JIM
>Well and good- but etymology does not always describe how words are USED.
>For only one example- the word "gay" etymologically meant happy or
carefree-
>but I suspect that if you went to a friend and said "i am gay" they might
>not take into account the etymology of the word!
BILL
But, it would certainly negate "down from Mark" as an example of "down from"
for KATA.
>>Wouldn't you phrase "hair hanging down from the head" more like the
similar
>>phrase in Acts 28:4? KREMAMENON TO QHRION EK TAS XEIROS AUTOU
JIM
Perhaps. But Paul and Luke are different authors with differing styles.
BILL
Granted. But my question was, wouldn't "you", trying to make a persuasive
point and wanting to be clear, choose a clearer choice of words? Would you
coin a new phrase?
>>Where is the "APO" or "EK" preposition that this begs?
JIM
>it is not necessary- and is included in the 'kata'
BILL
This preposition is used over 450 times in the GNT, can you find an example
of a usage at all similar?
>>Where is "TRIKWN" (hair)?
JIM
It is understood from the present context. Again, and to all, words have
usage, not meaning.
BILL
This preposition is used over 450 times in the GNT, can you find an example
of a usage at all similar?
>>Why such an obscure way of saying a simple, literal device?
JIM
That's Paul fer ya!!!!
BILL
My experience with Paul is that his words are extremely precise. Many things
he says read "bumpy" until you get a precise translation, and then they drip
with meaning.
>>It doesn't seem that Paul was going out of his way to say something in a
>>confusing manner, but that he was simply saying something different.
JIM
Not at all. He said it as straightforwardly as the old devil could.
BILL
I disagree. He could have said, had he meant this, something like the phrase
in Acts 28:4.