Hebrews 1:2

Hebrews 1:2 jim west jwest at Highland.Net
Sat Oct 30 14:52:10 εδτ 1999

 

Hebrews 1:2 Hebrews 1:2 At 02:03 πμ 10/30/99 +0000, you wrote:>Dear friends,> >Could you help me with επ εσξατου των hHMHRWN τουτων? Does it mean “on the >last of these days”? In this case what is meant here? Or “in the end of >these days”? But can the ejective εσξατοσ mean “end”? And what are “these >days”? “This age”?Hello. Epi with the genitive means “in”. The phrase thus means “in theselatter days”, “latter” being understood in an eschatological sense of “theolam haba” in distinction to the “olam hazeh” (The coming age- this presentage- respectively).In short, the writer is saying that “in these last days… God has spokennot by prophet or some other means but by his son… etc”.Best,Jim+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++Jim West, ThDjwest at highland.nethttp://web.infoave.net/~jwest

Hebrews 1:2Hebrews 1:2

Hebrews 1:2 Dmitriy Reznik dpreznik at usa.net
Sat Oct 30 14:03:32 εδτ 1999

Subjective and Objective Genitives Hebrews 1:2 Dear friends,Could you help me with επ εσξατου των hHMHRWN τουτων? Does it mean “on the last of these days”? In this case what is meant here? Or “in the end of these days”? But can the ejective εσξατοσ mean “end”? And what are “these days”? “This age”?Thank you.Dmitriy Reznik

Subjective and Objective GenitivesHebrews 1:2

Hebrews 1:2 Steven Craig Miller scmiller at www.plantnet.com
Sat Oct 30 16:43:27 εδτ 1999

Hebrews 1:2 Subjective an Objective Genitives To: Dmitriy Reznik,<< Could you help me with επ εσξατου των hHMHRWN τουτων? >>In the λχχ one can find:επ εσξατων των hHMERWN (at Gen 49:1 λχχ);επ εσξατου των hHMERWN (at Num 24:14 λχχ);επ ESCATWi των hHMERWN (at Deut 4:30 λχχ);επ εσξατων των hHMERWN (at Hos 3:5 λχχ);επ εσξατων των hHMERWN (at Mic 4:1 λχχ);επ εσξατου των hHMERWN (at Jer 23:20 λχχ);επ εσξατου των hHMERWN &amp; επ εσξατων των hHMERWN (at Dan 4:30 λχχ).Note that at times εσξατοσ is singular (εσξατου) and at other times plural (εσξατων), but without any real difference in sense. The preposition επι with the genitive, used temporally, means sometime like “in the time of.” Here at Hebrews 1:2, the phrase: επ εσξατου των hHMHRWN τουτων could literally be translated as: “at the last of these days.” But such a literal translation probably does not do justice to its real meaning. One might try something more idiomatic, such as: “at these last days.”-Steven Craig MillerAlton, Illinois (υσα)scmiller at www.plantnet.com”α thought is a tremendous mode of excitement” (Alfred North Whitehead, “Modes of Thought,” 36).

Hebrews 1:2Subjective an Objective Genitives

Hebrews 1:2 Carl ω. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Sat Oct 30 14:52:34 εδτ 1999

Hebrews 1:2 Hebrews 1:2 At 1:48 πμ -0500 10/30/99, Dmitriy Reznik wrote:>Dear friends,> >Could you help me with επ εσξατου των hHMHRWN τουτων? Does it mean “on the>last of these days”? In this case what is meant here? Or “in the end of>these days”? But can the ejective εσξατοσ mean “end”? And what are “these>days”? “This age”?ι think that here we must understand των hHMERWN τουτων as a defininggenitive, here almost in apposition to the time indicated in the firstgenitive: “At the end-time, the time consisting of these days.” It turnsout to be the same thing as “In these end-time days” or “In these latterdays” since “latter days” bears an eschatological associations in Englishever since κψβ.Carl ω. ConradDepartment of Classics/Washington UniversityOne Brookings Drive/St. Louis, μο, υσα 63130/(314) 935-4018Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, μο 63130/(314) 726-5649cwconrad at artsci.wustl.eduWWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/

