2 Cor 6:10 Brian & Tina Perkins perkinsfam at geocities.com
Thu Sep 2 12:58:53 EDT 1999
Which version of LXX? Which version of LXX? Hello all,Well, I survived the white-water rafting experience – a little bruised perhaps, but nothing broken!In 2 Cor 6:10, what do you think Paul was trying to say by differentiating between EXONTES and KATEXONTES? What’s the difference in “having” and “possessing”?(Off-list theological discussions on this topic are also welcomed.)Thanks,Brian
Which version of LXX?Which version of LXX?
2 Cor 6:10 Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Thu Sep 2 13:31:50 EDT 1999
Which version of LXX? Which version of LXX? At 11:58 AM -0500 9/2/99, Brian & Tina Perkins wrote:>Hello all,> >Well, I survived the white-water rafting experience – a little bruised>perhaps, but nothing broken!> >In 2 Cor 6:10, what do you think Paul was trying to say by differentiating>between EXONTES and KATEXONTES?hWS MHDEN ECONTES KAI PANTA KATECONTES>What’s the difference in “having” and “possessing”?The KATA- here can mean any number of things depending on the context, butclearly here there’s an antithesis implied pretty obviously, betweenpossessing (property, substance) and holding on tightly to everything thatis really important (beliefs, convictions, moral principles, etc.) Youmight take a look at Louw & Nida 13.150, 31.48 37.17, 54.22, 57.1, 85.9 forthe range of senses which KATECW may take in different contexts just in theGNT. I think the significant one for 2 Cor 6:10 is #31.48 “continue tobelieve, with the implication of acting in accordance with such belief …”>(Off-list theological discussions on this topic are also welcomed.)And keep them OFF-LIST!Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics/Washington UniversityOne Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Which version of LXX?Which version of LXX?
2 Cor 6:10 Joe A. Friberg JoeFriberg at email.msn.com
Thu Sep 2 15:15:07 EDT 1999
Jerusalem, neuter plural 2 Cor 6:10 —– Original Message —–From: Brian & Tina Perkins <perkinsfam at geocities.com>To: Biblical Greek < at franklin.oit.unc.edu>> In 2 Cor 6:10, what do you think Paul was trying to say by differentiatingbetween EXONTES and KATEXONTES?> What’s the difference in “having” and “possessing”?KATA- generally has an intensifying effect. May be something like ‘hold onto’ as in 1 Thes 5.21, 1 Cor 11.2, 15.2 (of gospel, traditions, etc.), orused negatively of physical possessions in 1 Cor 7.30.Choice of words EXW/KATEXW probably due to rhetoric as much as to specificsense of word. Especially since KATAEXW is so polysemous–it must pick upmuch of its sense from context: here it is contrast between physical lackand spiritual riches/blessings.Joe FribergArlngton, TX
Jerusalem, neuter plural2 Cor 6:10
2 Cor 6:10 clayton stirling bartholomew c.s.bartholomew at worldnet.att.net
Thu Sep 2 15:29:29 EDT 1999
2 Cor 6:10 2 Cor 6:10 >From: “Joe A. Friberg” <JoeFriberg at email.msn.com>>To: Biblical Greek < at franklin.oit.unc.edu>>Subject: Re: 2 Cor 6:10>Date: Thu, Sep 2, 1999, 12:15 PM> > KATA- generally has an intensifying effect.Joe,I wonder about this. I have read a number of KATAs both independent onesand ones in compound verbs. I know that there are grammars which saythat ” KATA- generally has an intensifying effect” but I remainunconvinced of this by my observation of KATA in actual use. I suspectthat any statement about what KATA generally means will be generallywrong. But you know I am a contrarian by nature, always attacking theconventional wisdom on questions like “what does KATA mean?” I am notsure that questions like “what does KATA mean?” are the sort ofquestions that can be answered in any general way. To the veterans this observation will draw a lot of yawns and perhaps a someremark like “there he goes again.”–Clayton Stirling BartholomewThree Tree PointP.O. Box 255 Seahurst WA 98062
2 Cor 6:102 Cor 6:10
2 Cor 6:10 Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Thu Sep 2 16:08:48 EDT 1999
2 Cor 6:10 2 Cor 6:10 At 12:29 PM -0700 9/2/99, clayton stirling bartholomew wrote:>>From: “Joe A. Friberg” <JoeFriberg at email.msn.com>>>To: Biblical Greek < at franklin.oit.unc.edu>>>Subject: Re: 2 Cor 6:10>>Date: Thu, Sep 2, 1999, 12:15 PM>> > >> KATA- generally has an intensifying effect.> >Joe,> >I wonder about this. I have read a number of KATAs both independent ones>and ones in compound verbs. I know that there are grammars which say>that ” KATA- generally has an intensifying effect” but I remain>unconvinced of this by my observation of KATA in actual use. I suspect>that any statement about what KATA generally means will be generally>wrong. But you know I am a contrarian by nature, always attacking the>conventional wisdom on questions like “what does KATA mean?” I am not>sure that questions like “what does KATA mean?” are the sort of>questions that can be answered in any general way. To the >veterans this observation will draw a lot of yawns and perhaps a some>remark like “there he goes again.”