2 Corinthians 12:7

[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7 bertdehaan at gosympatico.ca bertdehaan at gosympatico.ca
Sun May 23 16:54:43 EDT 2004

[] Matthew’s SU LEGW [] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7 2 Cor.12:7b-8(7B)EDOQH MOI SKOLOY THi SARKI, AGGELOS SATANA, hINA ME KOLAFIZHi, hINA MH hUPERAIRWMAI.(8)hUPER TOUTOU TRIS TON KURION PAREKALESA, hINA APOSTHi AP EMOU.In every English translation that I checked AGGELOS here is considered something impersonal. It is commonly explained as a physical problem. In verse 8, hINA APOSTHi AP EMOU is then translated as -that it might depart from me-. The Dutch translations have -that he might depart from me-.According to Trenchard the word AGGELOS occurs 175 times in the GNT. Using a concordance, I checked out a selection of them (I don’t have a Greek concordance so I can’t be exhaustive.) I could not find another instance where AGGELOS was translated as impersonal.Would it be more likely that Paul was plagued by a person as a messenger of Satan, rather than some sort of physical ailment?Thank you.Bert de Haan.(Ps. I now receive the digest so please Cc any replies to me.)

[] Matthew’s SU LEGW[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7

[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7 George F. Somsel gfsomsel at juno.com
Sun May 23 17:50:29 EDT 2004

[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7 [] Matthew’s SU EIPAS Bert,Note that SKOLOY is nom ms as is AGGELOS. This would suggest thatAGGELOS SATANA is in apposition. Unless we wish to consider the (not tobe automatically eliminated) option that this is viewed as a conceptrelated to demonic possession, it would need to be impersonal. SinceJesus and even the disciples are said to have cast out demons, it wouldseem that such a concept was operative during the NT though we would notascribe mental or physical illness to demonic possession today. Thus, Iwould suppose you could understand it as either personal or impersonal. I apologize that my response is beyond strict linguistic grounds, butsome things cannot be answered simply by linguistics.gfsomsel________On Sun, 23 May 2004 16:54:43 -0400 <bertdehaan at gosympatico.ca> writes:> 2 Cor.12:7b-8> (7B)EDOQH MOI SKOLOY THi SARKI, AGGELOS SATANA, hINA ME KOLAFIZHi, > hINA MH hUPERAIRWMAI.(8)hUPER TOUTOU TRIS TON KURION PAREKALESA, > hINA APOSTHi AP EMOU.> > In every English translation that I checked AGGELOS here is > considered something impersonal. It is commonly explained as a > physical problem. In verse 8, hINA APOSTHi AP EMOU is then > translated as -that it might depart from me-. The Dutch translations > have -that he might depart from me-.> > According to Trenchard the word AGGELOS occurs 175 times in the GNT. > Using a concordance, I checked out a selection of them (I don’t have > a Greek concordance so I can’t be exhaustive.) I could not find > another instance where AGGELOS was translated as impersonal.> Would it be more likely that Paul was plagued by a person as a > messenger of Satan, rather than some sort of physical ailment?> Thank you.> Bert de Haan.> (Ps. I now receive the digest so please Cc any replies to me.)> > —> home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/> > ________________________________________________________________The best thing to hit the Internet in years – Juno SpeedBand!Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!Only $14.95/ month – visit www.juno.com to sign up today!

[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7[] Matthew’s SU EIPAS

[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7 Michel Mix 12mix at xs4all.nl
Sun May 23 18:12:25 EDT 2004

[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7 [] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7 The German translations have ‘er’ (he) also.Robertson’s Word Pictures comments:”That it might depart from me (hINA APOSTHi AP EMOU). Second aorist active(intransitive) subjunctive of APISTEMI in final clause, “that he stand offfrom me for good.””Michel Mix—–Original Message—–From: -bounces at lists.ibiblio.org[mailto:-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org]On Behalf Ofbertdehaan at gosympatico.caSent: zondag 23 mei 2004 22:55To: at lists.ibiblio.orgSubject: [] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:72 Cor.12:7b-8(7B)EDOQH MOI SKOLOY THi SARKI, AGGELOS SATANA, hINA ME KOLAFIZHi, hINA MHhUPERAIRWMAI.(8)hUPER TOUTOU TRIS TON KURION PAREKALESA, hINA APOSTHi APEMOU.In every English translation that I checked AGGELOS here is consideredsomething impersonal. It is commonly explained as a physical problem. Inverse 8, hINA APOSTHi AP EMOU is then translated as -that it might departfrom me-. The Dutch translations have -that he might depart from me-.According to Trenchard the word AGGELOS occurs 175 times in the GNT. Using aconcordance, I checked out a selection of them (I don’t have a Greekconcordance so I can’t be exhaustive.) I could not find another instancewhere AGGELOS was translated as impersonal.Would it be more likely that Paul was plagued by a person as a messenger ofSatan, rather than some sort of physical ailment?Thank you.Bert de Haan.(Ps. I now receive the digest so please Cc any replies to me.)— home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/

