Fwd: Re : Lk 1:76 Carl ω. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Wed Sep 11 08:50:49 εδτ 2002
Lk 1:79 φωσ (Codex Bezae 05) Fwd: Re : Lk 1:76 ξωξ forwarding note: ι am forwarding to the list the response of Mme.Chabert d’Hyères, Englished as well as ι was able, to another part of mymessage of yesterday:In a message dated 9/10/2002 8:41:27 αμ Eastern Daylight Time,cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu wrote:>1:76 (προ προσωπου κυριου in D05 where ενωπιον κυριου is the reading of the>critical text: PROPOREUSHi gar ενωπιον (or προ προσωπου κυριου) hETOIMASAI>hODOUS αυτου. On the other hand, ι think it might reasonably be argued that>προ προσωπου with κυριου is strictly idiomatic and means simply “ahead of>“or “preceding” as in the texts cited regularly with accounts of the>appearance of John the Baptist as “the messenger sent ahead of the Lord”; if>that is so, then προ προσωπου κυριου is hardly different in meaning from>ενωπιον κυριου.What is strange, Carl, it is that in the parallel that you cite with Johnthe Baptist in Lk 7:27: αποστελλω τον αγγελον μου προ προσωπου σου, thepronoun σου does not appear in D05. Contrary to Ex 23:20 whence thisquotation is drawn, προ προσωπου is taken by Luc with the absolute sense “Isend my messenger in front of the Face”.Moreover in Lk 1, the choice of the prepositions ενωπιον, εναντι and προπροσωπου appears gradual. ενωπιον του θεου in 1:6 – according to D05 – doesnot comprise the nuance of opposition or confrontation which εν–αντι–ον(accepted in the “critical text”) holds. εν–αντι του θεου in Lk 1:9 refersto the service performed by the high priest entering the Holy of Holies;εναντι stressed the religious fear inspired by the divine presence (Ex28:12, 30 etc., chiefly according to μσ α). Could προ προσωπου in 1:76 bechosen to mark a difference between these two verses, a difference whichmight be explained by Lk 7:27D would explain … ?Sylvie Chabert d’Hyèreshttp://bezae.ifrance.com
Lk 1:79 φωσ (Codex Bezae 05)Fwd: Re : Lk 1:76
Wed Sep 11 10:17:49 εδτ 2002
Fwd: Re : Lk 1:76 Lk 1:76 At 8:50 αμ -0400 9/11/02, Sylvie Chabert d’Hyères wrote:> >In a message dated 9/10/2002 8:41:27 αμ Eastern Daylight Time,>cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu wrote:> >>1:76 (προ προσωπου κυριου in D05 where ενωπιον κυριου is the reading of the>>critical text: PROPOREUSHi gar ενωπιον (or προ προσωπου κυριου) hETOIMASAI>>hODOUS αυτου. On the other hand, ι think it might reasonably be argued that>>προ προσωπου with κυριου is strictly idiomatic and means simply “ahead of>>“or “preceding” as in the texts cited regularly with accounts of the>>appearance of John the Baptist as “the messenger sent ahead of the Lord”; if>>that is so, then προ προσωπου κυριου is hardly different in meaning from>>ενωπιον κυριου.> >What is strange, Carl, it is that in the parallel that you cite with John>the Baptist in Lk 7:27: αποστελλω τον αγγελον μου προ προσωπου σου, the>pronoun σου does not appear in D05. Contrary to Ex 23:20 whence this>quotation is drawn, προ προσωπου is taken by Luke with the absolute sense “ι>send my messenger in front of the Face”.