This sort of thing is anathema to me. And why do theologians have to be so very nasty to one another? But I’m trying to understand the syntax along with the sense, starting from ταύτης τοίνυν οὕτω συναιρομένης (6 lines up from end). There it looks to …
φθονεῖτε καὶ ζηλοῦτε in 2 seems clearly right to me. (And then the φθόνος in 5 is all the less likely to be God’s.)Statistics: Posted by mwh — Fri Jul 12, 2024 5:07 pm
1. Μακάριος ἀνήρ, ὃς οὐκ ἐπορεύθη ἐν βουλῇ ἀσεβῶν καὶ ἐν ὁδῷ ἁμαρτωλῶν οὐκ ἔστη καὶ ἐπὶ καθέδραν λοιμῶν οὐκ ἐκάθισεν, 2. ἀλλ’ ἢ ἐν τῷ νόμῳ κυρίου τὸ θέλημα αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐν τῷ νόμῳ αὐτοῦ μελετήσει ἡμέρας καὶ νυκτός. 3. καὶ ἔσται ὡς τὸ ξύλον τὸ πεφυτευμέν…
Yes but it’s the ἀλλ’ἤ combo—quite illogical on its face—that stands in need of explanation. Whatever its origin I think it just has to be accepted as a linguistic quirk.Statistics: Posted by mwh — Thu May 16, 2024 7:26 pm
Brian, Yes φθόνος is perhaps invariably regarded as bad, and I don’t know if it’s ever attributed to God. In the famous “God is a jealous god” (Exod.20.5, Deut.4.24) the term used is ζηλωτής. In classical Greek, as in the NT, ζῆλος (as applied to huma…
The ZIP-file is also available at:https://github.com/JeanLCP/NT-GREEK-MS-TRANSCRIPTIONSStatistics: Posted by Jean Putmans — Thu Feb 08, 2024 9:15 am
Thanks Jean, after checking it out on Archive.org it looks like volume 1 of the Analytical Concordance is what I’m looking for. But I can’t figure out what volume 2 is about, it just looks like an endless stream of phrases with xrefs but no headings–…
It helps to have a bit of context. But it seems to me most likely that βιάβα represents βιαία as I suggested, and τὸν πεπηγμένον the genitive plural. Then the requisite changes are minimal. ἀνάγκη is the obvious guess for ἀνάγγη but doesn’t account fo…
Joel has tried to explain this to you patiently and so have I, although perhaps not so patiently. You look at what you call ”Scripture” (for me it’s just an old text) as if it were a puzzle that can be forced to mean anything you want by assembling th…
Here is Xenophon:ὥσπερ εἰ εἴποις ὅτι δεῖ γράμματα ἐπίστασθαι τὸν μέλλοντα δυνήσεσθαι τὰ ὑπαγορευόμενα γράφειν καὶ τὰ γεγραμμένα ἀναγιγνώσκειν.Not that it gets us very far. He needs to know his letters to be able to both γράφειν and ἀναγιγνώσκειν, but …
Thanks that makes sense Joel. The NETS which translates from the Septuagint has:Not so, the impious, not so!Rather, they are like the dust that…And the LSJ entry for ἤ has this under the heading B. COMPARATIVE: after Advbs. or adverbial phrases, πλή…
Acts 7:7 has indeed δουλευσουσιν in NA28, but the ECM Acts has δουλευσωσιν (ECM III , 1:1 page 194).The text of Acts ECM will probably appear in the next na29.Statistics: Posted by Jean Putmans — Tue Oct 01, 2024 6:53 am
1 Πόθεν πόλεμοι καὶ πόθεν μάχαι ἐν ὑμῖν οὐκ ἐντεῦθεν ἐκ τῶν ἡδονῶν ὑμῶν τῶν στρατευομένων ἐν τοῖς μέλεσιν ὑμῶν 2 ἐπιθυμεῖτε καὶ οὐκ ἔχετε φονεύετε καὶ ζηλοῦτε καὶ οὐ δύνασθε ἐπιτυχεῖν μάχεσθε καὶ πολεμεῖτε οὐκ ἔχετε διὰ τὸ μὴ αἰτεῖσθαι ὑμᾶς 3 αἰτεῖτε …
Is that the only instance, where the Greek απο μακροθεν exactly fits to the Hebrew text?Statistics: Posted by Jean Putmans — Sat Apr 13, 2024 12:11 pm
NA28 and Kittel Theological Dictionary (Lemma : απαιτεω) say that Lk 12:20 refers to LXX Sap. (σοφια σαλομονος) 15:8 :The LXX uses a Passive: το της ψυχης απαιτηθεις χρεος (Rahlfs II, 368) (when the soul, which was lent him is demanded back; A new eng…
Hi Jean, I think then I’ll skip volume 2 then as I’ve found CGCG *very* helpful in learning endings and other morphology e.g. one doesn’t have to memorize all the weird exceptions if one simply learns the various phonological changes that occurred in …
Interestingly, I looked at a few English translations of this verse, and they do use the “passive” (as in “implication of an agent”): New International VersionFor the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back wi…
Ah, I missed that in verse 2, thanks. But again the ἢ may have been included there to signal a comparison between the two behaviors described in verses 1 and 2. The reason I’m bringing this up is because I just finished reading Chapter 32 Comparison o…
Καὶ οὕτως ὑψοῦ[ται ἐ]πὶ ξύλου καὶ τίτλος πρόσκει[ται]τὸν πεφονευμένον σημαίνων. Τίς [οὗτ]ος; Τὸ εἰπεῖν βαρὺκαὶ τὸ μὴ εἰπεῖν φοβερώτερον. Πλὴν ἀκούσατε τρέμοντεςδι’ ὃν ἐτρόμησεν ἡ γῆ· Ὁ κρεμάσας τὴν γῆν κρέμαται. Ὁ πήξας τοὺς οὐρανοὺς πέπεκ[ται]. Ὁ στη…
We mustn’t confuse the issues. There’s the εαν/αν spelling, and there’s the question of the semantics in various syntactic contexts. And there’s the question of textual corruption and “correction.” And the enquiry should not be limited to the NT, with…