Luke 17:6

[] Luke 17.6 AN = contingency? Mitch Larramore mitchlarramore at yahoo.com
Wed Feb 13 01:21:55 EST 2008

 

[] Luke 16:23 TOIS KOLPOIS [] Luke 17.6 AN = contingency? EIPEN DE hO KURIOS EI ECETE PISTIN hWS KOKKON SINAPEWSELEGETE AN THi SUKAMINWi TAUTHi EKRIZWQHTI KAIFUTEUQHTI EN THi QALASSHi KAI hUPHKOUSEN AN hUMIN How does AN change ELEGETE and uUPHKOUSEN had they notbeen there? Doesn’t AN make the verbs somewhat morecontingent on something? Almost as if, “you shallsay…” to “it is possible you could say…” Or, not”it will obey you” but something like “perhaps it willobey you.” (I think of AN as converting an Indicativeexpression/command closer to a Subjunctive.)Mitch LarramoreSugar Land, Texas ____________________________________________________________________________________Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

 

[] Luke 16:23 TOIS KOLPOIS[] Luke 17.6 AN = contingency?

[] Luke 17.6 AN = contingency? Carl Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Wed Feb 13 05:16:12 EST 2008

 

[] Luke 17.6 AN = contingency? [] hEAUTOU vs SEAUTOU On Feb 13, 2008, at 1:21 AM, Mitch Larramore wrote:> > EIPEN DE hO KURIOS EI ECETE PISTIN hWS KOKKON SINAPEWS> ELEGETE AN THi SUKAMINWi TAUTHi EKRIZWQHTI KAI> FUTEUQHTI EN THi QALASSHi KAI hUPHKOUSEN AN hUMIN> > How does AN change ELEGETE and uUPHKOUSEN had they not> been there? Doesn’t AN make the verbs somewhat more> contingent on something? Almost as if, “you shall> say…” to “it is possible you could say…” Or, not> “it will obey you” but something like “perhaps it will> obey you.” (I think of AN as converting an Indicative> expression/command closer to a Subjunctive.)You should learn to expect AN in conditional constructions and learn to distinguish the conditional constructions. AN used with the imperfect and aorist indicative is regular in the result clause of contrary-to-fact conditions: ‘If you DID have faith (but you don’t), you WOULD be saying … “Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)

 

[] Luke 17.6 AN = contingency?[] hEAUTOU vs SEAUTOU

[] Luke 17:16 simple conditional statement??? Travis Schuler jckaroe95 at yahoo.com
Tue Jun 30 08:42:09 EDT 2009

 

[] purpose hina vs. result hina? [] Luke 17:16 simple conditional statement??? Luke 17:6 εἶπεν δὲ ὁ κύριος εἰ ἔχετε πίστιν ὡς κόκκον σινάπεως ἐλέγετε ἂντῇ συκαμίνῳ ταύτῃ ἐκριζώθητι καὶ φυτεύθητι ἐν τῇ θαλάσσῃ καὶ ὑπήκουσενἂν ὑμῖν.Is this a simple conditional statement??? the use of the indicative in the protasis seems to indicate it is, but I understand simple conditionals are rather rare. Also, the theological interpretations I have encountered seem to treat this verse as a general conditional statement. Any input would be greatly appreciated.Thank you

 

[] purpose hina vs. result hina?[] Luke 17:16 simple conditional statement???

[] Luke 17:16 simple conditional statement??? Carl Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Tue Jun 30 12:10:08 EDT 2009

 