Hebrews 1:2 roby ellis rellis01 at chartertn.net
Tue Jun 26 17:15:40 εδτ 2001

Luke 2:2 The text of Luke 2:2 and word order επ εσξατου των hHMERWN TOUTWNGrammatically speaking, is there any real indication as to whether “thesedays” refers to the days in which the Hebrew writer lived or whether it isreferring the the times when God spoke to the fathers?Roby EllisChurch of ChristElizabethton, τν

Luke 2:2The text of Luke 2:2 and word order

Hebrews 1:2 Wayne Leman Wayne_Leman at σιλ.οργ
Tue Jun 26 18:56:09 εδτ 2001

The text of Luke 2:2 and word order Comparing αλλοσ and hETEROS > επ εσξατου των hHMERWN τουτων> > Grammatically speaking, is there any real indication as to whether “these> days” refers to the days in which the Hebrew writer lived or whether it is> referring the the times when God spoke to the fathers?> > Roby EllisRoby, yours is a reasonable question, since there are times when we cannottell for sure whether a Greek phrase syntactically connects to what precedesor what follows. In this case, since the preceding sentence (verse 1)already has its time adverb παλαι near its beginning, it would seem morereasonable to me that the phrase you are wondering about would set adifferent time, namely, the time for the statement of verse 2. This wouldalso result in parallelism of sentence-initial position of the time settingfor both sentences, which would highlight a contrast of two different timeswhich is quite possibly in focus here.Wayne—Wayne LemanBible translation site: http://www.geocities.com/bible_translation/

The text of Luke 2:2 and word orderComparing αλλοσ and hETEROS

Hebrews 1:2 Harold ρ. Holmyard ιιι hholmyard at ont.com
Tue Jun 26 22:28:47 εδτ 2001

John 4:17-18 Comparing αλλοσ and hETEROS Dear Roby,You write:>επ εσξατου των hHMERWN τουτων>Grammatically speaking, is there any real indication as to whether “these>days” refers to the days in which the Hebrew writer lived or whether it is>referring the the times when God spoke to the fathers?ηη: It seems that the contrast is between παλαι and επ εσξατου των hHMERWNTOUTWN. This follows from the fact that in the earlier period God spokethrough prophets, while in the latter period He spoke through His Son.Also, formerly He spoke to the fathers, and lately He spoke to “us.” So thecontrast works at several points to contrast one era with another.Yours,Harold HolmyardDallas, τχ

John 4:17-18Comparing αλλοσ and hETEROS

Hebrews 1:2 virgilsalvage1 virgilsalvage1 at msn.com
Wed Jun 27 05:17:23 εδτ 2001

Colossians 1:16 Mk 16:2 Constituent Order On Tues, 26 June 2001 at 17:15…..Roby Ellis wrote: “επ εσξατου των hHMERWN TOUTWNGrammatically speaking, is there any real indication as to whether “thesedays” refers to the days in which the Hebrew writer lived or whether it isreferring the the times when God spoke to the fathers?” Roby, ι think the answer concerning the grammatical indication that ” ELALHSENhHMIN εν UIWi” is referring to the days in which the Hebrew writer lived isthat….as has been pointed out; the speaking to the fathers in verse 1happened adverbally παλαι…( lexically…in the past, longago…formerly.)……however, the writer in verse 2, first gives specificclassification to God speaking to us in Son, as being….characterized byAT…what is λαστ… θε δαυσ….but what locks it in grammatically thatthese days are the ones in which the writer to the Hebrews is living is”τουτων.” This is the genitive plural demonstrative pronoun which has thefunction of pointing to something that has just proceded or that is at leastnearby. (It can also refer to next preceding) All of these options refer tosomething close. The demonstrative pronoun also is for distinguishingbetween two different objects or persons. So τουτων already hasdistinguished, being a demonstrative pronoun ,….” at …last…the days “from the times and places that were παλαι..past. But, more than that, TOUTWNpointing to something that is nearby….more than that by being the genitivesays that the “at…what is last…the days” is something that is actuallycharacterized by being “these days”….the nearby days. Close to the writerdays. Not past days. The Father having spoken to us ιν Son actually has the classification ofbeing for the writer, at what is the last days….(that by the use of thegenitive τουτων means) These nearby to him days, not Those somewhere longago days.Virgil NewkirkSalt Lake City, Utah