“There he goes again!” Ah yes, he does indeed.Actually I liked Joe’s other comment more–the one that Clay has NOT cited:>Choice of words EXW/KATEXW probably due to rhetoric as much as to specific>sense of word. Especially since KATEXW is so polysemous–it must pick up>much of its sense from context: here it is contrast between physical lack>and spiritual riches/blessings.I think that’s right on target!”polysemous”–yes, wonderful word, it is indeed polysemous; this is why inmy own response to Brian’s original question I pointed to the numerousarticles in Louw & Nida for the many very different senses in which KATECWis used.As for “intensifying effect,” I think that’s as true for compounds withDIA- and EPI- in particular, and often even APO- (APOBLEPW, for instance,means “to focus one’s eyes upon” although one might suppose that it means”look away”–as in the immortal words of the Confederate national anthem).It probably IS impossible to capture all the senses of KATA- very simply,but I’ve always thought that “in hot pursuit” summed up some of what’sessential to it: “zealously,” “intently,” “downstream,” with “hostility,”etc.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics/Washington UniversityOne Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
2 Cor 6:102 Cor 6:10
2 Cor 6:10 clayton stirling bartholomew c.s.bartholomew at worldnet.att.net
Thu Sep 2 17:00:01 EDT 1999
2 Cor 6:10 Jerusalem, neuter plural ———->From: “Carl W. Conrad” <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>>To: “clayton stirling bartholomew” <c.s.bartholomew at worldnet.att.net>>Cc: Biblical Greek < at franklin.oit.unc.edu>>Subject: Re: 2 Cor 6:10>Date: Thu, Sep 2, 1999, 1:08 PM> > As for “intensifying effect,” I think that’s as true for compounds with> DIA- and EPI- in particular, and often even APOCarl,I agree with most of what Joe said but his opening remark seemed tocontradict the rest of it. If KATEXW is polysemous then why talk at allabout the “general” since it would be more accurate to simply state thatthere are certain distributions of KATA some of which seem to show an”intensifying effect.” I am very skeptical about the idea that KATA orany other preposition (or word or element of grammar) has some sort ofstable CORE of meaning (either functional or referential meaning). Thisis why I raise these objections all the time. It is a question of Modelsand Methods. The Models and Methods of CORE meaning are problematic ifyou are doing “postmodern” grammar.Aren’t we all doing postmodern grammar? :->>>>Clay
2 Cor 6:10Jerusalem, neuter plural
2 Cor 6:10 Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Thu Sep 2 17:18:01 EDT 1999
Jerusalem, neuter plural “Present-future” Tense (was “Ungrammatical …”) At 2:00 PM -0700 9/2/99, clayton stirling bartholomew wrote:>Aren’t we all doing postmodern grammar? :->>>>> >ClaySpeak for yourself, Clay: you’re the one who seems to want to labelprocedures and people; I’ve always thought of my own procedures as a matterof trying to understand the tradition and applying it where it’s applicableand trying to find something that works better where the tradition is notapplicable. I don’t think of grammar as a science so much as a “lore.”Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics/Washington UniversityOne Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649cwconrad at artsci.wustl.eduWWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
Jerusalem, neuter plural”Present-future” Tense (was “Ungrammatical …”)
2 Cor 6:10 Joe A. Friberg JoeFriberg at email.msn.com
Thu Sep 2 22:38:18 EDT 1999
SPIT OUT in Gal 4:14 Which version of LXX? —– Original Message —–From: clayton stirling bartholomew <c.s.bartholomew at worldnet.att.net>To: Biblical Greek < at franklin.oit.unc.edu>> >From: “Joe A. Friberg” <JoeFriberg at email.msn.com>> >To: Biblical Greek < at franklin.oit.unc.edu>> >Subject: Re: 2 Cor 6:10> >Date: Thu, Sep 2, 1999, 12:15 PM> >> > > KATA- generally has an intensifying effect.> > Joe,> > I wonder about this. I have read a number of KATAs both independent ones> and ones in compound verbs. I know that there are grammars which say> that ” KATA- generally has an intensifying effect” but I remain> unconvinced of this by my observation of KATA in actual use. I suspect> that any statement about what KATA generally means will be generally> wrong. But you know I am a contrarian by nature, always attacking the> conventional wisdom on questions like “what does KATA mean?” I am not> sure that questions like “what does KATA mean?” are the sort of> questions that can be answered in any general way. To the > veterans this observation will draw a lot of yawns and perhaps a some> remark like “there he goes again.”Clay:I rightly eanred the reprimand! I fell into the trap of speaking in a vagueand grossly overstated generality rather than making a valid generalization!You are correct: the polysemy of KATEXW is derived at least in part from thepolysemy of KATA- prefixal. So, thanks!Now, I think I could have said ‘frequently’, ‘often’, or ‘sometimes’, no?Just for confirmation, there is the EXW/KATEXW pair of the current passage(but *not* other senses of KATEXW); also:ESQIW eat KATESQIW devourKATAKAIW burn upDoes anyone know of any exhaustive investigation of such categories ofmeaning of prefixes such as KATA-?Joe F.
