Matthew 1:20

[] ESTIN at Matthew 1:20 Awohili at aol.com Awohili at aol.com
Sun May 28 08:57:32 EDT 2006

[] The Interlinear St. John has moved. [] ESTIN at Matthew 1:20 There is a construction for “Holy Spirit” at the latter part of Matthew 1:20 that apparently is found nowhere else in the NT: TO GAR EN AUTHi GENNHQEN EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN AGIOU. This is universally translated along the lines of “That which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit.” However, nowhere else in the NT does ESTIN come between the words for Holy Spirit. Should we see here “Spirit [which] is holy” = Holy Spirit? What prevents this from being translated as “That which is conceived of her by the Spirit is holy,” i.e., the Child is holy? Other than the fact that no one else has ever translated it that way? Thanks, Solomon Landers

[] The Interlinear St. John has moved.[] ESTIN at Matthew 1:20

[] ESTIN at Matthew 1:20 George F Somsel gfsomsel at yahoo.com
Sun May 28 09:24:50 EDT 2006

[] ESTIN at Matthew 1:20 [] ESTIN at Matthew 1:20 If it were as you propose then it would need to be in the nominative to agree with TO (I know, it could be acc, but it isn’t). george gfsomsel ________Awohili at aol.com wrote: There is a construction for “Holy Spirit” at the latter part of Matthew 1:20 that apparently is found nowhere else in the NT:TO GAR EN AUTHi GENNHQEN EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN AGIOU.This is universally translated along the lines of “That which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit.” However, nowhere else in the NT does ESTIN come between the words for Holy Spirit. Should we see here “Spirit [which] is holy” = Holy Spirit?What prevents this from being translated as “That which is conceived of her by the Spirit is holy,” i.e., the Child is holy? Other than the fact that no one else has ever translated it that way?Thanks,Solomon Landers— home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/georgegfsomsel_________———————————Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.

[] ESTIN at Matthew 1:20[] ESTIN at Matthew 1:20

[] ESTIN at Matthew 1:20 Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Sun May 28 11:49:48 EDT 2006

[] ESTIN at Matthew 1:20 [] ESTIN at Matthew 1:20 On May 28, 2006, at 8:57 AM, Awohili at aol.com wrote:> There is a construction for “Holy Spirit” at the latter part of > Matthew 1:20> that apparently is found nowhere else in the NT:> > TO GAR EN AUTHi GENNHQEN EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN AGIOU.> > This is universally translated along the lines of “That which is > conceived> in her is of the Holy Spirit.” However, nowhere else in the NT > does ESTIN> come between the words for Holy Spirit. Should we see here “Spirit > [which] is> holy” = Holy Spirit?> > What prevents this from being translated as “That which is > conceived of her> by the Spirit is holy,” i.e., the Child is holy? Other than the > fact that no> one else has ever translated it that way?George has already explained why your suggestion can’t work with the text we have. I would just add that, although the configuration EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU with the verb EINAI intervening between the noun PNEUMATOS and the adjective hAGIOU is rare, there is at least one other instance of it in the GNT:Lk 2:25 … KAI PNEUMA HN hAGION EP’ AUTON.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad2 at mac.comWWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/

[] ESTIN at Matthew 1:20[] ESTIN at Matthew 1:20

[] ESTIN at Matthew 1:20 Awohili at aol.com Awohili at aol.com
Sun May 28 14:03:59 EDT 2006

[] ESTIN at Matthew 1:20 [] ESTIN at Matthew 1:20 Thanks (again), for the clear explanation. Solomon Landers

[] ESTIN at Matthew 1:20[] ESTIN at Matthew 1:20

[] ESTIN at Matthew 1:20 Awohili at aol.com Awohili at aol.com
Sun May 28 14:08:54 EDT 2006

[] ESTIN at Matthew 1:20 [] ESTIN at Matthew 1:20 Many thanks, Carl, for the additional reference. It looks strange to English-speaking eyes, but I suppose it made perfect sense to the Greeks to have ESTIN intervene in this way, even though the construction appears to be rare. Best regards, Solomon Landers In a message dated 05/28/2006 8:50:10 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu writes:George has already explained why your suggestion can’t work with the text we have. I would just add that, although the configuration EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU with the verb EINAI intervening between the noun PNEUMATOS and the adjective hAGIOU is rare, there is at least one other instance of it in the GNT:

[] ESTIN at Matthew 1:20[] ESTIN at Matthew 1:20

[] ESTIN at Matthew 1:20 Dave Smith dave at musicsmythe.com
Sun May 28 14:28:04 EDT 2006

[] ESTIN at Matthew 1:20 [] URL Correction I believe George is correct on this matter. The noun and the adjective agreein case, number, and gender, therefore it is most natural for it to be amodifier. It would need to be a predicate nominative or predicate accusativeto allow the translation “is holy.” It may repay the effort to examine otherinstance where Matthew splits the noun and adjective with ESTIN/EIMI. Itlooks like Matthew, in his grammatical style, sometimes chooses to dividereferents and modifiers/adjectives w/ ESTIN (5:34, 35; 10:26); we mayattribute it to a form of hypotaxis that is common in Greek, though not inlanguages, such as Hebrew or English, that tend to be bound by juxtapositionof words.I don’t believe that this has any significance to the meaning of the passageat hand.Dave SmithHudson, NC

[] ESTIN at Matthew 1:20[] URL Correction

[] Matthew 1:20 EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU / EK PNEUMATOShAGIOU ESTIN Jonathan Robie jwrobie at mindspring.com
Thu Feb 7 14:30:22 EST 2008

