James 1:3

[] James 1:3 John Colby colby at solutions2000.net
Mon Dec 29 18:18:00 EST 2003

[] Where can I get ancient Greek documents online? [] James 1:3 James 1:3 reads:GINWSKONTES hOTI TO DOKIMION hUMWN THS PISTEWS KATEPGAZETAI hUPOMONHNThis might be obvious, but what does hUMWN modify? I think it is quite obvious that it modifies THS PISTEWS. Could it modify TO DOKIMION? Is there a rule relating to this? Jonathan ColbyGuyana, South America

[] Where can I get ancient Greek documents online?[] James 1:3

[] James 1:3 Mike Sangrey msangrey at BlueFeltHat.org
Mon Dec 29 19:50:40 EST 2003

[] James 1:3 [] James 1:3 On Mon, 2003-12-29 at 18:18, John Colby wrote:> > James 1:3 reads:> > GINWSKONTES hOTI TO DOKIMION hUMWN THS PISTEWS KATEPGAZETAI hUPOMONHN> > This might be obvious, but what does hUMWN modify? I think it is quite > obvious that it modifies THS PISTEWS. Could it modify TO DOKIMION? Is > there a rule relating to this? Hmmmmmmm…What we would have in a rather literal rendering into English, then,would be something like:…knowing that your faith-kind-of genuineness produces endurance.then a viable translation would be something like:…knowing that your faithful genuineness produces endurance.Which sounds a whole like:…knowing that your genuine faith produces endurance.Now, doesn’t that sound a whole lot like James 2:17? Isn’t that kindathe point of the letter?I would be very interested in how those more experienced than me answeryour question.– Mike Sangreymsangrey at BlueFeltHat.orgLandisburg, Pa. “The first one last wins.” “A net of highly cohesive details reveals the truth.”

[] James 1:3[] James 1:3

[] James 1:3 Mike Sangrey msangrey at BlueFeltHat.org
Mon Dec 29 19:50:40 EST 2003

[] James 1:3 [] James 1:3 On Mon, 2003-12-29 at 18:18, John Colby wrote:> > James 1:3 reads:> > GINWSKONTES hOTI TO DOKIMION hUMWN THS PISTEWS KATEPGAZETAI hUPOMONHN> > This might be obvious, but what does hUMWN modify? I think it is quite > obvious that it modifies THS PISTEWS. Could it modify TO DOKIMION? Is > there a rule relating to this? Hmmmmmmm…What we would have in a rather literal rendering into English, then,would be something like:…knowing that your faith-kind-of genuineness produces endurance.then a viable translation would be something like:…knowing that your faithful genuineness produces endurance.Which sounds a whole like:…knowing that your genuine faith produces endurance.Now, doesn’t that sound a whole lot like James 2:17? Isn’t that kindathe point of the letter?I would be very interested in how those more experienced than me answeryour question.– Mike Sangreymsangrey at BlueFeltHat.orgLandisburg, Pa. “The first one last wins.” “A net of highly cohesive details reveals the truth.”

[] James 1:3[] James 1:3

[] James 1:3 Jeffrey B. Gibson jgibson000 at comcast.net
Mon Dec 29 20:27:26 EST 2003

[] James 1:3 [] James 1:3 Mike Sangrey wrote:> Hmmmmmmm…> > What we would have in a rather literal rendering into English, then,> would be something like:> …knowing that your faith-kind-of genuineness produces endurance.> I’m not so sure that DOKIMION has anything to do with “genuineness” or thatPISTEWS functions adjectivally here.And surely, given the lead-in to vs. 3 which speaks of the brethren meetingPEIRASMOIS, the construction in question has to be rendered the “testing ofyour faithfulness” and what such **tested (and approved) faithfulness**,produces. In other words, your literal translation misses the point since thatwhich produces “endurance” is not some kind of “genuineness” (let alone a”faith kind” — what ever that is) but a faithfulness that has proved itself.Yours,Jeffrey–Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon.)1500 W. Pratt Blvd. #1Chicago, IL 60626jgibson000 at comcast.net

[] James 1:3[] James 1:3

[] James 1:3 Mike Sangrey msangrey at BlueFeltHat.org
Mon Dec 29 22:51:22 EST 2003

