[] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc. Tom Moore tom at katabiblon.com
Tue Feb 26 16:09:06 EST 2008
[] relative value of re-reading the Greek NTversusfollowingthe advice of Conrad and Buth [] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + 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 ἅγιονYEUSASQAI SE TO PNEUMA TO 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 θεῷOUK EYEUSW ANQRWPOIS ALLA TWi QEWiCan TO PNEUMA TO 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 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc.
[] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc. Carl Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Tue Feb 26 16:50:49 EST 2008
[] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc. [] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc. On Feb 26, 2008, at 4:09 PM, 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> YEUSASQAI SE TO PNEUMA TO 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> OUK EYEUSW ANQRWPOIS ALLA TWi QEWi> > Can TO PNEUMA TO 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. BDAG s.v. YEUDOMAI: note the second usage there:2. to attempt to deceive by lying, tell lies to, impose upon τινὰ [TINA] someone (Eur., X. et al.; Plut., Alcib. 206 [26, 8], Marcell. 314 [27, 7]; Jos., Ant. 3, 273; 13, 25; PSI 232, 10) Ac 5:3 (Appian, Liby. 27 §113 τίς σε δαίμων ἔβλαψε . . . ψεύσασθαι θεοὺς οὓς ὤμοσας; [TIS SE DAIMWN … YEUSASQAI QEOUS hOUS WMOSAS?]=‘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]).—DELG. M-M. TW.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
[] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc.[] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc.
[] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc. Vasile Stancu stancu at mail.dnttm.ro
Fri Feb 29 15:06:40 EST 2008
[] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + 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… EPISTEUQH TO MARTURION… the testimony was believed…The object of the verb is here in the Accusative.Mt 21:25Διὰ τί οὖν οὐκ ἐπιστεύσατε αὐτῷ; DIA TI OUN OUK EPISTEUSATE 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 AKOUW: 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).I believe this principle may also apply to the case of YEUDOMAI + 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 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + 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 ἅγιονYEUSASQAI SE TO PNEUMA TO 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 θεῷOUK EYEUSW ANQRWPOIS ALLA TWi QEWiCan TO PNEUMA TO 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 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc.[] Question concerning Daniel Greek
[] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc. George F Somsel gfsomsel at yahoo.com
Fri Feb 29 17:24:53 EST 2008
[] portable electronic bible / study aids [] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc. There are not that many examples of the use of this verb with either the acc or with the dat in the NT. 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 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + 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… EPISTEUQH TO MARTURION… the testimony was believed…The object of the verb is here in the Accusative.Mt 21:25Διὰ τί οὖν οὐκ ἐπιστεύσατε αὐτῷ; DIA TI OUN OUK EPISTEUSATE 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 AKOUW: 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).I believe this principle may also apply to the case of YEUDOMAI + 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 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + 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 ἅγιονYEUSASQAI SE TO PNEUMA TO 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 θεῷOUK EYEUSW ANQRWPOIS ALLA TWi QEWiCan TO PNEUMA TO 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 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc.
[] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc. George F Somsel gfsomsel at yahoo.com
