Matthew 5:22

Dear Fellow GreekersIn studying Eschatology I have stumbled on whatappears to be a translating inquiry. Why is GEhENNAN(Mt. 5: 22, 28 + others) translated as ‘hell'(NRSV). To my thinking GEhENNAN is the name of aplace and therefore its title is a proper noun thesame as EFESOS is to Ephesus, why change it?On the other hand, if we are to change it, then asequally puzzling is hADES being translated as hades inkeeping with the proper noun (however the NIV hashades, depths, hell & grave). It seems to me that I’mmissing a piece of the puzzle. Please helpIf a response to these questions necessitatesclarification theologically, please feel free torespond off list.Yours in ChristLloyd DawsonTownsville, Aust.http://messenger.yahoo.com.au – Yahoo! Messenger- A great way to communicate long-distance for FREE!

 

Hell Ed Siefert sieferted at hotmail.com
Tue Dec 10 17:31:59 EST 2002

 

Future Passive Indicatives in NT (Correction) Future Passive Indicatives in NT (Correction) Wow, Waco:I just read your message and felt compelled to comment on the subjectwords. You are correct that Gehenna is the valley of fire south of OldJerusalem in which trash and the bodies of the crufified were thrown acouple of millennia ago. The word itself is Hebrew.Hades, according to Greek mythology, is the “unseen world,” the abode ofthe dead in which life continues on several different planes. One of thoseplanes is Tartarus, the lowest level of Hades where souls are kept ineternal punishment for their sins in this worldly life: home to somespiritually despicable people, I guess.Use of these words is the NT is highly idomatic. A western view of Hadeslead to confusion about Hell itself in early scriptural translations;perhaps was due to an improper emphasis on Tartarus.Ed

Ge’enna & ‘ades Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Mon May 13 07:09:03 EDT 2002

 

LOGIKOS2 LOGIKOS 2 At 11:23 PM +1000 5/12/02, Lloyd Dawson wrote:>Dear Fellow Greekers> >In studying Eschatology I have stumbled on what>appears to be a translating inquiry. Why is GEhENNAN>(Mt. 5: 22, 28 + others) translated as ‘hell’>(NRSV). To my thinking GEhENNAN is the name of a>place and therefore its title is a proper noun the>same as EFESOS is to Ephesus, why change it?Well, yes. We can find Ephesus on the map; we are told that Gehenna was thechasm to the south of the temple mount where garbage was burned, and Isuppose some might think that’s exactly what the Biblical texts arereferring to rather than assume that the designation is being usedmetaphorically for a spiritual place outside of space and time, a place notto be located on a map.>On the other hand, if we are to change it, then as>equally puzzling is hADES being translated as hades in>keeping with the proper noun (however the NIV has>hades, depths, hell & grave). It seems to me that I’m>missing a piece of the puzzle. Please helphADHS involves similar problems, but already in Greek and Roman antiquityits conceptualization and wide-ranging literary representations as therealm of the dead (originally a genitive hAiDOU, the “house of Hades”,Hades being the name of the brother of Zeus and Poseidon to whom theunderworld had been allotted as a realm) made it a “fuzzy” sort ofdesignation of death, the place of the dead, the place of punishment ANDreward rather than what in the western tradition is meant by “hell.” So Ithink hADHS in the GNT cannot be pinned down to any single notion in allits GNT usages; here are the citations in brief:hADHS hades, hell (10)Matt. 11:23 hUYWQHSH? hEWS hAiDOU KATABHSHiMatt. 16:18 EKKLHSIAN KAI PULAI hAiDOU OU KATISCUSOUSIN AUTHSLuke 10:15 hEWS OURANOU hUYWQHSH? hEWS hAiDOU KATABHSHiLuke 16:23 KAI EN TWi hAiDHi EPARAS TOUS OFQALMOUSActs 2:27 YUCHN MOU EIS hAiDHN OUDE DWSEIS TON …Acts 2:31 OUTE EGKATELEIFQH EIS hAiDHN OUTE hH SARX …Rev. 1:18 TAS KLEIS TOU QANATOU KAI TOU hAiDOURev. 6:8 QANATOS, KAI hO hAiDHS HKOLOUQEI MET’ AUTOURev. 20:13 QANATOS KAI hO hAiDHS EDWKAN TOUS NEKROUSRev. 20:14 QANATOS KAI hO hAiDHS EBLHQHSAN EIS THN …>If a response to these questions necessitates>clarification theologically, please feel free to>respond off list.I would hope it doesn’t, but there’s always the possibility of somebody’sox being gored when what the Biblical text may possibly mean LITERALLY whatmany or most readers will understand in a FIGURATIVE sense.– Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)Most months:: 1647 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu OR cwconrad at ioa.comWWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/