[] James 1:3 [] James 1:3 On Mon, 2003-12-29 at 20:27, Jeffrey B. Gibson wrote:> Mike Sangrey wrote:> > > Hmmmmmmm…> >> > What we would have in a rather literal rendering into English, then,> > would be something like:> > …knowing that your faith-kind-of genuineness produces endurance.> >> > I’m not so sure that DOKIMION has anything to do with “genuineness” or that> PISTEWS functions adjectivally here.‘Genuineness’ is taken right out of Louw & Nida as the second gloss forDOKIMION. The concept behind DOKIMION is that some form of testing hasshown the article tested is in fact genuine in nature. L&N list’testing’ first (27.45) but in the definition of DOKIMION in thesemantic domain of ‘try to learn’ they state, “to try to learn thegenuineness of something by examination and testing.” So, genuineness,as an English construct, more accurately reflects the core sense of theword. The other semantic domain under which the term is listed is, infact, ‘genuine, phony’. Here (73.3) L&N state, “genuineness on thebasis of having been tested.” So, at least according to L&N, DOKIMIONhas everything to do with ‘genuineness’.Also, at this point in my posting I wasn’t expressing PISTEWS as anadjective. I used the phrase ‘kind-of’ to express the genitivalrelationship. I got this idea from Robertson and use it as ananalytical hook to understand the use of a genitive in a given text.To keep the text before us:> GINWSKONTES hOTI TO DOKIMION hUMWN THS PISTEWS KATEPGAZETAI hUPOMONHNIf we drop all words within the hOTI clause except for those in thenominative, verb, and accusative slots, we simply have:TO DOKIMION KATEPGAZETAI hUPOMONHNSo, as James states it, it’s genuineness (of some kind) that producesendurance. Stating it like that immediately produces the question,genuineness of WHAT? Well, the words which were dropped answer thatquestion.> And surely, given the lead-in to vs. 3 which speaks of the brethren meeting> PEIRASMOIS, the construction in question has to be rendered the “testing of> your faithfulness” […]And this is the question under discussion. I agree with you thatPEIRASMOIS brings a lexical element of ‘testing’ to the text and thatelement syncs up (is syntagmatic) with DOKIMION. So, testing is astrong element in this text. But that doesn’t therefore require hUMWNto be construed with PISTEWS. I don’t think we can make that immediateconnection.It seems fairly natural to me to hear DOKIMION and then hear hUMWN withthe sense of delimiting DOKIMION and then to hear THS PISTEWS as afurther delimitation of DOKIMION hUMWN. The writer homes in from theconceptually general to the more specific by using a sequence ofgenitives.> and what such **tested (and approved) faithfulness**, produces.Yes, I agree. The idea of ‘approval’ is certainly one of the semanticcomponents of DOKIMION. I don’t see how this in any substantive waydiffers from the tentative conclusion I came to when I said:> …knowing that your genuine faith produces endurance.Something which is “tested and approved” is genuine, right? Perhaps youunderstand genuine sufficiently differently than I do, but not extremelyso, so that we’re speaking past each other.The interesting thing for me is as I think through how the Greek worksand then also think through how the English works, I find that being”faithfully genuine” and “genuinely faithful” mean the same thing.> In other words, your literal translation misses the point since that> which produces “endurance” is not some kind of “genuineness” (let alone a> “faith kind” — what ever that is) but a faithfulness that has proved itself.> Yours,> > Jeffrey>> > Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon.)> > 1500 W. Pratt Blvd. #1> Chicago, IL 60626> > jgibson000 at comcast.net> > >> home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/— Mike Sangreymsangrey at BlueFeltHat.orgLandisburg, Pa. “The first one last wins.” “A net of highly cohesive details reveals the truth.”

[] James 1:3[] James 1:3

[] James 1:3 Jeffrey B. Gibson jgibson000 at comcast.net
Mon Dec 29 20:27:26 EST 2003

[] James 1:3 [] James 1:3 Mike Sangrey wrote:> Hmmmmmmm…> > What we would have in a rather literal rendering into English, then,> would be something like:> …knowing that your faith-kind-of genuineness produces endurance.> I’m not so sure that DOKIMION has anything to do with “genuineness” or thatPISTEWS functions adjectivally here.And surely, given the lead-in to vs. 3 which speaks of the brethren meetingPEIRASMOIS, the construction in question has to be rendered the “testing ofyour faithfulness” and what such **tested (and approved) faithfulness**,produces. In other words, your literal translation misses the point since thatwhich produces “endurance” is not some kind of “genuineness” (let alone a”faith kind” — what ever that is) but a faithfulness that has proved itself.Yours,Jeffrey–Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon.)1500 W. Pratt Blvd. #1Chicago, IL 60626jgibson000 at comcast.net

