Hi all, just to zoom out to the broader context (and in passing I note that I agree with Michael that, when you read the whole sentence, τὸ πνεῦμα must be the object, especially given κατῴκισεν in the relative clause for which the subject must be God)…
BTW the reason I want an *exhaustive* concordance of the GNT is so I can find instances of various pronouns and particles in NT verses. Then I can use suchverses to help me remember what a particular pronoun or particle means. For example, if I can fi…
Hi Mitch, Yes CGCG is an outstanding resource (though it came too late for me). You have a nice example of ὁποῖος in Paul’s autobiographical speech to Agrippa in Acts 26, which I always remember because it’s so egomaniacal: εὐξαίμην ἂν … πάντας τοὺς ἀ…
Is there an example φημι used that way with an articular infinitive or a genitive? It seems odd to me, but maybe it’s an LXX thing.And you’d have to show me some usage examples of ἐνώπιον αὐτοῦ used like that. The “disguise in front of himself” idiom …
Ah you’re right, sorry. Not enough caffeine this morning :-PStatistics: Posted by Mitch — Sat May 18, 2024 4:01 pm
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…
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
Thanks.That means that for the time being the NT is the only witness for the use of δηναριον in Jesus-Lifetime.Statistics: Posted by Jean Putmans — Sun Dec 24, 2023 7:07 am
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…
Ah you’re right, sorry. Not enough caffeine this morning :-PStatistics: Posted by Mitch — Sat May 18, 2024 4:01 pm
LSJ Suppl. dissociates the Egyptian “barge” word from the non-Egyptian (Judaic?) “tower” one, rightly I expect.Statistics: Posted by mwh — Tue Mar 26, 2024 5:06 pm
Hi Mitch, Yes CGCG is an outstanding resource (though it came too late for me). You have a nice example of ὁποῖος in Paul’s autobiographical speech to Agrippa in Acts 26, which I always remember because it’s so egomaniacal: εὐξαίμην ἂν … πάντας τοὺς ἀ…
@mwhthanks for the attested απο πρωιθεν. I am surprised that the English translation (https://philipharland.com/greco-roman-a … -ii-i-bce/ ) of that instance has “previously” instead of “from the morning”.Indeed, the christian texts might very well …
No problem! The first 2 chapters of the Cambridge grammar cover these and similar issues, and there are some other explanations scattered elsewhere – see section 1.68 for τόνς. Unfortunately I don’t have anything with a detailed description of the dev…
This seems to be mostly nonsense. I recommend the Academy as a great place to go wild with your ideas.1. You’ve replaced ἐπέρχονται with the fantastically incorrect βαίνουσα, a feminine participle, which does not agree with your masculine “τυφών”, and…
Does Mark’s use of the Latin word denarius necessarily mean that he was referring to a coin in that exact value? Couldn’t he perhaps have simply been referring to a drachma, but giving it the name of a Latin near-equivalent to convey his meaning more …
The fairly Pauline statements in Acts 26 are no doubt constructed from the letters (as in Acts the journeys of Paul are clearly creatively constructed by someone trying to give a narrative to the names and places mentioned). For Acts 26:29 in particul…
I’d take this as meaning something like “As to jealousy he longs for the spirit that he implanted in us.” The subject of επιποθεῖ must surely be God, and το πνεῦμα must surely be its object. I really don’t see much room for doubt about that. The diffi…
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
It’s just pulling in Byzantine majority corrections. Getting your textual criticism from CBGM is about as silly as getting it from chat-gpt, imo.We also have ἐὰν μή τις ὁδηγήσει με in 8:31, again “corrected” in Byzantine majority texts to subjunctive….