 

LOGIKOS2LOGIKOS 2

Ge’enna & ‘ades Mark Wilson emory2oo2 at hotmail.com
Mon May 13 14:22:50 EDT 2002

 

LOGIKOS 2 Fwd: VB: Virus Just a brief observation here:>hADHS hades, hell (10)>Matt. 11:23 hUYWQHSH? hEWS hAiDOU KATABHSHi>Matt. 16:18 EKKLHSIAN KAI PULAI hAiDOU OU KATISCUSOUSIN AUTHS>Luke 10:15 hEWS OURANOU hUYWQHSH? hEWS hAiDOU KATABHSHi>Luke 16:23 KAI EN TWi hAiDHi EPARAS TOUS OFQALMOUS>Acts 2:27 YUCHN MOU EIS hAiDHN OUDE DWSEIS TON …>Acts 2:31 OUTE EGKATELEIFQH EIS hAiDHN OUTE hH SARX …>Rev. 1:18 TAS KLEIS TOU QANATOU KAI TOU hAiDOU>Rev. 6:8 QANATOS, KAI hO hAiDHS HKOLOUQEI MET’ AUTOU>Rev. 20:13 QANATOS KAI hO hAiDHS EDWKAN TOUS NEKROUS>Rev. 20:14 QANATOS KAI hO hAiDHS EBLHQHSAN EIS THN …> You will note that all these references are related to the OT.In the OT, you had Sheol, which corresponds to hADES in the NT.Sheol was comprised of all the dead, both righteous and unrighteous,but after Christ lead captivity away, Sheol no longer seems to havea compartment for the righteous. That is, in the OT, the redeemedwent to Abraham’s bosom; in the NT, the redeemed go immediatelyinto the presence of the Lord.In the OT, the redeemed expected to depart to Abraham’s bosom,where they awaited the resurrection at the final day.The parable of the rich man and Lazarus shows these twocompartments. And some argue that the wicked demonsthat are in Tartarus were yet in another compartmentwithin the Sheol complex.More thoughts,Mark Wilson_________________________________________________________________Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com

 

LOGIKOS 2Fwd: VB: Virus

Ge’enna & ‘ades Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Mon May 13 19:40:50 EDT 2002

 

Fwd: VB: Virus Ge’enna & ‘ades At 6:22 PM +0000 5/13/02, Mark Wilson wrote:>Just a brief observation here:> >>hADHS hades, hell (10)>>Matt. 11:23 hUYWQHSH? hEWS hAiDOU KATABHSHi>>Matt. 16:18 EKKLHSIAN KAI PULAI hAiDOU OU KATISCUSOUSIN AUTHS>>Luke 10:15 hEWS OURANOU hUYWQHSH? hEWS hAiDOU KATABHSHi>>Luke 16:23 KAI EN TWi hAiDHi EPARAS TOUS OFQALMOUS>>Acts 2:27 YUCHN MOU EIS hAiDHN OUDE DWSEIS TON …>>Acts 2:31 OUTE EGKATELEIFQH EIS hAiDHN OUTE hH SARX …>>Rev. 1:18 TAS KLEIS TOU QANATOU KAI TOU hAiDOU>>Rev. 6:8 QANATOS, KAI hO hAiDHS HKOLOUQEI MET’ AUTOU>>Rev. 20:13 QANATOS KAI hO hAiDHS EDWKAN TOUS NEKROUS>>Rev. 20:14 QANATOS KAI hO hAiDHS EBLHQHSAN EIS THN …>> > > >You will note that all these references are related to the OT.> >In the OT, you had Sheol, which corresponds to hADES in the NT.>Sheol was comprised of all the dead, both righteous and unrighteous,>but after Christ lead captivity away, Sheol no longer seems to have>a compartment for the righteous. That is, in the OT, the redeemed>went to Abraham’s bosom; in the NT, the redeemed go immediately>into the presence of the Lord.> >In the OT, the redeemed expected to depart to Abraham’s bosom,>where they awaited the resurrection at the final day.> >The parable of the rich man and Lazarus shows these two>compartments. And some argue that the wicked demons>that are in Tartarus were yet in another compartment>within the Sheol complex.This isn’t so much wrong as it oversimplifies a considerably more complexpicture For one thing, Tartarus belongs to Greek cultural notions, notHebraic ones, and in some instances hAiDHS seems to be a metaphor fordeath. I would simply suggest that those concerned with this issue checkwhat BDAG and Louw & Nida offer for hAiDHS.– Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)Most months:: 1647 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu OR cwconrad at ioa.comWWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/