[] James 1:3[] James 1:3

[] James 1:3 Mike Sangrey msangrey at BlueFeltHat.org
Mon Dec 29 22:51:22 EST 2003

[] James 1:3 [] James 1:3 On Mon, 2003-12-29 at 20:27, Jeffrey B. Gibson wrote:> Mike Sangrey wrote:> > > Hmmmmmmm…> >> > What we would have in a rather literal rendering into English, then,> > would be something like:> > …knowing that your faith-kind-of genuineness produces endurance.> >> > I’m not so sure that DOKIMION has anything to do with “genuineness” or that> PISTEWS functions adjectivally here.‘Genuineness’ is taken right out of Louw & Nida as the second gloss forDOKIMION. The concept behind DOKIMION is that some form of testing hasshown the article tested is in fact genuine in nature. L&N list’testing’ first (27.45) but in the definition of DOKIMION in thesemantic domain of ‘try to learn’ they state, “to try to learn thegenuineness of something by examination and testing.” So, genuineness,as an English construct, more accurately reflects the core sense of theword. The other semantic domain under which the term is listed is, infact, ‘genuine, phony’. Here (73.3) L&N state, “genuineness on thebasis of having been tested.” So, at least according to L&N, DOKIMIONhas everything to do with ‘genuineness’.Also, at this point in my posting I wasn’t expressing PISTEWS as anadjective. I used the phrase ‘kind-of’ to express the genitivalrelationship. I got this idea from Robertson and use it as ananalytical hook to understand the use of a genitive in a given text.To keep the text before us:> GINWSKONTES hOTI TO DOKIMION hUMWN THS PISTEWS KATEPGAZETAI hUPOMONHNIf we drop all words within the hOTI clause except for those in thenominative, verb, and accusative slots, we simply have:TO DOKIMION KATEPGAZETAI hUPOMONHNSo, as James states it, it’s genuineness (of some kind) that producesendurance. Stating it like that immediately produces the question,genuineness of WHAT? Well, the words which were dropped answer thatquestion.> And surely, given the lead-in to vs. 3 which speaks of the brethren meeting> PEIRASMOIS, the construction in question has to be rendered the “testing of> your faithfulness” […]And this is the question under discussion. I agree with you thatPEIRASMOIS brings a lexical element of ‘testing’ to the text and thatelement syncs up (is syntagmatic) with DOKIMION. So, testing is astrong element in this text. But that doesn’t therefore require hUMWNto be construed with PISTEWS. I don’t think we can make that immediateconnection.It seems fairly natural to me to hear DOKIMION and then hear hUMWN withthe sense of delimiting DOKIMION and then to hear THS PISTEWS as afurther delimitation of DOKIMION hUMWN. The writer homes in from theconceptually general to the more specific by using a sequence ofgenitives.> and what such **tested (and approved) faithfulness**, produces.Yes, I agree. The idea of ‘approval’ is certainly one of the semanticcomponents of DOKIMION. I don’t see how this in any substantive waydiffers from the tentative conclusion I came to when I said:> …knowing that your genuine faith produces endurance.Something which is “tested and approved” is genuine, right? Perhaps youunderstand genuine sufficiently differently than I do, but not extremelyso, so that we’re speaking past each other.The interesting thing for me is as I think through how the Greek worksand then also think through how the English works, I find that being”faithfully genuine” and “genuinely faithful” mean the same thing.> In other words, your literal translation misses the point since that> which produces “endurance” is not some kind of “genuineness” (let alone a> “faith kind” — what ever that is) but a faithfulness that has proved itself.> Yours,> > Jeffrey>> > Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon.)> > 1500 W. Pratt Blvd. #1> Chicago, IL 60626> > jgibson000 at comcast.net> > >> home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/— Mike Sangreymsangrey at BlueFeltHat.orgLandisburg, Pa. “The first one last wins.” “A net of highly cohesive details reveals the truth.”