[] Luke 17:16 simple conditional statement??? [] Luke 17:16 simple conditional statement??? On Jun 30, 2009, at 8:42 AM, Travis Schuler wrote:> Luke 17:6 εἶπεν δὲ ὁ κύριος εἰ ἔχετε > πίστιν ὡς κόκκον σινάπεως ἐλέγετε > ἂν> τῇ συκαμίνῳ ταύτῃ ἐκριζώθητι καὶ > φυτεύθητι ἐν τῇ θαλάσσῃ καὶ > ὑπήκουσεν> ἂν ὑμῖν.Our protocol requires that IF you cite the Greek text using Unicode UTF-8 Greek, you MUST ALSO give the text in transliterated form:EIPEN DE hO KURIOS, EI ECETE PISTIN hWS KOKKON SINAPEWS, ELEGETE AN THi SUKAMINWi TAUTHi, EKRIZWQHTI KAI FUTEUQHTE EN THi QALASSHi KAI hUPHKOUSEN AN hUMIN.> > Is this a simple conditional statement??? the use of the indicative > in the protasis seems to indicate it is, but I understand simple > conditionals are rather rare. Also, the theological interpretations > I have encountered seem to treat this verse as a general conditional > statement. Any input would be greatly appreciated.This is actually a mixed condition, but in its fundamental structure, it is closer to a present counterfactual co;ndition; we would really expect the protasis to be in the indicative imperfect, since the apodoses are ELEGETE AN and hUPHKOUSEN AN, which are appropriate to present and past counterfactual result-clauses.. The present tense of ECETE is odd; the more appropriate imperfect form EICETE. is less to be noted among textual variants than EAN ECHTE, which is not at all appropriate.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)

 

[] Luke 17:16 simple conditional statement???[] Luke 17:16 simple conditional statement???

[] Luke 17:16 simple conditional statement??? Mark Lightman lightmanmark at yahoo.com
Tue Jun 30 12:52:59 EDT 2009

 

[] Luke 17:16 simple conditional statement??? [] purpose hina vs. result hina? Carl wrote: <The present tense of ECETE is odd; the more appropriate imperfect form EICETE. is less to  be noted among textual variants than EAN ECHTE, which is not at all  appropriate.> I know that textual criticism is technically beyondthe parameters of the list, but I find it odd that neitherNA 27 nor Metzger has a note here indicating thatEIXETE is found in the Textus Receptus.  It mustbe poorly attested, because even Robinson Pierpontprints EXETE without a note, although Hodges/Farstaddoes at least have a note.  Without in any way arguing thatEIXETE is original, it seems it should at least be broughtto ones attention.  (And I’m glad Carl did so.)The NASB and the NRSV, by giving “If you hadfaith” (compare NIV “If you have faith”) seem to treat the passage as a normal contrary to fact condition,although I don’t know if this is because one often regularlyfinds these “mixed” types with presents where you wouldexpect imperfects, or because these versions are stillbeing influenced by the KJV which follows the T.R. Again, I say this not to argue for one or another text type,but just to point out what I’ve noticed  before, thatNA 27 often fails to even note T.R. readings which maybe secondary but should at least be part of the discussion. Mark LΦωσφορος ΜαρκοςFWSFOROS MARKOS— On Tue, 6/30/09, Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com> wrote:From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>Subject: Re: [] Luke 17:16 simple conditional statement???To: “Travis Schuler” <jckaroe95 at yahoo.com>Cc: at lists.ibiblio.orgDate: Tuesday, June 30, 2009, 10:10 AMOn Jun 30, 2009, at 8:42 AM, Travis Schuler wrote:> Luke 17:6  εἶπεν δὲ ὁ κύριος εἰ ἔχετε  > πίστιν ὡς κόκκον σινάπεως ἐλέγετε  > ἂν> τῇ συκαμίνῳ ταύτῃ ἐκριζώθητι καὶ  > φυτεύθητι ἐν τῇ θαλάσσῃ καὶ  > ὑπήκουσεν> ἂν ὑμῖν.Our protocol requires that IF you cite the Greek text using  Unicode UTF-8 Greek, you MUST ALSO give the text in transliterated form:EIPEN DE hO KURIOS, EI ECETE PISTIN hWS KOKKON SINAPEWS, ELEGETE AN  THi SUKAMINWi TAUTHi, EKRIZWQHTI KAI FUTEUQHTE EN THi QALASSHi KAI  hUPHKOUSEN AN hUMIN.> > Is this a simple conditional statement??? the use of the indicative  > in the protasis seems to indicate it is, but I understand simple  > conditionals are rather rare. Also, the theological interpretations  > I have encountered seem to treat this verse as a general conditional  > statement. Any input would be greatly appreciated.This is actually a mixed condition, but in its fundamental structure,  it is closer to a present counterfactual co;ndition; we would really  expect the protasis to be in the indicative imperfect, since the  apodoses are ELEGETE AN and hUPHKOUSEN AN, which are appropriate to  present and past counterfactual result-clauses.. The present tense of  ECETE is odd; the more appropriate imperfect form EICETE. is less to  be noted among textual variants than EAN ECHTE, which is not at all  appropriate.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)— home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/