ι really can’t take this perspective very seriously; even if the pronounSOU does not appear in Codex Bezae, ι believe that the sense of αποστελλωτον αγγελον μου προ προσωπου would be simply “ι send my messenger inadvance.” ι don’t think that the idiomatic adverbial expression προπροσωπου can be separated into its etymological components. Louw & Nida,whiie acknowledging the literal sense of προσωπον in the idiom,nevertheless point to the idiomatic usage of the phrase:67.19 προ προσωπου: (an idiom, literally ‘before the face,’ equivalent inmeaning to pro/b ‘before,’ 67.17, but a somewhat more elaborate phraserhetorically) a point of time, possibly only a short time before anotherpoint of time – ‘before, previous.’ προσκηρυχαντοσ ιωαννου προ προσωπου θσεισοδου ‘before the coming (of Jesus), John preached’ Ac 13:24.>Moreover in Lk 1, the choice of the prepositions ενωπιον, εναντι and προ>προσωπου appears gradual. ενωπιον του θεου in 1:6 – according to D05 – does>not comprise the nuance of opposition or confrontation which εν–αντι–ον>(accepted in the “critical text”) holds. εν–αντι του θεου in Lk 1:9 refers>to the service performed by the high priest entering the Holy of Holies;>εναντι stressed the religious fear inspired by the divine presence (Ex>28:12, 30 etc., chiefly according to μσ α). Could προ προσωπου in 1:76 be>chosen to mark a difference between these two verses, a difference which>might be explained by Lk 7:27D would explain … ?Quite frankly ι am dubious about this endeavor to differentiate what seemto me essentially to be synonymous expressions. Again ι cite Louw & Nida(who are the more useful here in that they αρε grouping expressions insemantic domains):83.33 EMPROSQENa; ENWPIONa; ENANTIONa; ENANTIa; KATENWPIONa; PROa;προσωπον, ου n.: a position in front of an object, whether animate orinanimate, which is regarded as having a spacial orientation of front andback – ‘in front of, before.’13EMPROSQENaÚ αφεσ εκει το δωρον σου εμπροσθεν του θυσιαασθριου ‘leave yourgift there in front of the altar’ Mt 5:24; hO δε ιησουσ εσταθη εμπροσθεντου hHGEMONOS ‘Jesus stood before the governor’ Mt 27:11; εχηλθεν εμπροσθενπαντω ‘he went away in front of everyone’ or ‘ while they all watched’ Mk2:12.ENWPIONaÚ ιδου ανηρ εσθ ενωπιον μου ‘suddenly a man stood in front of me’Ac 10:30; εγω ειμι γαβριηλ hO παρεσθκωσ ενωπιον του θεου v ‘ι am Gabriel,who stands before God’ Lk 1:19.ENANTIONa Ú hWS αμνοσ εναντιον του κειραντοσ αυτον αφωνοσ ‘like a lamb dumb before its shearer’ Ac 8:32.ENANTIa Ú hIERATEUEIN … εναντι του θεου v ‘serving as a priest beforeGod’ Lk 1:8.KATENWPIONa Ú κατενωπιον θσ δοχησ αυτου αμωμουσ εν αγαλλιασει ‘faultlessand joyful before his glorious presence’ Jd 24.PROa Ú hESTANAI τον πετρον προ του πυλωνοσ ‘Peter stood in front of thegate’ Ac 12:14.PROSWPONfÚ των εθνων hWN εχωθεν hO θεοσ απο προσωπου των πατερων hHMWN ‘thenations that God drove out in front of our ancestors’ (literally ‘ fromthe face of our ancestors’) Ac 7:45; απεστειλεν αυτουσ … προ προσωπουαυτου ‘he sent them out (to go) ahead of him’ Lk 10:1.– 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/
Fwd: Re : Lk 1:76Lk 1:76
Lk 1:76 Carl ω. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Wed Sep 11 10:23:06 εδτ 2002
Fwd: Re : Lk 1:76 Gal 6:2 ι forward this response of George Somsel to the list; it is a reply not tome, of course, but rather to the message of Sylvie Chabert d’Hyères which Ihad forwarded to the list.In a message dated 9/11/2002 8:51:35 αμ Eastern Daylight Time,cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu writes:>Moreover in Lk 1, the choice of the prepositions ενωπιον, εναντι and προ>προσωπου appears gradual. ενωπιον του θεου in 1:6 – according to D05 – does>not comprise the nuance of opposition or confrontation which εν–αντι–ον>(accepted in the “critical text”) holds. εν–αντι του θεου in Lk 1:9 refers>to the service performed by the high priest entering the Holy of Holies;>εναντι stressed the religious fear inspired by the divine presence (Ex>28:12, 30 etc., chiefly according to μσ α). Could προ προσωπου in 1:76 be>chosen to mark a difference between these two verses, a difference which>might be explained by Lk 7:27D would explain … ?