[] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc. Tom Moore tom at katabiblon.com
Tue Feb 26 16:09:06 εστ 2008
[] relative value of re-reading the Greek NTversusfollowingthe advice of Conrad and Buth [] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc. Acts 5:3 is consistently translated: “Peter said, Ananias, why has satan filled your heart (for) you to lie *to* the holy spirit?”But “the holy spirit” is accusative:ψεύσασθαί σε τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιονυευσασθαι σε το πνευμα το hAGIONWhile the very next verse shows lying *to* somebody in the dative (Acts 5:4: “You did not lie to men but to God”):Οὐκ ἐψεύσω ἀνθρώποις, ἀλλὰ τῷ θεῷουκ ευευσω ανθρωποισ αλλα TWi QEWiCan το πνευμα το hAGION be understood instead to be what Ananias lied about, rather than to whom Ananias lied: “Why has satan filled your heart (for) you to lie *about* [or to mispresent] the holy spirit?” (as being the one motivating his actions)? Given 5:4, why is “to the holy spirit” even valid?Thanks,Tom Moore
[] relative value of re-reading the Greek NTversusfollowingthe advice of Conrad and Buth[] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc.
[] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc. Carl Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Tue Feb 26 16:50:49 εστ 2008
[] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc. [] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc. On Feb 26, 2008, at 4:09 πμ, Tom Moore wrote:> Acts 5:3 is consistently translated: “Peter said, Ananias, why has > satan filled your heart (for) you to lie *to* the holy spirit?”> > But “the holy spirit” is accusative:> > ψεύσασθαί σε τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον> υευσασθαι σε το πνευμα το hAGION> > While the very next verse shows lying *to* somebody in the dative > (Acts 5:4: “You did not lie to men but to God”):> > Οὐκ ἐψεύσω ἀνθρώποις, ἀλλὰ τῷ θεῷ> ουκ ευευσω ανθρωποισ αλλα TWi QEWi> > Can το πνευμα το hAGION be understood instead to be what Ananias > lied about, rather than to whom Ananias lied: “Why has satan filled > your heart (for) you to lie *about* [or to mispresent] the holy > spirit?” (as being the one motivating his actions)? Given 5:4, why > is “to the holy spirit” even valid?Cf. βδαγ s.v. υευδομαι: note the second usage there:2. to attempt to deceive by lying, tell lies to, impose upon τινὰ [τινα] someone (Eur., χ. et al.; Plut., Alcib. 206 [26, 8], Marcell. 314 [27, 7]; Jos., Ant. 3, 273; 13, 25; ψι 232, 10) Ac 5:3 (Appian, Liby. 27 §113 τίς σε δαίμων ἔβλαψε . . . ψεύσασθαι θεοὺς οὓς ὤμοσας; [τισ σε δαιμων … υευσασθαι θεουσ hOUS ωμοσασ?]=‘what evil spirit beguiled you . . . to lie to the gods by whom you swore?’; Tat. 19, 3 ἑαυτόν [hEAUTON]); 1 Cl 15:4 (Ps 77:36, but w. αὐτῷ [AUTWi]).—δελγ. μ–μ. τω.Carl ω. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
[] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc.[] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc.
[] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc. Vasile Stancu stancu at mail.dnttm.ro
Fri Feb 29 15:06:40 εστ 2008
[] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc. [] Question concerning Daniel Greek In my opinion, the two different ways of employing this verb, with the Accusative and the Dative respectively, might be explained probably by the fact that an action, from its initiation to the final effect, may be depicted in one of its various stages of partial realisation in which the element involved in its fulfilment could be the direct agent or the other indirect agents.Here are some examples.2Thess 1:10ἐπιστεύθη τὸ μαρτύριον… επιστευθη το μαρτυριον… the testimony was believed…The object of the verb is here in the Accusative.Mt 21:25Διὰ τί οὖν οὐκ ἐπιστεύσατε αὐτῷ; δια τι ουν ουκ επιστευσατε AUTWi? Why did you not believe him?The object of the same verb is here in the Dative.In the first example it is the direct agent which is emphasised – the testimony itself – which produces the final effect upon its beneficiary; therefore it is in the Accusative.In the second example the emphasis falls on the confessor and is therefore in the Dative, as he is not the most immediate agent on which the faith is firstly directed: he is believed because the testimony or the words he uttered were previously believed.(See also the verb ἀκουω ακουω: it may be followed by the Accusative or the Genitive, depending on the agent involved in the listening/hearing; either the person who is speaking, or his voice, or the words of his voice, or some sound).ι believe this principle may also apply to the case of υευδομαι + Acc/Dat: Ananias lied to the Holy Spirit (directly, therefore the Accusative) and in so doing he lied, not to men, but to God (as a consequence, therefore the Dative).Vasile Stancu—–Original Message—–From: -bounces at lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Tom MooreSent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 6:09 AMTo: greek Subject: [] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc.Acts 5:3 is consistently translated: “Peter said, Ananias, why has satan filled your heart (for) you to lie *to* the holy spirit?”But “the holy spirit” is accusative:ψεύσασθαί σε τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιονυευσασθαι σε το πνευμα το hAGIONWhile the very next verse shows lying *to* somebody in the dative (Acts 5:4: “You did not lie to men but to God”):Οὐκ ἐψεύσω ἀνθρώποις, ἀλλὰ τῷ θεῷουκ ευευσω ανθρωποισ αλλα TWi QEWiCan το πνευμα το hAGION be understood instead to be what Ananias lied about, rather than to whom Ananias lied: “Why has satan filled your heart (for) you to lie *about* [or to mispresent] the holy spirit?” (as being the one motivating his actions)? Given 5:4, why is “to the holy spirit” even valid?Thanks,Tom Moore— home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/
[] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc.[] Question concerning Daniel Greek
[] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc. George φ Somsel gfsomsel at yahoo.com
Fri Feb 29 17:24:53 εστ 2008
[] portable electronic bible / study aids [] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc. There are not that many examples of the use of this verb with either the acc or with the dat in the ντ. Most of the time it is used absolutely (1), i.e. simply “to lie” without any indication of that regarding which one lies or to whom one lies. There are also instances of its use with a preposition which might usurp the place of a dative of the person (2) to whom one lies or the accusative of that regarding which one lies (3).(1) (2)(3) georgegfsomsel … search for truth, hear truth, learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, defend the truth till death. – Jan Hus_________—– Original Message —-From: Vasile Stancu <stancu at mail.dnttm.ro>To: Tom Moore <tom at katabiblon.com>; greek < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 3:06:40 PMSubject: Re: [] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc.In my opinion, the two different ways of employing this verb, with the Accusative and the Dative respectively, might be explained probably by the fact that an action, from its initiation to the final effect, may be depicted in one of its various stages of partial realisation in which the element involved in its fulfilment could be the direct agent or the other indirect agents.Here are some examples.2Thess 1:10ἐπιστεύθη τὸ μαρτύριον… επιστευθη το μαρτυριον… the testimony was believed…The object of the verb is here in the Accusative.Mt 21:25Διὰ τί οὖν οὐκ ἐπιστεύσατε αὐτῷ; δια τι ουν ουκ επιστευσατε AUTWi? Why did you not believe him?The object of the same verb is here in the Dative.In the first example it is the direct agent which is emphasised – the testimony itself – which produces the final effect upon its beneficiary; therefore it is in the Accusative.In the second example the emphasis falls on the confessor and is therefore in the Dative, as he is not the most immediate agent on which the faith is firstly directed: he is believed because the testimony or the words he uttered were previously believed.(See also the verb ἀκουω ακουω: it may be followed by the Accusative or the Genitive, depending on the agent involved in the listening/hearing; either the person who is speaking, or his voice, or the words of his voice, or some sound).ι believe this principle may also apply to the case of υευδομαι + Acc/Dat: Ananias lied to the Holy Spirit (directly, therefore the Accusative) and in so doing he lied, not to men, but to God (as a consequence, therefore the Dative).Vasile Stancu—–Original Message—–From: -bounces at lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Tom MooreSent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 6:09 AMTo: greek Subject: [] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc.Acts 5:3 is consistently translated: “Peter said, Ananias, why has satan filled your heart (for) you to lie *to* the holy spirit?”But “the holy spirit” is accusative:ψεύσασθαί σε τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιονυευσασθαι σε το πνευμα το hAGIONWhile the very next verse shows lying *to* somebody in the dative (Acts 5:4: “You did not lie to men but to God”):Οὐκ ἐψεύσω ἀνθρώποις, ἀλλὰ τῷ θεῷουκ ευευσω ανθρωποισ αλλα TWi QEWiCan το πνευμα το hAGION be understood instead to be what Ananias lied about, rather than to whom Ananias lied: “Why has satan filled your heart (for) you to lie *about* [or to mispresent] the holy spirit?” (as being the one motivating his actions)? Given 5:4, why is “to the holy spirit” even valid?Thanks,Tom Moore— home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/— home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/ ____________________________________________________________________________________Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
[] portable electronic bible / study aids[] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc.
Fri Feb 29 17:51:50 εστ 2008
[] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc. [] portable electronic bible / study aids There are not that many examples of the use of this verb with either the acc or with the dat in the ντ. Most of the time it is used absolutely (1), i.e. simply “to lie” without any indication of that regarding which one lies or to whom one lies. There are also instances of its use with a preposition (2) which might usurp the place of a dative of the person (3) to whom one lies or the accusative of that regarding which one lies (4).(1) Mt 5.11μακάριοί ἐστε ὅταν ὀνειδίσωσιν ὑμᾶς καὶ διώξωσιν καὶ εἴπωσιν πᾶν πονηρὸν καθʼ ὑμῶν [ψευδόμενοι] ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦμακαριοι εστε hOTAN ονειδισωσιν hUMAS και διωξωσιν και ειπωσιν παν πονηρον καθ‘ hUMWN [υευδομενοι] hENEKEN EMOU1 Tim 2.7εἰς ὃ ἐτέθην ἐγὼ κῆρυξ καὶ ἀπόστολος, ἀλήθειαν λέγω οὐ ψεύδομαι, διδάσκαλος ἐθνῶν ἐν πίστει καὶ ἀληθείᾳ.