[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7

[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7 ann nyland accuratebibles at ozemail.com.au
Sun May 23 20:15:38 EDT 2004

[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7 [] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7 Person or spirit – both are allowed by the Greek. There is nothing in theGreek to suggest a sickness, and I have not come across a Greek inscriptionwhere a sickness is spoken of in such terms – this is particularlysignifiant, as the NT healing words are used very much in the manner oftraditional Greek healing words, right from Homer. I would say theologicalconsiderations have been the basis for the traditional translation(sickness) of this verse. It could have been anything.Ann Nyland—– Original Message —– From: <bertdehaan at gosympatico.ca>To: < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 6:54 AMSubject: [] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7> 2 Cor.12:7b-8> (7B)EDOQH MOI SKOLOY THi SARKI, AGGELOS SATANA, hINA ME KOLAFIZHi, hINA MHhUPERAIRWMAI.(8)hUPER TOUTOU TRIS TON KURION PAREKALESA, hINA APOSTHi APEMOU.> > In every English translation that I checked AGGELOS here is consideredsomething impersonal. It is commonly explained as a physical problem. Inverse 8, hINA APOSTHi AP EMOU is then translated as -that it might departfrom me-. The Dutch translations have -that he might depart from me-.> > According to Trenchard the word AGGELOS occurs 175 times in the GNT. Usinga concordance, I checked out a selection of them (I don’t have a Greekconcordance so I can’t be exhaustive.) I could not find another instancewhere AGGELOS was translated as impersonal.> Would it be more likely that Paul was plagued by a person as a messengerof Satan, rather than some sort of physical ailment?> Thank you.> Bert de Haan.> (Ps. I now receive the digest so please Cc any replies to me.)> > —> home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/

[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7

[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7 Harold R. Holmyard III hholmyard at ont.com
Sun May 23 20:56:22 EDT 2004

[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7 [] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7 Dear Ann,>Person or spirit – both are allowed by the Greek. There is nothing in the>Greek to suggest a sickness, and I have not come across a Greek inscription>where a sickness is spoken of in such terms – this is particularly>signifiant, as the NT healing words are used very much in the manner of>traditional Greek healing words, right from Homer. I would say theological>considerations have been the basis for the traditional translation>(sickness) of this verse. It could have been anything.HH: It might be that you have not come across a Greek inscription where a sickness is spoken of like that because this may have been an especially Israelite idiom. The LXX uses SKOLOY in these verses:Num. 33:55 ¶ “‘But if you do not drive out the inhabitants of the land, those you allow to remain will become barbs in your eyes and thorns in your sides. They will give you trouble in the land where you will live.Hos. 2:6 Therefore I will block her path with thornbushes; I will wall her in so that she cannot find her way.Ezek. 28:24 ¶ “‘No longer will the people of Israel have malicious neighbors who are painful briers and sharp thorns. Then they will know that I am the Sovereign LORD. d them; and they shall know that I am the Lord GOD.HH: It probably relates to Genesis 3:Gen. 3:18 It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the field.HH: As you say, the Israelites could associate almost anything bad as a thorn. But this seems like a condition Paul had. He describes it as an ASQENEIA in 2 Cor 12:9-10, which often describes a sickness, disease, or bodily ailment:2Cor. 12:8 Three times I pleaded with the Lord to take it away from me.2Cor. 12:9 But he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ’s power may rest on me.2Cor. 12:10 That is why, for Christ’s sake, I delight in weaknesses, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, in difficulties. For when I am weak, then I am strong.HH: Some connect this ASQENEIA with the ASQENEIA that Paul mentions in Galatians 4:13f.:Gal. 4:13 As you know, it was because of an *illness* that I first preached the gospel to you.Gal. 4:14 Even though my illness was a trial to you, you did not treat me with contempt or scorn. Instead, you welcomed me as if I were an angel of God, as if I were Christ Jesus himself. HH: The large handwriting that he had to use suggested an eye ailment:Gal. 6:11 ¶ See what large letters I use as I write to you with my own hand!HH: So did his comment that the Galatians would gladly have torn out their eyes and given them to Paul if they could:Gal. 4:15 What has happened to all your joy? I can testify that, if you could have done so, you would have torn out your eyes and given them to me.HH: The eye hypothesis may not be provable, but it is not unreasonable for Galatians and may relate to 2 Corinthians. If it is his eyes, it seems a lengthy condition, since it seems to have affected his writing some time after the visit to Galatia.Yours,Harold Holmyard

