Thank you, for answers. I’ve met in christianity teaching: once saved, always saved (in sense: believe in Jesus and you will be saved instantly). I thougt that this text may be bear out so teaching. But the words of Jonathan are important: “It’s not telling us when this salvation occurs, it’s telling us that it can occur by the grace of Jesus Christ, without circumcision, for both Jews and Greeks.”
Thanks
Jarek Romanowski
Statistics: Posted by romanjaro — March 24th, 2017, 2:43 pm
ronsnider1 wrote:
My question relates to how one understands and classifies the genitive string in Romans 1:23 that follows the en clause. The entire phrase relates to that which was exchanged for the glory of the incorruptible God, but I am having a little trouble identifying the type of genitives used here.καὶ ἤλλαξαν τὴν δόξαν τοῦ ἀφθάρτου θεοῦ ἐν ὁμοιώματι εἰκόνος φθαρτοῦ ἀνθρώπου καὶ πετεινῶν καὶ τετραπόδων καὶ ἑρπετῶν.
It’s pretty clear, I’d say, that εἰκόνος depends upon ὁμοιώματι and that φθαρτοῦ ἀνθρώπου καὶ πετεινῶν καὶ τετραπόδων καὶ ἑρπετῶν all depend upon εἰκόνος. I would think too that φθαρτοῦ, although linked directly with ἀνθρώπου, is implicitly understood also with the other genitive nouns as well. The four genitive nouns dependent on εἰκόνος all fall under the most basic category of adnominal genitives, whether you call it “possessive” or “genitive of belonging”. Categorizing the adnominal linkage of εικόνος to ὁμοιώματι is perhaps less clearcut (if it really matters — the meaning of the phrase is hardly in doubt!); I think I’d call it an “appositive” or “explanatory” genitive (cf. Smyth, §1322): “a likeness, i.e. an image of … “.
Statistics: Posted by cwconrad — January 30th, 2014, 11:08 am
It seems like this is a Hebraism. In Hebrew, “to be” + preposition “Le” means “to become”, e.g. to become a wife, a people, son, father etc.
Statistics: Posted by Dmitriy Reznik — January 30th, 2014, 10:50 am
Mr. Conrad,
I tend to agree with you.
Added to that is that Paul calls what is happening a “mystery.” The 10 Northern Tribes being brought back into the “fold” (2 sticks becoming one, Ezekiel 37) would not have been a mystery since their Scriptures clearly expressed what would happen.
Thank you for the response. I appreciate it.
Dustin Curlee
Statistics: Posted by dcurlee — December 21st, 2013, 5:17 pm
Stephen Carlson wrote:
Actually, the phrase is καὶ ἐάν = even if.
WOW. That’s it. Thanks.
Moon
Statistics: Posted by moon — June 13th, 2014, 4:51 pm
Stephen Hughes wrote:Philippians 4:10 wrote:Ἐχάρην δὲ ἐν κυρίῳ μεγάλως, ὅτι ἤδη ποτὲ ἀνεθάλετε τὸ ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ φρονεῖν· ἐφ’ ᾧ καὶ ἐφρονεῖτε, ἠκαιρεῖσθε δέ.What explanation can be put forward to describe why ἠκαιρεῖσθε is in the middle voice here?
[The antonym εὐκαιρεῖν is used in the active voice, both absolutely ἐλεύσεται δὲ ὅταν εὐκαιρήσῃ. (1 Corinthians 16:12), and in conjunction with an infinitive οὐδὲ φαγεῖν εὐκαίρουν. (Mark 6:31).]
I’ve noted Mike’s comment and the further elaboration Stephen has offered. I think Mke is right here to say we’d have a better notion if we had more instances of the verb’s usage, but DGE (see Logeion) offers additional support for middle-passive usage;
it’s also the case that we don’t have much doubt about what Paul is saying in this rather informally-phrased locution: “Your impulsive thoughtfulness on my behalf has deeply gratified me — the fact that you wanted to do something but had no opportunity.” It seems to me that ἠκαιρεῖσθε here is a personal usage involving deprivation: Subject-affectedness is discerned and expressed in the middle voice here.
Statistics: Posted by cwconrad — March 18th, 2017, 8:44 am
Could this be legitimately translated as a question? εἰ μήτι πορευθέντες ἡμεῖς ἀγοράσωμεν εἰς πάντα τὸν λαὸν τοῦτον βρώματα. Trans: Unless we go, can we buy food for all these people? Luke 9:13 Thanks, MMStatistics: Posted by monte.mackey — Decem…
MAubrey wrote: ↑November 27th, 2017, 7:25 pmIf you remember, Rachel and I talked about a comparable example in Galatians back in Cambridge in June/July.starting on page 40…https://www.academia.edu/34125524/The_c … structionsThanks, this is exactly…
Thanks very much for the replies, which I have just found (has something changed with notifications? – I have just ticked or re-ticked some boxes in the User Control Panel, which hopefully will sort it out).And am glad that you read the text the same …
Stephen Carlson wrote:cwconrad wrote:At any rate, the likelihood of the sense intended in the proposed Englishing of this text in Codex Bezae seems low to me; I still find it easier to think that ἀναγκαῖον was negligently omitted by the scribe.The theory of the text of Acts that Rius-Camps & Read-Heimerdinger follow is that the Codex Bezae D text of Acts is more likely to be authorial than that of the Codex Vaticanus B text of Acts. As a result, they are wont to read as intelligible what may appear to other textual critics as scribal nonsense.
