[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
b-greek-digest V1 #788
b-greek-digest Wednesday, 19 July 1995 Volume 01 : Number 788
In this issue:
[none]
Re: PARADOUNAI TW SATANA
Re: the greek jesus
Re: PARADOUNAI TW SATANA
Re: TON PLHSION SOU = TON EXQRON? (Lk 10:27; Mt 5:43-4
Re: PARADOUNAI TW SATANA
Languages of Jesus
Anointing with oil
Re: Languages of Jesus
Greek grammars
GRAFW DIA (was Re: the greek jesus)
BG: PRWTH as "earlier" in Luke 2:2
Re: Anointing with Oil
Re: Anointing with Oil
Re: Last Supper as Anticipated Passover Meal?
Textual Criticism
Re: BG: PRWTH as "earlier" in Luke 2:2
Re: PARADOUNAI TW SATANA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: George Chryssogelos <geo@prometheus.hol.gr>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 11:58:40 +0200 (GMT+0200)
Subject: [none]
POSTPONE GREEK-L MAIL POSTPONE
------------------------------
From: Ken Penner <kpenner@mail.unixg.ubc.ca>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 06:14:25 -0800
Subject: Re: PARADOUNAI TW SATANA
On 17 Jul 95 at 20:48, Gregory Jordan (ENG) wrote:
> In Paul, Satan seems to play some sort of educational role -
> helping the person "handed over" eventually to be reconciled
> on God's terms.
Are you basing this view mainly on the stated purposes in these
two passages: hINA PAIDEUQWSIN MH BLASFHMEIN in 1Tim 1:20 and
hINA TO PNEUMA SWQHi EN THi hHMERAi TOU KURIOU in 1 Cor 5:5,
or are there other statements he made that also point in this
direction? 2Cor 12:7, maybe?
How does Satan in this case compare to the evil-seeming
AGGELOS THS TIMWRIAS who is really one of the "righteous
angels" in Hermas' Parable 6? Does Paul think Satan's job is "a
dirty job, but somebody's gotta do it," and he's actually a
good guy? That's not the impression I get from Paul.
> As far as I can see, it seemed to have involved a kind of
> temporary and optimistic disassociation.
When and how would reconciliation come about?
> I wonder if anyone knows of Jewish precedents for such a
> ritual.
You do see the "handing over" as a ritual, then? Would there
have been some sort of formal declaration in the presence of
witnesses? Is there enough evidence available to bring us
beyond speculation?
Ken Penner
Regent College, Vancouver
kpenner@unixg.ubc.ca
http://netshop.net/~kpenner
------------------------------
From: Ken Penner <kpenner@mail.unixg.ubc.ca>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 06:14:25 -0800
Subject: Re: the greek jesus
On 17 Jul 95 at 10:47, Stephen Carlson wrote:
> Ken Penner wrote:
> >I thought that the arguments against an uneducated Galilean
> >having written 1 Peter were based more on the sophisticated
> >style of the composition than on its language (Greek). I still
> >have a hard time reading it.
>
> Then there is 1 Peter's more or less explicit reference to an
> amanuensis: DIA *SILOUANOU ... EGRAYA (1Pt5:12).
I think this DIA ... EGRAYA wording more likely identifies the
emissary than an amanuensis. Besides the Acts 15:23 example of
identifying the messenger, Ignatius writes to the Romans DI'
*EFESIWN (10:1), to the Philadelphians and Smyrnaeans DIA
*BOURROU (11:2 and 12:1 respectively), and Polycarp probably
wrote something similar in his letter to the Philippians 14.
Do you think these might also be references to amanuenses?
Ken Penner
Regent College, Vancouver
kpenner@unixg.ubc.ca
http://netshop.net/~kpenner
------------------------------
From: "Gregory Jordan (ENG)" <jordan@chuma.cas.usf.edu>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 09:59:40 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: PARADOUNAI TW SATANA
On Tue, 18 Jul 1995, Ken Penner wrote:
> Are you basing this view mainly on the stated purposes in these
> two passages: hINA PAIDEUQWSIN MH BLASFHMEIN in 1Tim 1:20 and
> hINA TO PNEUMA SWQHi EN THi hHMERAi TOU KURIOU in 1 Cor 5:5,
> or are there other statements he made that also point in this
> direction? 2Cor 12:7, maybe?
2 Cor 12:7 does seem to point in the same direction. But I see no other
way to read 1 Tim 1:20 "paideuthOsin" unless one assumes there is some
unnamed third party who does the educating.
