Heb 2:18 PEPONQEN, PEIRASQEIS Jonathan Robie jonathan.robie at sagus.com
Fri Jul 30 08:47:18 EDT 1999
Hebrews 2:10 DIA (repentance) Heb 2:18 PEPONQEN, PEIRASQEIS Hebr 2:18 EN HWi GAR PEPONQEN AUTOS PEIRASQEISI am not sure that I have grasped the aspect of PEIRASQEIS in combination with the perfect verb PEPONQEN, and I am not sure what the force of PEIRASMOS is in this context. PEPONQEN is pretty clear here, but does PEIRASQEIS mean “having been tempted” in this context, e.g. “he has suffered, having been tempted”? I assume that the event time of PEIRASQEIS is the same as that of PEPONQEN, so that the suffering and testing occured at the same time, that the perfect focuses on the resulting state, and that PEIRASQEIS focuses on the time of the testing itself? Is the function of the phrase to bring out both the state of having been tested and the time of testing/temptation, saying that both knowing what it is to be tested and having made it through are reasons that Jesus can help those of us who are tested?Jonathan–Jonathan RobieR&D Fellow, Software AGjonathan.robie at sagus.com
Hebrews 2:10 DIA (repentance)Heb 2:18 PEPONQEN, PEIRASQEIS
Heb 2:18 PEPONQEN, PEIRASQEIS Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Fri Jul 30 09:20:47 EDT 1999
Heb 2:18 PEPONQEN, PEIRASQEIS Heb 2:18 PEPONQEN, PEIRASQEIS At 8:47 AM -0400 7/30/99, Jonathan Robie wrote:>Hebr 2:18 EN HWi GAR PEPONQEN AUTOS PEIRASQEIS> >I am not sure that I have grasped the aspect of PEIRASQEIS in combination>with the perfect verb PEPONQEN, and I am not sure what the force of>PEIRASMOS is in this context. PEPONQEN is pretty clear here, but does>PEIRASQEIS mean “having been tempted” in this context, e.g. “he has>suffered, having been tempted”? I assume that the event time of PEIRASQEIS>is the same as that of PEPONQEN, so that the suffering and testing occured>at the same time, that the perfect focuses on the resulting state, and that>PEIRASQEIS focuses on the time of the testing itself? Is the function of>the phrase to bring out both the state of having been tested and the time>of testing/temptation, saying that both knowing what it is to be tested and>having made it through are reasons that Jesus can help those of us who are>tested?I would rather say that PEIRASQEIS is of time prior to PEPONQEN, becausePEPONQEN must refer to the present–as present perfect, it indicates thefait accompli as of now of his suffering. I’d make it: “since he hashimself been tempted/tested in that wherein he has suffered/is the/anaccomplished sufferer.” As for the meaning of PEIRASQEIS here, I’ll leavethat to Jeffrey Gibson.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington UniversitySummer: 1647 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad at artsci.wustl.eduWWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
Heb 2:18 PEPONQEN, PEIRASQEISHeb 2:18 PEPONQEN, PEIRASQEIS
Heb 2:18 PEPONQEN, PEIRASQEIS Jeffrey B. Gibson jgibson000 at mailhost.chi.ameritech.net
Fri Jul 30 10:11:08 EDT 1999
Heb 2:18 PEPONQEN, PEIRASQEIS Kalos Computer Software. Jonathan Robie wrote:> Hebr 2:18 EN HWi GAR PEPONQEN AUTOS PEIRASQEIS> > I am not sure that I have grasped the aspect of PEIRASQEIS in combination> with the perfect verb PEPONQEN, and I am not sure what the force of> PEIRASMOS is in this context. PEPONQEN is pretty clear here, but does> PEIRASQEIS mean “having been tempted” in this context, e.g. “he has> suffered, having been tempted”? I assume that the event time of PEIRASQEIS> is the same as that of PEPONQEN, so that the suffering and testing occured> at the same time, that the perfect focuses on the resulting state, and that> PEIRASQEIS focuses on the time of the testing itself? Is the function of> the phrase to bring out both the state of having been tested and the time> of testing/temptation, saying that both knowing what it is to be tested and> having made it through are reasons that Jesus can help those of us who are> tested?> I think it might be important when attempting to answer the questions Jonathan raisedto first be clear what the referent of PASXW (PEPONQEN) is. That is to say, todetermine the relationship between the the suffering and the testing mentioned here,we need to determine what suffering(s) of Jesus the author of Hebrews had in mind..A side note. Burton in his _Moods and Tenses_, p. 433, regards PEIRASQEIS as anadverbial participle of means and renders the expression “he himself has suffered bybeing tested”. Don’t know if I buy that.But in any case, I will stand firm on the point that Heb. 2:18 has nothing to do withJesus experiencing the general “temptations” i.e., enticements, that all flesh isheir to, or that we find here a statement that is concerned to say that Jesus hasexperienced every temptation that **anyone** can or has experienced. As the contextand the echo of 2:18 in 4:15 shows, the intent of the author of Hebrews is to assertthat Jesus has been tested over **the specific issue** which the readers of Hebrewswere facing and which provoked the author of Hebrews to write to them. And this doesnot involves the readers chance experience of the vicissitudes of the humancondition, but their having been confronted with the possibility that their way offollowing God and living out the “confession” to which they had committed themselveswas NOT the way of God. In other words, the issue is apostasy.Yours,Jeffrey–Jeffrey B. Gibson7423 N. Sheridan Road #2AChicago, Illinois 60626e-mail jgibson000 at ameritech.net
Heb 2:18 PEPONQEN, PEIRASQEISKalos Computer Software.
