[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
b-greek-digest V1 #878
b-greek-digest Thursday, 28 September 1995 Volume 01 : Number 878
In this issue:
Re: Confusion over Fribergs' work
Re: Words
Re: Words
Re: Words
Re: Calling Jesus God in... (Granville Sharp)
Re: More questions on Mark
Didache and the future tense
Re: Words
Re: Didache and the future tense
RE: Words
Re: Words
Re: Calling Jesus God in... (Granville Sharp)
Re: A TC Question
Re: Didache and the future tense
Re: wedding garments
Re: Didache and the future tense
Re: Cancel
Romans 2:27
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Nichael Lynn Cramer <nichael@sover.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 08:35:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Confusion over Fribergs' work
At 10:47 PM 26/09/95, Edward Hobbs wrote:
>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....
Just a note: According to a note on the cover of the Clapp/Friberg
Concordances a companion analytical lexicon is "in preparation".
N
------------------------------
From: "Philip L. Graber" <pgraber@emory.edu>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 09:08:20 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Words
On Wed, 27 Sep 1995, James K. Tauber wrote:
> 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?
I suspect the programs being used to do the counts are handling accents
(which are punctuation marks, and therefore word delimiters, in English)
in different ways. If only spaces and LF and/or RET characters are
counted as word delimiters, the results are different than if / \ etc.
are read as punctuation rather than accents.
Philip Graber Graduate Division of Religion
Graduate Student in New Testament 211 Bishops Hall, Emory University
pgraber@emory.edu Atlanta, GA 30322 USA
------------------------------
From: "James D. Ernest" <ernest@mv.mv.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 09:32:25 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Words
On Wed, 27 Sep 1995, Philip L. Graber wrote:
>
> On Wed, 27 Sep 1995, James K. Tauber wrote:
>
> > 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?
>
> I suspect the programs being used to do the counts are handling accents
> (which are punctuation marks, and therefore word delimiters, in English)
> in different ways. If only spaces and LF and/or RET characters are
> counted as word delimiters, the results are different than if / \ etc.
> are read as punctuation rather than accents.
>
Very dull explanation, Philip. More exciting to suppose that
some counting programs are sensus plenior-aware and are including
words that are meant though not explicitly present.
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
James D. Ernest Joint Doctoral Program
Manchester, New Hampshire, USA Andover-Newton/Boston College
Internet: ernest@mv.mv.com Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts
------------------------------
From: Travis Bauer <bauer@acc.jc.edu>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 09:08:18 -35900
Subject: Re: Words
Would it help if I just sat down and counted by hand the words in
my texts? I'll do that and get back to you sometime after the turn of
the century. :)
/-----------------------------------------------------------------
/ Travis Bauer / If all the world's philosophers were laid /
/ Jamestown College / end to end, would they reach a conclusion? /
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
From: John Baima <jbaima@onramp.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 10:27:36 -0500
Subject: Re: Calling Jesus God in... (Granville Sharp)
>Carl W. Conrad
>(a) Personally I would not argue about these particular passages in Titus,
>2 Peter and John's gospel; I think that they do indeed imply the divinity
>of Jesus, although I would like to hear more about the Granville-Sharp rule
>and the basis upon which its validity has been asserted and argued.
Okay, here it is from Sharp:
When the copulative kai/ connects two nouns of the same case, [viz.
nouns (either substantive or adjective, or participles), of personal
description, respecting office, dignity, affinity, or connexion, and
attributes, properties, or qualities, good or ill], if the article o(,
or any of its cases, precedes the first of the said nouns or
participles, and is not repeated before the second noun or participle,
the latter always relates to the same person that is expressed or
described by the first noun or participle: i.e. it denotes a farther
description of the first-named person . . .
The "Granville Sharp Rule" with the article-noun-kai-noun needs
"nouns" which:
(1) neither is impersonal
(2) neither is plural
(3) neither is a proper name
As implausible as the rule seems on first blush, there are no contrary
examples in the NT.
Some may recognize that I wrote one of the Bible Software packages
(Bible Windows) and one of the example searches looks for Granville
Sharp constructions.
There were a set of articles which may be of interest by Kuehne, in the
_Journal of Theology_ starting with the Sept 1973 issue. One of the points
which are examined is the understanding of o( megaj qeoj kai swthr in
Patristic literature. The assertion is made that this phrase always referes
to one person in the patristics when the sense can be determined. I don't
have the time right now, but it would be an interesting exercise to search
the TLG for other examples of this phrase in pre-christian literature. This
used to be (perhaps still is) a passion with Dan Wallace of Dallas Seminary.