[] James 1:3[] James 1:3

[] James 1:3 Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org
Tue Dec 30 01:49:54 EST 2003

[] James 1:3 [] Where can I get ancient Greek documents online? > James 1:3 reads:> > GINWSKONTES hOTI TO DOKIMION hUMWN THS PISTEWS KATERGAZETAI hUPOMONHN> > This might be obvious, but what does hUMWN modify? I think it is> quite obvious that it modifies THS PISTEWS. Could it modify TO> DOKIMION? Is there a rule relating to this?> > Jonathan Colby> Guyana, South AmericaNormally a possessive pronoun like hUMWN follows what it modifies. If thereis focus on the pronoun, it is fronted to come before what it modifies. Fromthis rule, I would say that hUMWN grammatically modifies TO DOKIMION.Several mss of minor importance have moved hUMWN to come after THS PISTEWSin order to connect it more naturally with PISTEWS. There is no contextualreason to focus on hUMWN.However, it doesn’t really make much difference, because DOKIMION THSPISTEWS is a unit of two nouns: faith-testing (an objective genitive, if youwant). From the beginning of v. 2 we have the appeal by James to the readersto count it a joyful experience when they go through many different kinds oftestings. And that “faith-testing of yours” or “your faith-testing” producesendurance, so count it joy, as you see the results.Mike has suggested that DOKIMION may here have the sense of “genuineness” (aderived nominal from the adjective DOKIM(I)OS – proven, genuine), but BADGlists James 1:3 under sense 1 “testing, means of testing”, based on context,whereas the other sense is found in 1 Pet 1:7.L&N also have the two senses, the primary one being “testing” 27.45, and thesecondary one being the outcome of the testing, namely “proven genuineness”73.3.And L&N has interpreted Jas 1:3 to indicate the sense of testing, since theylist this passage under 27.45.DOKIMION is an interesting word, and it is clearly their faith (orfaithfulness) that is being tested. As Mike has said, we can think of thephrase in stages. First the testing that you undergo (your testing), andthen the specific object of testing, that is, your faith. It is assumed thatthey will pass the test, and in the 1 Pet 1:7 passage which has many lexicalsimilarities with Jas 1:3, the focus is on the outcome of the testing,namely their proven, genuine faith(fullness).So, the word can mean either “a test to prove”, “proven by testing” or”provenness/genuineness” with a great deal of overlap with DOKIMH.Iver Larsen

[] James 1:3[] Where can I get ancient Greek documents online?

[] James 1:3 Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org
Tue Dec 30 01:49:54 EST 2003

[] James 1:3 [] Where can I get ancient Greek documents online? > James 1:3 reads:> > GINWSKONTES hOTI TO DOKIMION hUMWN THS PISTEWS KATERGAZETAI hUPOMONHN> > This might be obvious, but what does hUMWN modify? I think it is> quite obvious that it modifies THS PISTEWS. Could it modify TO> DOKIMION? Is there a rule relating to this?> > Jonathan Colby> Guyana, South AmericaNormally a possessive pronoun like hUMWN follows what it modifies. If thereis focus on the pronoun, it is fronted to come before what it modifies. Fromthis rule, I would say that hUMWN grammatically modifies TO DOKIMION.Several mss of minor importance have moved hUMWN to come after THS PISTEWSin order to connect it more naturally with PISTEWS. There is no contextualreason to focus on hUMWN.However, it doesn’t really make much difference, because DOKIMION THSPISTEWS is a unit of two nouns: faith-testing (an objective genitive, if youwant). From the beginning of v. 2 we have the appeal by James to the readersto count it a joyful experience when they go through many different kinds oftestings. And that “faith-testing of yours” or “your faith-testing” producesendurance, so count it joy, as you see the results.Mike has suggested that DOKIMION may here have the sense of “genuineness” (aderived nominal from the adjective DOKIM(I)OS – proven, genuine), but BADGlists James 1:3 under sense 1 “testing, means of testing”, based on context,whereas the other sense is found in 1 Pet 1:7.L&N also have the two senses, the primary one being “testing” 27.45, and thesecondary one being the outcome of the testing, namely “proven genuineness”73.3.And L&N has interpreted Jas 1:3 to indicate the sense of testing, since theylist this passage under 27.45.DOKIMION is an interesting word, and it is clearly their faith (orfaithfulness) that is being tested. As Mike has said, we can think of thephrase in stages. First the testing that you undergo (your testing), andthen the specific object of testing, that is, your faith. It is assumed thatthey will pass the test, and in the 1 Pet 1:7 passage which has many lexicalsimilarities with Jas 1:3, the focus is on the outcome of the testing,namely their proven, genuine faith(fullness).So, the word can mean either “a test to prove”, “proven by testing” or”provenness/genuineness” with a great deal of overlap with DOKIMH.Iver Larsen

[] James 1:3[] Where can I get ancient Greek documents online?

People who read this article also liked:

[AuthorRecommendedPosts]

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>