Heb 2:18 PEPONQEN, PEIRASQEIS Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Fri Jul 30 09:20:47 EDT 1999
Heb 2:18 PEPONQEN, PEIRASQEIS Heb 2:18 PEPONQEN, PEIRASQEIS At 8:47 AM -0400 7/30/99, Jonathan Robie wrote:>Hebr 2:18 EN HWi GAR PEPONQEN AUTOS PEIRASQEIS> >I am not sure that I have grasped the aspect of PEIRASQEIS in combination>with the perfect verb PEPONQEN, and I am not sure what the force of>PEIRASMOS is in this context. PEPONQEN is pretty clear here, but does>PEIRASQEIS mean “having been tempted” in this context, e.g. “he has>suffered, having been tempted”? I assume that the event time of PEIRASQEIS>is the same as that of PEPONQEN, so that the suffering and testing occured>at the same time, that the perfect focuses on the resulting state, and that>PEIRASQEIS focuses on the time of the testing itself? Is the function of>the phrase to bring out both the state of having been tested and the time>of testing/temptation, saying that both knowing what it is to be tested and>having made it through are reasons that Jesus can help those of us who are>tested?I would rather say that PEIRASQEIS is of time prior to PEPONQEN, becausePEPONQEN must refer to the present–as present perfect, it indicates thefait accompli as of now of his suffering. I’d make it: “since he hashimself been tempted/tested in that wherein he has suffered/is the/anaccomplished sufferer.” As for the meaning of PEIRASQEIS here, I’ll leavethat to Jeffrey Gibson.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington UniversitySummer: 1647 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad at artsci.wustl.eduWWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
Heb 2:18 PEPONQEN, PEIRASQEISHeb 2:18 PEPONQEN, PEIRASQEIS
Heb 2:18 PEPONQEN, PEIRASQEIS Jeffrey B. Gibson jgibson000 at mailhost.chi.ameritech.net
Fri Jul 30 10:11:08 EDT 1999
Heb 2:18 PEPONQEN, PEIRASQEIS Kalos Computer Software. Jonathan Robie wrote:> Hebr 2:18 EN HWi GAR PEPONQEN AUTOS PEIRASQEIS> > I am not sure that I have grasped the aspect of PEIRASQEIS in combination> with the perfect verb PEPONQEN, and I am not sure what the force of> PEIRASMOS is in this context. PEPONQEN is pretty clear here, but does> PEIRASQEIS mean “having been tempted” in this context, e.g. “he has> suffered, having been tempted”? I assume that the event time of PEIRASQEIS> is the same as that of PEPONQEN, so that the suffering and testing occured> at the same time, that the perfect focuses on the resulting state, and that> PEIRASQEIS focuses on the time of the testing itself? Is the function of> the phrase to bring out both the state of having been tested and the time> of testing/temptation, saying that both knowing what it is to be tested and> having made it through are reasons that Jesus can help those of us who are> tested?> I think it might be important when attempting to answer the questions Jonathan raisedto first be clear what the referent of PASXW (PEPONQEN) is. That is to say, todetermine the relationship between the the suffering and the testing mentioned here,we need to determine what suffering(s) of Jesus the author of Hebrews had in mind..A side note. Burton in his _Moods and Tenses_, p. 433, regards PEIRASQEIS as anadverbial participle of means and renders the expression “he himself has suffered bybeing tested”. Don’t know if I buy that.But in any case, I will stand firm on the point that Heb. 2:18 has nothing to do withJesus experiencing the general “temptations” i.e., enticements, that all flesh isheir to, or that we find here a statement that is concerned to say that Jesus hasexperienced every temptation that **anyone** can or has experienced. As the contextand the echo of 2:18 in 4:15 shows, the intent of the author of Hebrews is to assertthat Jesus has been tested over **the specific issue** which the readers of Hebrewswere facing and which provoked the author of Hebrews to write to them. And this doesnot involves the readers chance experience of the vicissitudes of the humancondition, but their having been confronted with the possibility that their way offollowing God and living out the “confession” to which they had committed themselveswas NOT the way of God. In other words, the issue is apostasy.Yours,Jeffrey–Jeffrey B. Gibson7423 N. Sheridan Road #2AChicago, Illinois 60626e-mail jgibson000 at ameritech.net
Heb 2:18 PEPONQEN, PEIRASQEISKalos Computer Software.