 

Fwd: VB: VirusGe’enna & ‘ades

Ge’enna & ‘ades jhonhar at juno.com jhonhar at juno.com
Mon May 13 20:24:31 EDT 2002

 

Ge’enna & ‘ades Ge’enna & ‘ades Here is a comparison I did on the NIV and the KJV. Comparison was madeusing Strongs Cond. and matching the NIV to KJV.John Carrasjhonhar at juno.comOn Mon, 13 May 2002 19:40:50 -0400 “Carl W. Conrad”<cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu> writes:> At 6:22 PM +0000 5/13/02, Mark Wilson wrote:> >Just a brief observation here:> >> >>hADHS hades, hell (10)> >> Matt. 11:23 hUYWQHSH? hEWS hAiDOU KATABHSHi> >> Matt. 16:18 EKKLHSIAN KAI PULAI hAiDOU OU KATISCUSOUSIN > AUTHS> >> Luke 10:15 hEWS OURANOU hUYWQHSH? hEWS hAiDOU KATABHSHi> >> Luke 16:23 KAI EN TWi hAiDHi EPARAS TOUS OFQALMOUS> >> Acts 2:27 YUCHN MOU EIS hAiDHN OUDE DWSEIS TON …> >> Acts 2:31 OUTE EGKATELEIFQH EIS hAiDHN OUTE hH SARX …> >> Rev. 1:18 TAS KLEIS TOU QANATOU KAI TOU hAiDOU> >> Rev. 6:8 QANATOS, KAI hO hAiDHS HKOLOUQEI MET’ AUTOU> >> Rev. 20:13 QANATOS KAI hO hAiDHS EDWKAN TOUS NEKROUS> >> Rev. 20:14 QANATOS KAI hO hAiDHS EBLHQHSAN EIS THN …> >>> >> >> >You will note that all these references are related to the OT.> >> >In the OT, you had Sheol, which corresponds to hADES in the NT.> >Sheol was comprised of all the dead, both righteous and > unrighteous,> >but after Christ lead captivity away, Sheol no longer seems to > have> >a compartment for the righteous. That is, in the OT, the redeemed> >went to Abraham’s bosom; in the NT, the redeemed go immediately> >into the presence of the Lord.> >> >In the OT, the redeemed expected to depart to Abraham’s bosom,> >where they awaited the resurrection at the final day.> >> >The parable of the rich man and Lazarus shows these two> >compartments. And some argue that the wicked demons> >that are in Tartarus were yet in another compartment> >within the Sheol complex.> > This isn’t so much wrong as it oversimplifies a considerably more > complex> picture For one thing, Tartarus belongs to Greek cultural notions, > not> Hebraic ones, and in some instances hAiDHS seems to be a metaphor > for> death. I would simply suggest that those concerned with this issue > check> what BDAG and Louw & Nida offer for hAiDHS.> – > > Carl W. Conrad> Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)> Most months:: 1647 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) > 675-4243> cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu OR cwconrad at ioa.com> WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/> > —> home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/> You are currently subscribed to as: [jhonhar at juno.com]> To unsubscribe, forward this message to > $subst(‘Email.Unsub’)> To subscribe, send a message to > subscribe- at franklin.oit.unc.edu> > > ————– next part ————–A non-text attachment was scrubbed…Name: not availableType: application/mswordSize: 30720 bytesDesc: not availableUrl : http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail//attachments/20020513/4d3ca5b0/attachment.dot

 

Ge’enna & ‘adesGe’enna & ‘ades

Ge’enna & ‘ades jhonhar at juno.com jhonhar at juno.com
Mon May 13 21:18:59 EDT 2002

 