[] 2008 Lenten Greek Reading [] Matthew 1:20 EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU / EK PNEUMATOShAGIOU ESTIN Matthew 1:20 τὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ ηθὲν ἐκ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἁγίουMatthew 1:20 TO GAR EN AUTH HQEN EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOUMy poor American brain wants this to read ἐκ πνεύματός ἁγίου ἐστιν (EKPNEUMATOS hAGIOU ESTIN), rather than ἐκ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἁγίου (EKPNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU). Is there any significance to the difference inword order here? Is there any significance to the verb dividingπνεύματός ἁγίου (PNEUMATOS hAGIOU)?Jonathan

[] 2008 Lenten Greek Reading[] Matthew 1:20 EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU / EK PNEUMATOShAGIOU ESTIN

[] Matthew 1:20 EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU / EK PNEUMATOShAGIOU ESTIN Elizabeth Kline kline_dekooning at earthlink.net
Thu Feb 7 15:09:24 EST 2008

[] Matthew 1:20 EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU / EK PNEUMATOShAGIOU ESTIN [] Matthew 1:20 EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU / EK PNEUMATOShAGIOU ESTIN On Feb 7, 2008, at 11:30 AM, Jonathan Robie wrote:> Matthew 1:20 τὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ ηθὲν ἐκ > πνεύματός ἐστιν ἁγίου> Matthew 1:20 TO GAR EN AUTH HQEN EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU> > My poor American brain wants this to read ἐκ > πνεύματός ἁγίου ἐστιν (EK> PNEUMATOS hAGIOU ESTIN), rather than ἐκ πνεύματός > ἐστιν ἁγίου (EK> PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU). Is there any significance to the > difference in> word order here? Is there any significance to the verb dividing> πνεύματός ἁγίου (PNEUMATOS hAGIOU)?> > JonathanI don’t know if there is any significance but in earlier greek you might have found something like TO GAR EN AUTH HQEN hAGIOU EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN with the adjective in front of the preposition.Elizabeth Kline

[] Matthew 1:20 EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU / EK PNEUMATOShAGIOU ESTIN[] Matthew 1:20 EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU / EK PNEUMATOShAGIOU ESTIN

[] Matthew 1:20 EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU / EK PNEUMATOShAGIOU ESTIN Carl Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Thu Feb 7 16:41:13 EST 2008

[] Matthew 1:20 EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU / EK PNEUMATOShAGIOU ESTIN [] Matthew 1:20 EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU / EKPNEUMATOShAGIOU ESTIN On Feb 7, 2008, at 3:09 PM, Elizabeth Kline wrote:> On Feb 7, 2008, at 11:30 AM, Jonathan Robie wrote:> >> Matthew 1:20 τὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ ηθὲν ἐκ>> πνεύματός ἐστιν ἁγίου>> Matthew 1:20 TO GAR EN AUTH HQEN EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU>> >> My poor American brain wants this to read ἐκ>> πνεύματός ἁγίου ἐστιν (EK>> PNEUMATOS hAGIOU ESTIN), rather than ἐκ πνεύματός>> ἐστιν ἁγίου (EK>> PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU). Is there any significance to the>> difference in>> word order here? Is there any significance to the verb dividing>> πνεύματός ἁγίου (PNEUMATOS hAGIOU)?>> >> Jonathan> > I don’t know if there is any significance but in earlier greek you> might have found something like TO GAR EN AUTH HQEN hAGIOU EK> PNEUMATOS ESTIN with the adjective in front of the preposition.(1) It appears that the citation itself is corrupted. It should be:τὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ γεννηθὲν ἐκ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἁγίου.TO GAR EN AUTHi GENNHQEN EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU.(2) You might compare Luke 2:25 … καὶ ὁ ἄνθρωπος οὗτος δίκαιος καὶ εὐλαβὴς προσδεχόμενος παράκλησιν τοῦ Ἰσραήλ, καὶ πνεῦμα ἦν ἅγιον ἐπ᾿ αὐτόν·KAI hO ANQRWPOS hOUTOS DIKAIOS KAI EULABHS PROSDECOMENOS PARAKLHSIN TOU ISRAHL, KAI PNEUMA HN hAGION EP’ AUTON.(3) In the GNT the combination of PNEUMA and the adjective hAGION in agreement with it is found both with and without the article. I won’t cite the lengthy article in BDAG but I would urge those interested to check s.v.PNEUMA :5. God’s being as controlling influence, with focus on association with humans, Spirit, spirit …alpha. w. the art. τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον TO PNEUMA TO hAGIONbeta. without the art. (s. B-D-F §257, 2; Rob. 761; 795) πνεῦμα ἅγιον PNEUMA hAGION(4) I’d also note BDF §257 (2) “TO hAGION PNEUMA sometimes with article as more or less a person; sometimes without article as a divine spirit entering into man.” And, as BDAG notes, A.T. Robertson discusses this and says much the same on pp. 761 and 796 of the big grammar.(5) Inasmuch as the adjectival form hAGIOU in Mt 1:20, hAGION in Lk 2;25 clearly is in agreement with the nominal form of PNEUMATOS/PNEUMA respectively, even though separated by a verb, there should be no question of whether they belong together.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)

[] Matthew 1:20 EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU / EK PNEUMATOShAGIOU ESTIN[] Matthew 1:20 EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU / EKPNEUMATOShAGIOU ESTIN

[] Matthew 1:20 EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU / EKPNEUMATOShAGIOU ESTIN Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org
Fri Feb 8 11:13:01 EST 2008