εισ hO ετεθην εγω κηρυξ και αποστολοσ, αληθειαν λεγω ου υευδομαι, διδασκαλοσ εθνων εν πιστει και ALHQEIAiHeb 6.18 ἵνα διὰ δύο πραγμάτων ἀμεταθέτων, ἐν οἷς ἀδύνατον ψεύσασθαι [τὸν] θεόν, ἰσχυρὰν παράκλησιν ἔχωμεν οἱ καταφυγόντες κρατῆσαι τῆς προκειμένης ἐλπίδος· hINA δια δυο πραγματων αμεταθετων, εν hOIS αδυνατον υευσασθαι [τον] θεον, ισχυραν παρακλησιν εχωμεν hOI καταφυγοντεσ κραθσαι θσ προκειμενησ ELPIDOS1 Jn 1.6Ἐὰν εἴπωμεν ὅτι κοινωνίαν ἔχομεν μετʼ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐν τῷ σκότει περιπατῶμεν, ψευδόμεθα καὶ οὐ ποιοῦμεν τὴν ἀλήθειαν· εαν ειπωμεν hOTI κοινωνιαν εχομεν μετ‘ αυτου και εν TWi σκοτει περιπατωμεν, υεδομεθα και ου ποιουμεν θν ALHQEIANRe 3.9ἰδοὺ διδῶ ἐκ τῆς συναγωγῆς τοῦ σατανᾶ τῶν λεγόντων ἑαυτοὺς Ἰουδαίους εἶναι, καὶ οὐκ εἰσὶν ἀλλὰ ψεύδονται. ιδου διδω εκ θσ συναγωγησ του σατανα των λεγοντω hEAUTOUS ιουδαιουσ ειναι, και ουκ εισιν αλλα υευδονται(2)Rom 9.1 Ἀλήθειαν λέγω ἐν Χριστῷ, οὐ ψεύδομαι, συμμαρτυρούσης μοι τῆς συνειδήσεώς μου ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ, αληθειαν λεγω εν XRISTWi, ου υευδομαι, συμμαρτυρουσησ μοι θσ συνειδησεωσ μου εν πνευματι hAGIWi2 Cor 11.31 ὁ θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ οἶδεν, ὁ ὢν εὐλογητὸς εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας, ὅτι οὐ ψεύδομαι.hO θεοσ και παθρ του κυριου ιησου οιδεν, hO ων ευλογητοσ εισ τουσ αιωνασ, hOTI ου YEUDOMAIGal 1.19ἃ δὲ γράφω ὑμῖν, ἰδοὺ ἐνώπιον τοῦ θεοῦ ὅτι οὐ ψεύδομαι.hA δε γραφω hUMIN, ιδου ενωπιον του θεου hOTI ου υευδομαι (3)Ac 5.4οὐχὶ μένον σοὶ ἔμενεν καὶ πραθὲν ἐν τῇ σῇ ἐξουσίᾳ ὑπῆρχεν; τί ὅτι ἔθου ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ σου τὸ πρᾶγμα τοῦτο; οὐκ ἐψεύσω ἀνθρώποις ἀλλὰ τῷ θεῷ.ουκι μενον σοι εμενεν και πραθεν εν THi SHi ECOUSIAi hUPHRXEN? τι hOTI εθου εν THi KARDIAi σου το πραγμα τουτο? ουκ ευευσω ανθρωποισ αλλα TWi QEWi.”Col 3.9 μὴ ψεύδεσθε εἰς ἀλλήλους, ἀπεκδυσάμενοι τὸν παλαιὸν ἄνθρωπον σὺν ταῖς πράξεσιν αὐτοῦ μη υευδεσθε εισ αλληλουσ, απεκδυσαμενοι τον παλαιον ανθρωπον συν ταισ πραξεσιν αυτου(4) Ac 5.3εἶπεν δὲ ὁ Πέτρος· Ἁνανία, διὰ τί ἐπλήρωσεν ὁ σατανᾶς τὴν καρδίαν σου, ψεύσασθαί σε τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον καὶ νοσφίσασθαι ἀπὸ τῆς τιμῆς τοῦ χωρίου; ειπεν δε hO πετροσ “ανανια, δια τι επληρωσεν hO σατανασ θν καρδιαν σου, υευσασθαι σε το πνευμα το hAGION και νοσφισασθαι απο θσ τιμησ του χωριου?”Jas 3.14εἰ δὲ ζῆλον πικρὸν ἔχετε καὶ ἐριθείαν ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ ὑμῶν, μὴ κατακαυχᾶσθε καὶ ψεύδεσθε κατὰ τῆς ἀληθείας.ει δε ζηλον πικρον εχετε και εριθειαν εν THi KARDIAi hUMWN, μη κατακαυχασθε και υευδεσθε κατα θσ αληθειασ georgegfsomsel … search for truth, hear truth, learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, defend the truth till death. – Jan Hus_________—– Original Message —-From: Vasile Stancu <stancu at mail.dnttm.ro>To: Tom Moore <tom at katabiblon.com>; greek < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 3:06:40 PMSubject: Re: [] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc.In my opinion, the two different ways of employing this verb, with the Accusative and the Dative respectively, might be explained probably by the fact that an action, from its initiation to the final effect, may be depicted in one of its various stages of partial realisation in which the element involved in its fulfilment could be the direct agent or the other indirect agents.Here are some examples.2Thess 1:10ἐπιστεύθη τὸ μαρτύριον… επιστευθη το μαρτυριον… the testimony was believed…The object of the verb is here in the Accusative.Mt 21:25Διὰ τί οὖν οὐκ ἐπιστεύσατε αὐτῷ; δια τι ουν ουκ επιστευσατε AUTWi? Why did you not believe him?The object of the same verb is here in the Dative.In the first example it is the direct agent which is emphasised – the testimony itself – which produces the final effect upon its beneficiary; therefore it is in the Accusative.In the second example the emphasis falls on the confessor and is therefore in the Dative, as he is not the most immediate agent on which the faith is firstly directed: he is believed because the testimony or the words he uttered were previously believed.(See also the verb ἀκουω ακουω: it may be followed by the Accusative or the Genitive, depending on the agent involved in the listening/hearing; either the person who is speaking, or his voice, or the words of his voice, or some sound).ι believe this principle may also apply to the case of υευδομαι + Acc/Dat: Ananias lied to the Holy Spirit (directly, therefore the Accusative) and in so doing he lied, not to men, but to God (as a consequence, therefore the Dative).Vasile Stancu—–Original Message—–From: -bounces at lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Tom MooreSent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 6:09 AMTo: greek Subject: [] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc.Acts 5:3 is consistently translated: “Peter said, Ananias, why has satan filled your heart (for) you to lie *to* the holy spirit?”But “the holy spirit” is accusative:ψεύσασθαί σε τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιονυευσασθαι σε το πνευμα το hAGIONWhile the very next verse shows lying *to* somebody in the dative (Acts 5:4: “You did not lie to men but to God”):Οὐκ ἐψεύσω ἀνθρώποις, ἀλλὰ τῷ θεῷουκ ευευσω ανθρωποισ αλλα TWi QEWiCan το πνευμα το hAGION be understood instead to be what Ananias lied about, rather than to whom Ananias lied: “Why has satan filled your heart (for) you to lie *about* [or to mispresent] the holy spirit?” (as being the one motivating his actions)? Given 5:4, why is “to the holy spirit” even valid?Thanks,Tom Moore— home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/— home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage. ____________________________________________________________________________________Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
[] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc.[] portable electronic bible / study aids
Sun Mar 2 23:55:35 εστ 2008
[] Titus 2:13 [] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc. George,When you say “the accusative of that regarding which one lies (4)” in reference to Acts 5:3 (vs. the “dative of the person (3) to whom one lies” in Acts 5:4), are you saying Ananias is lying *about* the holy spirit rather than *to* the holy spirit (that is, in agreement with my supposition)?Tom
[] Titus 2:13[] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc.