Colossians 1:16Mk 16:2 Constituent Order

Hebrews 1:2 David Thiele thielogian at yahoo.com
Wed May 29 02:19:48 εδτ 2002

Easy Texts Hebrews 1:2 Hebrews 1:2 reads επ εσχατου των hHMERWN τουτωνελαλησεν hHMIN εν hUIW(i).My question is this: Since εσχατοσ is an adjectivepresumably qualifying hHMERWN (certainly to judge bythe translations), why is it singular when hHMERWN isplural? To put the question another way, if the usualtranslation (“these last days”) is the correct one isthere any particular significance in the lack ofagreement in number?RegardsDavid ThielePacific Adventist UniversityPapua New Guinea__________________________________________________Do You Yahoo!?Everything you’ll ever need on one web pagefrom News and Sport to Email and Music Chartshttp://uk.my.yahoo.com

Easy TextsHebrews 1:2

Hebrews 1:2 Steve Drukas plunix at subdimension.com
Wed May 29 04:22:39 εδτ 2002

Hebrews 1:2 Discourse Analysis – Authors? ι don’t see why the adjective here would be singular when it applies to a plural noun. The only possible answer ι can think of is that this is an incorrect reading of the text. The Nestle-Aland ντ contains the text you quoted, but the Textus Receptus contains εσξατων (plural), not εσξατου (singular).On Wednesday 29 May 2002 01:19 am, David Thiele wrote:> Hebrews 1:2 reads επ εσξατου των hHMERWN τουτων> ελαλησεν hHMIN εν hUIW(i).> > My question is this: Since εσξατοσ is an adjective> presumably qualifying hHMERWN (certainly to judge by> the translations), why is it singular when hHMERWN is> plural?> > To put the question another way, if the usual> translation (“these last days”) is the correct one is> there any particular significance in the lack of> agreement in number?[Steve Drukas. Moderator’s note: new list-members please take notethat βγ List protocol requires that all messages sent to the list be followed by a full-name personal signature.]

Hebrews 1:2Discourse Analysis – Authors?

Hebrews 1:2 Blahoslav Cicel Blahoslav.Cicel at cb.cz
Wed May 29 04:00:09 εδτ 2002

Hebrews 1:2 Hebrews 1:2 Hello David,First: επ εσξατου is in ω–η and υβσ, τρ has επ εσξατων. Thus no lack ofagreement in number.Second: if ι am correct εσξατου is Gen.Sing.Masc. (Fem. should be εσξαθσ).So there is lack not only in number, but in gender either. My suggestion isto take it as:At the final (time), i.e. in these days, he spoke in…Blahopastor in the North of Czecho—–Original Message—–From: David Thiele [mailto:thielogian at yahoo.com]Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 8:20 AMTo: Biblical GreekSubject: [] Hebrews 1:2Hebrews 1:2 reads επ εσχατου των hHMERWN τουτωνελαλησεν hHMIN εν hUIW(i).My question is this: Since εσχατοσ is an adjectivepresumably qualifying hHMERWN (certainly to judge bythe translations), why is it singular when hHMERWN isplural?To put the question another way, if the usualtranslation (“these last days”) is the correct one isthere any particular significance in the lack ofagreement in number?RegardsDavid ThielePacific Adventist UniversityPapua New Guinea__________________________________________________Do You Yahoo!?Everything you’ll ever need on one web pagefrom News and Sport to Email and Music Chartshttp://uk.my.yahoo.com— home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/You are currently subscribed to as: [Blahoslav.Cicel at cb.cz]To unsubscribe, forward this message to$subst(‘Email.Unsub’)To subscribe, send a message to subscribe- at franklin.oit.unc.edu