[] Matthew 1:20 EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU / EK PNEUMATOShAGIOU ESTIN [] PARARREW’s root word (in Hebrews 2:1)? —– Original Message —– From: “Jonathan Robie” <jwrobie at mindspring.com>To: “” < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: 7. februar 2008 22:30Subject: [] Matthew 1:20 EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU / EK PNEUMATOShAGIOU ESTIN> Matthew 1:20 τὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ γεννηθὲν ἐκ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἁγίου> Matthew 1:20 TO GAR EN AUTH GENNHQEN EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU> > My poor American brain wants this to read ἐκ πνεύματός ἁγίου ἐστιν (EK> PNEUMATOS hAGIOU ESTIN), rather than ἐκ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἁγίου (EK> PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU). Is there any significance to the difference in> word order here? Is there any significance to the verb dividing> πνεύματός ἁγίου (PNEUMATOS hAGIOU)?> > JonathanTwo comments related to word order:First, the common order for PNEUMA hAGION is to have PNEUMA first. In a few cases (especially in the articular genitive usage) hAGIOS comes first, and this may indicate a relatively higher emphasis on the concept of holiness. The plural PNEUMATA refer to evil spirits, but the singular PNEUMA in the context of the NT refers to God’s Spirit or occasionally a person’s spirit. Since God’s PNEUMA is necessarily holy, the word hAGIOS is not that important for the sake of identifying the reference, so it tends to follow the noun. It is also most common for an adjective to follow the noun in any case.Second, that ESTIN comes before hAGIOU I interpret to indicate that this word is slightly more prominent than hAGIOU. It has already been noted that split phrases are not that rare in Greek. I might express what I consider to be the intended emphasis as follows: “For that which was conceived in her is indeed from the Spirit (the Holy Spirit, of course).”Iver Larsen

[] Matthew 1:20 EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU / EK PNEUMATOShAGIOU ESTIN[] PARARREW’s root word (in Hebrews 2:1)?

[] Matthew 1:20 EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU / EK PNEUMATOShAGIOU ESTIN Tony Pope borikayaama_tekiri at sil.org
Fri Feb 8 08:52:54 EST 2008

[] PARARREW’s root word (in Hebrews 2:1)? [] Mark 16.9ff. On Feb 7, 2008, at 11:30 AM, Jonathan Robie wrote:> Matthew 1:20 τὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ ηθὲν ἐκ> πνεύματός ἐστιν ἁγίου> Matthew 1:20 TO GAR EN AUTH HQEN EK PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU> > My poor American brain wants this to read ἐκ> πνεύματός ἁγίου ἐστιν (EK> PNEUMATOS hAGIOU ESTIN), rather than ἐκ πνεύματός> ἐστιν ἁγίου (EK> PNEUMATOS ESTIN hAGIOU). Is there any significance to the > difference in> word order here? Is there any significance to the verb dividing> πνεύματός ἁγίου (PNEUMATOS hAGIOU)?> > JonathanTony:Split phrases (discontinuous phrases) occur from time to time in the NT, andthey generally indicate “emphasis” or something of that sort. In other wordsthe phrase EK PNEUMATOS hAGIOU is being brought into focus,presumably emphasized as unexpected or as a contrast to the implied usualmeans by which a child might be born.Other examples of such phrases in the Synoptic gospels are at: Matt 4.16,27.15; Mark 10.31; Lk2.25 (already cited by Dr Conrad), 14.19, 15.8, 22.38.Carl Conrad wrote:Thu Feb 7 16:41:13 EST 2008<snip>(3) In the GNT the combination of PNEUMA and the adjective hAGION inagreement with it is found both with and without the article. I won’tcite the lengthy article in BDAG but I would urge those interested tocheck s.v.PNEUMA :5. God’s being as controlling influence, with focus on associationwith humans, Spirit, spirit …alpha. w. the art. τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον TO PNEUMA TOhAGIONbeta. without the art. (s. B-D-F §257, 2; Rob. 761; 795)πνεῦμα ἅγιον PNEUMA hAGION(4) I’d also note BDF §257 (2) “TO hAGION PNEUMA sometimes witharticle as more or less a person; sometimes without article as adivine spirit entering into man.” And, as BDAG notes, A.T. Robertsondiscusses this and says much the same on pp. 761 and 796 of the biggrammar.Tony:As regards the distinction made by BDF, whereby the article is thought toimply reference to a personal being and the anarthrous form rather not, Iwould like to draw people’s attention to a quite different explanation ofthe data given by my colleague Stephen Levinsohn in an article in the BibleTranslator, Vol 44.1, available athttp://rosetta.reltech.org/Ebind/docs/TC/TBT/1993/01/TBT199301.html?seq=40and following pages. Briefly, Levinsohn argues that the phrase has noarticle when it is in focus in the sentence, and the referent is broadly thesame whether there is an article or not. The advantage of Levinsohn’sexplanation is, as he points out at the end of his article, that it can beapplied to other nouns as well, e.g. NOMOS etc in Paul, and even to propernames.Tony PopeBible translation adviser

[] PARARREW’s root word (in Hebrews 2:1)?[] Mark 16.9ff.

[] Matthew 1:20 Dony K. Donev dony at cupandcross.com
Sun Nov 28 17:18:49 EST 2010

[] Col 3:16b syntax [] Matthew 1:20 Does hAGION refer to the Spirit OR the begotten, since both are neuter singular?If it refers to the Spirit, please explain why and are there other example by Matthewwhere hAGION and pneumatos are separated by a verb (ex. estin). Thanks.Dony K. Donev

[] Col 3:16b syntax[] Matthew 1:20

[] Matthew 1:20 Michael Aubrey mga318 at yahoo.com
Sun Nov 28 17:37:55 EST 2010

[] Matthew 1:20 [] Matthew 1:20 hAGION cannot modify GENNHQEN because of the intervening preposition. While discontinuous phrases are allow in Greek, there are strict limits on the form they take. In the case of prepositional phrases, you are only going to find two patterns:Preposition -> Adjective -> X -> NounPreposition -> Noun -> X -> Adjective Discontinuous constituency like this arises with the author/speaker viewed the first part of the discontinuity as particularly important or relevant to the message.The only occasions where a word that is functionally in a prepositional phrase can appear before the preposition are in Poetry, though even then, I can only say that for Classical poetry. I haven’t looked at Hellenistic poetry. Also, in Homeric Greek, there is significantly more freedom in the placement of prepositions, but such phenomena are not relevant to what we’re seeing here.If you’re willing to push through some rather technical discussion, I’ve done some writing on the subject of discontinuous phrases in Greek, specifically looking at the Hellenistic period:http://evepheso.wordpress.com/studies-in-greek-syntax/Mike Aubreyhttp://evepheso.wordpress.com________________________________From: Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>To: Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 2:18:49 PMSubject: [] Matthew 1:20Does hAGION refer to the Spirit OR the begotten, since both are neuter singular?If it refers to the Spirit, please explain why and are there other example by Matthewwhere hAGION and pneumatos are separated by a verb (ex. estin). Thanks.Dony K. Donev— home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/