[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases Mitch Larramore mitchlarramore at yahoo.com
Fri Jan 9 12:27:22 EST 2009

[] Providing for the Cast Members [] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases KAI THi hUPERBOLHi TWN APOKALUYEWN DIO hINA MH hUPERAIRWMAI EDOQH MOI SKOLOY THi SARKI AGGELOS SATANA hINA ME KOLAFIZHi hINA MH hUPERAIRWMAI So many commentaries offer numerous suggestions as to what the thorn in the flesh was. Many seem to think it was his poor eyesight or malaria. However, does not this passage simply state that the SKOLOY was the AGGELOS SATANA? And further, that this AGGELOS was authorized to KOLAFIZHi Paul, namely, to ‘beat’ him in some sense. My question really then is why do commentaries move from the thorn representing an angel beating Paul to the thorn representing some eye disease, or some other malady? (I don’t see how KOLAFIZHi could mean ‘eye disease.’)Mitch LarramoreSugar Land, Texas

[] Providing for the Cast Members[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases George F Somsel gfsomsel at yahoo.com
Fri Jan 9 19:02:32 EST 2009

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases [] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases There is a certain amount of deduction involved in stating that this “thorn in the flesh” is a reference to problems with his eyes (incidentally, the word does signify a “thorn” or “splinter”).  This deduction involves the reference to his Damascus Road experience and subsequent temporary blindness as recorded in Acts as well as his reference to his large writing in his letter to the Galatians.  So far this may be somewhat suggestive of a POSSIBILITY, but certainly falls short of any proof.  In fact, though I have some material to add for consideration, I would not claim conclusiveness for it either.  The phrase SKOLOY THi SARKI which he uses seems to possibly reference Num 33.55 in the LXXἐὰν δὲ μὴ ἀπολέσητε τοὺς κατοικοῦντας ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἀπὸ προσώπου ὑμῶν, καὶ ἔσται οὓς ἐὰν καταλίπητε ἐξ αὐτῶν, ** σκόλοπες ἐν τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς ὑμῶν ** καὶ βολίδες ἐν ταῖς πλευραῖς ὑμῶν καὶ ἐχθρεύσουσιν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, ἐφ̓ ἣν ὑμεῖς κατοικήσετε,  EAN DE MH APOLESHTE TOUS KATOIKOUNTAS EPI THS GHS APO PROSWPOU hUMWN, KAI ESTAI hOUS EAN KATALIPHTE EC AUTWN, ** SKOLOPES EN TOIS OFQALMOIS hUMWN ** KAI BOLIDES EN TAIS PLEURAIS hUMWN KAI EXQREUSOUSIN EPI THS GHS, EF’ hHN hUMEIS KATOIKHSETE.Yet, even though Paul ** may ** be referencing this passage, does this mean that he is truly saying that he is having problems with his eyes?  The LXX passage refers to the result of not dispossessing the former inhabitants of the land and the reference to “thorns in the eyes” may be purely figurative.  It is possible that Paul may be referring to his failure to either change the minds of certain opponents or to root them out of the church and thus a reference to the rest of the passage to which he ** may ** be referring.  georgegfsomsel … search for truth, hear truth, learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, defend the truth till death.- Jan Hus_________ ________________________________From: Mitch Larramore <mitchlarramore at yahoo.com>To: B Greek < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Friday, January 9, 2009 12:27:22 PMSubject: [] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseasesKAI THi hUPERBOLHi TWN APOKALUYEWN DIO hINA MH hUPERAIRWMAI EDOQH MOI SKOLOY THi SARKI AGGELOS SATANA hINA ME KOLAFIZHi hINA MH hUPERAIRWMAI So many commentaries offer numerous suggestions as to what the thorn in the flesh was. Many seem to think it was his poor eyesight or malaria. However, does not this passage simply state that the SKOLOY was the AGGELOS SATANA? And further, that this AGGELOS was authorized to KOLAFIZHi Paul, namely, to ‘beat’ him in some sense. My question really then is why do commentaries move from the thorn representing an angel beating Paul to the thorn representing some eye disease, or some other malady? (I don’t see how KOLAFIZHi could mean ‘eye disease.’)Mitch LarramoreSugar Land, Texas      — home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases Carl Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Fri Jan 9 19:17:22 EST 2009

