Galatians 2:8

[] Galatians 2:8 ellipsis lws39 at juno.com lws39 at juno.com
Sat Feb 16 23:29:24 EST 2008

 

[] Is GRAFH in the singular used in Josephus or Philofor all the scriptures? [] Galatians 2:8 ellipsis Galatians 2:8O GAR ENERGHSAS PETRW EIS APOSTOLHN THS PERITOMHS ENHRGHSEN KAI EMOI EIS TA EQNHMy question pertains to the phrases:EIS APOSTOLHN THS PERITOMHS and EIS TA EQNH.I would have expected an ellipsis of the accusative APOSTOLHN followed by the genitive TWN EQNWN. Instead it is EIS TA EQNH.Is there any significance to the difference here?Thank you.Walt SeeversMissoula Montana_____________________________________________________________Tired of going to the post office? Click for home mailing solution.http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2111/fc/Ioyw6iie6ZSdbsTCM4wFAjyBTPJnDL5kOJhf9LjRcllPDQ0aIQGDiY/

 

[] Is GRAFH in the singular used in Josephus or Philofor all the scriptures?[] Galatians 2:8 ellipsis

[] Galatians 2:8 ellipsis Vasile Stancu stancu at mail.dnttm.ro
Sun Feb 17 02:18:25 EST 2008

 

[] Galatians 2:8 ellipsis [] Galatians 2:8 ellipsis The ellipsis here seems to be not perfectly mathematical, at first sight…… or, perhaps – if I am allowed to change my mind – it is rigorouslymathematical, if EIS is emphasised, instead of TWN, as the prompter for theellipsis. The sense of the phrase would then be, O GAR ENERGHSAS PETRW EISAPOSTOLHN THS PERITOMHS ENHRGHSEN KAI EMOI EIS TA EQNH [APOSTOLOS] (i.e.that I, Paul, be that which was previously said of Peter, except, not tothose of the circumcision, but to those of the gentiles).Vasile StancuP.S. Please do not take this as an opinion of a scholar: I am just a personwho has a great passion for biblical Greek. A faithful reader.—–Original Message—–From: -bounces at lists.ibiblio.org[mailto:-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of lws39 at juno.comSent: Sunday, February 17, 2008 1:29 PMTo: at lists.ibiblio.orgSubject: [] Galatians 2:8 ellipsisGalatians 2:8O GAR ENERGHSAS PETRW EIS APOSTOLHN THS PERITOMHS ENHRGHSEN KAI EMOI EIS TAEQNHMy question pertains to the phrases:EIS APOSTOLHN THS PERITOMHS and EIS TAEQNH.I would have expected an ellipsis of the accusative APOSTOLHN followed bythe genitive TWN EQNWN. Instead it is EIS TA EQNH.Is there any significance to the difference here?Thank you.Walt SeeversMissoula Montana_____________________________________________________________Tired of going to the post office? Click for home mailing solution.http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2111/fc/Ioyw6iie6ZSdbsTCM4wFAjyBTPJnDL5kOJhf9LjRcllPDQ0aIQGDiY/— home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/

 

[] Galatians 2:8 ellipsis[] Galatians 2:8 ellipsis

[] Galatians 2:8 ellipsis Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org
Mon Feb 18 00:27:06 EST 2008

 

[] Galatians 2:8 ellipsis [] Prevalence of holy books —– Original Message —– From: <lws39 at juno.com>To: < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: 17. februar 2008 07:29Subject: [] Galatians 2:8 ellipsis> Galatians 2:8> O GAR ENERGHSAS PETRW EIS APOSTOLHN THS PERITOMHS ENHRGHSEN KAI EMOI EIS TA EQNH> My question pertains to the phrases:EIS APOSTOLHN THS PERITOMHS and EIS TA EQNH.> I would have expected an ellipsis of the accusative APOSTOLHN followed by the genitive TWN EQNWN. > Instead it is EIS TA EQNH.> Is there any significance to the difference here?> Thank you.> Walt Seevers> Missoula MontanaIt is not clear to me what you would have expected. You are correct that there is an ellipsis of the word APOSTOLH. The full form would have been:O GAR ENERGHSAS PETRW EIS APOSTOLHN THS PERITOMHS, ENHRGHSEN KAI EMOI EIS APOSTOLHN TWN EQNWNThe apostleship idea is shared between the two clauses, whereas there is a contrast between Jews and Gentiles, so it is natural to not repeat APOSTOLH in the second clause. If you keep EIS and remove APOSTOLH, then EQNH has to be in the accusative following EIS.Were you thinking of also eliding EIS? In that case, I suppose it might be:O GAR ENERGHSAS PETRW EIS APOSTOLHN THS PERITOMHS, ENHRGHSEN KAI EMOI TWN EQNWNI don’t know if this is possible. It looks strange and ungrammatical to have a hanging genitive like that.Iver

 

[] Galatians 2:8 ellipsis[] Prevalence of holy books

People who read this article also liked:

[AuthorRecommendedPosts]