Sun Mar 2 23:59:05 εστ 2008
[] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc. [] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc. If υσευδομαι is analogous to πιστευω (acc=thing believed; dat=person saying the thing that is believed) and to ακουω (acc=what is spoken and heard; gen=person doing the speaking), wouldn’t that support the idea that the accusative of υσευδομαι is the lie itself and the dative is the recipient of the lie?(In 2 Thes 1:10, μαρτυριον [neu] is nominative, no? Nevertheless, an example of πιστευω + accusative is found in 1 Cor 13:5: παντα πιστευει.)Tom> ——-Original Message——-> From: Vasile Stancu <stancu at mail.dnttm.ro>> Subject: ρε: [] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc.> Sent: Feb 29 ’08 20:06> > In my opinion, the two different ways of employing this verb, with the Accusative and the Dative respectively, might be explained probably by the fact that an action, from its initiation to the final effect, may be depicted in one of its various stages of partial realisation in which the element involved in its fulfilment could be the direct agent or the other indirect agents.> > Here are some examples.> > 2Thess 1:10> ἐπιστεύθη τὸ μαρτύριον… επιστευθη το μαρτυριον… the testimony was believed…> The object of the verb is here in the Accusative.> > Mt 21:25> Διὰ τί οὖν οὐκ ἐπιστεύσατε αὐτῷ; δια τι ουν ουκ επιστευσατε AUTWi? Why did you not believe him?> The object of the same verb is here in the Dative.> > In the first example it is the direct agent which is emphasised – the testimony itself – which produces the final effect upon its beneficiary; therefore it is in the Accusative.> > In the second example the emphasis falls on the confessor and is therefore in the Dative, as he is not the most immediate agent on which the faith is firstly directed: he is believed because the testimony or the words he uttered were previously believed.> > (See also the verb ἀκουω ακουω: it may be followed by the Accusative or the Genitive, depending on the agent involved in the listening/hearing; either the person who is speaking, or his voice, or the words of his voice, or some sound).> > ι believe this principle may also apply to the case of υευδομαι + Acc/Dat: Ananias lied to the Holy Spirit (directly, therefore the Accusative) and in so doing he lied, not to men, but to God (as a consequence, therefore the Dative).> > Vasile Stancu> > > —–Original Message—–> From: -bounces at lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Tom Moore> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 6:09 αμ> To: greek > Subject: [] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc.> > Acts 5:3 is consistently translated: “Peter said, Ananias, why has satan filled your heart (for) you to lie *to* the holy spirit?”> > But “the holy spirit” is accusative:> > ψεύσασθαί σε τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον> υευσασθαι σε το πνευμα το hAGION> > While the very next verse shows lying *to* somebody in the dative (Acts 5:4: “You did not lie to men but to God”):> > Οὐκ ἐψεύσω ἀνθρώποις, ἀλλὰ τῷ θεῷ> ουκ ευευσω ανθρωποισ αλλα TWi QEWi> > Can το πνευμα το hAGION be understood instead to be what Ananias lied about, rather than to whom Ananias lied: “Why has satan filled your heart (for) you to lie *about* [or to mispresent] the holy spirit?” (as being the one motivating his actions)? Given 5:4, why is “to the holy spirit” even valid?> > Thanks,> Tom Moore> —> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/> > >
Mon Mar 3 00:53:30 εστ 2008
[] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc. [] relative value of re-reading the Greek ντ versusfollowing the advice of Conrad and Buth ι think βδαγ‘s explanation doesn’t agree with me on this (though ι think most translations do) but my understanding υσευδομαι + dative in Acts 5:4 is that the recipient of Ananias’ lie was Peter, to which Peter replied, no, the recipient of the lie was God: “Look, it’s not me (or men) you’re lying to, but God” [not a literal translation].But if ι understand βδαγ‘s distinction correctly (between the accusative and the dative), the recipient of a lie goes in the accusative, while the one being harmed by a lie goes in the dative.Therefore, is it correct to say that, αξξορδινγ το βδαγ, in Acts 5:4 Ananias lied neither to men nor to God; rather, the recipient of his lie was the holy spirit, and Peter’s response was, “Look, your lie to the holy spirit doesn’t/didn’t harm men; it harms/harmed God”?If ι have misunderstood, what distinction is βδαγ drawing? (And am ι wrong to assume that the writer of Acts must intend a distinction by choosing one and then the other?)If ι have understood correctly, then is βδαγ the final word on this? (Is this an impertinent question?) Because in this case ι‘m not clear on the meaning of the verse.ι also attempted–unsuccessfully–to google βδαγ‘s “Appianus, Liby.” reference. Is it possible that it, too, within its context, could be alternatively understood as lying *about* the gods instead of *to* the gods?Tom Moore> ——-Original Message——-> From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>> Subject: Re: [] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc.> Sent: Feb 26 ’08 21:50> > > On Feb 26, 2008, at 4:09 πμ, Tom Moore wrote:> > > Acts 5:3 is consistently translated: “Peter said, Ananias, why has > > satan filled your heart (for) you to lie *to* the holy spirit?”> >> > But “the holy spirit” is accusative:> >> > ψεύσασθαί σε τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον> > υευσασθαι σε το πνευμα το hAGION> >> > While the very next verse shows lying *to* somebody in the dative > > (Acts 5:4: “You did not lie to men but to God”):> >> > Οὐκ ἐψεύσω ἀνθρώποις, ἀλλὰ τῷ θεῷ> > ουκ ευευσω ανθρωποισ αλλα TWi QEWi> >> > Can το πνευμα το hAGION be understood instead to be what Ananias > > lied about, rather than to whom Ananias lied: “Why has satan filled > > your heart (for) you to lie *about* [or to mispresent] the holy > > spirit?” (as being the one motivating his actions)? Given 5:4, why > > is “to the holy spirit” even valid?> > Cf. βδαγ s.v. υευδομαι: note the second usage there:> > 2. to attempt to deceive by lying, tell lies to, impose upon τινὰ > [τινα] someone (Eur., χ. et al.; Plut., Alcib. 206 [26, 8], Marcell. > 314 [27, 7]; Jos., Ant. 3, 273; 13, 25; ψι 232, 10) Ac 5:3 (Appian, > Liby. 27 §113 τίς σε δαίμων ἔβλαψε . . . > ψεύσασθαι θεοὺς οὓς ὤμοσας; [τισ σε > δαιμων … υευσασθαι θεουσ hOUS ωμοσασ?]=‘what evil spirit beguiled > you . . . to lie to the gods by whom you swore?’; Tat. 19, 3 > ἑαυτόν [hEAUTON]); 1 Cl 15:4 (Ps 77:36, but w. αὐτῷ > [AUTWi]).—δελγ. μ–μ. τω.> > > Carl ω. Conrad> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)> > > >
[] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc.[] relative value of re-reading the Greek ντ versusfollowing the advice of Conrad and Buth
Mon Mar 3 07:14:23 εστ 2008
[] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc. [] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc. On Mar 2, 2008, at 11:59 πμ, Tom Moore wrote:> If υσευδομαι is analogous to πιστευω (acc=thing believed; dat=person > saying the thing that is believed) and to ακουω (acc=what is spoken > and heard; gen=person doing the speaking), wouldn’t that support the > idea that the accusative of υσευδομαι is the lie itself and the > dative is the recipient of the lie?> > (In 2 Thes 1:10, μαρτυριον [neu] is nominative, no? Nevertheless, an > example of πιστευω + accusative is found in 1 Cor 13:5: παντα > πιστευει.)ι really don’t see why the usage of υευδομαι should be assumed to be analogous to that of πιστευω, inasmuch as πιστευω is more directly concerned with trust relationships than with truth/falsehood.On Mar 3, 2008, at 12:24 αμ, Tom Moore wrote:> Correction: …my understanding of θε δατιβε ιν Acts 5:4…> > ——-Original Message——-> From: Tom Moore <tom at katabiblon.com>> Subject: Re: [] Acts 5:3 ψευδομαι/υευδομαι + Acc.> Sent: Mar 03 ’08 05:14> > ι think βδαγ‘s explanation doesn’t agree with me on this, though ι > think most translations do, but my understanding of Acts 5:3-4 is > that the recipient of Anaias’ lie was Peter, and Peter said, “Look, > it’s not me (or men) you’re lying to, but God” [not a literal > translation].> > But if ι understand βδαγ‘s distinction correctly (between the > accusative and the dative), the recipient of a lie goes in the > accusative, while the one being harmed by a lie goes in the dative.> > Therefore, is it correct to say that, according to βδαγ, in Acts 5:4 > Ananais lied neither to men nor to God; rather, the recipient of his > lie was the holy spirit, and Peter’s response was, “Look, your lie > to the holy spirit doesn’t/didn’t harm men; it harms/harmed God”?> > If ι‘m misunderstanding, what distinction is βδαγ drawing? (And am ι > wrong to assume that the writer of Acts must intend a distinction by > choosing one and then the other?)> > But if ι‘m not misunderstanding, is βδαγ the final word on this? (Is > this an impertinant question?) Because then ι don’t understand the > meaning of the verse.> > ι attempted–unsuccessfully–to google the “Appianus, Liby.” > reference. Is it possible, within its context, that this quote also > could be alternatively understood as lying *about* the gods instead > of *to* the gods?ι don’t think that βδαγ is indicating any distinction in meaning so much as a distinction of usage. Well, maybe there is a distinction of meaning: with an accusative υευδομαι seems to be transitive and mean “cheat, play (someone) false,” while with the dative it seems to be intransitive and mean “act/speak falsely (to someone).βδαγ is certainly not the last word on a question, but if it shows instances wherein υευδομαι is construed with a dative and others wherein υευδομαι is construed with an accusative, those instances do need to be explained — somehow.Carl ω. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
[] Acts 5:3-4 timothy mcmahon targum at msn.com
Fri Dec 4 22:39:11 εστ 2009
[] ιπα New Testament [] Acts 5:3-4 Two roughly parallel statements in Acts 5:3-4… υευσασθαι… το πνευμα and ευευσω τω θεω. Any significance here in the use of the two different cases after υευδομαι?
