theories[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU?

[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU? craig newsgroupstuff at people.net.au
Sat Sep 17 09:05:37 EDT 2005

 

[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU? [] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU? > > Does anyone else have any further comments on below? I’m > > still kurious about KURIAKOS 🙂> > > Maybe I’m being stupid, but I’m not getting the problem. > KURIAKOS is an > adjective; KURIOU is a noun in the genitive. What am I not > seeing? Barbara D. Colt, mailto:babc2 at comcast.net St John the > Evangelist, San Francisco> >From envy, hatred, and malice and all uncharitableness> Good Lord, deliver us.To me there would seem to be some overlap between saying something is KURIOU(<noun> of the Lord) and putting it with the adjective KURIAKOS (the Lord’s<noun>). I’m wondering why choose one over the other? Why is KURIAKOS onlyused 2 times in the NT, and not anywhere else?For example, reading over Jeff and George’s replies and thinking over it abit more as an adjective, perhaps using KURIAKOS gives it a closerconnection with the noun, rather than as a ‘secondary modifier’ if KURIOUwas used? Then KURIAKOS would be more integral to the thing talked about,bundled together with it, kind of as part of the title or name of the thing,morese than perhaps KURIOU would.Alternatively, perhaps KURIAKOS has more cultural significance or something,and therefore that might be a reason for its use over KURIOU.I’m hoping Carl will chime in and add his thoughts too!–Craig JohnsonBrisbane, Australia PS Sorry Barbara for sending you a blank email.. I accidentally clicked on’send’ before typing anything!

 

[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU?[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU?

[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU? Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at ioa.com
Sat Sep 17 11:18:07 EDT 2005

 

[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU? [] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU? I honestly don’t think there’s an ounce of difference in the meanings: an adnominal genitive is rightly often called an “adjectival” genitive, meaning that it serves the same function as an adjective.On Sep 17, 2005, at 9:05 AM, craig wrote:>>> Does anyone else have any further comments on below? I’m>>> still kurious about KURIAKOS 🙂>>> >>> >> Maybe I’m being stupid, but I’m not getting the problem.>> KURIAKOS is an>> adjective; KURIOU is a noun in the genitive. What am I not>> seeing? Barbara D. Colt, mailto:babc2 at comcast.net St John the>> Evangelist, San Francisco>> >>> From envy, hatred, and malice and all uncharitableness>>> >> Good Lord, deliver us.>> > > To me there would seem to be some overlap between saying something > is KURIOU> (<noun> of the Lord) and putting it with the adjective KURIAKOS > (the Lord’s> <noun>). I’m wondering why choose one over the other? Why is > KURIAKOS only> used 2 times in the NT, and not anywhere else?> > For example, reading over Jeff and George’s replies and thinking > over it a> bit more as an adjective, perhaps using KURIAKOS gives it a closer> connection with the noun, rather than as a ‘secondary modifier’ if > KURIOU> was used? Then KURIAKOS would be more integral to the thing talked > about,> bundled together with it, kind of as part of the title or name of > the thing,> morese than perhaps KURIOU would.> > Alternatively, perhaps KURIAKOS has more cultural significance or > something,> and therefore that might be a reason for its use over KURIOU.> > I’m hoping Carl will chime in and add his thoughts too!> >> Craig Johnson> Brisbane, Australia> > PS Sorry Barbara for sending you a blank email.. I accidentally > clicked on> ‘send’ before typing anything!> >> home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/> Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad2 at mac.comWWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/

 

[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU?[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU?

[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU? Iver Larsen iver at larsen.dk
Sat Sep 17 14:40:13 EDT 2005

 

[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU? [] ELUPHSE TON KAIN LIAN > I honestly don’t think there’s an ounce of difference in the> meanings: an adnominal genitive is rightly often called an> “adjectival” genitive, meaning that it serves the same function as an> adjective.Whereas this is certainly correct in general, there is a clear distinctionbetween the usage of the relevant two expressions in the NT.hH hHMERA KURIOU as in 2 Pet 3:10 and several other places refer to thecoming of the Lord in the future. It is consistently rendered as “the day ofthe Lord” in English translation.hH KURIAKH hHMERA as in Rev 1:10 refers to a particular day of the week setaside for the Lord. It is consistently rendered in English translations as”the Lord’s day”.This second one gradually became a fixed expression for Sunday, but to use agenitive like in the first for Sunday would create confusion, because thegenitive expression already had a specific and different meaning within theChurch.English is fortunate to have two types of genitives, so that thisdistinction in reference can be maintained. This is not possible in Danish(and many other languages), so the literal versions in Danish traditionallytranslate both expressions the same way, resulting in seriousmisunderstandings. (Literal translations often create seriousmisunderstandings). In an idiomatic Danish translation Rev 1:10 has to betranslated by its meaning, which is Sunday, whereas the others can betranslated as “the Lord’s day” (or “(the day) when the Lord returns” orsomething similar).Iver LarsenBible Translation consultantKenya

 

[] KURIAKOS vs KURIOU?[] ELUPHSE TON KAIN LIAN

People who read this article also liked:

[AuthorRecommendedPosts]

One thought on “1 Corinthians 11:20

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>