1 Thessalonians 5:22

[] ειδοσ in 1 Thessalonians 5:22 Jon Boyd boyd at huxcomm.net
Thu May 1 23:57:09 εδτ 2003

[] English to Greek [] ειδοσ in 1 Thessalonians 5:22 Dear ers,ι was just reading a book that made a big point of abstaining from all”appearance of evil” as the κβψ translates 1 Thess. 5:22. 1 Thess. 5:21-22PANTA δε δοκιμαζετε, το καλον κατεξετε, απο παντοσ ειδουσ πονηρου απεξεσθε.Looking at βδαγ ι see they have three categories for ειδοσ: 1) the shape andstructure of someth. as it appears to someone, 2) a variety of someth., 3)the act of looking/seeing.βδαγ lists several passages to support the sense “variety of something,”including Josephus, Ant. 10:37, which speaks of παν ειδοσ πονηριασ.My Bibleworks copy of Louw and Nida lists two senses of ειδοσ: 1) form 58.14and 2) sight 24.1. My questions: Is the second sense in βδαγ legitimate, and if so why isn’t itincluded in Louw and Nida? Does anyone have any thoughts on the κψβ‘stranslation “appearance of evil”? Every other modern version ι‘ve seen goeswith “form” or “kind” of evil.Thanks,Jonathan BoydHuxley, Iowa

[] English to Greek[] ειδοσ in 1 Thessalonians 5:22

[] ειδοσ in 1 Thessalonians 5:22 Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org
Fri May 2 01:17:55 εδτ 2003

[] ειδοσ in 1 Thessalonians 5:22 [] National Biblical Greek Exam (Free Trial) > ι was just reading a book that made a big point of abstaining from all> “appearance of evil” as the κβψ translates 1 Thess. 5:22.> > 1 Thess. 5:21-22> παντα δε δοκιμαζετε, το καλον κατεξετε, απο παντοσ ειδουσ πονηρου> απεξεσθε.> > Looking at βδαγ ι see they have three categories for ειδοσ: 1)> the shape and> structure of someth. as it appears to someone, 2) a variety of someth., 3)> the act of looking/seeing.> > βδαγ lists several passages to support the sense “variety of something,”> including Josephus, Ant. 10:37, which speaks of παν ειδοσ πονηριασ.This must be the latest edition of βαγ. My βαγδ has 1) form, outwardappearance, 2) kind, 3) active seeing/sight.The gloss “a variety of something” is inaccurate and misleading, ιμο. Thevariety aspect seems to come from πασ in παντοσ ειδουσ or from aspects ofthe English word “kind” that are not included in ειδοσ. If so, it came aboutwhen Danker was redefining the English word “kind” using more words withoutdistinguishing carefully the various senses of “kind” in English.> > My Bibleworks copy of Louw and Nida lists two senses of ειδοσ: 1)> form 58.14 and 2) sight 24.1.Yes, but their “form” in 58.14 include “appearance”. ι would translate”every form of evil” which as you say is a common translation. In thecontext of “all, every” ι don’t see any difference between “every kind of”and “every form of”, but that does not mean that “kind” and “form” ingeneral are synonymous, and “form” is a better gloss for ειδοσ than “kind”.So, what ι am saying is that 2) is dubious for the ντ, but ι think it isprimarily a question of English glosses and English semantics.> > My questions: Is the second sense in βδαγ legitimate, and if so> why isn’t it included in Louw and Nida?ι would say, no, it is not legitimate, or at least misleading.> Does anyone have any thoughts on the κψβ‘s translation “appearance ofevil”?ι suppose we are dealing with a change in the English language as so oftenhappens when you compare the old English of the κψβ with modern English. MyWebster’s give 9 senses of “appearance” of which only a few would beappropriate glosses for ειδοσ today, but more may have been appropriate 400years ago. When you say “appearance of evil”, my guess is that many peoplewould think of sense 2b: “semblance”, and this sense is not part of ειδοσ,and therefore the κψ rendering does not accurately communicate the Greektext in modern English.Iver Larsen

[] ειδοσ in 1 Thessalonians 5:22[] National Biblical Greek Exam (Free Trial)