- -John Baima
------------------------------
From: "Larry W. Hurtado" <hurtado@cc.umanitoba.ca>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 10:58:51 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: More questions on Mark
On Tue, 26 Sep 1995, Bruce Terry wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Sep 1995, Jim McGuire wrote:
>
> > "ego eimi" is the equivalent Greek phrase to "YHWH" in the Old Testament.
>
> Apparently you missed the discussion earlier this year in which it was pointed
> out that the LXX of Ex. 3:14 has hO WN used alone of God rather than EGW EIMI.
> First it says EGW EIMI hO WN "I am the Being" and then it says hO WN
> APESTALKEN ME PROS hUMAS "The Being sent me to you." However, this is not the
> equivalent of Yahweh; that in verse 15 is KURIOS.
If "ego eimi" (of Mark 6 and elsewhere in the Gospels) is an allusion to the
Yhwh of the OT, it is *not* to Exod 3, of course, but to Isa. 42-46,
where the absolute form "ego eimi" is a refrain of Yhwh (and cf. the "me
phobou" also in 44:2!!). It is here, in these chaps. of Deutero-Isaiah
of the LXX that we have the Greek expression functioning as a virtual
self-identification formula for Yhwh, and since Deutero-Isaiah is *such*
a major mine of christological material for the Evangelists, it seems
almost certain that readers were expected to catch the allusions. Thus,
the *absolute* form (ego eimi without a predicate adj or noun), I
suggest, may more likely characteristically be intended to allude to the
use of the expression in the "theophanic" oracles of Deut-Isa.
Larry Hurtado, Religion, Univ. of Manitoba
------------------------------
From: Travis Bauer <bauer@acc.jc.edu>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 12:00:36 -35900
Subject: Didache and the future tense
In chapters one and two of the didache, there are a lot of future
tense verbs that seem to operate as imperatives. Can future tense be
used as such?
/-----------------------------------------------------------------
/ Travis Bauer / If all the world's philosophers were laid /
/ Jamestown College / end to end, would they reach a conclusion? /
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
From: Vincent Broman <broman@np.nosc.mil>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 95 09:57:19 PDT
Subject: Re: Words
jtauber@tartarus.uwa.edu.au counted different....:
> What's going on here?
I'll have to confirm Tauber's NA26 count. I had some brackets
with space on each side counting as words.
My careful, ultimate count of words in the NT, not counting the titles
of the books, and without any text obtained from between the lines....
Text Omit stuff in brackets Include stuff in brackets
W-H 136481 137675
NA26 136866 138019
Byzantine-Robinson 140032 140250
Scrivener 140606 same
Stephanus 1550 140537 140677
Vincent Broman, code 786 Bayside Email: broman@nosc.mil
Naval Command Control and Ocean Surveillance Center, RDT&E Div.
San Diego, CA 92152-6147, USA Phone: +1 619 553 1641
------------------------------
From: "Carl W. Conrad" <cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 12:28:08 -0500
Subject: Re: Didache and the future tense
At 6:00 AM 10/12/95, Travis Bauer wrote:
> In chapters one and two of the didache, there are a lot of future
>tense verbs that seem to operate as imperatives. Can future tense be
>used as such?
Yes; this is, I believe, a Semitism, coming from usage of the Hebrew
imperfect to state commands, as in the 10 Commandments. The LXX translates
these as future indicatives in the Greek and the usage is seen at several
points in Semitizing NT Greek, and, of course, particularly in citations
from the LXX.
Ironically, the future indicative appears originally to be derived from an
aorist subjunctive; in Homeric Greek the aorist subjunctive with a
short-vowel link (O/E instead of W/H) is frequently used as an imperative
and looks like a future, but this usage is not found in classical Attic,
nor, I believe, in Hellenistic Greek outside of writers affected by the
LXX. I shouldn't want to be dogmatic about that, but I believe it's the
case.
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: "Timothy B. Smith" <xapa@usaor.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 13:28:53 -0400
Subject: RE: Words
Bill Mounce in his introductory textbook *Basics of Biblical Greek* says
that there are 5437 different words in the Greek New Testament and that they
occur a total of 138,162 times. He bases his information on the computer
program Gramcord. As a little aside, Mounce also points out that 319 words
account for 110,425 word occurences or 79.92% of the total word count.[cf
Mounce, page 17].
xapis kai eipnvn
Timothy B. Smith
United Presbyterian Church In Ingram
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Geneva College
Part-Time Faculty
Beaver Falls, Pennsylvania
xapa@usaor.net
------------------------------
From: WINBROW@aol.com
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 14:39:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Words
You are right. It has several problems. It counted all of the verse numbers
as words and also counted words with an accent over an W as two words. For
some reason it does not count words with accents over some letters as two
words. Allowing for these, it looks like to me there are about136 thousand
words in the UBS3 Greek NT.
