[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
b-greek-digest V1 #877
b-greek-digest Wednesday, 27 September 1995 Volume 01 : Number 877
In this issue:
PISTIS in Romans 1
Re: More questions on Mark
Re: Words
Terry-inspired corrections on lexica!
Re: Words
Re: More questions on Mark
Re: Comments on Greek lexicons, updated
Nomail
Re: PISTIS in Romans 1
Confusion over Fribergs' work
Re: Words
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: drmills@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 16:59:41 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: PISTIS in Romans 1
In a group that reads Greek together weekly, we recently began reading
Romans. A couple of questions arose that we would like to address to
experts.
1. In 1:12, what is the meaning of THS EN ALLHLOIS PISTEWS? The translations
"the faith among us" or "the mutual faith" seem to lack the reciprocity
usually implied by ALLHLWN. A translation such as "the confidence in one
another" does not retain the usual meaning for PISTIS in the book as a
whole.
2. In 1:17, what is the meaning of EK PISTEWS EIS PISTIN? Does the EK
PISTEWS in the Habakkuk quotation somehow encompass both the former EK
PISTEWS and the EIS PISTIN?
Thanks in advance,
(It looks like Greek to me, an English teacher!)
===========================
David R. Mills
drmills@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Applied English Center
University of Kansas
------------------------------
From: Mike Adams <mikadams@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 15:10:26 -0700
Subject: Re: More questions on Mark
I agree with Bruce and the others who say that egw eimi does not bear
the same force as the OT Yaweh (sp?). In the context in Mark 6, it is
probably "It is I."
The uses in John seem to me a bit stronger. I read them as "I (myself)
am The Way." "I (myself) am The Truth." It is my understanding that
the emphasis is stronger in sentences which combine egw and eimi, when
grammatically eimi would suffice.
However, in the section in John 10, when he said "Before Abraham was I
am," the context causes it to be an extremely forceful statement, which
I agree might be tantamount to Yaweh.
I am also aware that B-Greek discussed in length the language of
Christ. My own suspicions are that Jesus was intelligent enough to be
bi or even tri lingual, as is not uncommon in areas with a native,
trade and official language. It is also common for someone who is
comfortably multi-lingual to speak in whichever language would be most
meaningful to the hearers, such as in the case of the healing of
Jairus's daughter. So I suspect that at the temple that Jesus spoke
Hebrew, and considering the reaction he could very well have used that
"forbidden" phrase concerning himself.
Just my thoughts.
Ellen
------------------------------
From: WINBROW@aol.com
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 18:25:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Words
Bart,
I ran a copy of the UBS3 Corrected through my word count function in MS Word
and I came up with the following.
Words - Characters - Lines - Returns
Matt - 23479 - 142790 - 1766 - 292
Mark - 14642 - 88845 - 1074 - 140
Luke - 24963 - 151893 - 1848 - 278
John - 20546 - 115759 - 1351 - 131
Acts - 23379 - 147040 - 1794 - 226
Rom - 8988 - 54734 - 688 - 125
1 Cor - 8771 - 52396 - 634 - 83
2 Cor - 5595 - 34951 - 422 - 59
Gal - 2888 - 17469 - 212 - 31
Eph - 3020 - 18744 - 228 - 25
Phil - 2069 - 12572 - 152 - 20
Col - 1940 - 12332 - 149 - 21
1 Thess - 1836 - 11628 - 139 - 19
2 Thess - 1009 - 6372 - 77 - 10
1 Tim - 2034 - 13426 - 171 - 28
2 Tim - 1573 - 10063 - 125 - 18
Titus - 844 - 5630 - 71 - 11
Philm - 432 - 2547 - 34 - 8
Heb - 6388 - 40506 - 554 - 150
James - 2197 - 13721 - 172 - 28
1 Peter - 2092 - 13893 - 191 - 52
2 Peter - 1349 - 9141 - 113 - 13
1 John - 2763 - 15460 - 190 - 33
2 John - 314 - 1813 - 22 - 4
3 John - 274 - 1770 - 24 - 8
Jude - 570 - 3873 - 48 - 8
Rev - 12129 - 72507 - 975 - 240
Totals - 176084 - 1071875 - 13224 - 2061
Words - Characters - Lines - Returns
The characters may or may not include accents. The lines are in my program
with each line set on six inches. The returns will not exactly equal
paragraphs because some of the poetic, hymnic, and quotes have a return after
each line.
Hope this helps.