Fri Feb 29 17:51:50 EST 2008
[] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + 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 NT. 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 ἐμοῦMAKARIOI ESTE hOTAN ONEIDISWSIN hUMAS KAI DIWCWSIN KAI EIPWSIN PAN PONHRON KAQ’ hUMWN [YEUDOMENOI] hENEKEN EMOU1 Tim 2.7εἰς ὃ ἐτέθην ἐγὼ κῆρυξ καὶ ἀπόστολος, ἀλήθειαν λέγω οὐ ψεύδομαι, διδάσκαλος ἐθνῶν ἐν πίστει καὶ ἀληθείᾳ.EIS hO ETEQHN EGW KHRUC KAI APOSTOLOS, ALHQEIAN LEGW OU YEUDOMAI, DIDASKALOS EQNWN EN PISTEI KAI ALHQEIAiHeb 6.18 ἵνα διὰ δύο πραγμάτων ἀμεταθέτων, ἐν οἷς ἀδύνατον ψεύσασθαι [τὸν] θεόν, ἰσχυρὰν παράκλησιν ἔχωμεν οἱ καταφυγόντες κρατῆσαι τῆς προκειμένης ἐλπίδος· hINA DIA DUO PRAGMATWN AMETAQETWN, EN hOIS ADUNATON YEUSASQAI [TON] QEON, ISXURAN PARAKLHSIN EXWMEN hOI KATAFUGONTES KRATHSAI THS PROKEIMENHS ELPIDOS1 Jn 1.6Ἐὰν εἴπωμεν ὅτι κοινωνίαν ἔχομεν μετʼ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐν τῷ σκότει περιπατῶμεν, ψευδόμεθα καὶ οὐ ποιοῦμεν τὴν ἀλήθειαν· EAN EIPWMEN hOTI KOINWNIAN EXOMEN MET’ AUTOU KAI EN TWi SKOTEI PERIPATWMEN, YEDOMEQA KAI OU POIOUMEN THN ALHQEIANRe 3.9ἰδοὺ διδῶ ἐκ τῆς συναγωγῆς τοῦ σατανᾶ τῶν λεγόντων ἑαυτοὺς Ἰουδαίους εἶναι, καὶ οὐκ εἰσὶν ἀλλὰ ψεύδονται. IDOU DIDW EK THS SUNAGWGHS TOU SATANA TWN LEGONTW hEAUTOUS IOUDAIOUS EINAI, KAI OUK EISIN ALLA YEUDONTAI(2)Rom 9.1 Ἀλήθειαν λέγω ἐν Χριστῷ, οὐ ψεύδομαι, συμμαρτυρούσης μοι τῆς συνειδήσεώς μου ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ, ALHQEIAN LEGW EN XRISTWi, OU YEUDOMAI, SUMMARTUROUSHS MOI THS SUNEIDHSEWS MOU EN PNEUMATI hAGIWi2 Cor 11.31 ὁ θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ οἶδεν, ὁ ὢν εὐλογητὸς εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας, ὅτι οὐ ψεύδομαι.hO QEOS KAI PATHR TOU KURIOU IHSOU OIDEN, hO WN EULOGHTOS EIS TOUS AIWNAS, hOTI OU YEUDOMAIGal 1.19ἃ δὲ γράφω ὑμῖν, ἰδοὺ ἐνώπιον τοῦ θεοῦ ὅτι οὐ ψεύδομαι.hA DE GRAFW hUMIN, IDOU ENWPION TOU QEOU hOTI OU YEUDOMAI (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.OUKI MENON SOI EMENEN KAI PRAQEN EN THi SHi ECOUSIAi hUPHRXEN? TI hOTI EQOU EN THi KARDIAi SOU TO PRAGMA TOUTO? OUK EYEUSW ANQRWPOIS ALLA TWi QEWi.”Col 3.9 μὴ ψεύδεσθε εἰς ἀλλήλους, ἀπεκδυσάμενοι τὸν παλαιὸν ἄνθρωπον σὺν ταῖς πράξεσιν αὐτοῦ MH YEUDESQE EIS ALLHLOUS, APEKDUSAMENOI TON PALAION ANQRWPON SUN TAIS PRACESIN AUTOU(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; EIPEN DE hO PETROS “ANANIA, DIA TI EPLHRWSEN hO SATANAS THN KARDIAN SOU, YEUSASQAI SE TO PNEUMA TO hAGION KAI NOSFISASQAI APO THS TIMHS TOU XWRIOU?”Jas 3.14εἰ δὲ ζῆλον πικρὸν ἔχετε καὶ ἐριθείαν ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ ὑμῶν, μὴ κατακαυχᾶσθε καὶ ψεύδεσθε κατὰ τῆς ἀληθείας.EI DE ZHLON PIKRON EXETE KAI ERIQEIAN EN THi KARDIAi hUMWN, MH KATAKAUXASQE KAI YEUDESQE KATA THS ALHQEIAS 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 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + 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… EPISTEUQH TO MARTURION… the testimony was believed…The object of the verb is here in the Accusative.Mt 21:25Διὰ τί οὖν οὐκ ἐπιστεύσατε αὐτῷ; DIA TI OUN OUK EPISTEUSATE 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 AKOUW: 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).I believe this principle may also apply to the case of YEUDOMAI + 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 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + 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 ἅγιονYEUSASQAI SE TO PNEUMA TO 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 θεῷOUK EYEUSW ANQRWPOIS ALLA TWi QEWiCan TO PNEUMA TO 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 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc.[] portable electronic bible / study aids
[] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc. Tom Moore tom at katabiblon.com
Sun Mar 2 23:55:35 EST 2008
[] Titus 2:13 [] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + 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 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc.
[] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc. Tom Moore tom at katabiblon.com
Sun Mar 2 23:59:05 EST 2008
[] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc. [] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc. If YSEUDOMAI is analogous to PISTEUW (acc=thing believed; dat=person saying the thing that is believed) and to AKOUW (acc=what is spoken and heard; gen=person doing the speaking), wouldn’t that support the idea that the accusative of YSEUDOMAI is the lie itself and the dative is the recipient of the lie?(In 2 Thes 1:10, MARTURION [neu] is nominative, no? Nevertheless, an example of PISTEUW + accusative is found in 1 Cor 13:5: PANTA PISTEUEI.)Tom> ——-Original Message——-> From: Vasile Stancu <stancu at mail.dnttm.ro>> Subject: RE: [] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + 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… EPISTEUQH TO MARTURION… the testimony was believed…> The object of the verb is here in the Accusative.> > Mt 21:25> Διὰ τί οὖν οὐκ ἐπιστεύσατε αὐτῷ; DIA TI OUN OUK EPISTEUSATE 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 AKOUW: 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).> > I believe this principle may also apply to the case of YEUDOMAI + 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 AM> To: greek > Subject: [] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + 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> YEUSASQAI SE TO PNEUMA TO 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> OUK EYEUSW ANQRWPOIS ALLA TWi QEWi> > Can TO PNEUMA TO 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/> > >
[] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc.[] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc.
[] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc. Tom Moore tom at katabiblon.com
Mon Mar 3 00:53:30 EST 2008
[] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc. [] relative value of re-reading the Greek NT versusfollowing the advice of Conrad and Buth I think BDAG’s explanation doesn’t agree with me on this (though I think most translations do) but my understanding YSEUDOMAI + 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 I understand BDAG’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 BDAG, 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 I have misunderstood, what distinction is BDAG drawing? (And am I wrong to assume that the writer of Acts must intend a distinction by choosing one and then the other?)If I have understood correctly, then is BDAG the final word on this? (Is this an impertinent question?) Because in this case I’m not clear on the meaning of the verse.I also attempted–unsuccessfully–to google BDAG’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 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc.> Sent: Feb 26 ’08 21:50> > > On Feb 26, 2008, at 4:09 PM, 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> > YEUSASQAI SE TO PNEUMA TO 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> > OUK EYEUSW ANQRWPOIS ALLA TWi QEWi> >> > Can TO PNEUMA TO 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. BDAG s.v. YEUDOMAI: note the second usage there:> > 2. to attempt to deceive by lying, tell lies to, impose upon τινὰ > [TINA] someone (Eur., X. et al.; Plut., Alcib. 206 [26, 8], Marcell. > 314 [27, 7]; Jos., Ant. 3, 273; 13, 25; PSI 232, 10) Ac 5:3 (Appian, > Liby. 27 §113 τίς σε δαίμων ἔβλαψε . . . > ψεύσασθαι θεοὺς οὓς ὤμοσας; [TIS SE > DAIMWN … YEUSASQAI QEOUS hOUS WMOSAS?]=‘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]).—DELG. M-M. TW.> > > Carl W. Conrad> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)> > > >
[] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc.[] relative value of re-reading the Greek NT versusfollowing the advice of Conrad and Buth
[] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc. Carl Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Mon Mar 3 07:14:23 EST 2008
[] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc. [] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc. On Mar 2, 2008, at 11:59 PM, Tom Moore wrote:> If YSEUDOMAI is analogous to PISTEUW (acc=thing believed; dat=person > saying the thing that is believed) and to AKOUW (acc=what is spoken > and heard; gen=person doing the speaking), wouldn’t that support the > idea that the accusative of YSEUDOMAI is the lie itself and the > dative is the recipient of the lie?> > (In 2 Thes 1:10, MARTURION [neu] is nominative, no? Nevertheless, an > example of PISTEUW + accusative is found in 1 Cor 13:5: PANTA > PISTEUEI.)I really don’t see why the usage of YEUDOMAI should be assumed to be analogous to that of PISTEUW, inasmuch as PISTEUW is more directly concerned with trust relationships than with truth/falsehood.On Mar 3, 2008, at 12:24 AM, Tom Moore wrote:> Correction: …my understanding of THE DATIVE IN Acts 5:4…> > ——-Original Message——-> From: Tom Moore <tom at katabiblon.com>> Subject: Re: [] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc.> Sent: Mar 03 ’08 05:14> > I think BDAG’s explanation doesn’t agree with me on this, though I > 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 I understand BDAG’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 BDAG, 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 I’m misunderstanding, what distinction is BDAG drawing? (And am I > wrong to assume that the writer of Acts must intend a distinction by > choosing one and then the other?)> > But if I’m not misunderstanding, is BDAG the final word on this? (Is > this an impertinant question?) Because then I don’t understand the > meaning of the verse.> > I 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?I don’t think that BDAG is indicating any distinction in meaning so much as a distinction of usage. Well, maybe there is a distinction of meaning: with an accusative YEUDOMAI 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).BDAG is certainly not the last word on a question, but if it shows instances wherein YEUDOMAI is construed with a dative and others wherein YEUDOMAI is construed with an accusative, those instances do need to be explained — somehow.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
[] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc.[] Acts 5:3 PSEUDOMAI/YEUDOMAI + Acc.