Wed May 29 06:19:05 εδτ 2002

λχχ-induced errors Hebrews 1:2 At 7:19 αμ +0100 5/29/02, David Thiele wrote:>Hebrews 1:2 reads επ εσξατου των hHMERWN τουτων>ελαλησεν hHMIN εν hUIW(i).> >My question is this: Since εσξατοσ is an adjective>presumably qualifying hHMERWN (certainly to judge by>the translations), why is it singular when hHMERWN is>plural?> >To put the question another way, if the usual>translation (“these last days”) is the correct one is>there any particular significance in the lack of>agreement in number?While εσξατοσ is indeed an adjective which, when modifying a noun, shouldbe in agreement with it in number, gender, and case, nevertheless in thepresent instance it is used substantivally as a neuter noun in the sense of”last/ultimate part.” It probably is used in deliberate imitation of theLXX phrase which translates the Hebrew phrase b’acharit hayammim, whereacharit is a feminine noun meaning “last part.”– Carl ω. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)Most months:: 1647 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, νξ 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu ορ cwconrad at ioa.comWWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/

λχχ-induced errorsHebrews 1:2

Hebrews 1:2 dan_rach dan_rach at ntlworld.com
Wed May 29 06:37:00 εδτ 2002

Hebrews 1:2 Aspect and nesting (was: Perfective, Imperfective, and Iterative) Is not εσξατου simply the genitive of the noun το εσξατον. Compare, Acts 1:8and 13:47 (the latter quoting Isa.), referring to the εσξατου θσ γησ (noteGH is also fem.), or Mk 12:22 εσξατον παντων (here it is adverbial – ‘at theend of it all’). ι don’t feel ι have any grammatical problem with the NAtext as it stands. το εσξατον is a fairly common substantive on its own inHerodotus and other classical writings.However, my NA27 gives the textual witness to εσξατων asY,629,1505,pauci,a,b,d,t. There is no reference to Majority Text, yet the TRclearly does have εσξατων. Is this an oversight by να?Dan King> Hebrews 1:2 reads επ εσχατου των hHMERWN τουτων> ελαλησεν hHMIN εν hUIW(i).> > My question is this: Since εσχατοσ is an adjective> presumably qualifying hHMERWN (certainly to judge by> the translations), why is it singular when hHMERWN is> plural?> > To put the question another way, if the usual> translation (“these last days”) is the correct one is> there any particular significance in the lack of> agreement in number?> > Regards> > David Thiele> Pacific Adventist University> Papua New Guinea>

Hebrews 1:2Aspect and nesting (was: Perfective, Imperfective, and Iterative)

Hebrews 1:2 Matthew Farrell mwfarrell at mindex.com
Wed May 29 10:35:09 εδτ 2002

Aspect and nesting (was: Perfective, Imperfective, and Iterative) λχχ-induced errors Since εσχατοσ, though an adjective, can function as a substantive (i.e., anoun), it can stand independent and therefore does not need to agree ingender or number to another noun in the phrase. It may be best totranslate this phrase as “at the last of these days”/”at the end of thesedays.”

Aspect and nesting (was: Perfective, Imperfective, and Iterative)λχχ-induced errors

[] Hebrews 1:2 Jesus Arocho jesus_arocho at comcast.net
Sun Jul 11 15:57:12 εδτ 2004

[] Mark 16:14, ω [] Hebrews 1:2 Why is the word αιωνασ translated as world as opporsed to ages?

[] Mark 16:14, ω[] Hebrews 1:2

Sun Jul 11 16:10:01 εδτ 2004

[] Hebrews 1:2 [] Hebrews 1:2 Second question:Why is “εν υιω” translated as “His Son” although υιω is in the dative case?

[] Hebrews 1:2[] Hebrews 1:2

[] Hebrews 1:2 Carl ω. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Sun Jul 11 17:24:54 εδτ 2004

[] Hebrews 1:2 [] Hebrews 1:2 At 3:57 πμ -0400 7/11/04, Jesus Arocho wrote:>Why is the word αιωνασ translated as world as opporsed to ages?Because the word means something like “time-space frame” — world and thetime span for which it is intended to endure. In the context of this verse,the reference is surely not merely to the creation of spans of time but tothe created world.– Carl ω. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, νξ 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad at artsci.wustl.eduWWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/