Carlton Winbery
Prof. NT & Greek
LA College, Pineville, LA
------------------------------
From: Edward Hobbs <EHOBBS@wellesley.edu>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 18:45:47 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Terry-inspired corrections on lexica!
Bruce Terry's quick response to my re-issue of comments on lexicons has
shown me two mistakes already. (1) I haven't looked at Han for years, and had
forgotten that it parses only verbs. I should have noted that, but didn't even
*notice*! Incidentally, I too had found quite a few mistakes in Han; I see my
copy has a lot of red ink making corrections; but I found nothing like 150
errors, primarily because I never really *used* the book; I simply showed it to
students who seemed to be in trouble, and in working through a chapter here or
there with them found the errors. NO, Bruce, one every three pages is NOT
acceptable! I should either not have mentioned the book, or warned against
using it, as I did with the old Analytical Lexicon. (2) My other mistake was
one of judgment. I wondered whether to mention Thayer or not, and decided no
one really would even see it any more. Bruce's comment caused me to look in a
book catalog, and behold! Hendrickson has re-issued it as "The NEW Thayer's
Greek-English Lexicon", the "New" being the addition of Strong's number-codes
(a horrendous device, enabling those who don't understand Greek at all to
pronounce on "what the original Greek says"!). Their price is $25, and CBD
(their retail arm) sells it for $16 (plus shipping). So it is certainly one to
be commented on.
My comments on Thayer:
(Personal paragraph first--omit reading if not in a reminiscent mood.)
I have real affection for Thayer; I bought a copy when I began
reading the New Testament in Greek, and thought it was wonderful. Then I
really began learning real Greek, at the University of Chicago (which offered
nothing on New Testament Greek at that time) where I read Xenophon, Plato,
Aristotle, Sophocles, et alia, and discovered that a marvelous new edition of
Liddell-Scott had been completed in England, but was unavailable here because
of the War (WW-II, that is). So I gave in to necessity and bought the 8th
edition; when Blackwell's made the New 9th Edition (L-S-J-M) available in two
volumes, for 5 guineas, I rushed to purchase it. (Twenty years later, Barber's
Supplement came out. Now Glare has replaced that.) But by then I had learned
a great deal about Hellenistic Greek, doing a seminar in it, editing texts of
the period, etc., and realized that Thayer was impossible. Our knowledge of
the Greek of the New Testament period had advanced far more than our knowledge
of the classical period(s), and Bauer's work was obviously the only lexicon to
use. Trouble was, you had to read German to use it. But happy day! -- Wilbur
Gingrich came to the Un. of Chicago Press, and was working in the old Press
building right across the street from my handsome office in the new
Administration Building: working at translating Bauer! You all know the rest.
Meanwhile, I began teaching reading courses in the Greek Testament for advanced
students, in the fall of 1952, and had to recommend *something* as a lexicon
for non-German-proficient readers. That was when I latched on to Abbott-Smith
as the next-best thing, since it took significant account of the papyri. The
appearance of Arndt and Gingrich's translation of Bauer in 1957 seemed
heaven-sent!
(Serious comment on Thayer:)
Thayer's lexicon was a translation of a German original (aren't
they all!), K. L. W. Grimm's revision of C. G. Wilke's 1839/1851 lexicon.
Grimm's work appeared in 1862, and its 2nd edition in 1879 was translated into
English by Joseph Henry Thayer, with an 1886 publication date. The work was
quite excellent for its time. But all the papyri discoveries came after that,
so that not only is the work now 116 years old, it is seriously mistaken on a
great deal of the vocabulary. This means that at $25, or even at $16, it is
not a good buy, since it is so often misleading.
The net result of all these comments, I suppose, is that we ought to
try to get Abbott-Smith available, preferably at CBD (thus a low price!).
(Or maybe try to get U. of C. Press to issue the Gingrich-Danker pocket version
for $10 -- but they won't!)
Edward C. Hobbs
------------------------------
From: Vincent Broman <broman@np.nosc.mil>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 95 16:14:24 PDT
Subject: Re: Words
WINBROW@aol.com wrote:
> I ran a copy of the UBS3 Corrected through my word count function in MS Word
> and I came up with the following.
> Matt - 23479 - 142790 - 1766 - 292
> ...
> Totals - 176084 - 1071875 - 13224 - 2061
> Words - Characters - Lines - Returns
I totalled up your counts in column one and got 148474 words.
The inconsistency makes it seem like the tool has a problem.