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases [] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases On Jan 9, 2009, at 12:27 PM, Mitch Larramore wrote:> KAI THi hUPERBOLHi TWN APOKALUYEWN DIO hINA MH hUPERAIRWMAI EDOQH > MOI SKOLOY THi SARKI AGGELOS SATANA hINA ME KOLAFIZHi hINA MH > hUPERAIRWMAI> > So many commentaries offer numerous suggestions as to what the thorn > in the flesh was. Many seem to think it was his poor eyesight or > malaria. However, does not this passage simply state that the SKOLOY > was the AGGELOS SATANA? And further, that this AGGELOS was > authorized to KOLAFIZHi Paul, namely, to ‘beat’ him in some sense. > My question really then is why do commentaries move from the thorn > representing an angel beating Paul to the thorn representing some > eye disease, or some other malady? (I don’t see how KOLAFIZHi could > mean ‘eye disease.’)KOLAFIZW means simply “beat” or “cudgel.” My guess is that even this is metaphorical in the sense, “chastise” — “afflict for one’s own good.” I think that much of what Paul says in his letters depends upon background known only to himself and his original readers. If Paul had felt it was important for us to know precisely what “affliction” he was suffering, I think he would have stated it more openly. Commentators have a field day with passages like this precisely because, in the absence of any clear and convincing contextual evidence, the field is wide open to speculation of any and every kind.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases Harold Holmyard hholmyard3 at earthlink.net
Fri Jan 9 19:21:44 EST 2009

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases [] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases Mitch,> KAI THi hUPERBOLHi TWN APOKALUYEWN DIO hINA MH hUPERAIRWMAI EDOQH MOI SKOLOY THi SARKI AGGELOS SATANA hINA ME KOLAFIZHi hINA MH hUPERAIRWMAI > > So many commentaries offer numerous suggestions as to what the thorn in the flesh was. Many seem to think it was his poor eyesight or malaria. However, does not this passage simply state that the SKOLOY was the AGGELOS SATANA? And further, that this AGGELOS was authorized to KOLAFIZHi Paul, namely, to ‘beat’ him in some sense. My question really then is why do commentaries move from the thorn representing an angel beating Paul to the thorn representing some eye disease, or some other malady? (I don’t see how KOLAFIZHi could mean ‘eye disease.’)> An eye disease could harass someone. “Harass” is one of the glosses given for KOLAFIZW. So are “strike” and “trouble.” An eye disease with its limitations could beat one down in a figurative sense.Your,Harold Holmyard>

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases Jeffrey B. Gibson jgibson000 at comcast.net
Fri Jan 9 19:38:32 EST 2009

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases [] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases George F Somsel wrote:> There is a certain amount of deduction involved in stating that this “thorn in the flesh” is a reference to problems with his eyes (incidentally, the word does signify a “thorn” or “splinter”). This deduction involves the reference to his Damascus Road experience and subsequent temporary blindness as recorded in Acts as well as his reference to his large writing in his letter to the Galatians. > Actually the deduction seems to stem from his acknowledgment in Gal 4:15 that the Galatians would have given him their eyes, doesn’t it?Jeffrey– Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon)1500 W. Pratt Blvd.Chicago, Illinoise-mail jgibson000 at comcast.net

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases Harold Holmyard hholmyard3 at earthlink.net
Fri Jan 9 19:43:13 EST 2009

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases [] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases Jeffrey,> George F Somsel wrote:> >> There is a certain amount of deduction involved in stating that this “thorn in the flesh” is a reference to problems with his eyes (incidentally, the word does signify a “thorn” or “splinter”). This deduction involves the reference to his Damascus Road experience and subsequent temporary blindness as recorded in Acts as well as his reference to his large writing in his letter to the Galatians. >> >> > > Actually the deduction seems to stem from his acknowledgment in Gal 4:15 > that the Galatians would have given him their eyes, doesn’t it?> Yes, and the allusion to the Num 33:55 LXX that George gave was very interesting. The fact that Gal 6:11 occurs in the same letter with Gal 4:5 is also suggestive.Yours,Harold

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases Jeffrey B. Gibson jgibson000 at comcast.net
Fri Jan 9 19:45:27 EST 2009

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases [] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases Harold Holmyard wrote:> Mitch,> >> KAI THi hUPERBOLHi TWN APOKALUYEWN DIO hINA MH hUPERAIRWMAI EDOQH MOI SKOLOY THi SARKI AGGELOS SATANA hINA ME KOLAFIZHi hINA MH hUPERAIRWMAI >> >> So many commentaries offer numerous suggestions as to what the thorn in the flesh was. Many seem to think it was his poor eyesight or malaria. However, does not this passage simply state that the SKOLOY was the AGGELOS SATANA? And further, that this AGGELOS was authorized to KOLAFIZHi Paul, namely, to ‘beat’ him in some sense. My question really then is why do commentaries move from the thorn representing an angel beating Paul to the thorn representing some eye disease, or some other malady? (I don’t see how KOLAFIZHi could mean ‘eye disease.’)>> >> > > An eye disease could harass someone. “Harass” is one of the glosses > given for KOLAFIZW.Given where? I don’t see it in BDAG.Jeffrey– Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon)1500 W. Pratt Blvd.Chicago, Illinoise-mail jgibson000 at comcast.net

