[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS dstorm at sorenkierkegaard.org dstorm at sorenkierkegaard.org
Sat May 22 14:07:38 EDT 2004
[] New Koine Greek Study Group [] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS Romans 11.26 says, APOSTREYEI ASEBEIAS APO IAKWB.I have checked all NT references to APOSTREFW, and see that it takes an accusative d.o. Am I correct in understanding ASEBEIAS to be acc. plural? And if so, is the sense acts of godlessless?However, sometimes the preposition can follow the noun. Is there any chance that ASEBEIAS is gen. sg. and that the verse means “he will turn Jacob from ungodliness”?D. Anthony StormRedmond, WAdstorm at sorenkierkegaard.org
[] New Koine Greek Study Group[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS
[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS A. Philip Brown II pbrown at GBS.EDU
Sat May 22 14:20:39 EDT 2004
[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS [] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS I can think of no instance in the NT where an object of a prepositionprecedes the preposition. If there are such cases, I would like to knowabout them.I know places where a genitive pronoun will precede the noun it modifies,rather than the normal syntact of substantive followed by genitive.A quick scan through BDAG’s entry for APO identified no instances in whichAPO is preceded by its object.Further, since this is a quote from the LXX and the Hebrew of Isa. 59:20unequivocally has ‘transgression’ as the direct object of the verb, I wouldthink taking ASEBEIAS as the object of APO is impossible.Philip Brown> —–Original Message—–> From: -bounces at lists.ibiblio.org> [mailto:-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org]On Behalf Of> dstorm at sorenkierkegaard.org> Sent: Saturday, May 22, 2004 2:08 PM> To: at lists.ibiblio.org> Subject: [] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS> > > Romans 11.26 says, APOSTREYEI ASEBEIAS APO IAKWB.> > I have checked all NT references to APOSTREFW, and see that it takes an> accusative d.o. Am I correct in understanding ASEBEIAS to be acc.> plural? And> if so, is the sense acts of godlessless?> > However, sometimes the preposition can follow the noun. Is there> any chance> that ASEBEIAS is gen. sg. and that the verse means “he will turn> Jacob from> ungodliness”?> > D. Anthony Storm> Redmond, WA> dstorm at sorenkierkegaard.org> > > > —> home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/
[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS
[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Sat May 22 17:04:52 EDT 2004
[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS [] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS At 2:20 PM -0400 5/22/04, A. Philip Brown II wrote:>I can think of no instance in the NT where an object of a preposition>precedes the preposition. If there are such cases, I would like to know>about them.> >I know places where a genitive pronoun will precede the noun it modifies,>rather than the normal syntact of substantive followed by genitive.In Classical Attic hENEKA “for the sake of” regularly follows a genitivecase form; in the GNT it’s more commonly hENEKEN and generally the genitivecase follows hENEKA, but Luke has it in Acts 19:32 … OUK HiDEISAN TINOShENEKA SUNELHLUQEISAN; I suppose one might argue that TINOS hENEKA is aphrase simply equivalent to DIA TI, “why?”, but I’d guess that the usage inActs is a survival or deliberate usage of literary Greek.In Classical Attic poetry it’s common for a disyllabic preposition toappear at the end of a line, in which case the accent recedes to the penultfrom its normal position on the ultima.– 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/
[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS
[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS A. Philip Brown II pbrown at GBS.EDU
Sat May 22 19:34:20 EDT 2004
[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS [] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS Thanks, Carl. Is hENEKA the only preposition you know of that does this?As you mentioned, BDAG suggests TINOS hENEKA is an idiom for ‘why?’Philip Brown
[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS
[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS Maurice A. O’Sullivan mauros at iol.ie
Sat May 22 20:52:43 EDT 2004
[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS [] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS At 19:20 22/05/2004, A. Philip Brown II wrote:>Further, since this is a quote from the LXX and the Hebrew of Isa. 59:20Not quite the same — Fitzmyer [ Anchor Bible 33 ] points out that: >> Paul quotes Is. 59:20-21a in a form closer to the LXX than to the MT<<and that >> Paul changes the prep. hENEKEN ” for the sake of ” to EK “from” perhaps under the influence of Ps.13(14):7 “TIS DWSEI EK SION”Maurice A. O’Sullivan [ Bray, Ireland ]mauros at iol.ie
[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS
[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS A. Philip Brown II pbrown at GBS.EDU
Sat May 22 21:11:41 EDT 2004
[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS [] study aids wanted Thanks for the correction, Maurice.I should have been more technically precise and said this is a quote fromthe OT, either Paul quotes the LXX or translates the Hebrew text himself.However, it strikes me as odd that the singular pesha’ is translated by theLXX with a plural ASEBEIAS, which is also mirrored in Rom. 11:26. Thishappens in the LXX only here in Isa. 59:20 and 2/3x in Micah (3:8, 6:7?,7:18). Interestingly enough, there are two other times in Micah where thesingular pesha’ is translated with a singular asebeian (1:5 2x). Makes mewonder if the LXX translator considered pesha’ a collective noun, withsingularity/plurality determined by context.Philip Brown> —–Original Message—–> From: -bounces at lists.ibiblio.org> [mailto:-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org]On Behalf Of Maurice A.> O’Sullivan> Sent: Saturday, May 22, 2004 8:53 PM> To: A. Philip Brown II> Cc: at lists.ibiblio.org> Subject: RE: [] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS> > > At 19:20 22/05/2004, A. Philip Brown II wrote:> > >Further, since this is a quote from the LXX and the Hebrew of Isa. 59:20> > Not quite the same — Fitzmyer [ Anchor Bible 33 ] points out that:> >> Paul quotes Is. 59:20-21a in a form closer to the LXX than to the MT<<> and that> >> Paul changes the prep. hENEKEN ” for the sake of ” to EK> “from” perhaps> under the influence of Ps.13(14):7 “TIS DWSEI EK SION”> > > Maurice A. O’Sullivan [ Bray, Ireland ]> mauros at iol.ie> > > —> home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/
[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS[] study aids wanted
[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Sun May 23 10:50:04 EDT 2004
[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS [] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS At 7:34 PM -0400 5/22/04, A. Philip Brown II wrote:>Thanks, Carl.> >Is hENEKA the only preposition you know of that does this?> >As you mentioned, BDAG suggests TINOS hENEKA is an idiom for ‘why?’Actually, it’s simply glossed as “why”–it’s not indicated as an idiom assuch. I know of no other “postpositions” in the GNT; I mentioned this oneonly to inject a ‘diachronic; note into what seemed to me too absolute a’synchronic’ assertion. It’s sometimes argued that the elements in suchexpressions as KAQ’ hOLOU and KATA MEROS in the sense of “generally” and”partially” respectively are not thought of as distinct elements; I knowthat ultimately such items do fuse together, but I submit that people whouse “on the whole” for “generally” in English are (generally) well enoughaware of what each word in the phrase “on-the-whole’ means. I don’t thinkthis is really worth arguing about, since obviously reasonable argumentscan be advanced on both sides of the issue.– 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/
[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS
[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS A. Philip Brown II pbrown at GBS.EDU
Mon May 24 16:18:27 EDT 2004
[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS [] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS Carl wrote: I mentioned this one only to inject a ‘diachronic; note into what seemed tome too absolute a ‘synchronic’ assertion.Thanks, Carl,I appreciate & agree with your insistence that synchronic study must not beconducted to the exclusion of the diachronic. Thanks for the reminder.Also thanks to Jon Boyd for bringing CARIN to my attention.Philip Brown
[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS[] Romans 11.26: ASEBEIAS