[] Matthew 1:20[] Matthew 1:20

[] Matthew 1:20 Mark Lightman lightmanmark at yahoo.com
Sun Nov 28 18:22:03 EST 2010

[] Matthew 1:20 [] Matthew 1:20 ταῦτα δὲ αὐτοῦ ἐνθυμηθέντος ἰδοὺ ἄγγελος κυρίου κατ’ ὄναρ ἐφάνη αὐτῷ λέγων, Ἰωσὴφ υἱὸς Δαυίδ, μὴ φοβηθῇς παραλαβεῖν Μαρίαν τὴν γυναῖκά σου, τὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ γεννηθὲν ἐκ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἁγίου: TO GAR EN AUTHi GENNHQEN EK PNEUMATOW ESTIN hAGIOU.Unless I am missing something, the form in the verse is hAGIOU, not hAGION, and for that reason must go with the genitive PNEUMATOS and not the nominative TO GENNHQEN.I don’t see any variants with hAGION. Mark LFWSFOROS MARKOS________________________________From: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>To: Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>; Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 3:37:55 PMSubject: Re: [] Matthew 1:20hAGION cannot modify GENNHQEN because of the intervening preposition. While discontinuous phrases are allow in Greek, there are strict limits on the form they take. In the case of prepositional phrases, you are only going to find two patterns:Preposition -> Adjective -> X -> NounPreposition -> Noun -> X -> Adjective Discontinuous constituency like this arises with the author/speaker viewed the first part of the discontinuity as particularly important or relevant to the message.The only occasions where a word that is functionally in a prepositional phrase can appear before the preposition are in Poetry, though even then, I can only say that for Classical poetry. I haven’t looked at Hellenistic poetry. Also, in Homeric Greek, there is significantly more freedom in the placement of prepositions, but such phenomena are not relevant to what we’re seeing here.If you’re willing to push through some rather technical discussion, I’ve done some writing on the subject of discontinuous phrases in Greek, specifically looking at the Hellenistic period:http://evepheso.wordpress.com/studies-in-greek-syntax/Mike Aubreyhttp://evepheso.wordpress.com________________________________From: Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>To: Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 2:18:49 PMSubject: [] Matthew 1:20Does hAGION refer to the Spirit OR the begotten, since both are neuter singular?If it refers to the Spirit, please explain why and are there other example by Matthewwhere hAGION and pneumatos are separated by a verb (ex. estin). Thanks.Dony K. Donev— 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/

[] Matthew 1:20[] Matthew 1:20

[] Matthew 1:20 Michael Aubrey mga318 at yahoo.com
Sun Nov 28 18:46:01 EST 2010

[] Matthew 1:20 [] Matthew 1:20 You are indeed correct. I didn’t actually look at the verse. My own comments were from memory from studying discontinuous constituents.Mike________________________________From: Mark Lightman <lightmanmark at yahoo.com>To: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>; Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>; Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 3:22:03 PMSubject: Re: [] Matthew 1:20ταῦτα δὲ αὐτοῦ ἐνθυμηθέντος ἰδοὺ ἄγγελος κυρίου κατ’ ὄναρ ἐφάνη αὐτῷ λέγων, Ἰωσὴφ υἱὸς Δαυίδ, μὴ φοβηθῇς παραλαβεῖν Μαρίαν τὴν γυναῖκά σου, τὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ γεννηθὲν ἐκ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἁγίου: TO GAR EN AUTHi GENNHQEN EK PNEUMATOW ESTIN hAGIOU.Unless I am missing something, the form in the verse is hAGIOU, not hAGION, and for that reason must go with the genitive PNEUMATOS and not the nominative TO GENNHQEN.I don’t see any variants with hAGION. Mark LFWSFOROS MARKOS________________________________From: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>To: Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>; Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 3:37:55 PMSubject: Re: [] Matthew 1:20hAGION cannot modify GENNHQEN because of the intervening preposition. While discontinuous phrases are allow in Greek, there are strict limits on the form they take. In the case of prepositional phrases, you are only going to find two patterns:Preposition -> Adjective -> X -> NounPreposition -> Noun -> X -> Adjective Discontinuous constituency like this arises with the author/speaker viewed the first part of the discontinuity as particularly important or relevant to the message.The only occasions where a word that is functionally in a prepositional phrase can appear before the preposition are in Poetry, though even then, I can only say that for Classical poetry. I haven’t looked at Hellenistic poetry. Also, in Homeric Greek, there is significantly more freedom in the placement of prepositions, but such phenomena are not relevant to what we’re seeing here.If you’re willing to push through some rather technical discussion, I’ve done some writing on the subject of discontinuous phrases in Greek, specifically looking at the Hellenistic period:http://evepheso.wordpress.com/studies-in-greek-syntax/Mike Aubreyhttp://evepheso.wordpress.com________________________________From: Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>To: Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 2:18:49 PMSubject: [] Matthew 1:20Does hAGION refer to the Spirit OR the begotten, since both are neuter singular?If it refers to the Spirit, please explain why and are there other example by Matthewwhere hAGION and pneumatos are separated by a verb (ex. estin). Thanks.Dony K. Donev— 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/