> Carl,This somewhat misrepresents the case. εναντι του θεου is used 3 time inthe λχχ — Ex 28.29; Num 10.10; Jer 3.25. In Ex 28.29 it might possiblyrefer to the entrance into the inner sanctum or it might simply refer toAaron’s service in the tabernacle/temple generally. In Num 10.10, however,we readKAI εν ταισ hHMERAIS θσ ευφροσυνησ hUMWN και εν ταισ hEWRTAIS hUMWNSALPIETE ταισ σαλπιγξιν επι θσ hOLOKAUTWMASIN και επι ταισ θυσιασ τωνσωθριων hUMWN, και εσται hUMIN αναμνησισ εναντι του θεου hUMWN, εγω KURIOShO θεοσ hUMWN.Here it is plain that the burnt offerings over which the trumpets were tobe sounded were not sacrificed in the Holy of Holies, but outside. also in Jer 3.25 we readEKOIMHQHMEN εν THi AISXUNHi hHMWN, και επεκαλυυεν hHMAS hH ατιμια hHMWN,διοτι εναντι του θεου hHMWN hHMARTOMEN hHMEIS και hOI πατερεσ hHMWN απονεοθτοσ hEWS θσ hHMERAS ταυθσ και ουχ hUPHKOUSAMEN θσ φωνησ κυριου τουθεου hHMWN.Surely Jeremiah is not envisioning the entire city of Jerusalem enteringinto the Holy of Holies to commit sins in the very presence of God! ι‘mafraid we have a case of convenient theologizing here.gfsomsel
Fwd: Re : Lk 1:76Gal 6:2
Wed Sep 11 17:35:50 εδτ 2002
Sabbatos Derivation of βαρβαροσ ξωξ forwarding note: ι am forwarding to the list the response of Mme.Chabert d’Hyères, Englished–hopefully without gross misrepresentation–,to earlier messages in the thread sent by George Somsel and myself:Thank you Carl and George for your remarks which call for clarification oramplification of the thought.>> Quite frankly ι am dubious about this endeavor to differentiate what seem to>me essentially to be synonymous expressions. Again ι cite Louw & Nida…> ENANTIONa: hWS αμνοσ εναντιον του κειραντοσ αυτον αφωνοσ>> ‘like a lamb dumb before its shearer’ Ac 8:32.The Greek-French dictionary of Bailly gives two senses for the adverbENANTION: (1) in front of, opposite, in the presence of ( w. genitive) (2)vis-a-vis, with idea of hostility (with or without movement w. genitive)Luke in his gospel and according to D05 kept εναντιον for confrontationbetween the emissary of the authorities of the Temple and the people (Lk20:26) ουκ ισξυσαν επιλαβεσθαι αυτου hRHMATOS εναντιον του λαου. Baillydoes not make this distinction for ενωπιον, which it translates as”opposite.” All things considered, the author who does not wish to allow anotion of hostility will use ενωπιον in preference to εναντιον.>> ENANTIa: hIERATEUEIN … εναντι του θεου v ‘serving as a priest before>> God’ Lk 1:8.Bailly gives for εναντι only biblical references such as those of Ben Sirach:–Ben Sirach 38:15 on the recognition of sins before God, a text comparableto Jer 3:25, cited by George Somsel.–Ben Sirach 51:14 on the prayer of the priest for the people before theHoly of Holies, a text which can be associated with Ex 28:12 and 29. If anassociation can be made between Ben Sirach and some verses of the Torah,would it be inappropriate to give weight to Luke’s verse by comparison withthese texts? εναντι is rather infrequent to count; however in the HebrewMt, “lifnei”, the equivalent of εναντι, is very frequent and does not callfor comment. Also ι wonder whether εναντι would not form part of avocabulary specific to a sacerdotal context – of Alexandria or elsewhere -and is discernible in the introductions of certain Psalms of the λχχ,indicating, for example, the day of the week; ψ 91: εισ θν hHMERAN τουσαββατου. ψ 93 τετραδι σαββατων.Sylvie Chabert d’Hyères
