Textual and Grammatical Considerations in Matthew 6:12: The Verb ἀφίημι body { font-family: ‘Times New Roman’, serif; line-height: 1.6; margin: 2em; max-width: 900px; } h2, h3 { color: #333; margin-top: 1.5em; margin-bottom: 0.8em; } p { margin-bottom: 1em; } blockquote { border-left: 3px solid #ccc; margin: 1em 0; padding-left: 1em; color: #555; font-style: italic; }…
An Exegetical Study of Matthew 28:1a: The Interpretation of ὀψὲ δὲ σαββάτων This exegetical study of Matthew 28:1 Interpretation is based on a b-greek discussion from Thu Jan 3 01:24:15 2002. The initial inquiry focused on the interpretive challenge presented by the phrase ὀψὲ δὲ σαββάτων in Matthew 28:1a, specifically the interaction between the adverb…
Shirley Rollinson wrote: ↑January 5th, 2018, 8:55 pmIn Matthew 14:25 Jesus walks ἐπὶ τὴν θάλασσαν – but in the next verse the disciples see him walking ἐπὶ τῆς θαλάσσης – could it be that in the first instance the thought is that he is walking ‘toward…
I think that the difference between λανθάνω and ἐπιλανθάνομαι is similar to the difference between ποθέω and ἐπιποθέω
Statistics: Posted by Stephen Hughes — May 17th, 2017, 10:58 am
S Walch wrote: ↑November 23rd, 2017, 6:33 amGood quick rundown there, Stirling. Just a few quick mistakes for you to rectify:Rev 10:1: you’ve not bolded the definite articles before κεφαλὴν/ςRev 11:3: In SBLG you’ve bolded προφητεύσουσιν instead of πε…
Stephen Hughs wrote:
Is there enough in the πρός for us to know who was supplying the food? Is it more accurately: “I’ll be joining you for Pascha with my disciples.” or
“I’ll need a room at your place to hold Pascha with my disciples.”
I think it means “You will prepare the food, serve the tables and clean up afterward.”
Seriously though, I don’t think there is any particular indication though I don’t think Tupperware had yet been invented so I doubt that a pot luck dinner was envisioned. Probably the host would prepare the meal as well as providing the facilities for the dinner, but that isn’t something you’re going to get from the language of the passage
Statistics: Posted by George F Somsel — January 18th, 2014, 12:22 pm
Stephen Hughes wrote:If John was in the thick of it, he was relating a part event that Peter wasn’t an ear-witness to.I fear that taking this position is wrapping an assumption in another assumption. If Matthew and Mark are taking a bird’s eye view, t…
Tony Pope wrote: ↑November 29th, 2017, 5:14 amBut is there anyway a problem in the syntax of τὸ σῶμα τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν κλώμενον? If the argument is simply that such a complex phrase never occurs elsewhere in Paul and therefore it is unPauline, that is sure…
I also got the black faux leather version. I have to say that it is the nicest looking GNT I’ve seen. Even the black box it comes in is really well done. Two big thumbs up. The page layout is excellent and uncluttered. The paragraph break format…
Stephen Hughes wrote: ↑April 20th, 2017, 1:09 amHow difficult is it to make concordance list this into one with verse-either-side or paragraph contexts? Looking them up one by one and finding the element mentioned is tedious.
Here’s one way you could do that: use a text editor to make lists of verses like this:
CODE:
![New Testament • Re: Rev 2:13 ο μαρτυς μου, ο πιστος [μου]?](https://probible.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/New-Testament--Re-Rev-213-ο-μαρτυς-μου-ο-πιστος-μου8.png)
Luke 19:23; John 17:6; John 17:8Now use a site like Biblegateway that allows you to specify more than one verse at the same time. Here is the format for the URL you need:
CODE:
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke 19:23; John 17:6; John 17:8&version=SBLGNTOr you can enter the list of verses into their text box and select SBLGNT, if you prefer. Please start a new thread if you want to discuss the results of that, or put it into your moieties thread.
Statistics: Posted by Jonathan Robie — April 20th, 2017, 6:16 am
Stephen Hughes wrote:Philippians 4:10 wrote:Ἐχάρην δὲ ἐν κυρίῳ μεγάλως, ὅτι ἤδη ποτὲ ἀνεθάλετε τὸ ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ φρονεῖν· ἐφ’ ᾧ καὶ ἐφρονεῖτε, ἠκαιρεῖσθε δέ.What explanation can be put forward to describe why ἠκαιρεῖσθε is in the middle voice here?