[] Matthew 1:20[] Matthew 1:20

[] Matthew 1:20 Mark Lightman lightmanmark at yahoo.com
Sun Nov 28 18:54:49 EST 2010

[] Matthew 1:20 [] Matthew 1:20 Fair enough, Mike, but are you saying that if the text DID sayτὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ γεννηθὲν ἐκ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἅγιον (hAGION)in the sense of “the thing born of the Spirit in you is holy,” that that would not be permissible Greek for some reason? Mark LFWSFOROS MARKOS________________________________From: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>To: Mark Lightman <lightmanmark at yahoo.com>; Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>; Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 4:46:01 PMSubject: Re: [] Matthew 1:20You are indeed correct. I didn’t actually look at the verse. My own comments were from memory from studying discontinuous constituents.Mike________________________________From: Mark Lightman <lightmanmark at yahoo.com>To: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>; Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>; Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 3:22:03 PMSubject: Re: [] Matthew 1:20ταῦτα δὲ αὐτοῦ ἐνθυμηθέντος ἰδοὺ ἄγγελος κυρίου κατ’ ὄναρ ἐφάνη αὐτῷ λέγων, Ἰωσὴφ υἱὸς Δαυίδ, μὴ φοβηθῇς παραλαβεῖν Μαρίαν τὴν γυναῖκά σου, τὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ γεννηθὲν ἐκ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἁγίου: TO GAR EN AUTHi GENNHQEN EK PNEUMATOW ESTIN hAGIOU.Unless I am missing something, the form in the verse is hAGIOU, not hAGION, and for that reason must go with the genitive PNEUMATOS and not the nominative TO GENNHQEN.I don’t see any variants with hAGION. Mark LFWSFOROS MARKOS________________________________From: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>To: Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>; Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 3:37:55 PMSubject: Re: [] Matthew 1:20hAGION cannot modify GENNHQEN because of the intervening preposition. While discontinuous phrases are allow in Greek, there are strict limits on the form they take. In the case of prepositional phrases, you are only going to find two patterns:Preposition -> Adjective -> X -> NounPreposition -> Noun -> X -> Adjective Discontinuous constituency like this arises with the author/speaker viewed the first part of the discontinuity as particularly important or relevant to the message.The only occasions where a word that is functionally in a prepositional phrase can appear before the preposition are in Poetry, though even then, I can only say that for Classical poetry. I haven’t looked at Hellenistic poetry. Also, in Homeric Greek, there is significantly more freedom in the placement of prepositions, but such phenomena are not relevant to what we’re seeing here.If you’re willing to push through some rather technical discussion, I’ve done some writing on the subject of discontinuous phrases in Greek, specifically looking at the Hellenistic period:http://evepheso.wordpress.com/studies-in-greek-syntax/Mike Aubreyhttp://evepheso.wordpress.com________________________________From: Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>To: Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 2:18:49 PMSubject: [] Matthew 1:20Does hAGION refer to the Spirit OR the begotten, since both are neuter singular?If it refers to the Spirit, please explain why and are there other example by Matthewwhere hAGION and pneumatos are separated by a verb (ex. estin). Thanks.Dony K. Donev— 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/

[] Matthew 1:20[] Matthew 1:20

[] Matthew 1:20 Michael Aubrey mga318 at yahoo.com
Sun Nov 28 19:02:42 EST 2010

[] Matthew 1:20 [] Matthew 1:20 No, because then hAGION is not modifying GENNHQEN. Its then modifying ESTIN.From memory, I had reconstructed the texts wrong in my head.Hypothetically, if GENNHQEN, PNEUMATOS, and hAGION were all the same case/gender/number in the same structure, hAGION cannot be viewed as modifying GENNHQEN.And next time, I will look directly at the text instead of speaking from memory.Mike________________________________From: Mark Lightman <lightmanmark at yahoo.com>To: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>; Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>; Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 3:54:49 PMSubject: Re: [] Matthew 1:20Fair enough, Mike, but are you saying that if the text DID sayτὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ γεννηθὲν ἐκ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἅγιον (hAGION)in the sense of “the thing born of the Spirit in you is holy,” that that would not be permissible Greek for some reason? Mark LFWSFOROS MARKOS________________________________From: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>To: Mark Lightman <lightmanmark at yahoo.com>; Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>; Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 4:46:01 PMSubject: Re: [] Matthew 1:20You are indeed correct. I didn’t actually look at the verse. My own comments were from memory from studying discontinuous constituents.Mike________________________________From: Mark Lightman <lightmanmark at yahoo.com>To: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>; Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>; Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 3:22:03 PMSubject: Re: [] Matthew 1:20ταῦτα δὲ αὐτοῦ ἐνθυμηθέντος ἰδοὺ ἄγγελος κυρίου κατ’ ὄναρ ἐφάνη αὐτῷ λέγων, Ἰωσὴφ υἱὸς Δαυίδ, μὴ φοβηθῇς παραλαβεῖν Μαρίαν τὴν γυναῖκά σου, τὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ γεννηθὲν ἐκ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἁγίου: TO GAR EN AUTHi GENNHQEN EK PNEUMATOW ESTIN hAGIOU.Unless I am missing something, the form in the verse is hAGIOU, not hAGION, and for that reason must go with the genitive PNEUMATOS and not the nominative TO GENNHQEN.I don’t see any variants with hAGION. Mark LFWSFOROS MARKOS________________________________From: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>To: Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>; Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 3:37:55 PMSubject: Re: [] Matthew 1:20hAGION cannot modify GENNHQEN because of the intervening preposition. While discontinuous phrases are allow in Greek, there are strict limits on the form they take. In the case of prepositional phrases, you are only going to find two patterns:Preposition -> Adjective -> X -> NounPreposition -> Noun -> X -> Adjective Discontinuous constituency like this arises with the author/speaker viewed the first part of the discontinuity as particularly important or relevant to the message.The only occasions where a word that is functionally in a prepositional phrase can appear before the preposition are in Poetry, though even then, I can only say that for Classical poetry. I haven’t looked at Hellenistic poetry. Also, in Homeric Greek, there is significantly more freedom in the placement of prepositions, but such phenomena are not relevant to what we’re seeing here.If you’re willing to push through some rather technical discussion, I’ve done some writing on the subject of discontinuous phrases in Greek, specifically looking at the Hellenistic period:http://evepheso.wordpress.com/studies-in-greek-syntax/Mike Aubreyhttp://evepheso.wordpress.com________________________________From: Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>To: Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 2:18:49 PMSubject: [] Matthew 1:20Does hAGION refer to the Spirit OR the begotten, since both are neuter singular?If it refers to the Spirit, please explain why and are there other example by Matthewwhere hAGION and pneumatos are separated by a verb (ex. estin). Thanks.Dony K. Donev— 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/