Sun Jul 11 17:34:59 εδτ 2004

[] Hebrews 1:2 [] re. ι Cor 15,22 At 4:10 πμ -0400 7/11/04, Jesus Arocho wrote:>Second question:> >Why is “εν υιω” translated as “His Son” although υιω is in the dative case?You appear to be asking questions based upon a translation, perhaps aninterlinear text, rather than upon a Greek text which you have parsed andunderstood the construction of directly. The phrase εν hUIWi is apreposition used with an instrumental dative–that means that εν must bearthe sense “by means of” or “through the instrumentality of.” hUIWi isindeed dative but as ι‘ve noted above, it’s not a dative of indirect objectand it’s not a locative dative; in an English translation the φυνξτιον ofthe case and preposition are normally conveyed by a preposition or aprepositional phrase such as “by means of” or “through the instrumentalityof”; hUIWi apart from its case working with εν bears the sense “a son”;that is to say, “His” is not explicitly indicated in the Greek at all;translators supply it because it seems appropriate–but you’ll probablyfind that some translations do have it simply as “by means of a son.” Sofor instance νετ conveys verse 2 thus: ” … in these last days he hasspoken to us in a son …” ι‘d prefer “by means of a son” myself, butperhaps most readers might find “in a son” meaningful enough here.– Carl ω. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, νξ 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad at artsci.wustl.eduWWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/

[] Hebrews 1:2[] re. ι Cor 15,22

[] Hebrews 1:2 EgwEimi at aol.com EgwEimi at aol.com
Sun Jul 11 19:45:08 εδτ 2004

[] re. ι Cor 15,22 — ξορρεξτιον [] Hebrews 1:2 My own rendering doesn’t read either of those things. It has, “At the last of these days, he has spoken to us by a son,whom he placed to be Heir of All Things,on account of whom he made the ages ….”ι assume there are quite a few other translations that read similarly, since (as Carl indicated) the meaning isn’t really in dispute here. Comparing a few translations, ι see this: “…in these last days, he spoke to us through a son, whom he made heir of all things and through whom he created the universe, ….” (ναβ) “…but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.” (ρσβ)The νρσβ has “worlds” instead of “world” but is similar in other ways. “…but in our time, the final days, he has spoken to us in the person of his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things and through whom he made the ages.” (νψβ) So, it appears that εν hUIW is rendered as “a son” or “his son” by the average translation. Those who render more literally as “a son” are probably noticing the comparison between εν τοισ προφηταισ and εν hUIW. Carl has already noted that αιωνασ can be understood more than one way. The most literal again would be “ages,” but the expression βασιλεοσ των αιωνων (as, for example, in 1T 1:17) is often rendered “King of the Universe” rather than “King of the Ages.” Clearly, some translators have chosen “ages”, while others have selected the other rendering (“world,” “worlds,” or “universe”). Frank Frank DanielsEgwEimi at aol.com

[] re. ι Cor 15,22 — ξορρεξτιον[] Hebrews 1:2

[] Hebrews 1:2 Steven Lo Vullo slovullo at mac.com
Sun Jul 11 20:11:36 εδτ 2004

[] Hebrews 1:2 [] Commands vs statements On Jul 11, 2004, at 6:45 πμ, EgwEimi at aol.com wrote:> My own rendering doesn’t read either of those things.> > It has,> > “At the last of these days, he has spoken to us by a son,> whom he placed to be Heir of All Things,> on account of whom he made the ages ….”Frank, δια with the genitive is not causal (on account of) but instrumental (through or by). For the causal sense δια with the accusative would have been used.============Steven Lo VulloMadison, ωι

[] Hebrews 1:2[] Commands vs statements
Mon Jul 12 11:35:43 εδτ 2004

[] καλοσ update available [] ρε: Roush [Rouse] α Greek Boy at Home Steven wrote: “Frank, δια with the genitive is not causal (on account of) but instrumental (through or by). For the causal sense δια with the accusative would have been used.” Yes, and ι mean the same as “through,” here.But it’s like “through” in the sense of a path through one locale to a destination.This is hard to express in English, so one approximates; as, “with him in mind.”So, ι have rendered it as ι have. The rationale requires the commentary. Incidentally, ι have often wondered why in these electronic days translators do not keep websites wherein they answer questions about the plan and details of their translations.If such sites do exist, there are not many of them. Frank Frank DanielsEgwEimi at aol.com

[] καλοσ update available[] ρε: Roush [Rouse] α Greek Boy at Home