1 Cor. 5:5 clearly says the purpose of handing this person over to Satan
was so they would be rescued from punishment at the Last Judgment, and of
course, 2 Cor 2:5-11 shows us the person repenting and receiving
forgiveness from and reconciliation with the others. Paul admits he
himself has been playing Satan by testing their obedience to him (2 Cor.
2:9), and that if they keep condemning the repentant person, they will
themselves be succumbing to Satan (2 Cor. 2:11).
> How does Satan in this case compare to the evil-seeming
> AGGELOS THS TIMWRIAS who is really one of the "righteous
> angels" in Hermas' Parable 6? Does Paul think Satan's job is "a
> dirty job, but somebody's gotta do it," and he's actually a
> good guy? That's not the impression I get from Paul.
I don't have Shepherd of Hermas handy - you'll have to answer that one.
But I would not say Satan is being represented as a "good guy" - just the
OT Satan who, despite being the enemy of God and humanity, helps God
and humanity unwittingly by administering trials and temptations. Cf. Job,
Luke 22:31-32, etc.
> > As far as I can see, it seemed to have involved a kind of
> > temporary and optimistic disassociation.
>
> When and how would reconciliation come about?
2 Cor. 2 seems to answer that - as soon as the offender repents the
community seems obligated to forgive the person (especially when he
hadn't actually offended very many people - 2 Cor. 2:5 is difficult to
interpret) and accept him.
> You do see the "handing over" as a ritual, then? Would there
> have been some sort of formal declaration in the presence of
> witnesses? Is there enough evidence available to bring us
> beyond speculation?
1 Cor. 5 clearly describes a ritual - invoking the spiritual presence of
Paul and Jesus during a meeting and then handing the person over to
Satan, after which the person is no longer (apparently) welcome at the
meeting. But this does not even seem to have involved shunning, since
somehow enough people continued to associate with this person to learn
that he had repented and then pass this information along to Paul. Paul
doesn't seem to be inventing this ritual, and I would bet money that
there must be further evidence for it among Christians and Jews.
Perhaps someone else has done sufficient research into this topic...I've
exhausted my evidence.
Greg Jordan
jordan@chuma.cas.usf.edu
------------------------------
From: Pat Tiller <ptiller@husc.harvard.edu>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 11:56:35 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: TON PLHSION SOU = TON EXQRON? (Lk 10:27; Mt 5:43-4
On Mon, 17 Jul 1995, Carl W. Conrad wrote:
> At 1:32 PM 7/17/95, Pat Tiller wrote:
> >
> >So, how do you understand the parable of the Good Samaritan?
>
> Now, MY question was a relatively simple one! I don't know if you're
> serious; I've heard several different interpretations of the parable.
I guess I was only 1/2 serious - wondered if you would take the `bait' :-)
As I think I said, you have a very good point about Luke. Your
"paraphrase" could be quite useful in bringing out Luke's interest in
the pericope. But it all does depend on the meaning of the parable.
Pat Tiller
Harvard Divinity School
------------------------------
From: Mark O'Brien <Mark_O'Brien@dts.edu>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 95 10:30:33 CST
Subject: Re: PARADOUNAI TW SATANA
As I was following this thread over 1Co 5, I had Ro 1:24 ff. come
to mind, and I was wondering whether any of you see a connection
here with the imagery?
Mark
- ----
"I usually find it best not to explain..."
------------------------------
From: Paul Moser <PMOSER@cpua.it.luc.edu>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 95 11:57 CDT
Subject: Languages of Jesus
Regarding the languages spoken by Jesus, it's hard to
improve on the careful discussion by Joseph Fitzmyer
in "Did Jesus Speak Greek?", *Biblical Archaeology
Review* 18, #5 (1992), 58-63, and in his *A Wandering
Aramean: Collected Aramaic Essays* (Scholars, 1979),
chaps. 1 and 2. His conclusion: "So the answer to the
question, 'Did Jesus speak Greek?' is yes, on some
occasions, but we have no real record of it. Did Jesus
teach and preach in Greek? That is unlikely; but if
he did, there is no way to sort out what he might have
taught in Greek from what we have inherited in the
Greek tradition of the Gospels." -- Paul Moser,
Loyola University of Chicago.
------------------------------
From: Yirah@aol.com
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 14:44:53 -0400
Subject: Anointing with oil
In James 5:14-15 Scripture calls for the elders to anoint with oil those who
are sick, etc. The church I presently attend does this, calling for God to
heal, etc. It's not to the point that those who are prayed for don't see a
doctor or pack away their medicines--but it seems mighty close at times.