[] Matthew 1:20[] Matthew 1:20

[] Matthew 1:20 George F Somsel gfsomsel at yahoo.com
Sun Nov 28 19:24:06 EST 2010

[] Matthew 1:20 [] Matthew 1:20 I think we have some confusion here.  The word ἁγίου is an adjective.  One does not normally expect an adjective to modify a verb — not even a copulative verb (perhaps a couple of exceptions in neut).  Matthew 1:20 (NA27) 20ταῦτα δὲ αὐτοῦ ἐνθυμηθέντος ἰδοὺ ἄγγελος κυρίου κατʼ ὄναρ ἐφάνη αὐτῷ λέγων· Ἰωσὴφ υἱὸς Δαυίδ, μὴ φοβηθῇς παραλαβεῖν Μαρίαν τὴν γυναῖκά σου· τὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ γεννηθὲν ἐκ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἁγίου.  It seems to me that this is a simple case of a pred adj.  I will demonstrate my understanding by putting dashes between words which function as a conceptual unit. “The-begotten-in-her-by-the-Spirit is holy.” georgegfsomsel … search for truth, hear truth, learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, defend the truth till death.- Jan Hus_________ ________________________________From: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>To: Mark Lightman <lightmanmark at yahoo.com>; Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>; Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 5:02:42 PMSubject: Re: [] Matthew 1:20No, because then hAGION is not modifying GENNHQEN. Its then modifying ESTIN.From memory, I had reconstructed the texts wrong in my head.Hypothetically, if GENNHQEN, PNEUMATOS, and hAGION were all the same case/gender/number in the same structure, hAGION cannot be viewed as modifying GENNHQEN.And next time, I will look directly at the text instead of speaking from memory.Mike________________________________From: Mark Lightman <lightmanmark at yahoo.com>To: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>; Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>; Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 3:54:49 PMSubject: Re: [] Matthew 1:20Fair enough, Mike, but are you saying that if the text DID sayτὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ γεννηθὲν ἐκ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἅγιον (hAGION)in the sense of “the thing born of the Spirit in you is holy,”  that that would not be permissible Greek for some reason?Mark LFWSFOROS MARKOS________________________________From: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>To: Mark Lightman <lightmanmark at yahoo.com>; Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>; Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 4:46:01 PMSubject: Re: [] Matthew 1:20You are indeed correct. I didn’t actually look at the verse. My own comments were from memory from studying discontinuous constituents.Mike________________________________From: Mark Lightman <lightmanmark at yahoo.com>To: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>; Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>; Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 3:22:03 PMSubject: Re: [] Matthew  1:20ταῦτα δὲ αὐτοῦ ἐνθυμηθέντος ἰδοὺ ἄγγελος κυρίου κατ’ ὄναρ ἐφάνη αὐτῷ λέγων, Ἰωσὴφ υἱὸς Δαυίδ, μὴ φοβηθῇς παραλαβεῖν Μαρίαν τὴν γυναῖκά σου, τὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ γεννηθὲν ἐκ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἁγίου: TO GAR EN AUTHi GENNHQEN EK PNEUMATOW ESTIN hAGIOU.Unless I am missing something, the form in the verse is hAGIOU, not hAGION, and for that reason must go with the genitive PNEUMATOS and not the nominative TO GENNHQEN.I don’t see any variants with hAGION. Mark LFWSFOROS MARKOS________________________________From: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>To: Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>; Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 3:37:55 PMSubject: Re: [] Matthew 1:20hAGION cannot modify GENNHQEN because of the intervening preposition. While discontinuous phrases are allow in Greek, there are strict limits on the form they take. In the case of prepositional phrases, you are only going to find two patterns:Preposition -> Adjective -> X -> NounPreposition -> Noun -> X -> Adjective Discontinuous constituency like this arises with the author/speaker viewed the first part of the discontinuity as particularly important or relevant to the message.The only occasions where a word that is functionally in a prepositional phrase can appear before the preposition are in Poetry, though even then, I can only say that for Classical poetry. I haven’t looked at Hellenistic poetry. Also, in Homeric Greek, there is significantly more freedom in the placement of prepositions, but such phenomena are not relevant to what we’re seeing here.If you’re  willing to push through some rather technical discussion, I’ve done some writing on the subject of discontinuous phrases in Greek, specifically looking at the Hellenistic period:http://evepheso.wordpress.com/studies-in-greek-syntax/Mike Aubreyhttp://evepheso.wordpress.com________________________________From: Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>To: Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 2:18:49 PMSubject: [] Matthew  1:20Does hAGION refer to the Spirit OR the begotten, since both are neuter singular?If  it refers to the Spirit, please explain why and are there other example by Matthewwhere hAGION and pneumatos are separated by a verb (ex. estin). Thanks.Dony K. Donev— 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/      — home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/