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases George F Somsel gfsomsel at yahoo.com
Fri Jan 9 20:04:12 EST 2009

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases [] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases I’m afraid Harold is using the glosses in Barclay Newman again.  κολαφίζωbeat, strike; harass, trouble Newman, B. M. (1993). Concise Greek-English dictionary of the New Testament. (102). Stuttgart, Germany: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft; United Bible Societies. BDAG does, however, have “torment” as one gloss with is arguably in the same semantic domain. georgegfsomsel … search for truth, hear truth, learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, defend the truth till death.- Jan Hus_________ ________________________________From: Jeffrey B. Gibson <jgibson000 at comcast.net>To: Harold Holmyard <hholmyard3 at earthlink.net>Cc: at lists.ibiblio.orgSent: Friday, January 9, 2009 7:45:27 PMSubject: Re: [] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseasesHarold Holmyard wrote:> Mitch,>  >> KAI THi hUPERBOLHi TWN APOKALUYEWN DIO hINA MH hUPERAIRWMAI EDOQH MOI SKOLOY THi SARKI AGGELOS SATANA hINA ME KOLAFIZHi hINA MH hUPERAIRWMAI >> >> So many commentaries offer numerous suggestions as to what the thorn in the flesh was. Many seem to think it was his poor eyesight or malaria. However, does not this passage simply state that the SKOLOY was the AGGELOS SATANA? And further, that this AGGELOS was authorized to KOLAFIZHi Paul, namely, to ‘beat’ him in some sense. My question really then is why do commentaries move from the thorn representing an angel beating Paul to the thorn representing some eye disease, or some other malady? (I don’t see how KOLAFIZHi could mean ‘eye disease.’)>>  >>    > > An eye disease could harass someone. “Harass” is one of the glosses > given for KOLAFIZW.Given where?  I don’t see it in BDAG.Jeffrey– Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon)1500 W. Pratt Blvd.Chicago, Illinoise-mail jgibson000 at comcast.net— home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases Harold Holmyard hholmyard3 at earthlink.net
Fri Jan 9 21:16:57 EST 2009

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases [] EGINWSKEN (Matthew 1:25) Jeffrey,>> >> An eye disease could harass someone. “Harass” is one of the glosses >> given for KOLAFIZW.> > Given where? I don’t see it in BDAG. 2 Corinthians 12:7 (English Standard Version)So^ to keep me from becoming conceited because of the surpassing greatness of the revelations, a thorn was given me in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to harass me, to keep me from becoming conceited.Yours,Harold Holmyard

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases[] EGINWSKEN (Matthew 1:25)

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases Harold Holmyard hholmyard3 at earthlink.net
Fri Jan 9 21:39:16 EST 2009

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases [] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases George,> I’m afraid Harold is using the glosses in Barclay Newman again.Barclay Newman is no slouch. Otherwise his dictionary probably would not have been chosen to attach to the UBS text. Here are some of his publications:The UBS Greek New Testament: A Reader’s Edition <http://www.amazon.com/UBS-Greek-New-Testament-Readers/dp/1598562851/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1231554548&sr=1-1> by Barclay M. Newman (Hardcover – Dec 5, 2007)Concise Greek-English Dictionary of the New Testament <http://www.amazon.com/Concise-Greek-english-Dictionary-New-Testament/dp/1598561650/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1231554548&sr=1-2> by Barclay M. Newman (Hardcover – Aug 2006)Translator’s Handbook on the Gospel of Matthew (UBS Handbooks Helps for Translators) <http://www.amazon.com/Translators-Handbook-Gospel-Matthew-Handbooks/dp/0826701345/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1231554548&sr=1-3> by Barclay M. Newman and Philip C. Stine (Paperback – Sep 1988)A Handbook on the Gospel of John (UBS Handbooks Helps for Translators) <http://www.amazon.com/Handbook-Gospel-Handbooks-Helps-Translators/dp/0826701582/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1231554548&sr=1-4> by Barclay M. Newman and Eugene A. Nida (Paperback – Aug 1993)A Handbook on the Acts of the Apostles (UBS Handbooks Helps for Translators) <http://www.amazon.com/Handbook-Apostles-Handbooks-Helps-Translators/dp/0826701590/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1231554548&sr=1-5> by Barclay M. Newman and Eugene A. Nida (Paperback – Sep 1993)A Handbook on the Book of Joshua (UBS Handbooks Helps for Translators) <http://www.amazon.com/Handbook-Joshua-Handbooks-Helps-Translators/dp/0826701094/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1231554548&sr=1-7> by Robert G. Bratcher and Barclay M. Newman (Paperback – Nov 1992)A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans (UBS Handbooks Helps for Translators) <http://www.amazon.com/Handbook-Letter-Romans-Handbooks-Translators/dp/0826701604/ref=sr_1_10?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1231554548&sr=1-10> by Barclay M. Newman and Eugene A. Nida (Paperback – Jan 1994)Yours,Harold Holmyard