Vincent Broman
------------------------------
From: Kenneth Litwak <kenneth@sybase.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 16:18:37 +0800
Subject: Re: More questions on Mark
Actually, I woud retract my statement at this point. I've been
convinced, partly from posts here, and partly from reading Gundry's
commentary on Mark, that this story is presented as a theophany, so that
even if the original disciples didn't understand it thus, Mark expects
his readers to understand ego eimi as an intimation of much more than
"it's me". Rather, it would point back to theophanies such as Ex 33-34
and 2 Kings 19. I don't think the disciples, as seen from the narrative,
have begun to grasp who Jesus is, so they probably aren't ready to hear
ego eimi this way.
Ken Litwak
GTU
Bezerkley, CA
------------------------------
From: BibAnsMan@aol.com
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 19:31:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Comments on Greek lexicons, updated
Terry,
A better reference that parses all verbs below the Greek text and declines
the nouns, and deals with all parts of speech is "Analytical Greek New
Testament" by Barbara and Timothy Friberg, published by Baker Book House
1990.
Grace to you,
Jim McGuire
Professor of Greek at
Logos Bible Institute
13248 Roscoe Blvd.
Sun Valley, CA 91352
------------------------------
From: SHelton886@aol.com
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 20:24:18 -0400
Subject: Nomail
Set B-Greek Nomail
------------------------------
From: BibAnsMan@aol.com
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 20:59:24 -0400
Subject: Re: PISTIS in Romans 1
In a message dated 95-09-26 20:07:05 EDT, David R. Mills writes:
>In a group that reads Greek together weekly, we recently began reading
>Romans. A couple of questions arose that we would like to address to
>experts.
>1. In 1:12, what is the meaning of THS EN ALLHLOIS PISTEWS? The
translations
>"the faith among us" or "the mutual faith" seem to lack the reciprocity
>usually implied by ALLHLWN. A translation such as "the confidence in one
>another" does not retain the usual meaning for PISTIS in the book as a
>whole.
>2. In 1:17, what is the meaning of EK PISTEWS EIS PISTIN? Does the EK
>PISTEWS in the Habakkuk quotation somehow encompass both the former EK
>PISTEWS and the EIS PISTIN?
In answer to question #1, the "ALLHLWN" retains its reciprocal properties, it
is just hard for us to bring it across accurately in English. But I am
probably not telling anything new to you here.
This, however is one of those articular prepositional phrases. Its literal
rendering would be something like, "but this is to be encouraged together
with you, through that which is by one another's faith, both yours and mine."
PISTIS retains its normal meaning here.
Question #2: EK is probably best translated "from" as in ".... revealed
from faith to faith..." In this sense, it backs up the previous verse in
context. It is the righteousness of God being evidenced or revealed from
faith to faith to faith to faith. Paul is pointing to the individual
believer's faith as it is revealed, whether he is a Jew or a Greek, or
whatever he may be. It is the faith in context demonstrating the
righteousness of God bearing fruit in one's life. The rest of the verse
describes how this happens indicated by the EK again indicating the source
from which the righteous man lives, the grace of God lived and demonstrated
through his faith.
Serving Him,
Jim McGuire
Professor of Greek at
Logos Bible Institute
13248 Roscoe Blvd.
Sun Valley, CA 91352
------------------------------
From: Edward Hobbs <EHOBBS@wellesley.edu>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 22:47:38 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Confusion over Fribergs' work
A couple of posters have suggested that I omitted work by the Fribergs,
either their NT or their 2-volume Concordance. These are not lexicons.
I hold their work in high regard, especially for those lacking tools
on the computer such as Gramcord. But they are not lexicons. Neither
did I in this lengthy posting discuss grammars. I did not even discuss
Gramcord (which I value highly).
Listing Han's work was a mistake -- I regret it, and will omit
it in my next revision, thanks to Bruce's keen eye.
Edward Hobbs
------------------------------
From: "James K. Tauber" <jtauber@tartarus.uwa.edu.au>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 11:51:04 +0800 (WST)
Subject: Re: Words
What puzzles me about these word counts is that the texts (both plain and
tagged) I have from CCAT have 138019 words.
What's going on here?
James K. Tauber <jtauber@tartarus.uwa.edu.au> currently at ALS 95
University Computing Services and Centre for Linguistics
University of Western Australia, Perth, AUSTRALIA
http://www.uwa.edu.au/student/jtauber finger for PGP key
------------------------------
End of b-greek-digest V1 #877
*****************************
** 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