[] Matthew 1:20[] Matthew 1:20

[] Matthew 1:20 Michael Aubrey mga318 at yahoo.com
Sun Nov 28 19:28:56 EST 2010

[] Matthew 1:20 [] Matthew 1:20 If an adjective is functioning a the clause level and not the phrase level as it is here, then in as much as the verb is the head of the clause, the adjective is dependent on the verb.Mike________________________________From: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>To: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>; Mark Lightman <lightmanmark at yahoo.com>; Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>; Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 4:24:06 PMSubject: Re: [] Matthew 1:20I think we have some confusion here. The word ἁγίου is an adjective. One does not normally expect an adjective to modify a verb — not even a copulative verb (perhaps a couple of exceptions in neut). Matthew 1:20 (NA27) 20ταῦτα δὲ αὐτοῦ ἐνθυμηθέντος ἰδοὺ ἄγγελος κυρίου κατʼ ὄναρ ἐφάνη αὐτῷ λέγων· Ἰωσὴφ υἱὸς Δαυίδ, μὴ φοβηθῇς παραλαβεῖν Μαρίαν τὴν γυναῖκά σου· τὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ γεννηθὲν ἐκ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἁγίου. It seems to me that this is a simple case of a pred adj. I will demonstrate my understanding by putting dashes between words which function as a conceptual unit. “The-begotten-in-her-by-the-Spirit is holy.” georgegfsomsel … search for truth, hear truth, learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, defend the truth till death.- Jan Hus_________ ________________________________ From: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>To: Mark Lightman <lightmanmark at yahoo.com>; Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>; Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 5:02:42 PMSubject: Re: [] Matthew 1:20No, because then hAGION is not modifying GENNHQEN. Its then modifying ESTIN.From memory, I had reconstructed the texts wrong in my head.Hypothetically, if GENNHQEN, PNEUMATOS, and hAGION were all the same case/gender/number in the same structure, hAGION cannot be viewed as modifying GENNHQEN.And next time, I will look directly at the text instead of speaking from memory.Mike________________________________From: Mark Lightman <lightmanmark at yahoo.com>To: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>; Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>; Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 3:54:49 PMSubject: Re: [] Matthew 1:20Fair enough, Mike, but are you saying that if the text DID sayτὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ γεννηθὲν ἐκ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἅγιον (hAGION)in the sense of “the thing born of the Spirit in you is holy,” that that would not be permissible Greek for some reason?Mark LFWSFOROS MARKOS________________________________From: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>To: Mark Lightman <lightmanmark at yahoo.com>; Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>; Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 4:46:01 PMSubject: Re: [] Matthew 1:20You are indeed correct. I didn’t actually look at the verse. My own comments were from memory from studying discontinuous constituents.Mike________________________________From: Mark Lightman <lightmanmark at yahoo.com>To: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>; Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>; Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 3:22:03 PMSubject: Re: [] Matthew 1:20ταῦτα δὲ αὐτοῦ ἐνθυμηθέντος ἰδοὺ ἄγγελος κυρίου κατ’ ὄναρ ἐφάνη αὐτῷ λέγων, Ἰωσὴφ υἱὸς Δαυίδ, μὴ φοβηθῇς παραλαβεῖν Μαρίαν τὴν γυναῖκά σου, τὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ γεννηθὲν ἐκ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἁγίου: TO GAR EN AUTHi GENNHQEN EK PNEUMATOW ESTIN hAGIOU.Unless I am missing something, the form in the verse is hAGIOU, not hAGION, and for that reason must go with the genitive PNEUMATOS and not the nominative TO GENNHQEN.I don’t see any variants with hAGION. Mark LFWSFOROS MARKOS________________________________From: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>To: Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>; Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 3:37:55 PMSubject: Re: [] Matthew 1:20hAGION cannot modify GENNHQEN because of the intervening preposition. While discontinuous phrases are allow in Greek, there are strict limits on the form they take. In the case of prepositional phrases, you are only going to find two patterns:Preposition -> Adjective -> X -> NounPreposition -> Noun -> X -> Adjective Discontinuous constituency like this arises with the author/speaker viewed the first part of the discontinuity as particularly important or relevant to the message.The only occasions where a word that is functionally in a prepositional phrase can appear before the preposition are in Poetry, though even then, I can only say that for Classical poetry. I haven’t looked at Hellenistic poetry. Also, in Homeric Greek, there is significantly more freedom in the placement of prepositions, but such phenomena are not relevant to what we’re seeing here.If you’re willing to push through some rather technical discussion, I’ve done some writing on the subject of discontinuous phrases in Greek, specifically looking at the Hellenistic period:http://evepheso.wordpress.com/studies-in-greek-syntax/Mike Aubreyhttp://evepheso.wordpress.com________________________________From: Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>To: Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 2:18:49 PMSubject: [] Matthew 1:20Does hAGION refer to the Spirit OR the begotten, since both are neuter singular?If it refers to the Spirit, please explain why and are there other example by Matthewwhere hAGION and pneumatos are separated by a verb (ex. estin). Thanks.Dony K. Donev— 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/ — home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/

[] Matthew 1:20[] Matthew 1:20

[] Matthew 1:20 yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net
Sun Nov 28 19:39:46 EST 2010