[] Heb 2,18 Eddie Mishoe edmishoe at yahoo.com
Wed Apr 28 20:45:10 EDT 2004
[] Re: use of “lord” in NT [] Heb 2,18 EN hW GAR PEPONQEN AUTOS PEIRASQEIS, DUNATAI TOISPEIRAZOMENOIS BOHQHSAIShould we have expected an Aorist here, not thePerfect PEPONQEN? The Perfect tense seems to indicatea present state, but surely Jesus is not currently inthis state.=====Eddie MishoePastor__________________________________Do you Yahoo!?Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
[] Re: use of “lord” in NT[] Heb 2,18
[] Heb 2,18 Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Wed Apr 28 21:46:57 EDT 2004
[] Heb 2,18 [] Heb 3,5 & 6 At 5:45 PM -0700 4/28/04, Eddie Mishoe wrote:>EN hW GAR PEPONQEN AUTOS PEIRASQEIS, DUNATAI TOIS>PEIRAZOMENOIS BOHQHSAI> >Should we have expected an Aorist here, not the>Perfect PEPONQEN? The Perfect tense seems to indicate>a present state, but surely Jesus is not currently in>this state.PEPONQEN doesn’t indicate a “state” of suffering but rather the experienceof one who has fully undergone suffering. I think the text is saying thatChrist, by virtue of his human experience of suffering is able to assistthose who are currently confronting ordeals. I’m reminded of Socrates inRepublic I saying to the aged Cephalus that he always found it enlighteningto talk to the very old because they have the experience and wisdom toadvise younger people about what lies ahead of them on a course that theolder man has already traveled.– 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/
[] Heb 2,18[] Heb 3,5 & 6
[] EN hWi: Heb. 2:18 Webb webb at selftest.net
Fri May 11 02:00:06 EDT 2007
[] John 4:28. Aorist and present verbs [] FW: EN hWi: Heb. 2:18 EN hW GAR PEPONQEN AUTOS PEIRASQEIS (Heb. 2:18)Carl Conrad rendered this a while ago on the list as “since he has himselfbeen tempted/tested in that wherein he has suffered/is the/an accomplishedsufferer.”I see that Lattimore has, “…for by the fact that he himself sufferedthrough trial”.I’m not interested for the purposes of this post in the matter oftrial/testing versus temptation, but in the weight of EN hWi. When I firstencountered it, I read it as “After all, given the fact that he’s sufferedtemptation/testing himself”. But then I remembered that EN hWi has usuallybeen taken as meaning what Carl’s rendering suggests. Is there a way ofdeciding which of these readings–the more abstract, or the morespecific–is more likely to be what the author meant? Webb Mealy
[] John 4:28. Aorist and present verbs[] FW: EN hWi: Heb. 2:18
[] FW: EN hWi: Heb. 2:18 Webb webb at selftest.net
Fri May 11 02:09:11 EDT 2007
[] EN hWi: Heb. 2:18 [] FW: EN hWi: Heb. 2:18 Correction:EN hWi GAR PEPONQEN AUTOS PEIRASQEIS (Heb. 2:18)I see that ZHubert’s translation algorithm has left out the iotasubscript from hWi, as has happened before recently. It usually does verywell, but maybe it can only handle one special lowercase letter per word.(?)Webb Mealy—–Original Message—–From: -bounces at lists.ibiblio.org[mailto:-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of WebbSent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 11:00 PMTo: ‘B Greek’Subject: [] EN hWi: Heb. 2:18EN hW GAR PEPONQEN AUTOS PEIRASQEIS (Heb. 2:18)Carl Conrad rendered this a while ago on the list as “since he has himselfbeen tempted/tested in that wherein he has suffered/is the/an accomplishedsufferer.”I see that Lattimore has, “…for by the fact that he himself sufferedthrough trial”.I’m not interested for the purposes of this post in the matter oftrial/testing versus temptation, but in the weight of EN hWi. When I firstencountered it, I read it as “After all, given the fact that he’s sufferedtemptation/testing himself”. But then I remembered that EN hWi has usuallybeen taken as meaning what Carl’s rendering suggests. Is there a way ofdeciding which of these readings–the more abstract, or the morespecific–is more likely to be what the author meant? Webb Mealy— home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/