SPIT OUT in Gal 4:14Which version of LXX?
Superior Assurance Rom 8:16
“The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God,”
Catholics claim we can’t be sure of going to heaven when we die.
Arminians say we must be faithful until death or lose our salvation, and most Five Point Calvinists claim we never had salvation if the “right” works are not evident.
Obviously, none of these approaches offers reliable assurance of salvation,
since their source of assurance depends on the ongoing production of good fruit. So what happened to 1 John 5: 13, which says that anyone who has believed on the name of the Son of God can know right now that he has eternal life?
It is not a future hope or anybody’s guess. It is certain knowledge — now. And what is the basis of this knowledge, this assurance?
Simply God’s promises — the Bible tells me so.
That’s why we don’t have to wait until we die to have the “blessed assurance”
that we will spend eternity with our Maker.
Perhaps the best known and most loved verse in the Bible is John 3: 16,
which says, “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believes in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life.”
It is a promise.
The promises of God are essential for our assurance; they are our primary source. However, they are not our only source.
There is also what we call secondary or “corroborating” assurance:
it is our Christian walk, our experience.
Some will recoil from this statement, saying, assurance as a newly adopted child,
I am not concerned about my privileges as a mature son.
I just want to know that I am in the family, that I am one of His children.
This assurance comes primarily from the promises of God.
But during later times of adversity and self-doubt, it comes
secondarily from the Holy Spirit, and Paul will expand on this ministry of the Spirit in our suffering in the second half of Romans 8.
In Ephesians 1: 13 the Holy Spirit is the seal from the Father
that marks us as His permanent possession.
In 2 Corinthians 1: 22 the Father gives us the Holy Spirit
as a down payment (arrabōn) to assure us that we belong to Him.
We are presently “on lay away,”
but at the appointed time the redemption of our body will be complete.
And here in Romans 8: 16 the Holy Spirit has been appointed our legal guardian until that final day of redemption —
our official tutor to teach us and train us for a life in the royal family.
The very presence of our tutor from heaven assures us
that the King of the universe truly has adopted us.
For the mature son, however, there is a superior assurance available —
he has experienced the power of the Spirit;
he has allowed the Spirit to lead him, guide him, teach him, and train him;
and through the years the Spirit has put to death one foul deed or practice
of the flesh after another (8: 13).
Each time the Spirit does another work in his life, the growing son has
further assurance that he is a child of the King and growing into His likeness.
Unfortunately, the carnal believer knows little of this internal testimony or power of the Holy Spirit. He has rejected the leadership of his appointed tutor. Instead he has chosen to go back to this old tutor, the flesh.
As he walks in darkness, he is like a near-sighted man that stumbles along,
unable to see heaven before him or hell behind him.
“He cannot even remember the day his sins were purged” (2 Pet 1: 9).
The point is that a believer who logs more time walking with the Spirit, experiencing His power, watching the scales of his old life peel off like the skin of a snake — this maturing believer has greater and greater assurance of his salvation. That is one of the benefits of growing up. And greater assurance only enhances our intimacy with God, thus leading to even greater fellowship.
But besides the promise of Greater Freedom (8: 14– 15a) and Greater Fellowship (8: 15b– 16), Paul offers one more powerful incentive to grow up —
the promise of a Greater Future.