[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases[] 2 Cor 12:7 beatings or diseases

[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7 ann nyland accuratebibles at ozemail.com.au
Sun May 23 21:24:59 EDT 2004

[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7 [] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7 Dear Harold,I am not sure if you are disagreeing with what I have said (?) as yourquotes support what I said.The verses you have cited about SKOLOS actually support what I said – I havesuggested there is wide range of meaning for the AGGELOS in question, andthe verses you have cited are not sickness. Further, I myself translateASQENEIA as “weakness” in the passage you have quoted, as indeed does thepassage you have quoted, not as “sickness”. Of course, the word’s semanticrange includes both.At any rate, Paul did not actually use large handwriting in Galatians due topoor eyesight, – to put it in our idiom, he was saying, in effect, “Get thepoint! Look at the large letters I’m using! I’m spelling it out to you rightnow!” – “Hey, you! Look at this! Get the point! Read my lips!”. Galatiansuses typical words about the evil-eye spell – these have been ignored todate in published NT translation, but throughout Galatians Paul plays onwords with the word “eye”. Gal. 3:1, “You senseless Galatians, who has casta spell on you by using the evil eye spell of mind control!”: BASKAINW, touse words to cast a mind-control spell on someone by means of the evil eye,hapax for the N.T. Some believed that to see one’s reflection made oneliable to the effects of the evil eye, and the spell was broken by spittingthree times, cf. Theokritos, VI, 35-40. A 3rd century A.D. stone inscriptiontells of the effects upon one who testifies to having the evil eye put onthem, with the result that his wife and children were killed. ed. CIG (1877;repr. 1977) 9668, l.2. A funerary epigram for Apollodorus, Pfuhl/Mobius1.1021 (pl. 153; = E. Schwertheim, Die Inschriften von Kyzikos und Umgebung,1 [IK 26.1; Bonn, 1980] 493 [pl. 34], describes Hades as casting his evileye upon honorable things. An amulet described by J. Russell, JOB 32 (1982)539-548 has the wording “the seal of Solomon holds in check the evil eye.”See also the early 1st c. inscription, IG VII 581.5 (Megara), which alludesto the pagan god Hades’ jealousy of mortals who have higher thoughts; IKret2.3.44 (Aptera, III AD), of a husband lamenting that the evil eye was put onhim and thus his wife died; and TAM 3.1.810.8 (Termessos, II-III AD), anepitaph in which it states that fate cast her evil eye on the deceased.Paul continues the wordplay with the next sentence, “Before your very eyes”.In Galatians 4:14, some translations add “bodily illness”, “state of my poorbody”, “my illness / condition was a trial to you”, none of which are in theGreek. In v 15, Paul continues to play on words (and we all know just howmuch Paul loves to play on words, that is, in the Greek – it is often notapparent in English translation).In conclusion, people prior to the evidence of the papyri and inscriptionshave surmised, with a great deal of circular reliance, that Paul had badeyesight and that the Satanic messenger was a sickness, but the evidencesuggests otherwise.Best wishes,Ann Nyland—– Original Message —– From: “Harold R. Holmyard III” <hholmyard at ont.com>To: < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 10:56 AMSubject: Re: [] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7Dear Ann,>Person or spirit – both are allowed by the Greek. There is nothing in the>Greek to suggest a sickness, and I have not come across a Greek inscription>where a sickness is spoken of in such terms – this is particularly>signifiant, as the NT healing words are used very much in the manner of>traditional Greek healing words, right from Homer. I would say theological>considerations have been the basis for the traditional translation>(sickness) of this verse. It could have been anything.HH: It might be that you have not come across aGreek inscription where a sickness is spoken oflike that because this may have been anespecially Israelite idiom. The LXX uses SKOLOYin these verses:Num. 33:55 ¶ “‘But if you do not drive out theinhabitants of the land, those you allow toremain will become barbs in your eyes and thornsin your sides. They will give you trouble in theland where you will live.Hos. 2:6 Therefore I will block her path withthornbushes; I will wall her in so that shecannot find her way.Ezek. 28:24 ¶ “‘No longer will the people ofIsrael have malicious neighbors who are painfulbriers and sharp thorns. Then they will know thatI am the Sovereign LORD. d them; and they shallknow that I am the Lord GOD.HH: It probably relates to Genesis 3:Gen. 3:18 It will produce thorns and thistles foryou, and you will eat the plants of the field.HH: As you say, the Israelites could associatealmost anything bad as a thorn. But this seemslike a condition Paul had. He describes it as anASQENEIA in 2 Cor 12:9-10, which often describesa sickness, disease, or bodily ailment:2Cor. 12:8 Three times I pleaded with the Lord to take it away from me.2Cor. 12:9 But he said to me, “My grace issufficient for you, for my power is made perfectin weakness.” Therefore I will boast all the moregladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ’spower may rest on me.2Cor. 12:10 That is why, for Christ’s sake, Idelight in weaknesses, in insults, in hardships,in persecutions, in difficulties. For when I amweak, then I am strong.HH: Some connect this ASQENEIA with the ASQENEIAthat Paul mentions in Galatians 4:13f.:Gal. 4:13 As you know, it was because of an*illness* that I first preached the gospel to you.Gal. 4:14 Even though my illness was a trial toyou, you did not treat me with contempt or scorn.Instead, you welcomed me as if I were an angel ofGod, as if I were Christ Jesus himself.HH: The large handwriting that he had to use suggested an eye ailment:Gal. 6:11 ¶ See what large letters I use as I write to you with my own hand!HH: So did his comment that the Galatians wouldgladly have torn out their eyes and given them toPaul if they could:Gal. 4:15 What has happened to all your joy? Ican testify that, if you could have done so, youwould have torn out your eyes and given them tome.HH: The eye hypothesis may not be provable, butit is not unreasonable for Galatians and mayrelate to 2 Corinthians. If it is his eyes, itseems a lengthy condition, since it seems to haveaffected his writing some time after the visit toGalatia.Yours,Harold Holmyard