Red faced,
Carlton Winbery
Prof. NT & Greek
LA College, Pineville, LA
------------------------------
From: Larry Swain <lswain@wln.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 12:28:54 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Calling Jesus God in... (Granville Sharp)
John,
On the Granville Sharp rule, I am wondering what the rule is for clauses,
is there anything beyond how one reads the context to determine if 2
subordinate, predicate clauses joined by kai/ are referrents to the same,
or stand independantly.
Larry Swain
Parmly Billings Library
lswain@wln.com
------------------------------
From: Vincent Broman <broman@np.nosc.mil>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 95 14:22:10 PDT
Subject: Re: A TC Question
mark_o'brien@dts.edu asked about Sturz:
> I am curious
> as to exactly what he does with internal evidence in his evaluations.
> How does he deal with conflations...?
Your curiosity will be rewarded by reading Sturz's book on the Byzantine
text type yourself. There he gives evidence that no text type is immune
to conflation and that the Byzantines are not specially prone to it.
He also deals with other types of internal evidences in general terms.
Aside from my own paper found at http://archimedes.nosc.mil/gnt/lukediff.txt
I'm not aware of any work which methodically and repeatably evaluates the
preponderance of internal evidence for/against any of the major text types,
with the possible exception of the text of Bezae.
(I'd love to learn otherwise.)
I think Sturz and I agree that internal evidences do not weigh against
the potential value of the Byzantines.
Vincent Broman, code 786 Bayside Email: broman@nosc.mil
Naval Command Control and Ocean Surveillance Center, RDT&E Div.
San Diego, CA 92152-6147, USA Phone: +1 619 553 1641
------------------------------
From: SHelton886@aol.com
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 18:36:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Didache and the future tense
Travis,
Your wrote:
>>In chapters one and two of the didache, there are a lot of future
tense verbs that seem to operate as imperatives. Can future tense be
used as such?
Yes. e.g., see James 2:8. Burton writes, "The 2d per of the Fut. Ind. is
often used as an Imp." (my abbr.) See Ernest De Witt Burton, Syntax of the
Moods and Tenses in NT Greek x 67, 68.
Stan Helton
------------------------------
From: SHelton886@aol.com
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 18:32:05 -0400
Subject: Re: wedding garments
James Kuiper,
You wrote:
>>Has anyone found the term "wedding garments" in extra-Biblical literature>>
The nature of the garments are unknown. The expression <<enduma gamou>> does
not occur elsewhere in the NT or the LXX. In the long text of Joseph and
Asenath 20.6 it refers to the clothing of the bride not the guest; this,
however, may be post-Christian (cf. "New" International Standard Bible
Encyclopedia, s.v. "wedding garments").
That text reads, "And her father and mother and his whole family came from
the field which was their inheritance. And they saw aseneth like (the)
appearance of light, and her beauty was like heavenly beauty. And they saw
her sitting with Joseph and dressed in a wedding garmentx" Cited from
Charlesworth, The OT Pseudepigrapha, vol. 2.
Stan Helton
------------------------------
From: Travis Bauer <bauer@acc.jc.edu>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 18:02:22 -35900
Subject: Re: Didache and the future tense
Thanks for the answer. I though that is was used so, but my only
grammar text is Machen and I couldn't find it there.
/-----------------------------------------------------------------
/ Travis Bauer / If all the world's philosophers were laid /
/ Jamestown College / end to end, would they reach a conclusion? /
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
From: JFFPTRS@aol.com
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 23:46:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Cancel
UNSUBSCRIBE B-GREEK
------------------------------
From: JClar100@aol.com
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 23:57:57 -0400
Subject: Romans 2:27
Would someone help me with Romans 2:27:
"kai krinei hH ek phusews akrobustia ton nomon telousa se ton dia grammatos
kai peritomHs parabatHn nomou"?
1) Is the writer saying that "the one who is physically uncircumcised and
yet fulfills the law will judge you who are a transgressor of the law through
'letter' and circumcision"?
2) If so, what is the justification for using the "ton" which is found
before "dia"?
3) As a definite article what noun or pronoun does it stand in relation to?
If it has a substantive use, how is it identified grammatically? Does it
link with "parabatHn"? If so, why isn't it "tHn"? The other three nouns
following it are genitives, if I'm not mistaken?
4) Is there a simple rule governing the use of the article which I have
overlooked?
5) Also, would making this verse a question as the UBS 4th ed. apparatus
suggests some manuscripts have done have any bearing on the use of "ton" or
the overall meaning of the verse?
Thanks for any comments.
JClar100@aol.com
------------------------------
End of b-greek-digest V1 #878
*****************************
** 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