[The antonym εὐκαιρεῖν is used in the active voice, both absolutely ἐλεύσεται δὲ ὅταν εὐκαιρήσῃ. (1 Corinthians 16:12), and in conjunction with an infinitive οὐδὲ φαγεῖν εὐκαίρουν. (Mark 6:31).]
I’ve noted Mike’s comment and the further elaboration Stephen has offered. I think Mke is right here to say we’d have a better notion if we had more instances of the verb’s usage, but DGE (see Logeion) offers additional support for middle-passive usage;
it’s also the case that we don’t have much doubt about what Paul is saying in this rather informally-phrased locution: “Your impulsive thoughtfulness on my behalf has deeply gratified me — the fact that you wanted to do something but had no opportunity.” It seems to me that ἠκαιρεῖσθε here is a personal usage involving deprivation: Subject-affectedness is discerned and expressed in the middle voice here.
Statistics: Posted by cwconrad — March 18th, 2017, 8:44 am
Thanks very much for the replies, which I have just found (has something changed with notifications? – I have just ticked or re-ticked some boxes in the User Control Panel, which hopefully will sort it out).And am glad that you read the text the same …
Shirley, it’s not a modern re-write but following the Byzantine text rather than the Alexandrian text. N-A, of course, promulgates the Alexandrian text-type. Maurice Robinson, IIRC, thinks that the Alexandrian text type may have been an ancient schola…
Stephen Hughes wrote: ↑October 24th, 2017, 11:29 amJonathan Robie wrote: ↑October 24th, 2017, 6:01 amI don’t want this to get lost – Timothy is correct here, and this is the one direct response to the question in the OP.ταυτη is not referring back to …
“`html An Exegetical Analysis of the Perfect Tense in Matthew 13:46: The Aspect of πέπρακεν body { font-family: ‘Palatino Linotype’, ‘Book Antiqua’, Palatino, serif; line-height: 1.6; margin: 40px; } h1, h2, h3 { color: #333; } h2 { border-bottom: 1px solid #ccc; padding-bottom: 5px; margin-top: 30px; } h3 { color: #555; margin-top: 25px; } blockquote…
An Exegetical Analysis of λάθρᾳ in Matthew 1:19: Syntactical Ambiguity and Translational Implications An Exegetical Analysis of λάθρᾳ in Matthew 1:19: Syntactical Ambiguity and Translational Implications This exegetical study of An Exegetical Analysis of λάθρᾳ in Matthew 1:19: Syntactical Ambiguity and Translational Implications is based on a b-greek discussion from April 6th, 2012. The initial…
An Exegetical Analysis of Matthew 19:9: The Exception Clause and the Nature of Adultery This exegetical study of Matthew 19:9 is based on a b-greek discussion from Wednesday, May 12, 1999. The initial inquiry focused on the grammatical structure of Matthew 19:9, particularly the phrase μὴ ἐπὶ πορνείᾳ, and its implications for understanding Jesus’ teaching…
“`html An Exegetical Analysis of Matthew 24:15b: The Imperative of Discernment in Eschatological Contexts This exegetical study of An Exegetical Analysis of Matthew 24:15b: The Imperative of Discernment in Eschatological Contexts is based on a b-greek discussion from April 1, 2011. The initial discussion highlights a contemporary entry on a biblical studies blog concerning the…
An Exegetical Analysis of Matthew 1:20: The Discontinuous Construction of ἐκ Πνεύματος Ἁγίου This exegetical study of the Greek construction at Matthew 1:20 is based on a b-greek discussion from Sun May 28 08:57:32 2006. The initial inquiry focused on the distinctive syntax of the phrase “Holy Spirit” in the latter part of Matthew 1:20,…
“`html An Exegetical Analysis of Matthean Genealogy: The Anaphoric Article in Matthew 1:6 body { font-family: ‘Times New Roman’, serif; line-height: 1.6; max-width: 900px; margin: 2em auto; padding: 0 1em; } h1, h2, h3 { color: #333; } h2 { border-bottom: 1px solid #ccc; padding-bottom: 0.5em; margin-top: 2em; } h3 { margin-top: 1.5em; } blockquote…