[] ιπα New Testament[] Acts 5:3-4
[] Acts 5:3-4 Barry nebarry at verizon.net
Fri Dec 4 22:58:02 εστ 2009
[] Acts 5:3-4 [] Acts 5:3-4 ————————————————–From: “timothy mcmahon” <targum at msn.com>Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 10:39 PMTo: < at lists.ibiblio.org>Subject: [] Acts 5:3-4> > Two roughly parallel statements in Acts 5:3-4� υευσασθαι� το πνευμα and > ευευσω τω θεω. Any significance here in the use of the two different cases > after υευδομαι?The difference, perhaps, between “deceive” and “tell a lie to…”ν.ε. Barry HofstetterFecisti nos ad te et inquietum est cor nostrum, donec requiescat in te… — Augustine, Confessions 1:1http://mysite.verizon.net/nebarry/http://my.opera.com/BarryHofstetter/blog/
[] Acts 5:3-4[] Acts 5:3-4
[] Acts 5:3-4 George φ Somsel gfsomsel at yahoo.com
Fri Dec 4 23:03:54 εστ 2009
[] Acts 5:3-4 [] Acts 5:3-4 3 εἶπεν δὲ ὁ Πέτρος· Ἁνανία, διὰ τί ἐπλήρωσεν ὁ σατανᾶς τὴν καρδίαν σου, ψεύσασθαί σε τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον καὶ νοσφίσασθαι ἀπὸ τῆς τιμῆς τοῦ χωρίου; 4 οὐχὶ μένον σοὶ ἔμενεν καὶ πραθὲν ἐν τῇ σῇ ἐξουσίᾳ ὑπῆρχεν; τί ὅτι ἔθου ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ σου τὸ πρᾶγμα τοῦτο; οὐκ ἐψεύσω ἀνθρώποις ἀλλὰ τῷ θεῷ. There are not two different cases involved here. Ψεύσασθαί υευσασθαι is an aorist middle inf and ἐψεύσω ευευσω is an aorist middle ind 2nd sg. Both are aorist middle. georgegfsomsel … search for truth, hear truth, learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, defend the truth till death.- Jan Hus_________ ________________________________From: timothy mcmahon <targum at msn.com>To: at lists.ibiblio.orgSent: Fri, December 4, 2009 8:39:11 PMSubject: [] Acts 5:3-4Two roughly parallel statements in Acts 5:3-4… υευσασθαι… το πνευμα and ευευσω τω θεω. Any significance here in the use of the two different cases after υευδομαι? — home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/3 ειπεν δε hO πετροσ, “ανανια, δια τι επληρωσεν hO σατανασ θν καρδιαν σου υευσασθαι σε το πνευμα το hAGION και νοσφισασθαι απο θσ τιμησ του χωριου? 4 ουχι μενον σοι εμενεν και πραθεν εν THi SHi ECOUSIAi hUPARXEN? τι hOTI εν THi KARDIAi σου το πραγμα τουτο? ουκ ευευσω ανθρωποισ αλλα TWi QEWi.
Fri Dec 4 23:32:52 εστ 2009
[] Acts 5:3-4 [] Acts 5:3-4 ————————————————–From: “George φ Somsel” <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 11:03 PMTo: “timothy mcmahon” <targum at msn.com>; < at lists.ibiblio.org>Subject: [] Acts 5:3-4> 3 εἶπεν δὲ ὁ Πέτρος· Ἁνανία, διὰ τί ἐπλήρωσεν ὁ σατανᾶς τὴν καρδίαν σου, > ψεύσασθαί σε τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον καὶ νοσφίσασθαι ἀπὸ τῆς τιμῆς τοῦ χωρίου; > 4 οὐχὶ μένον σοὶ ἔμενεν καὶ πραθὲν ἐν τῇ σῇ ἐξουσίᾳ ὑπῆρχεν; τί ὅτι ἔθου > ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ σου τὸ πρᾶγμα τοῦτο; οὐκ ἐψεύσω ἀνθρώποις ἀλλὰ τῷ θεῷ.> > There are not two different cases involved here. Ψεύσασθαί υευσασθαι is > an aorist middle inf and ἐψεύσω ευευσω is an aorist middle ind 2nd sg. > Both are aorist middle.George, ι think he’s talking about τὸ πνεῦμα, το πνευμα, and ἀνθρώποις… τῷ θεῷ, (ανθρωποισ…TWi QEWi. In the former, accusative, the latter, dative.ν.ε. Barry HofstetterFecisti nos ad te et inquietum est cor nostrum, donec requiescat in te… — Augustine, Confessions 1:1http://mysite.verizon.net/nebarry/http://my.opera.com/BarryHofstetter/blog/
[] Acts 5:3-4 Eddie Mishoe edmishoe at yahoo.com
Sat Dec 5 09:10:18 εστ 2009
[] Acts 5:3-4 [] 1 Corinthians 7:33 Timothy,5.3 has Accusative of Purpose (with Infinitive verb)5.4 has Dative of Person (with Finite verb)Eddie Mishoe— On Fri, 12/4/09, timothy mcmahon <targum at msn.com> wrote:From: timothy mcmahon <targum at msn.com>Subject: [] Acts 5:3-4To: at lists.ibiblio.orgDate: Friday, December 4, 2009, 10:39 PMTwo roughly parallel statements in Acts 5:3-4… υευσασθαι… το πνευμα and ευευσω τω θεω. Any significance here in the use of the two different cases after υευδομαι? — home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/
[] Acts 5:3-4[] 1 Corinthians 7:33
[] Acts 5:3-4 Tom Moore tom at katabiblon.com
Sat Dec 5 10:24:14 εστ 2009
[] Modern Greek ντ Audio [] Acts 5:3-4 ι posed this same question two years ago:http://www.google.com/search?q=pseudomai+site%3Aibiblio.orgThough my conjecture was shot down, it still makes the most sense to me.ι think in Acts 5:3, Ananias is lying *about* the holy spirit (υευδομαι + acc.), by misrepresenting the holy spirit as being the motivator behind his actions.Εἶπεν δὲ ὁ Πέτρος, Ἁνανία, διὰ τί ἐπλήρωσεν ὁ σατανᾶς τὴν καρδίαν σου, ψεύσασθαί σε τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον, καὶ νοσφίσασθαί ἀπὸ τῆς τιμῆς τοῦ χωρίου;ειπεν δε hO πετροσ, hANANIA, δια τι επληρωσεν hO σατανασ θν καρδιαν σου, υευσασθαι σε το πνευμα το hAGION, και νοσφισασθαι απο θσ τιμησ του ξωριου;In Acts 5:4, Ananias is lying *to* God (υευδομαι + dat.).Οὐχὶ μένον σοὶ ἔμενεν, καὶ πραθὲν ἐν τῇ σῇ ἐξουσίᾳ ὑπῆρχεν; Τί ὅτι ἔθου ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ σου τὸ πρᾶγμα τοῦτο; Οὐκ ἐψεύσω ἀνθρώποις, ἀλλὰ τῷ θεῷ.ουξι μενον σοι εμενεν, και πραθεν εν THi SHi εχουσια hUPHRCEN; τι hOTI εθου εν THi KARDIAi σου το πραγμα τουτο; ουκ ευευσω ανθρωποισ, αλλα TWi QEWiRegards,Tom Moorewww.katabiblon.com> ——-Original Message——-> From: timothy mcmahon <targum at msn.com>> Subject: [] Acts 5:3-4> Sent: Dec 05 ’09 03:39> > > Two roughly parallel statements in Acts 5:3-4… υευσασθαι… το πνευμα and ευευσω τω θεω. Any significance here in the use of the two different cases after υευδομαι? > —> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/>