SabbatosDerivation of βαρβαροσ
Wed Sep 11 20:56:56 εδτ 2002
Derivation of βαρβαροσ Lk 1:76 Forwarded for George Somsel:>In a message dated 9/11/2002 5:36:50 πμ Eastern Daylight Time,>cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu forwards on behalf of Sylvie Chabert d’Hyères:> >–Ben Sirach 51:14 on the prayer of the priest for the people before the>Holy of Holies, a text which can be associated with Ex 28:12 and 29. If an>association can be made between Ben Sirach and some verses of the Torah,>would it be inappropriate to give weight to Luke’s verse by comparison with>these texts? εναντι is rather infrequent to count; however in the Hebrew>Mt, “lifnei”, the equivalent of εναντι, is very frequent and does not call>for comment. Also ι wonder whether εναντι would not form part of a>vocabulary specific to a sacerdotal context – of Alexandria or elsewhere –>and is discernible in the introductions of certain Psalms of the λχχ,>indicating, for example, the day of the week; ψ 91: εισ θν hHMERAN του>σαββατου. ψ 93 τετραδι σαββατων.>_____________________Sirach speaks of εναντι ναου “before the temple”, not the “Holy of Holies”specifically and exclusively. You are correct that λιφ:ν“υ is quite frequentin the Hebrew. It does not seem, however, to βυ ιτσελφ have a cultic sense.We have, e.g., in Gen 6.11WaT.i$fX”τ Hf)fRe+ LiF:ν“υ ) Ha):eLoHiYMAnd the earth was corrupt before Godbut it not only has a locative usage, but a temporal one as well as in Gen13.10LiF:ν“υ $aX”τ υηωη )eT_SeDoMbefore υηωη destroyed Sodomor a locative usage in regard to other men as in Gen 23.12LiF:ν“υ (aM Hf)fRe+before the people of the landPS 91: εισ θν hHMERAN του σαββατου [Heb Ps 92]would seem to indicate “On [or ‘For’] the Sabbath” andPS 93 τετραδι σαββατων [Heb Ps 94]might be “On [or ‘For’ — dat.] the fourth Sabbath”??What puzzles me is what has εισ to do with εναντι? These appear to betemporal statements.gfsomselPolycarp66 at aol.com
Derivation of BARBAROSLk 1:76
Thu Sep 12 06:50:57 εδτ 2002
Lk 1:76 Derivation of βαρβαροσ George Somsel wrote:>> Sirach speaks of εναντι ναου “before the temple”, not the “Holy of Holies”>> specifically and exclusively.>According to the Gospel of Luke hIERON designates the Temple in the broad>sense of the term, and ναοσ the part reserved with the Holy. The evangelist>did not use το αγιον, even in 1:9 when Zacharias entered to burn incense.Why ? is there any rule about το hAGION?Sylvie Chabert d’Hyèreshttp://bezae.ifrance.com
Lk 1:76Derivation of βαρβαροσ
Thu Sep 12 08:36:23 εδτ 2002
Lk 1:64 παραξῥμα τετραχλισμενα forwarded to for George Somsel:>In a message dated 9/12/2002 6:51:53 αμ Eastern Daylight Time,>cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu forwards on behalf of Sylvie Chabert d’Hyères:> >>George Somsel wrote:>> >>>> Sirach speaks of εναντι ναου “before the temple”, not the “Holy of Holies”>>>> specifically and exclusively.>>>According to the Gospel of Luke hIERON designates the Temple in the broad>>>sense of the term, and ναοσ the part reserved with the Holy. The evangelist>>>did not use το αγιον, even in 1:9 when Zacharias entered to burn incense.