[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7

[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7 bertdehaan at gosympatico.ca bertdehaan at gosympatico.ca
Sun May 23 21:51:33 EDT 2004

[] Matthew’s SU EIPAS [] circumflex falls on H of the verb APHLQEN Thanks George (and Ann and Michel)George, maybe I misunderstand you, are you saying that because messenger of Satan is in apposition to thorn, an impersonal noun, messenger may need to be viewed as impersonal? Couldn’t SKOLOY THi SARKI be a figure of speech indicating either someTHING or someONE, the same way someone in English may say it (or he) is such a pain in the neck?Bert de Haan.—————- > From: “George F. Somsel” <gfsomsel at juno.com>> Date: Sun, 23 May 2004 17:50:29 -0400> To: bertdehaan at gosympatico.ca> CC: at lists.ibiblio.org> Subject: Re: [] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7> > Bert,> > Note that SKOLOY is nom ms as is AGGELOS. This would suggest that> AGGELOS SATANA is in apposition. Unless we wish to consider the (not to> be automatically eliminated) option that this is viewed as a concept> related to demonic possession, it would need to be impersonal. Since> Jesus and even the disciples are said to have cast out demons, it would> seem that such a concept was operative during the NT though we would not> ascribe mental or physical illness to demonic possession today. Thus, I> would suppose you could understand it as either personal or impersonal. > I apologize that my response is beyond strict linguistic grounds, but> some things cannot be answered simply by linguistics.> > gfsomsel> ________> > On Sun, 23 May 2004 16:54:43 -0400 <bertdehaan at gosympatico.ca> writes:> > 2 Cor.12:7b-8> > (7B)EDOQH MOI SKOLOY THi SARKI, AGGELOS SATANA, hINA ME KOLAFIZHi, > > hINA MH hUPERAIRWMAI.(8)hUPER TOUTOU TRIS TON KURION PAREKALESA, > > hINA APOSTHi AP EMOU.> > > > In every English translation that I checked AGGELOS here is > > considered something impersonal. It is commonly explained as a > > physical problem. In verse 8, hINA APOSTHi AP EMOU is then > > translated as -that it might depart from me-. The Dutch translations > > have -that he might depart from me-.> > > > According to Trenchard the word AGGELOS occurs 175 times in the GNT. > > Using a concordance, I checked out a selection of them (I don’t have > > a Greek concordance so I can’t be exhaustive.) I could not find > > another instance where AGGELOS was translated as impersonal.> > Would it be more likely that Paul was plagued by a person as a > > messenger of Satan, rather than some sort of physical ailment?> > Thank you.> > Bert de Haan.> > (Ps. I now receive the digest so please Cc any replies to me.)> > > > —> > home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/> > mailing list> > at lists.ibiblio.org> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/> > > > > > ________________________________________________________________> The best thing to hit the Internet in years – Juno SpeedBand!> Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!> Only $14.95/ month – visit www.juno.com to sign up today!>

[] Matthew’s SU EIPAS[] circumflex falls on H of the verb APHLQEN

[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7 Harold R. Holmyard III hholmyard at ont.com
Sun May 23 21:56:09 EDT 2004