[] Modern Greek ντ Audio[] Acts 5:3-4
[] Acts 5:3-4 yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net
Sat Dec 5 15:14:32 εστ 2009
[] Acts 5:3-4 [] Acts 5:3-4 λσψ has some good examples of ψευσασθαι τινά τι υευσασθαι τινα τι is to deceive someone in a thing. Similarly, with just the accusative it means “to deceive by lies, cheat,” for example, from Aechylus, Agamemnon ξυναινέσασα Λοξίαν ἐψευσάμην, χυναισεσασα λοχιαν ευευσαμην “when ι swore, ι lied/deceived Apollo.” βδαγ gives several other examples. α particularly good one is his retelling of the test for adultery from Numbers 5: ψευσαμένη δὲ τὸν ἄνδρα ἐπὶ τοῖς γάμοις καὶ τὸν θεὸν ἐπὶ τοῖς ὅρκοις υευσαμενη δε τον ανδρα επι τοισ γαμοισ και τον θεον επι τοισ ορκοισ “but if [the woman] had lied to her husband about her marriage vows and to God concerning the oath, she died in a shameful manner.”Yancy Smith, PhDyancywsmith at sbcglobal.netY.ω.Smith at tcu.eduyancy at wbtc.com5636 Wedgworth RoadFort Worth, τχ 76133817-361-7565On Dec 5, 2009, at 9:24 αμ, Tom Moore wrote:> ι posed this same question two years ago:> http://www.google.com/search?q=pseudomai+site%3Aibiblio.org> > Though my conjecture was shot down, it still makes the most sense to me.> > ι think in Acts 5:3, Ananias is lying *about* the holy spirit (υευδομαι + acc.), by misrepresenting the holy spirit as being the motivator behind his actions.> > Εἶπεν δὲ ὁ Πέτρος, Ἁνανία, διὰ τί ἐπλήρωσεν ὁ σατανᾶς τὴν καρδίαν σου, ψεύσασθαί σε τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον, καὶ νοσφίσασθαί ἀπὸ τῆς τιμῆς τοῦ χωρίου;> ειπεν δε hO πετροσ, hANANIA, δια τι επληρωσεν hO σατανασ θν καρδιαν σου, υευσασθαι σε το πνευμα το hAGION, και νοσφισασθαι απο θσ τιμησ του ξωριου;> > In Acts 5:4, Ananias is lying *to* God (υευδομαι + dat.).> > Οὐχὶ μένον σοὶ ἔμενεν, καὶ πραθὲν ἐν τῇ σῇ ἐξουσίᾳ ὑπῆρχεν; Τί ὅτι ἔθου ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ σου τὸ πρᾶγμα τοῦτο; Οὐκ ἐψεύσω ἀνθρώποις, ἀλλὰ τῷ θεῷ.> ουξι μενον σοι εμενεν, και πραθεν εν THi SHi εχουσια hUPHRCEN; τι hOTI εθου εν THi KARDIAi σου το πραγμα τουτο; ουκ ευευσω ανθρωποισ, αλλα TWi QEWi> > Regards,> Tom Moore> www.katabiblon.com> > >> ——-Original Message——->> From: timothy mcmahon <targum at msn.com>>> Subject: [] Acts 5:3-4>> Sent: Dec 05 ’09 03:39>> >> >> Two roughly parallel statements in Acts 5:3-4… υευσασθαι… το πνευμα and ευευσω τω θεω. Any significance here in the use of the two different cases after υευδομαι? >> —>> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/>> mailing list>> at lists.ibiblio.org>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/>> > —> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/
Sat Dec 5 15:23:29 εστ 2009
[] Acts 5:3-4 [] Acts 5:3-4 My apologies, a correction. It was Josephus’ retelling, not βδαγ‘s:λσψ has some good examples of ψευσασθαι τινά τι. υευσασθαι τινα τι is to deceive someone in a thing. Similarly, with just the accusative it means “to deceive by lies, cheat,” for example, from Aechylus, Agamemnon ξυναινέσασα Λοξίαν ἐψευσάμην, χυναισεσασα λοχιαν ευευσαμην “when ι swore, ι lied/deceived Apollo.” βδαγ gives several other examples. α particularly good one is Josephus’ (Ant. of the Jews 3.273) retelling of the test for adultery from Numbers 5: ψευσαμένη δὲ τὸν ἄνδρα ἐπὶ τοῖς γάμοις καὶ τὸν θεὸν ἐπὶ τοῖς ὅρκοις υευσαμενη δε τον ανδρα επι τοισ γαμοισ και τον θεον επι τοισ ορκοισ “but if [the woman] had lied to her husband about her marriage vows and to God concerning the oath, she died in a shameful manner.”Yancy Smith, PhDyancywsmith at sbcglobal.netY.ω.Smith at tcu.eduyancy at wbtc.com5636 Wedgworth RoadFort Worth, τχ 76133817-361-7565Begin forwarded message:> λσψ has some good examples of ψευσασθαι τινά τι υευσασθαι τινα τι is to deceive someone in a thing. Similarly, with just the accusative it means “to deceive by lies, cheat,” for example, from Aechylus, Agamemnon ξυναινέσασα Λοξίαν ἐψευσάμην, χυναισεσασα λοχιαν ευευσαμην “when ι swore, ι lied/deceived Apollo.” βδαγ gives several other examples. α particularly good one is his retelling of the test for adultery from Numbers 5: ψευσαμένη δὲ τὸν ἄνδρα ἐπὶ τοῖς γάμοις καὶ τὸν θεὸν ἐπὶ τοῖς ὅρκοις υευσαμενη δε τον ανδρα επι τοισ γαμοισ και τον θεον επι τοισ ορκοισ “but if [the woman] had lied to her husband about her marriage vows and to God concerning the oath, she died in a shameful manner.”