I've heard that this passage is actually referring to a type of oil that was
used for medicinal purposes--that is, it was an oil used as an actual
medicine in that day. I have not been able to find any information that
either supports or contradicts this position.
Does anyone have any articles, books, studies, etc., that would help in
untangling this verse and what practice it is actually promoting?
Thanks in advance,
William Brooks
Pastor in waiting
Port Angeles, WA
------------------------------
From: "David B. Gowler" <dgowler@minerva.cis.yale.edu>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 14:58:15 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Languages of Jesus
On Tue, 18 Jul 1995, Paul Moser wrote:
> Regarding the languages spoken by Jesus, it's hard to
> improve on the careful discussion by Joseph Fitzmyer
> in "Did Jesus Speak Greek?", *Biblical Archaeology
> Review* 18, #5 (1992), 58-63, and in his *A Wandering
> Aramean: Collected Aramaic Essays* (Scholars, 1979),
> chaps. 1 and 2. His conclusion: "So the answer to the
> question, 'Did Jesus speak Greek?' is yes, on some
> occasions, but we have no real record of it. Did Jesus
> teach and preach in Greek? That is unlikely; but if
> he did, there is no way to sort out what he might have
> taught in Greek from what we have inherited in the
> Greek tradition of the Gospels."
I think Fitzmyer's very fine article also can be found in the recent
Sheffield volume devoted to this issue (although I think Fitzmyer tends
to underestimate a bit the Hellenization of the Galilee).
It seems that we are screeching to a halt at another historical Jesus
cul-de-sac:
On one hand, people like Black, Jeremias, Dalman, etc. would echo the
words of T. W. Manson that the detection of assonance, consonance,
alliteration, paranomasia, and onomatopoeia depends upon the texts being
translated back into Aramaic (in *Teaching*).
On the other hand, Funk, Hedrick and others point out very clearly that
these elements already dominate in the Greek (hence the "sound" studies
that some NT scholars are doing).
The horizon of historicity always recedes.
David
************************************
David B. Gowler
Associate Professor of Religion
Chowan College
Summer address (until Aug 11):
dgowler@minerva.cis.yale.edu
------------------------------
From: LLJohns@aol.com
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 16:24:58 -0400
Subject: Greek grammars
I failed to introduce myself when I asked about what good inductive
introductory grammars are available out there.
My name is Loren L. Johns, and I am an assistant professor of religion at
Bluffton College, Bluffton, Ohio (northwest Ohio, about an hour south of
Toledo).
------------------------------
From: Stephen Carlson <scc@reston.icl.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 95 15:35:52 EDT
Subject: GRAFW DIA (was Re: the greek jesus)
Ken Penner wrote:
> On 17 Jul 95 at 10:47, Stephen Carlson wrote:
> > Ken Penner wrote:
> > >I thought that the arguments against an uneducated Galilean
> > >having written 1 Peter were based more on the sophisticated
> > >style of the composition than on its language (Greek). I still
> > >have a hard time reading it.
> >
> > Then there is 1 Peter's more or less explicit reference to an
> > amanuensis: DIA *SILOUANOU ... EGRAYA (1Pt5:12).
>
> I think this DIA ... EGRAYA wording more likely identifies the
> emissary than an amanuensis. Besides the Acts 15:23 example of
> identifying the messenger, Ignatius writes to the Romans DI'
> *EFESIWN (10:1), to the Philadelphians and Smyrnaeans DIA
> *BOURROU (11:2 and 12:1 respectively), and Polycarp probably
> wrote something similar in his letter to the Philippians 14.
>
> Do you think these might also be references to amanuenses?
BAGD's entry for GRAFW says that the use of DIA can refer to
either the person who carried the letter (citing your references)
or someone who helped in the writing of it (citing Dionys. of Cor.
in Euseb. H.E. 4,23,11 and perhaps 1Pt5:12). Note, however, the
translator to the Loeb edition took the phrase as meaning "by
the hand of," which indicates an amanuensis.
Not cited in BAGD, but eight subscriptions to epistles (of later
date of course) use DIA to indicate the messenger. Compare the
Romans subscription's DIA FOIBHS with 16:1 (Phoebe is the emissary)
and v22 (Tertius is the amanuensis).