 

[] Luke 17:16 simple conditional statement???[] purpose hina vs. result hina?

[] Luke 17:16 simple conditional statement??? Elizabeth Kline kline_dekooning at earthlink.net
Tue Jun 30 13:49:58 EDT 2009

 

[] Luke 17:16 simple conditional statement??? [] Luke 17:16 simple conditional statement??? Carl,On Jun 30, 2009, at 9:10 AM, Carl Conrad wrote:> On Jun 30, 2009, at 8:42 AM, Travis Schuler wrote:> >> Luke 17:6 εἶπεν δὲ ὁ κύριος εἰ ἔχετε>> πίστιν ὡς κόκκον σινάπεως ἐλέγετε>> ἂν>> τῇ συκαμίνῳ ταύτῃ ἐκριζώθητι καὶ>> φυτεύθητι ἐν τῇ θαλάσσῃ καὶ>> ὑπήκουσεν>> ἂν ὑμῖν.> > Our protocol requires that IF you cite the Greek text using> Unicode UTF-8 Greek, you MUST ALSO give the text in transliterated > form:> > EIPEN DE hO KURIOS, EI ECETE PISTIN hWS KOKKON SINAPEWS, ELEGETE AN> THi SUKAMINWi TAUTHi, EKRIZWQHTI KAI FUTEUQHTE EN THi QALASSHi KAI> hUPHKOUSEN AN hUMIN.>> >> Is this a simple conditional statement??? the use of the indicative>> in the protasis seems to indicate it is, but I understand simple>> conditionals are rather rare. Also, the theological interpretations>> I have encountered seem to treat this verse as a general conditional>> statement. Any input would be greatly appreciated.> > This is actually a mixed condition,Which raises the question, what is at fault here? The language of the author or the system of categories for conditionals? In light of our recent discussion of the genitive case, I wonder what the categories accomplish for us. When a question like this is raised, I assume the student is preparing an exegesis paper or getting ready for an exam. I read the text in Luke without any question about what it was saying. So my training in Koine must be defective somehow since I should have stopped and asked, what is wrong here, this construction doesn’t fit into the canonical paradigms for Greek conditionals.> but in its fundamental structure,> it is closer to a present counterfactual co;ndition; we would really> expect the protasis to be in the indicative imperfect, since the> apodoses are ELEGETE AN and hUPHKOUSEN AN, which are appropriate to> present and past counterfactual result-clauses.. The present tense of> ECETE is odd; the more appropriate imperfect form EICETE. is less to> be noted among textual variants than EAN ECHTE, which is not at all> appropriate.Elizabeth Kline

 

[] Luke 17:16 simple conditional statement???[] Luke 17:16 simple conditional statement???

People who read this article also liked:

[AuthorRecommendedPosts]

22 thoughts on “Luke 17:6

    1. Troy Day: I appreciate your help. But this particular discussion seems to be center around whether the tree will be moved or it might be moved.
      But my question is centered around AS A GRAIN OF MUSTARD SEED.
      Some translations say SIZE OF A MUSTARD SEED..
      A grain of mustard seed means one seed.
      Whereas the size of a mustard seed is not about how many grains of seed you hove, but about the physical size of the seed.
      There is a difference in the interpretation with two seemingly different meaning.
      I am not a theological student. This could be a doctrinal point.