Ge’enna & ‘ades Ge’enna & ‘ades Dear –> Here is a comparison as an attachment I did on the NIV and the KJV.Comparison was > made> using Strongs Cond. and matching the NIV to KJV.> John Carras> jhonhar at juno.com> > On Mon, 13 May 2002 19:40:50 -0400 “Carl W. Conrad”> <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu> writes:> > At 6:22 PM +0000 5/13/02, Mark Wilson wrote:> > >Just a brief observation here:> > >> > >>hADHS hades, hell (10)> > >> Matt. 11:23 hUYWQHSH? hEWS hAiDOU KATABHSHi> > >> Matt. 16:18 EKKLHSIAN KAI PULAI hAiDOU OU > KATISCUSOUSIN > > AUTHS> > >> Luke 10:15 hEWS OURANOU hUYWQHSH? hEWS hAiDOU > KATABHSHi> > >> Luke 16:23 KAI EN TWi hAiDHi EPARAS TOUS OFQALMOUS> > >> Acts 2:27 YUCHN MOU EIS hAiDHN OUDE DWSEIS TON …> > >> Acts 2:31 OUTE EGKATELEIFQH EIS hAiDHN OUTE hH SARX > …> > >> Rev. 1:18 TAS KLEIS TOU QANATOU KAI TOU hAiDOU> > >> Rev. 6:8 QANATOS, KAI hO hAiDHS HKOLOUQEI MET’ AUTOU> > >> Rev. 20:13 QANATOS KAI hO hAiDHS EDWKAN TOUS NEKROUS> > >> Rev. 20:14 QANATOS KAI hO hAiDHS EBLHQHSAN EIS THN > …> > >>> > >> > >> > >You will note that all these references are related to the OT.> > >> > >In the OT, you had Sheol, which corresponds to hADES in the NT.> > >Sheol was comprised of all the dead, both righteous and > > unrighteous,> > >but after Christ lead captivity away, Sheol no longer seems to > > have> > >a compartment for the righteous. That is, in the OT, the > redeemed> > >went to Abraham’s bosom; in the NT, the redeemed go immediately> > >into the presence of the Lord.> > >> > >In the OT, the redeemed expected to depart to Abraham’s bosom,> > >where they awaited the resurrection at the final day.> > >> > >The parable of the rich man and Lazarus shows these two> > >compartments. And some argue that the wicked demons> > >that are in Tartarus were yet in another compartment> > >within the Sheol complex.> > > > This isn’t so much wrong as it oversimplifies a considerably more > > > complex> > picture For one thing, Tartarus belongs to Greek cultural notions, > > > not> > Hebraic ones, and in some instances hAiDHS seems to be a metaphor > > > for> > death. I would simply suggest that those concerned with this issue > > > check> > what BDAG and Louw & Nida offer for hAiDHS.> > – > > > > Carl W. Conrad> > Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)> > Most months:: 1647 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) > > 675-4243> > cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu OR cwconrad at ioa.com> > WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/> > > > —> > home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/> > You are currently subscribed to as: [jhonhar at juno.com]> > To unsubscribe, forward this message to > > $subst(‘Email.Unsub’)> > To subscribe, send a message to > > subscribe- at franklin.oit.unc.edu> > > > > >

 

Matt.5:22/ DE Brian Swedburg brian at discoveryhills.org
Wed Sep 22 18:31:17 EDT 1999

 

Greek Inscriptions and Orthography Matt. 5:22 / DE Greetings! I’ve enjoyed watching the friendly fray for a few weeks now,so I thought I would piggyback on the present discussion of DE.In Matt 5:22, EGW DE LEGW, is often translated ‘but ‘(NIV, NKJV, NAS,RSV), in a manner implying it is used adversatively. Recent b-Greekdiscussion and BAGD agree that DE can connect and contrast. (Basicassumption…)Given Jesus’ strong statement concerning his intent PLHRWSAI the law inMt 5:17, I am inclined to see this DE following an OT quote asconnective or ascensive.What do you think? Am I missing something here?

 

Greek Inscriptions and OrthographyMatt. 5:22 / DE

Matt.5:22/ DE Steve Puluka spuluka at hotmail.com
Wed Sep 22 21:30:31 EDT 1999

 

Old NT MS Old NT MS >From: Brian Swedburg <brian at discoveryhills.org>>Mt 5:17, I am inclined to see this DE following an OT quote as>connective or ascensive.> Thayer classifies this verse as “…opposes persons to persons or things previously mentioned or thought of,**either with strong emphasis**Matt 5:22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44 ,6:6, 8:12, 8:20Mark 8:29Luke 7:29, 9:581 Cor 1:23, 2:152 Cor 10:13**or with slight discrimination**Mark 1:45, 3:4, 5:34, 6:37, 7:6, 8:28Matt 2:5, 13:29, 37, 52Luke 4:40, 43, 5:16, 6:8, 8:10, 54, 15:29Thayer finds no less than TEN distinctive uses of DE. Quite a versitile word for the weakest of connections…..Steve PulukaAdult Education InstructorByzantine Catholic Archeparchy of Pittsburgh______________________________________________________Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

 

Old NT MSOld NT MS