You may also consider Mt2:5 DIA TOU PROFHTOU and Lk18:31 DIA TWN
PROFHTWN to be examples of the prophet's recording of the words
of the LORD (though there is an arguable emissary aspect as
well). Also, for inanimate instruments DIA is used with GRAFW
(1Jn2:12 2Jn1:12).
In light of your examples and 1 Peter's contextual similarity to
them, I retract my statement that the reference is "more or less
explicit." It remains, however, a possible meaning. Assuming
Petrine authorship, Peter almost certainly would have needed one
depending on how you read Ac4:13.
Stephen Carlson
- --
Stephen Carlson : Poetry speaks of aspirations, : ICL, Inc.
scc@reston.icl.com : and songs chant the words. : 11490 Commerce Park Dr.
(703) 648-3330 : Shujing 2:35 : Reston, VA 22091 USA
------------------------------
From: Bruce Terry <terry@bible.acu.edu>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 18:55:30 CST
Subject: BG: PRWTH as "earlier" in Luke 2:2
I would appreciate comments on F.M. Heichelheim's interesting 1938 suggestion
that Luke 2:2 hAUTH APOGRAFH PRWTH EGENETO hHGEMONEUONTOS THS SURIAS KURHNIOU
be translated "This census happened earlier than Quirinius' governing Syria,"
especially in light of BAG's discussion of PRWTOS used with a genitive of
comparison under 1a on p. 733.
********************************************************************************
Bruce Terry E-MAIL: terry@bible.acu.edu
Box 8426, ACU Station Phone: 915/674-3759
Abilene, Texas 79699 Fax: 915/674-3769
********************************************************************************
------------------------------
From: Roger Bailey <RBAILEY@accdvm.accd.edu>
Date: 18 Jul 95 19:14:09 CST
Subject: Re: Anointing with Oil
From: Roger Blackwell Bailey
William, the James passage does not really allow the sense of which you
speak, to wit, that the oil has certain medicinal properties. It says
that the prayer of faith will deliver the sick person from the disease.
By way of contrast, consider the oil and wine poured by the Samaritan
into the wounds of him who had fallen among thieves. There the oil had
some efficacy as medicine ( to soothe ?) just as did the wine ( for
antisepsis ?).
Roger
------------------------------
From: Michael I Bushnell <mib@gnu.ai.mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 20:14:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Anointing with Oil
Date: 18 Jul 95 19:14:09 CST
From: Roger Bailey <RBAILEY@accdvm.accd.edu>
William, the James passage does not really allow the sense of which you
speak, to wit, that the oil has certain medicinal properties. It says
that the prayer of faith will deliver the sick person from the disease.
By way of contrast, consider the oil and wine poured by the Samaritan
into the wounds of him who had fallen among thieves. There the oil had
some efficacy as medicine ( to soothe ?) just as did the wine ( for
antisepsis ?).
It's worth noticing that the James passage is the justification for
the sacrament of the anointing of the sick.
Oil (just ordinary oil) was use medicinally; it does have palliative
properties and can help heal wounds, principally by keeping out
moisture.
Michael
------------------------------
From: Bruce Terry <terry@bible.acu.edu>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 19:39:26 CST
Subject: Re: Last Supper as Anticipated Passover Meal?
On Wed, 12 Jul 95, Paul Moser wrote:
>that they had a lamb.... We have noted that the
>Jewish day began at sunset. The killing of the
>lambs took place in the afternoon between about
>3 and 5pm, while the Passover meal followed after
>dark.... When therefore Mark 14:12 speaks of a meal
>held after dark on the same day when the lambs were
>killed, he cannot be speaking of the regular Passover
>meal, which was the next 'day', but must refer to
>the evening before the killing, which began the
>same Jewish 'day' (pp. 50-51). France concludes:
>"Taken within his own Jewish context, (Mark) is
>describing the same date which John also clearly
>presents for the Last Supper, that is the evening
>which began Nisan 14, 'the day on which (some 15-20
>hours later) they sacrificed the Passover lamb'."
This confusion about days is due to the fact that the Jews had two types of
days, a ceremonial (evening to evening) and a practical (from when one gets
up until one goes to bed), just as they had two types of years, a ceremonial
(spring to spring) and an agricultural (fall to fall). Days were almost
always numbered, for both the month and the week, using the practical day.
Thus passover lambs were killed on the 14th of Nisan and eaten on the evening
of the 14th (a different ceremonial, but the same practical and numbered day).