Right. I am cautions about accepting the readings (interpretations of Bezae) of Acts in Rius-Camps & Read-Heimerdinger for precisely that reason.
BTW, I have another Text Critical project going on behind the scenes which will eventually see the light of day but at this time is kind of under wraps due to copyright negotiations. Wondering if there is anyone here who would like to do a little work in text of Acts in support of a worthy cause. It could be anywhere from a hours work to a big project depending on how much interest you have in it. All you would need is the ability to read the critical apparatus in UBS4. A copy of NA27 and Swanson for Acts would be nice but not essential. I have a rather full apparatus for Acts in a word file I can send you.
My immediate need is for someone to simply look through the the full apparatus for Acts and mark (color highlighting or some sort of marking) any variant that is found in the UBS4 apparatus. A simple task should not take more than hour. I don’t have UBS4. If anyone has an interest in a project like this send me a PM and I will give you more detail.
Statistics: Posted by Stirling Bartholomew — December 13th, 2013, 5:18 pm
Shirley, it’s not a modern re-write but following the Byzantine text rather than the Alexandrian text. N-A, of course, promulgates the Alexandrian text-type. Maurice Robinson, IIRC, thinks that the Alexandrian text type may have been an ancient schola…
Stephen Hughes wrote: ↑October 24th, 2017, 11:29 amJonathan Robie wrote: ↑October 24th, 2017, 6:01 amI don’t want this to get lost – Timothy is correct here, and this is the one direct response to the question in the OP.ταυτη is not referring back to …
Dear friends,
what is the effect of putting αὐτοῦ before its Referent “τὰ ἔργα”:
John 3:21 Ὁ δὲ ποιῶν τὴν ἀλήθειαν ἔρχεται πρὸς τὸ φῶς, ἵνα φανερωθῇ αὐτοῦ τὰ ἔργα, ὅτι ἐν θεῷ ἐστιν εἰργασμένα.
Is it possible to translate this Feature? Maybe “his own deeds” or something similar? Then, additionally, how can the “truth” be done? Is it rather: to act according to truth?
Thanks for all help !
Yours
Peter, Germany
Statistics: Posted by Peter Streitenberger — November 27th, 2013, 7:44 am
Scott Lawson » June 17th, 2013, 12:50 pm 6 ἑκ τούτων γάρ ἑισιν οἰ ἐνδύνοντες εἰς τὰς οἱκίας καὶ αἱχμαλωτίζοντες γυναικάρια σεσωρευμένα ἁμαρτίαις, ἁγόμενα ἑπιθυμίαις ποικίλιαις, 7 πάντοτε μανθάνοντα καὶ μηδέποτε εἱς ἑπίγνωσιν ἁληθείᾳ ἑλθειν δυνάμενα. (My apologies…I couldn’t get the circumflex over the iota in ἑλθειν for some reason)γυναικάριον, ου τό is diminutive of γυνή…
Stephen Carlson » February 26th, 2013, 11:23 am Alan Patterson wrote:I will reread your excellent post, but I want to first thank you for such a detailed answer. To give me a head start, are there any unambiguous examples of 6, which partially reads: it’s basically equivalent to an aorist where no relevance to the current…
Jeremy Spencer » March 8th, 2013, 12:49 pm ἔρχεται οὖν πρὸς Σίμων Πέτρον. λέγει αὐτῷ, Κύριε, σύ μου νίπτεις τοὺς πόδας;I was wondering about the placement of μου prior to νίπτεις. Does the Greek text grammatically move the possessive pronoun forward as a matter of emphasis? Does Peter’s question, and its phrasing in Greek grammar, imply…
Stephen Carlson » February 20th, 2013, 5:12 pm John 11:25-27 (SBL) wrote:25 εἶπεν αὐτῇ ὁ Ἰησοῦς· Ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ ἀνάστασις καὶ ἡ ζωή· ὁ πιστεύων εἰς ἐμὲ κἂν ἀποθάνῃ ζήσεται, 26 καὶ πᾶς ὁ ζῶν καὶ πιστεύων εἰς ἐμὲ οὐ μὴ ἀποθάνῃ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα· πιστεύεις τοῦτο; 27 λέγει αὐτῷ· Ναί, κύριε· ἐγὼπεπίστευκα ὅτι σὺ εἶ ὁ χριστὸς ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ εἰς…
Stephen Carlson » February 14th, 2013, 6:14 am Luke 2:33 wrote:καὶ ἦν ὁ πατὴρ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἡ μήτηρ θαυμάζοντες ἐπὶ τοῖς λαλουμένοις περὶ αὐτοῦ. Why is the main verb ἦν singular when the subject ὁ πατὴρ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἡ μήτηρ and the modifying participle θαυμάζοντες are both plural? Is this a case of anacoluthon where the…
Louis L Sorenson » May 8th, 2013, 10:30 pm 34 Ἀνοίξας δὲ Πέτρος τὸ στόμα εἶπεν· ἐπʼ ἀληθείας καταλαμβάνομαι ὅτι οὐκ ἔστιν προσωπολήμπτης ὁ θεός, 35 ἀλλʼ ἐν παντὶ ἔθνει ὁ φοβούμενος αὐτὸν καὶ ἐργαζόμενος δικαιοσύνην δεκτὸς αὐτῷ ἐστιν. 36 τὸν λόγον [ὃν] ἀπέστειλεν τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ εὐαγγελιζόμενος εἰρήνην διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, οὗτός ἐστιν πάντων κύριος,…