>> >>Why ? is there any rule about το hAGION?>> > > >ι‘m afraid ι do not understand your question. ι will nevertheless attempt>to respond to what ι think you might intend.> >ι would assume that by το hAGION you are νοτ referring simply to ‘holy’ or>‘sacred’ things as in Jesus’ statement> >μν δωτε το hAGION τοισ κυσιν (Mt 7.6)> >but rather the usage of Lev 16.2, 3> >και ειπεν κυριοσ προσ μωυσην λαλησον προσ ααρον τον αδελφον σου και μη>εισπορευεσθω πασαν hWRAN εισ τον hAGION εσωτερον του καταπετασματοσ εισ>προσωπον του hILASTHRIOU, hO εστιν επι θσ κιβωτου του μαρτυριου . . .> >ι still am uncertain what you mean by “_is there any rule about_ το>hAGION.” If you mean “When does it refer to the “Holy of Holies”, only>the context can determine that. The article here serves to turn the>adjective hAGIOS, –α, –ον into a noun — “the ηολυ (place/thing)”. By>your statement “According to the Gospel of Luke hIERON designates the>Temple in the broad sense of the term, and ναοσ the part reserved with the>Holy.” ι assume you mean that Lk used ναοσ to refer to το hAGION or the>“Holy of Holies.” This is clearly not the case unless you wish to make>Zacarias the High Priest and unless you wish to place the altar of incense>within the ‘Holy of Holies’ itself. Such was clearly not intended.> >gfsomsel
Lk 1:64 παραξῥματετραχλισμενα
Thu Sep 12 14:03:25 εδτ 2002
Re. βδαγ – where are *-*? menu problem Forwarded to the list by ξω Conrad for Mme Chabert d’Hyères (ι may add thatI may have contributed to the confusion because ι Englished “le Saint” as”Holy of Holies.” in her earlier messages):George ,Sorry for my unclear question>> ι assume you mean that Lk used ναοσ to refer to το hAGION or the”Holy ofHolies.”No, but ναοσ as the square of the men and that of the priests with theHoly.το hAGION according to Hebrews 🙁νκψβ) Hebrews 9:1 Then indeed, even the first covenant had ordinances ofdivine service and the earthly sanctuary. 2 For a tabernacle was prepared:the first part, in which [was] the lampstand, the table, and the showbread,which is called the sanctuary (hAGIA); 3 and behind the second veil, thepart of the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of All, (hAGIA hAGIWN) …6 Now when these things had been thus prepared, the priests always wentinto the first part of the tabernacle, performing the services.For me, το hAGION = hAGIA + hAGIA hAGIWN>> unless you wish to place the altar of incense>>within the ‘Holy of Holies’ itself. Such was clearly not intended.Where exactly was this altar? ι thought this altar, too, was in thesanctuary, hAGIA… So ι was wondering why Luke used neither το hAGION norhAGIA.Sylvie Chabert d’Hyèreshttp://bezae.ifrance.com
Re. βδαγ – where are *-*?menu problem
Thu Sep 12 20:52:18 εδτ 2002
Anyone know of this book Lk 1:64 παραξῥμα Forwarded for George Somsel:>In a message dated 9/12/2002 2:05:13 πμ Eastern Daylight Time, σ. Chabert>d’Hyères writes:> > >>No, but ναοσ as the square of the men and that of the priests with the>>Holy.>>το hAGION according to Hebrews :>>(νκψβ) Hebrews 9:1 Then indeed, even the first covenant had ordinances of>>divine service and the earthly sanctuary. 2 For a tabernacle was prepared:>>the first part, in which [was] the lampstand, the table, and the showbread,>>which is called the sanctuary (hAGIA); 3 and behind the second veil, the>>part of the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of All, (hAGIA hAGIWN)>>…6 Now when these things had been thus prepared, the priests always went>>into the first part of the tabernacle, performing the services.