I have described this system in some detail (including a chart of the passover
week) in a little distributed article I wrote 20 years ago, arguing that Acts
20:7 is referring to Sunday evening, not Saturday evening. I have posted the
article to my FTP site (bible.acu.edu in the subdirectory \Greek\papers) and
will send it to anyone who desires a copy but does not have FTP privileges.
Just drop me a line off-list.
********************************************************************************
Bruce Terry E-MAIL: terry@bible.acu.edu
Box 8426, ACU Station Phone: 915/674-3759
Abilene, Texas 79699 Fax: 915/674-3769
********************************************************************************
------------------------------
From: BennyWP@aol.com
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 20:44:30 -0400
Subject: Textual Criticism
I have a serious question, or rather, a whole body of questions, regarding
the validity of modern textual criticism. I understand the purpose of this
science but I'm not so sure it is on the right track. Basically, I see that
we have written a myriad of new versions based on "new" information found in
the past two centuries which TC normally says is more accurate than what we
had. But this seems to be an assumption without merit unless I see
otherwise. My question is simply this: why prefer Wescott and Hort's text
to the old Textus Receptus? The usual answer is, "Well Wescott and Hort used
Codex B and Aleph (Vaticanus and Sinaiticus) which were fourth century texts,
the oldest Greek mss available, therefore they are more accurate." After
some study into the origin of Aleph, B and the whole line of Eusebius/Origen
style biblical texts, as well as the characters of the world's most
influential textual critics, Wescott and Hort, I have serious doubts as to
the old "the older the better" idea. Could I get some input pro and con for
the Wescott and Hort's "new" revised text over the old Received Text?
Thank you very much,
Paul Watkins
BennyWP@aol.com
------------------------------
From: "Carl W. Conrad" <cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 20:48:53 -0500
Subject: Re: BG: PRWTH as "earlier" in Luke 2:2
At 6:55 PM 7/18/95, Bruce Terry wrote:
>I would appreciate comments on F.M. Heichelheim's interesting 1938 suggestion
>that Luke 2:2 hAUTH APOGRAFH PRWTH EGENETO hHGEMONEUONTOS THS SURIAS KURHNIOU
>be translated "This census happened earlier than Quirinius' governing Syria,"
>especially in light of BAG's discussion of PRWTOS used with a genitive of
>comparison under 1a on p. 733.
As I am at home and can't consult BAGD immediately, I really shouldn't
comment, but not having been one to waver heretofore--
(1) It does not seem to me to a "natural" way of understanding the Greek;
(2) I think parallels with the predicative use of PRWTOS are more apt; (3)
I think the suggested idea would have been expressed by Luke in a more
"natural" Greek idiomatic construction.
It seems to me that this is really very different from PRWTOS with a simple
genitive as in John 1:15 PRWTOS MOU HN; rather it is much more like the
predicative usage in John 8:7 PRWTOS EP' AUTHN BALETW LIQON: "Let him throw
a stone before anyone else."
Furthermore, the phrase hHGEMONEUONTOS THS SURIAS KURHNIOU (1) is patently
(dare I say that?) a genitive absolute construction, and (2) is the normal
Greek manner of indicating the year of an event, precisely WITH a genitive
absolute construction.
Finally, if my sense of Lucan style is not amiss, it seems to me that Luke
would have expressed the idea Bruce is suggesting here rather with a phrase
like PRIN hHGEMONEUEIN (or hHGEMONEUSAI) THS SURIAS TON KURHNION or PRO TOU
hHGEMONEUEIN (or hHGEMONEUSAI) THS SURIAS TON KURHNION.
So much for grammatical objections. It occurs to me also, however, that the
suggested way of reading this phrase may be intended to get around the
apparent problem of the dating of Jesus' birth to the year of Quirinius'
governorship of Syria, i.e. 6 C.E. (and the discrepancy with the earlier
indication in Luke 1 that Mary was pregnant with Jesus during the rule of
Herod the Great, who died in 4 B.C.E.). So what would this reading be
intended to achieve? An assertion by Luke that Jesus was born AT SOME
UNKNOWN TIME PRIOR TO THE GOVERNORSHIP OF QUIRINIUS? But why would Luke
want to give an imprecise date like that when it appears to be his regular
custom to cite precisely, often with more than one gentive-absolute
construction, the year of an event--as, e.g., the activity of John the
Baptist introducing the baptism (or should we say, the epiphany) of Jesus
(Lk 3:1-2 EN ETEI DE PENTEKAIDEKATWi THS hHEGEMONIAS TIBERIOU KAISAROS,
hHGEMONEUONTOS PONTIOU PILATOU THS IOUDAIAS, KAI TETRAARXOUNTOS THS
GALILAIAS hHRWDOU, FILIPPOU DE TOU ADELFOU AUTOU TETRAARXOUNTOS THS
ITOURAIAS ...). So what would be gained by this rather "unnatural"
understanding of the Greek over against the more common practice of Luke?