    2. Troy Day Troy Day says:

      This is what Luke 17:6 says and what the ProBible discussion is about

      Lk 17:6 He replied, “If you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mulberry tree, ‘Be uprooted and planted in the sea,’ and it will obey you.

  1. Troy Day Troy Day says:

    Scotty Searan the musterd part is freely assumed I’ve seen many translations trying to figure out the greek word συκαμίνῳ

    GRK: ἂν τῇ συκαμίνῳ ταύτῃ Ἐκριζώθητι
    NAS: to this mulberry tree, ‘Be uprooted
    KJV: unto this sycamine tree, Be thou plucked up by the root,
    INT: anyhow to the mulberry tree this Be you rooted up

    1. Troy Day Troy Day says:

      KJV translates the word (int its forms)

      κόκκῳ — 3 Occ.
      κόκκον — 3 Occ.
      κόκκος — 1 Occ.

      as grain, seed and corn – see John 12:24
      KJV: unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall

      the only time Paul uses the word is in 1 Corinthians 15:37
      GRK: ἀλλὰ γυμνὸν κόκκον εἰ τύχοι
      NAS: which is to be, but a bare grain, perhaps
      KJV: bare grain, it may chance
      INT: but a bare grain if it may be

    2. Thank you. There isn’t any scriptures in the Greek about the mustard seed that it is the about the size of the seed. It is about the faith of the seed that God put in it, just like all of us were given the measure of faith.
      No matter the size of the seed whether it be a ford hook Lima bean seed or the mustard seed they both have the same amount of faith created in them as the other

  2. Troy Day Troy Day says:

    Scotty Searan I dont think the Bible answers your question at all

    mustard seed in modern Greek is σπόρος μουστάρδας
    sporos is the word for seed – the word used in the Bible us usually used for grain, corn ie multi-seed crop HOWEVER 2000 yrs later we may not have the clear idea how this word was used within the Community of Jesus Not to mention KJV lingo still messes up with our heads today

    1. Why not take it as it is read. This is pretty straight forward..
      All seed that you put in the ground have the same amount of faith whether it is Lima Bean Seed or mustard seed,
      It isn’t the size of the seed, but it is the faith in the seed.
      Just like God Gives to every man the measure of faith.
      Thank you for your help. I don’t know it might have made you think about this

    2. Troy Day Troy Day says:

      As it reads in the Greek? Which one?

      Stephens 1550 Textus Receptus
      eipen de o kurioV ei eicete pistin wV kokkon sinapewV elegete an th sukaminw tauth ekrizwqhti kai futeuqhti en th qalassh kai uphkousen an umin

      Scrivener 1894 Textus Receptus
      eipen de o kurioV ei eicete pistin wV kokkon sinapewV elegete an th sukaminw tauth ekrizwqhti kai futeuqhti en th qalassh kai uphkousen an umin

      Byzantine Majority
      eipen de o kurioV ei ecete pistin wV kokkon sinapewV elegete an th sukaminw tauth ekrizwqhti kai futeuqhti en th qalassh kai uphkousen an umin

      Alexandrian
      eipen de o kurioV ei ecete pistin wV kokkon sinapewV elegete an th sukaminw [tauth] ekrizwqhti kai futeuqhti en th qalassh kai uphkousen an umin

      Hort and Westcott
      eipen de o kurioV ei ecete pistin wV kokkon sinapewV elegete an th sukaminw tauth ekrizwqhti kai futeuqhti en th qalassh kai uphkousen an umin

      Latin Vulgate

    3. KOKKON Every one means a grain, kernel or seed not size
      I an’t read the Greek, but I probably could take Google and find out the meaning.
      They are almost all alike.
      Some say sentence structure in Greek can change the meaning of the word.
      Where do they get sizer of seed as being the amount of faith?

    4. Troy Day KJV does not say it that way, but some of the others say it that way.
      Where does the other translations get it from when the Greek word about a single seed not size.
      KJV is about quality of faith not quantity of faith

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>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.