[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7 [] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7 Dear Ann,>I am not sure if you are disagreeing with what I have said (?) as your>quotes support what I said.HH: I’m not disagreeing with what you’ve said. However, you seemed to favor the person or spirit approach as against the bodily condition interpretation.>The verses you have cited about SKOLOS actually support what I said – I have>suggested there is wide range of meaning for the AGGELOS in question, and>the verses you have cited are not sickness. Further, I myself translate>ASQENEIA as “weakness” in the passage you have quoted, as indeed does the>passage you have quoted, not as “sickness”. Of course, the word’s semantic>range includes both.HH: Right, I was saying that ASQENEIA suggests a physical condition in the passages.>At any rate, Paul did not actually use large handwriting in Galatians due to>poor eyesight, – to put it in our idiom, he was saying, in effect, “Get the>point! Look at the large letters I’m using! I’m spelling it out to you right>now!” – “Hey, you! Look at this! Get the point! Read my lips!”.HH: That could be. It’s not right at the end of the epistle. Content does follow the verse about large letters.>Galatians>uses typical words about the evil-eye spell – these have been ignored to>date in published NT translation, but throughout Galatians Paul plays on>words with the word “eye”. Gal. 3:1, “You senseless Galatians, who has cast>a spell on you by using the evil eye spell of mind control!”: BASKAINW, to>use words to cast a mind-control spell on someone by means of the evil eye,>hapax for the N.T. Some believed that to see one’s reflection made one>liable to the effects of the evil eye, and the spell was broken by spitting>three times, cf. Theokritos, VI, 35-40.HH: Right, BAGD agrees with you.> A 3rd century A.D. stone inscription>tells of the effects upon one who testifies to having the evil eye put on>them, with the result that his wife and children were killed. ed. CIG (1877;>repr. 1977) 9668, l.2. A funerary epigram for Apollodorus, Pfuhl/Mobius>1.1021 (pl. 153; = E. Schwertheim, Die Inschriften von Kyzikos und Umgebung,>1 [IK 26.1; Bonn, 1980] 493 [pl. 34], describes Hades as casting his evil>eye upon honorable things. An amulet described by J. Russell, JOB 32 (1982)>539-548 has the wording “the seal of Solomon holds in check the evil eye.”>See also the early 1st c. inscription, IG VII 581.5 (Megara), which alludes>to the pagan god Hades’ jealousy of mortals who have higher thoughts; IKret>2.3.44 (Aptera, III AD), of a husband lamenting that the evil eye was put on>him and thus his wife died; and TAM 3.1.810.8 (Termessos, II-III AD), an>epitaph in which it states that fate cast her evil eye on the deceased.>Paul continues the wordplay with the next sentence, “Before your very eyes”.>In Galatians 4:14, some translations add “bodily illness”, “state of my poor>body”, “my illness / condition was a trial to you”, none of which are in the>Greek. In v 15, Paul continues to play on words (and we all know just how>much Paul loves to play on words, that is, in the Greek – it is often not>apparent in English translation).> >In conclusion, people prior to the evidence of the papyri and inscriptions>have surmised, with a great deal of circular reliance, that Paul had bad>eyesight and that the Satanic messenger was a sickness, but the evidence>suggests otherwise.HH: Thanks for all this information, but I’m not sure that Gal 4:15’s idea about tearing out their eyes is related to the earlier bewitching idea. At least I don’t see the connection. It’s pretty far from Gal 3:1, and the context is different. If Paul was suffering in his eyes, this spirit on their part would suggest a generous sympathy in keeping with the context of the physical condition suggested by the phrase ASQENEIA THS SARKOS (Gal 4:13). The Galatians had a trial on account of his flesh, his body (v. 14). But they did not reject him on account of it. Rather they would have torn out their eyes for him if that would have done any good, which of course it wouldn’t.Yours,Harold Holmyard

[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7

[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7 Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org
Mon May 24 12:07:01 EDT 2004

[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7 [] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7 > > At any rate, Paul did not actually use large handwriting in> Galatians due to poor eyesight, – to put it in our idiom, he was saying,in> effect, “Get the point! Look at the large letters I’m using! I’m spellingit out> to you right now!” – “Hey, you! Look at this! Get the point! Read mylips!”.Ann, do you have any evidence for this claim, or are you reading a modernEnglish idiom into the Greek text?> In conclusion, people prior to the evidence of the papyri and inscriptions> have surmised, with a great deal of circular reliance, that Paul had bad> eyesight and that the Satanic messenger was a sickness, but the evidence> suggests otherwise.What evidence are you thinking of? And what does that evidence suggest?Iver Larsen

[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7[] AGGELOS in 2 Cor 12:7