[] Matthew 1:20 [] Matthew 1:20 No, if you keep the word order and don’t add it the information in the case to the English pony translation, it does not illustrate your point. hHAGIOU is not a simple predicate adjective, rather, it is part of the adverbial construction EK PNEUMATOS … hAGIOU. It is an “adjective” and it is in the predicate, but not properly a “predicate adjective.” The placement the verb ESTIN may serve to emphasize the element hAGIOU, because it breaks up the normal word order. The verb is not necessary.Yancy Smith, PhDyancywsmith at sbcglobal.netY.W.Smith at tcu.eduyancy at wbtc.com5636 Wedgworth RoadFort Worth, TX 76133817-361-7565On Nov 28, 2010, at 6:24 PM, George F Somsel wrote:> I think we have some confusion here. The word ἁγίου is an adjective. One > does not normally expect an adjective to modify a verb — not even a copulative > verb (perhaps a couple of exceptions in neut). > > > > Matthew 1:20 (NA27) > 20ταῦτα δὲ αὐτοῦ ἐνθυμηθέντος ἰδοὺ ἄγγελος κυρίου κατʼ ὄναρ ἐφάνη αὐτῷ λέγων· > Ἰωσὴφ υἱὸς Δαυίδ, μὴ φοβηθῇς παραλαβεῖν Μαρίαν τὴν γυναῖκά σου· τὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ > γεννηθὲν ἐκ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἁγίου. > > > It seems to me that this is a simple case of a pred adj. I will demonstrate my > understanding by putting dashes between words which function as a conceptual > unit.> > “The-begotten-in-her-by-the-Spirit is holy.”> > george> gfsomsel > > > … search for truth, hear truth, > learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, > defend the truth till death.> > > – Jan Hus> _________ > > > > > ________________________________> From: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>> To: Mark Lightman <lightmanmark at yahoo.com>; Dony K. Donev > <dony at cupandcross.com>; Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>> Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 5:02:42 PM> Subject: Re: [] Matthew 1:20> > No, because then hAGION is not modifying GENNHQEN. Its then modifying ESTIN.> > From memory, I had reconstructed the texts wrong in my head.> > Hypothetically, if GENNHQEN, PNEUMATOS, and hAGION were all the same > case/gender/number in the same structure, hAGION cannot be viewed as modifying > GENNHQEN.> > And next time, I will look directly at the text instead of speaking from memory.> > Mike> > > > > ________________________________> From: Mark Lightman <lightmanmark at yahoo.com>> To: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>; Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>; > Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>> Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 3:54:49 PM> Subject: Re: [] Matthew 1:20> > > Fair enough, Mike, but are you saying that if the text DID say> > τὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ γεννηθὲν ἐκ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἅγιον (hAGION)> > in the sense of “the thing born of the Spirit in you is holy,” that that would > not be permissible Greek for some reason?> > > > > > Mark L> > > > FWSFOROS MARKOS> > > > > ________________________________> From: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>> To: Mark Lightman <lightmanmark at yahoo.com>; Dony K. Donev > <dony at cupandcross.com>; Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>> Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 4:46:01 PM> Subject: Re: [] Matthew 1:20> > > You are indeed correct. I didn’t actually look at the verse. My own comments > were from memory from studying discontinuous constituents.> > Mike> > > > > ________________________________> From: Mark Lightman <lightmanmark at yahoo.com>> To: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>; Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>; > Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>> Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 3:22:03 PM> Subject: Re: [] Matthew 1:20> > > ταῦτα δὲ αὐτοῦ ἐνθυμηθέντος ἰδοὺ ἄγγελος κυρίου κατ’ ὄναρ ἐφάνη αὐτῷ λέγων, > Ἰωσὴφ υἱὸς Δαυίδ, μὴ φοβηθῇς παραλαβεῖν Μαρίαν τὴν γυναῖκά σου, τὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ > γεννηθὲν ἐκ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἁγίου: > > > TO GAR EN AUTHi GENNHQEN EK PNEUMATOW ESTIN hAGIOU.> > Unless I am missing something, the form in the verse is hAGIOU, not hAGION, and > for that reason must go with the genitive PNEUMATOS and not the nominative TO > GENNHQEN.> > I don’t see any variants with hAGION. > > > > > Mark L> > > > FWSFOROS MARKOS> > > > > ________________________________> From: Michael Aubrey <mga318 at yahoo.com>> To: Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>; Biblical Greek’ > < at lists.ibiblio.org>> Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 3:37:55 PM> Subject: Re: [] Matthew 1:20> > hAGION cannot modify GENNHQEN because of the intervening preposition. While > discontinuous phrases are allow in Greek, there are strict limits on the form > they take. In the case of prepositional phrases, you are only going to find two > patterns:> > Preposition -> Adjective -> X -> Noun> Preposition -> Noun -> X -> Adjective > > Discontinuous constituency like this arises with the author/speaker viewed the > first part of the discontinuity as particularly important or relevant to the > message.> > The only occasions where a word that is functionally in a prepositional phrase > can appear before the preposition are in Poetry, though even then, I can only > say that for Classical poetry. I haven’t looked at Hellenistic poetry. Also, in > Homeric Greek, there is significantly more freedom in the placement of > prepositions, but such phenomena are not relevant to what we’re seeing here.> > If you’re willing to push through some rather technical discussion, I’ve done > some writing on the subject of discontinuous phrases in Greek, specifically > looking at the Hellenistic period:> > http://evepheso.wordpress.com/studies-in-greek-syntax/> > Mike Aubrey> http://evepheso.wordpress.com> > > ________________________________> From: Dony K. Donev <dony at cupandcross.com>> To: Biblical Greek’ < at lists.ibiblio.org>> Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 2:18:49 PM> Subject: [] Matthew 1:20> > Does hAGION refer to the Spirit OR the begotten, since both are neuter singular?> If it refers to the Spirit, please explain why and are there other example by > Matthew> where hAGION and pneumatos are separated by a verb (ex. estin). Thanks.> > Dony K. Donev> —> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/> > > > > —> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/> > > > —> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/> > > > > —> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/

[] Matthew 1:20[] Matthew 1:20

[bible passage=”Matthew 1:20″]

Does hAGION refer to the Spirit OR the begotten, since both are neuter singular? If it refers to the Spirit, please explain why and are there other example by Matthew where hAGION and pneumatos are separated by a verb (ex. estin). Thanks.

Dony K. Donev — home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list @lists.ibiblio.org http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/