>> >>For me, το hAGION = hAGIA + hAGIA hAGIWN>> > > >This is not correct. το hAGION <> hAGIA hAGIWN. hAGIA hAGIWN = σκηνη>which is μετα δε το δευτερον καταπετασμα. The tent which is the ‘Holy of>Holies cannot be both “behind the second curtain” and be inclusive of the>second curtain and all that is before it which is το τε hAGION (Heb>9.1-3). The λυχνια (lampstand), hH τραπεζα (the table [of incense]), and>the προθεσισ των αρτων (Bread of the Presence). According to Ex 30.1, 6>the altar of incense is outside the veil before one reaches the Holy of>Holies.> >ω:(f&iYTf MiZB.”aX MiQ:+aR θ:+oReT . . .>και ποιησεισ θυσιασθριον θυμιαματοσ . . .>And you shall make an altar for incense of smoke . . .> >ω:NTaT.fH )oToH LiF:ν“υ HaP.fRoKeT )a$eR (aL_):aRoN Hf(“DuT . . .>και θησεισ αυτο απεναντι του καταπετασματοσ του οντοσ επι θσ κιβωτου των>μαρτυριων . . .>and you shall place it before the second curtain that is before the ark of>the covenant> >Thus the two cannot be considered to be equivalent.> >“No, but ναοσ as the square of the men and that of the priests with the>Holy.” confuses me even more. What do you mean by “the square of the men>and that of the priests . . .”?> >gfsomsel
Anyone know of this bookLk 1:64 παραξῥμα
Lk:1:76 Temple Carl ω. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Fri Sep 13 15:44:07 εδτ 2002
α “Timeless” Aorist? α “Timeless” Aorist? Englished and forwarded by ξωξ to for σ. Chabert d’Hyères:George Somsel wrote:>>What do you mean by “the square of the men>>and that of the priests . . .”?ι used the word “square” instead of “court”.Thanks for preparing a lexicon of the terms relating to this plan of the Templehttp://www.ucalgary.ca/~elsegal/Shokel/Preaching/Temple.GIFMoving back and forth through four different languages doesn’t make it easyfor me to manage and correct the erroneous scheme that ι have in mind.Sylvie Chabert d’Hyèreshttp://bezae.ifrance.com
α “Timeless” Aorist?α “Timeless” Aorist?
Fri Sep 13 19:08:32 εδτ 2002
α “Timeless” Aorist? α “Timeless” Aorist? Forwarded for George Somsel:>In a message dated 9/13/2002 3:46:03 πμ Eastern Daylight Time,>cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu writes:>>Englished and forwarded by ξωξ to for σ. Chabert d’Hyères:>> >>George Somsel wrote:>>>>What do you mean by “the square of the men>>>>and that of the priests . . .”?>> >> >>ι used the word “square” instead of “court”.>> >>Thanks for preparing a lexicon of the terms relating to this plan of the>>Temple>>http://www.ucalgary.ca/~elsegal/Shokel/Preaching/Temple.γιφ>> >>Moving back and forth through four different languages doesn’t make it easy>>for me to manage and correct the erroneous scheme that ι have in mind.>> > >ι can appreciate the difficulty you experience with several languages>being involved. ι apparently am haveing enough trouble with English>alone. When you wrote “square of the men and priests” my mind went to>mathmatical terms (The square of the hypotenuse is equal to the sum of>the squares of the other two sides). From that point ι was lost and never>recovered. It was my mistake to not consider another meaning of “square”,>viz. a public square. My apologies.> >ι will attempt to provide a wordlist of the terms used in the diagram you>referenced, but it may be a couple of days before ι am able to get to it.> >gfsomsel