[] Acts 5:3-4 Carl ω. Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Sat Dec 5 15:31:41 εστ 2009
[] Acts 5:3-4 [] How about a Audio Bible The bit from Aeschylus’ Agamemnon is in fact Cassandra, explaining to the chorus, why Apollo made her foretell things but never be believed; she says, “ι had consented (to sex with him), but ι played Apollo false.”Carl ω. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (ret) On Saturday, December 05, 2009, at 03:14PM, “yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net” <yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net> wrote:>λσψ has some good examples of ψευσασθαι τινά τι υευσασθαι τινα τι is to deceive someone in a thing. Similarly, with just the accusative it means “to deceive by lies, cheat,” for example, from Aechylus, Agamemnon ξυναινέσασα Λοξίαν ἐψευσάμην, χυναισεσασα λοχιαν ευευσαμην “when ι swore, ι lied/deceived Apollo.” βδαγ gives several other examples. α particularly good one is his retelling of the test for adultery from Numbers 5: ψευσαμένη δὲ τὸν ἄνδρα ἐπὶ τοῖς γάμοις καὶ τὸν θεὸν ἐπὶ τοῖς ὅρκοις υευσαμενη δε τον ανδρα επι τοισ γαμοισ και τον θεον επι τοισ ορκοισ “but if [the woman] had lied to her husband about her marriage vows and to God concerning the oath, she died in a shameful manner.”> >Yancy Smith, PhD>yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net>υ.ω.Smith at tcu.edu>yancy at wbtc.com>5636 Wedgworth Road>Fort Worth, τχ 76133>817-361-7565> > > > > > >On Dec 5, 2009, at 9:24 αμ, Tom Moore wrote:> >> ι posed this same question two years ago:>> http://www.google.com/search?q=pseudomai+site%3Aibiblio.org>> >> Though my conjecture was shot down, it still makes the most sense to me.>> >> ι think in Acts 5:3, Ananias is lying *about* the holy spirit (υευδομαι + acc.), by misrepresenting the holy spirit as being the motivator behind his actions.>> >> Εἶπεν δὲ ὁ Πέτρος, Ἁνανία, διὰ τί ἐπλήρωσεν ὁ σατανᾶς τὴν καρδίαν σου, ψεύσασθαί σε τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον, καὶ νοσφίσασθαί ἀπὸ τῆς τιμῆς τοῦ χωρίου;>> ειπεν δε hO πετροσ, hANANIA, δια τι επληρωσεν hO σατανασ θν καρδιαν σου, υευσασθαι σε το πνευμα το hAGION, και νοσφισασθαι απο θσ τιμησ του ξωριου;>> >> In Acts 5:4, Ananias is lying *to* God (υευδομαι + dat.).>> >> Οὐχὶ μένον σοὶ ἔμενεν, καὶ πραθὲν ἐν τῇ σῇ ἐξουσίᾳ ὑπῆρχεν; Τί ὅτι ἔθου ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ σου τὸ πρᾶγμα τοῦτο; Οὐκ ἐψεύσω ἀνθρώποις, ἀλλὰ τῷ θεῷ.>> ουξι μενον σοι εμενεν, και πραθεν εν THi SHi εχουσια hUPHRCEN; τι hOTI εθου εν THi KARDIAi σου το πραγμα τουτο; ουκ ευευσω ανθρωποισ, αλλα TWi QEWi>> >> Regards,>> Tom Moore>> www.katabiblon.com>> >> >>> ——-Original Message——->>> From: timothy mcmahon <targum at msn.com>>>> Subject: [] Acts 5:3-4>>> Sent: Dec 05 ’09 03:39>>> >>> >>> Two roughly parallel statements in Acts 5:3-4… υευσασθαι… το πνευμα and ευευσω τω θεω. Any significance here in the use of the two different cases after υευδομαι? >>> —>>> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/>>> mailing list>>> at lists.ibiblio.org>>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/>>> >> —>> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/>> mailing list>> at lists.ibiblio.org>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/> >—> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/> >
[] Acts 5:3-4[] How about a Audio Bible