[] Acts 5:3-4 timothy mcmahon targum at msn.com
Fri Dec 4 22:39:11 EST 2009
[] IPA New Testament [] Acts 5:3-4 Two roughly parallel statements in Acts 5:3-4… YEUSASQAI… TO PNEUMA and EYEUSW TW QEW. Any significance here in the use of the two different cases after YEUDOMAI?
[] IPA New Testament[] Acts 5:3-4
[] Acts 5:3-4 Barry nebarry at verizon.net
Fri Dec 4 22:58:02 EST 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� YEUSASQAI� TO PNEUMA and > EYEUSW TW QEW. Any significance here in the use of the two different cases > after YEUDOMAI?The difference, perhaps, between “deceive” and “tell a lie to…”N.E. 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 F Somsel gfsomsel at yahoo.com
Fri Dec 4 23:03:54 EST 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 YEUSASQAI is an aorist middle inf and ἐψεύσω EYEUSW 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… YEUSASQAI… TO PNEUMA and EYEUSW TW QEW. Any significance here in the use of the two different cases after YEUDOMAI? — home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/3 EIPEN DE hO PETROS, “ANANIA, DIA TI EPLHRWSEN hO SATANAS THN KARDIAN SOU YEUSASQAI SE TO PNEUMA TO hAGION KAI NOSFISASQAI APO THS TIMHS TOU XWRIOU? 4 OUXI MENON SOI EMENEN KAI PRAQEN EN THi SHi ECOUSIAi hUPARXEN? TI hOTI EN THi KARDIAi SOU TO PRAGMA TOUTO? OUK EYEUSW ANQRWPOIS ALLA TWi QEWi.
[] Acts 5:3-4[] Acts 5:3-4
[] Acts 5:3-4 Barry nebarry at verizon.net
Fri Dec 4 23:32:52 EST 2009
[] Acts 5:3-4 [] Acts 5:3-4 ————————————————–From: “George F 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 YEUSASQAI is > an aorist middle inf and ἐψεύσω EYEUSW is an aorist middle ind 2nd sg. > Both are aorist middle.George, I think he’s talking about τὸ πνεῦμα, TO PNEUMA, and ἀνθρώποις… τῷ θεῷ, (ANQRWPOIS…TWi QEWi. In the former, accusative, the latter, dative.N.E. 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 Eddie Mishoe edmishoe at yahoo.com
Sat Dec 5 09:10:18 EST 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… YEUSASQAI… TO PNEUMA and EYEUSW TW QEW. Any significance here in the use of the two different cases after YEUDOMAI? — 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 EST 2009
[] Modern Greek NT Audio [] Acts 5:3-4 I 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.I think in Acts 5:3, Ananias is lying *about* the holy spirit (YEUDOMAI + 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;EIPEN DE hO PETROS, hANANIA, DIA TI EPLHRWSEN hO SATANAS THN KARDIAN SOU, YEUSASQAI SE TO PNEUMA TO hAGION, KAI NOSFISASQAI APO THS TIMHS TOU CWRIOU;In Acts 5:4, Ananias is lying *to* God (YEUDOMAI + 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.OUCI MENON SOI EMENEN, KAI PRAQEN EN THi SHi EXOUSIA hUPHRCEN; TI hOTI EQOU EN THi KARDIAi SOU TO PRAGMA TOUTO; OUK EYEUSW ANQRWPOIS, ALLA 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… YEUSASQAI… TO PNEUMA and EYEUSW TW QEW. Any significance here in the use of the two different cases after YEUDOMAI? > —> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/>
[] Modern Greek NT Audio[] Acts 5:3-4
[] Acts 5:3-4 yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net
Sat Dec 5 15:14:32 EST 2009
[] Acts 5:3-4 [] Acts 5:3-4 LSJ has some good examples of ψευσασθαι τινά τι YEUSASQAI TINA TI 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, XUNAISESASA LOXIAN EYEUSAMHN “when I swore, I lied/deceived Apollo.” BDAG gives several other examples. A 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 YEUSAMENH DE TON ANDRA EPI TOIS GAMOIS KAI TON QEON EPI TOIS ORKOIS “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.W.Smith at tcu.eduyancy at wbtc.com5636 Wedgworth RoadFort Worth, TX 76133817-361-7565On Dec 5, 2009, at 9:24 AM, Tom Moore wrote:> I 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.