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University
One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, USA 63130
(314) 935-4018
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu OR cwc@oui.com
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
------------------------------
From: Ken Penner <kpenner@mail.unixg.ubc.ca>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 21:39:23 -0800
Subject: Re: PARADOUNAI TW SATANA
On 18 Jul 95 at 9:59, Gregory Jordan (ENG) wrote:
> > How does Satan in this case compare to the evil-seeming
> > AGGELOS THS TIMWRIAS who is really one of the "righteous
> > angels" in Hermas' Parable 6? Does Paul think Satan's job is "a
> > dirty job, but somebody's gotta do it," and he's actually a
> > good guy? That's not the impression I get from Paul.
>
> I don't have Shepherd of Hermas handy - you'll have to
> answer that one.
Basically, the story goes like this:
An angel appeared to me and showed me the shepherd of the
sheep. First we saw a young shepherd dressed in yellow,
feeding a very frisky flock. The sheep were skipping
about, and the shepherd seemed very happy, too.
The angel said this was the angel of luxury and deception
(AGGELOS TRUFHS KAI APATHS). "He crushes the souls of
God's servants and turns them away from the truth,
deceiving them with evil desires in which they perish. For
they forget the commandments of the living God and live
pleasureably in worthless luxury, and are destroyed by
this angel, some to death, and some to corruption. The
sheep that you saw happily skipping about are those people
who have been turned away from God completely, and have
handed themselves over to the lusts of this world. Among
these therefore, there is no repentance leading to life,
because they have also blasphemed against the Lord's name.
For such people, then, there is death.
"But the sheep that you saw that were not skipping, but
were feeding in one place, are those who have handed
themselves over to acts of luxury and deception, but have
not spoken blasphemy against the Lord. These, therefore,
have been corrupted from truth, for them there is the hope
of repentance, by which they are able to live. So
corruption has some hope of renewal, but death has only
eternal destruction."
Next we saw a huge, wild, mean-looking shepherd wearing a
goatskin and carrying a whip and a hard knobby staff. He
was getting those sheep that were feeding in one place
from the young shepherd and putting them in treacherous
places with briars, where they got tangled up. Then he
would beat them and give them no rest.
The angel said this was the angel of punishment (AGGELOS
THS TIMWRIAS). "He is one of the righteous angels and
presides over punishment. So he recieves those who have
wandered away from God and walked after the desires and
pleasures of this world, and punishes them, as they
deserve, with various terrible punishments. The various
tortures and punishments are tortures they experience in
this life. For some are punished with losses, and others
with every kind of disturbance, and others are insulted by
worthless people and suffer many other things.
"For many, vacillating in their intentions, attempt many
things, but nothing ever succeeds with them. And then they
say that they do not prosper in their efforts, and it never
enters their hearts that they have done evil deeds;
instead, they blame the Lord.
"So, when they are afflicted with every kind of
affliction, then they are handed over to me for good
instruction and are strengthened in the faith of the Lord
and serve the Lord with a pure heart the rest of the days
of their lives. When they repent, therefore, the wvil
deeds which they did enter their hearts, and then they
glorify God, because he is a righteous Judge and because
each one rightly suffered for what he had done. And from
then on they serve the Lord with pure hearts and prosper
in all they do, receiving from the Lord everything they
ask for. And then they glorify the Lord because they were
handed over to me, and they no longer suffer any evil."
(Translation: Lightfoot/Harmer).
What intrigues me are the parallels here: "handed over",
"blasphemy", and "instruction" (PAIDEIA).
Ken Penner
Regent College, Vancouver
kpenner@unixg.ubc.ca
http://netshop.net/~kpenner
------------------------------
End of b-greek-digest V1 #788
*****************************
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
To unsubscribe from this list write
majordomo@virginia.edu
with "unsubscribe b-greek-digest" as your message content. For other
automated services write to the above address with the message content
"help".
For further information, you can write the owner of the list at
owner-b-greek@virginia.edu
You can send mail to the entire list via the address:
b-greek@virginia.edu