Gal 5:17 – Comments aside RHutchin at aol.com RHutchin at aol.com
Fri Dec 31 12:24:12 EST 1999
Hadjiantoniou’s Greek Grammar 2. Re: Semiotics and Word Studies I recently saw an article proposing that one read Gal 5:17 as–hH GAR SARX EPIQUMEI KATA TOU PNEUMATOS…. (TO DE PNEUMA KATA THS SARKOS TAUTA GAR ALLHLOIS ANTIKEITAI) …hINA MH hA EAN QELHTE TAUTA POIHTE.and then presenting a defense for the position.Regardless of the validity of the above position, but using it as an example, how does the writer of Greek insert asides into an argument without having the presence of those asides debated 2,000 years later to the detriment of the argument?Roger HutchinsonRHutchin at AOL.com
Hadjiantoniou’s Greek Grammar2. Re: Semiotics and Word Studies
[] Galatians 5:17 Chadwick Wilcox chadwick_wilcox at yahoo.com
Fri May 30 11:56:34 EDT 2003
[] What’s with “no subject”? [] Galatians 5:17 There is a iva clause where in one text (UBS) it is: iva mh ha eav thelete; and in another text (majority text) it is: iva mh ha av thelete. Are there any thoughts on this? Wherein the first it says: In order that not the things except you will. In the second it says: In order that not the things whatever you will. I would appreciate any and all reactions to the preceeding, thank you.———————————Do you Yahoo!?The New Yahoo! Search – Faster. Easier. Bingo.
[] What’s with “no subject”?[] Galatians 5:17
[] Galatians 5:17 Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Fri May 30 13:48:17 EDT 2003
[] Galatians 5:17 [] 1 Cor 6:3: MH/TIGE vs. MH/TI GE At 8:56 AM -0700 5/30/03, Chadwick Wilcox wrote:>There is a iva clause where in one text (UBS) it is: iva mh ha eav>thelete; and in another text (majority text) it is: iva mh ha av thelete.>Are there any thoughts on this? Wherein the first it says: In order that>not the things except you will. In the second it says: In order that not>the things whatever you will. I would appreciate any and all reactions to>the preceeding, thank you.This would be clearer if you would use the standard ASCIItransliteration scheme; I can’t tell if you’ve simply pasted from a text insome Greek font or what, but in standard transliteration into ASCII, it is:UBS: hINA MH hA EAN QELHTE TAUTA POIHTEMT: hINA MH hA AN QELHTE TAUTA POIHTEThe meaning is actually the same in both versions: EAN (originally acombination of EI + AN) is quite commonly used in Hellenistic Greek whereolder Greek had only AN. Both versions bear the same sense: “so that youdon’t (implicitly ‘can’t’) do whatsoever things you wish (to do).” I thinkthat the hINA clause in this instance is better understood as a resultclause than as a purpose clause.– Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad at artsci.wustl.eduWWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/
[] Galatians 5:17[] 1 Cor 6:3: MH/TIGE vs. MH/TI GE