[] EN hWi: Heb. 2:18[] FW: EN hWi: Heb. 2:18
[] FW: EN hWi: Heb. 2:18 Webb webb at selftest.net
Fri May 11 03:14:40 EDT 2007
[] FW: EN hWi: Heb. 2:18 [] FW: EN hWi: Heb. 2:18 I see that Zerwick-Grosvenor takes EN hWi similarly to the way Lattimore andI have, saying, “EN hWi in that, because, EN causal, Rom. 8:3 para. 119”,referencing Zerwick, Biblical Greek, English edn (Rome: SPIB, 1963), p. 40,in which it says, referring to Heb. 2:18, –Unless this usage be taken into account, how is one to understand Paulwhen he says, of the hope of resurrection, Acts 24,16: EN TOUTWi (=’therefore’) KAI AUTOS ASKW APROSKOPON SUNEIDHSIN ECEIN…, or Rom. 8,3 TOGAR ADUNATON TOU NOMOU EN hWi HSQENEI DIA THS SARKOS, where the onlyreasonable sense for EN hWi is ‘in that’ = ‘because’.More grist for the mill.Webb Mealy—–Original Message—–From: -bounces at lists.ibiblio.org[mailto:-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of WebbSent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 11:00 PMTo: ‘B Greek’Subject: [] EN hWi: Heb. 2:18EN hW GAR PEPONQEN AUTOS PEIRASQEIS (Heb. 2:18)Carl Conrad rendered this a while ago on the list as “since he has himselfbeen tempted/tested in that wherein he has suffered/is the/an accomplishedsufferer.”I see that Lattimore has, “…for by the fact that he himself sufferedthrough trial”.I’m not interested for the purposes of this post in the matter oftrial/testing versus temptation, but in the weight of EN hWi. When I firstencountered it, I read it as “After all, given the fact that he’s sufferedtemptation/testing himself”. But then I remembered that EN hWi has usuallybeen taken as meaning what Carl’s rendering suggests. Is there a way ofdeciding which of these readings–the more abstract, or the morespecific–is more likely to be what the author meant? Webb Mealy— home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/— home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/
[] FW: EN hWi: Heb. 2:18[] FW: EN hWi: Heb. 2:18
[] FW: EN hWi: Heb. 2:18 Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org
Fri May 11 04:43:49 EDT 2007
[] FW: EN hWi: Heb. 2:18 [] John 4:28. Aorist and present verbs —– Original Message —– From: “Webb” <webb at selftest.net>Subject: Re: [] FW: EN hWi: Heb. 2:18>I see that Zerwick-Grosvenor takes EN hWi similarly to the way Lattimore and> I have, saying, “EN hWi in that, because, EN causal, Rom. 8:3 para. 119”,> referencing Zerwick, Biblical Greek, English edn (Rome: SPIB, 1963), p. 40,> in which it says, referring to Heb. 2:18, > > –Unless this usage be taken into account, how is one to understand Paul> when he says, of the hope of resurrection, Acts 24,16: EN TOUTWi (=> ‘therefore’) KAI AUTOS ASKW APROSKOPON SUNEIDHSIN ECEIN…, or Rom. 8,3 TO> GAR ADUNATON TOU NOMOU EN hWi HSQENEI DIA THS SARKOS, where the only> reasonable sense for EN hWi is ‘in that’ = ‘because’.> BAGD under EN, sense 6 has:d. causal: because [Rom] 8:3; Hb 2:18; 6:17.Iver Larsen
[] FW: EN hWi: Heb. 2:18[] John 4:28. Aorist and present verbs