> > I think in Acts 5:3, Ananias is lying *about* the holy spirit (YEUDOMAI + 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;> EIPEN DE hO PETROS, hANANIA, DIA TI EPLHRWSEN hO SATANAS THN KARDIAN SOU, YEUSASQAI SE TO PNEUMA TO hAGION, KAI NOSFISASQAI APO THS TIMHS TOU CWRIOU;> > In Acts 5:4, Ananias is lying *to* God (YEUDOMAI + 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.> OUCI MENON SOI EMENEN, KAI PRAQEN EN THi SHi EXOUSIA hUPHRCEN; TI hOTI EQOU EN THi KARDIAi SOU TO PRAGMA TOUTO; OUK EYEUSW ANQRWPOIS, ALLA 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… YEUSASQAI… TO PNEUMA and EYEUSW TW QEW. Any significance here in the use of the two different cases after YEUDOMAI? >> —>> 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[] Acts 5:3-4
[] Acts 5:3-4 yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net
Sat Dec 5 15:23:29 EST 2009
[] Acts 5:3-4 [] Acts 5:3-4 My apologies, a correction. It was Josephus’ retelling, not BDAG’s:LSJ has some good examples of ψευσασθαι τινά τι. YEUSASQAI TINA TI 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, XUNAISESASA LOXIAN EYEUSAMHN “when I swore, I lied/deceived Apollo.” BDAG gives several other examples. A 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 YEUSAMENH DE TON ANDRA EPI TOIS GAMOIS KAI TON QEON EPI TOIS ORKOIS “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.W.Smith at tcu.eduyancy at wbtc.com5636 Wedgworth RoadFort Worth, TX 76133817-361-7565Begin forwarded message:> LSJ has some good examples of ψευσασθαι τινά τι YEUSASQAI TINA TI 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, XUNAISESASA LOXIAN EYEUSAMHN “when I swore, I lied/deceived Apollo.” BDAG gives several other examples. A 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 YEUSAMENH DE TON ANDRA EPI TOIS GAMOIS KAI TON QEON EPI TOIS ORKOIS “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[] Acts 5:3-4
[] Acts 5:3-4 Carl W. Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Sat Dec 5 15:31:41 EST 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, “I had consented (to sex with him), but I played Apollo false.”Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (ret) On Saturday, December 05, 2009, at 03:14PM, “yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net” <yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net> wrote:>LSJ has some good examples of ψευσασθαι τινά τι YEUSASQAI TINA TI 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, XUNAISESASA LOXIAN EYEUSAMHN “when I swore, I lied/deceived Apollo.” BDAG gives several other examples. A 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 YEUSAMENH DE TON ANDRA EPI TOIS GAMOIS KAI TON QEON EPI TOIS ORKOIS “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>Y.W.Smith at tcu.edu>yancy at wbtc.com>5636 Wedgworth Road>Fort Worth, TX 76133>817-361-7565> > > > > > >On Dec 5, 2009, at 9:24 AM, Tom Moore wrote:> >> I 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.>> >> I think in Acts 5:3, Ananias is lying *about* the holy spirit (YEUDOMAI + 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;>> EIPEN DE hO PETROS, hANANIA, DIA TI EPLHRWSEN hO SATANAS THN KARDIAN SOU, YEUSASQAI SE TO PNEUMA TO hAGION, KAI NOSFISASQAI APO THS TIMHS TOU CWRIOU;>> >> In Acts 5:4, Ananias is lying *to* God (YEUDOMAI + 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.>> OUCI MENON SOI EMENEN, KAI PRAQEN EN THi SHi EXOUSIA hUPHRCEN; TI hOTI EQOU EN THi KARDIAi SOU TO PRAGMA TOUTO; OUK EYEUSW ANQRWPOIS, ALLA 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… YEUSASQAI… TO PNEUMA and EYEUSW TW QEW. Any significance here in the use of the two different cases after YEUDOMAI? >>> —>>> 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