[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
b-greek-digest V1 #20
b-greek-digest Thursday, 30 November 1995 Volume 01 : Number 020
In this issue:
Re: AGAPAW
RE: Bible study software.
Re: Bible study software? (fwd)
Re: Basic Foundation
Re: Basic Foundation
Textual Problems in Mark 7:24, 28
Vocabulary books for <10 X in the NT
Answer sheets for BBG
Re: Bible study software? (fwd)
Re: Basic Foundation
Basic Foundation
Re: Bible study software? (fwd)
Re: Bible study software? (fwd)
Re: Bible study software?
Dative Direct Objects, Heb 1:6
Re: Textual Problems in Mark 7:24, 28
Bible study software? (fwd)
Re: Bible study software? (fwd)
Re: Bible study software? (fwd)
Bible study software thread
Re: Basic Foundation
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mike Adams <mikadams@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 23:55:52 -0800
Subject: Re: AGAPAW
I can't seem to find the beginning of this thread. Was the original question
concerning the fact that John 3:16 says "God so loved the world...." but
I John 2:15 warns us to "love not the world"? Many find this confusing.
I recently saw a program on Public television concerning the principles of
language. Children were studied to discover how they learned language. They
noted that the children (and likely all people) had a natural presuppostion
that each word should have only one meaning, and every concept should have a
unique name. In learning a new language most people wish that were the case.
Regrettably, some attempt to translate is if it were.
Both agapaw and kosmos have a range of meanings.
Carlton Winbery wrote:
>With respect to what is signified by KOSMOS in the Gospel of John, 1:10 is
>very interesting. He was in the TWi KOSMWi, and the hO KOSMOS was made
>through him, and hO KOSMOS knew (aor.) him not. Obviously the word
>signifies three different things in this one verse; humanity, creation, and
>humanity apart from God.
A recent thread comparing the words for love clearly pointed out that
"Agapaw" denotes a strong affinity and has a range of meanings from a
virtuous affection to a carnal desire.
With this information, and by simply looking at the context we see.
"God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son...."
Love is a noble compassion, the world: humanity.
"Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world...the lust of
the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life..."
We should not desire created things which will pass away.
One can love (nobly) the world (mankind) without loving (desiring) the world
(physical creation.)
Ellen Adams
------------------------------
From: "D. Peterson" <harpbard@ccnet.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 00:14:31 -0800
Subject: RE: Bible study software.
>Paul Dixon asked about Bible study software.
Do I use it? A whole lot.
My personal favorites: for Windows-BibleWorks, for Macintosh On Line Bible.
Both have original language support, good search features, many
translations into both English and other languages, good export functions,
good cross references, etc.
Here is why I think using a computer for this kind of study is useful:
1. You have exhaustive concordances for every single version you
install-BHS, N26, LXX, NIV, NRSV, RSV, KJV, Reina-Valera, Luther, etc. You
can look up specific phrases as well-this week I used "Day of the Lord" to
get a set of OT references for a discussion of eschatology. Imagine how
long that takes with a regular concordance.
2. You can look up by root, by inflection, etc. If you want to know how
often Paul uses the first person present tense in his letters, you can do
it in a flash.
3. You can move text into lesson notes, sermons, newsletters instantly.
4. You can get cross-references, footnotes, commentaries at the push of a
button. [Personally I think Robinson's Word Pictures is very useful for
improving my Greek--he points out a number of fine points. ]
5. In my experience, reading other translations can help me see a text in a
new light. The more translations available the better. Its a lot easier to
work with the electronic version than all those volumes of books.
Too bad that Anchor Bible Dictionary is not available on CD rom.....
------------------------------
From: fitchel bandy <who@usa.pipeline.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 10:29:13 -0500
Subject: Re: Bible study software? (fwd)
1>d
- --
Fitchel BANDY
tn nuepa tou kupiou nuwv
------------------------------
From: Mark O'Brien <Mark_O'Brien@dts.edu>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 09:13:55 CST
Subject: Re: Basic Foundation
Original message sent on Tue, Nov 28 6:33 PM by cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu (Carl
W. Conrad) :
>At 5:05 PM 11/28/95, Mark O'Brien wrote:
>>However, it strikes me that very few of us are able to approach the
>>exegesis of the text without some reference to our presuppositions
>>concerning the reliability or veracity of the text. I know that we
>>would like to let ourselves think that our exegesis fully drives our
>>theology, but I have a strong feeling that this is not reality! (Take, for
>>example, the recent discussion regarding 1Co 13.)
>This is unquestionably true, but it is another thing altogether to start
>talking about biblical inerrancy. Some of us hold to such a doctrine
>while others do not. To start a discussion on that topic is most likely
>to bring us to start flaming each other rather than helping each other
>out in matters where we CAN be helpful to each other. Theology
>cannot help but intrude into discussions of the Greek text, but it is
>the Greek text that is our primary focus, as was clearly indicated in
>the description of the list sent out to all of us, and I think it is only at
>great risk that we embark upon direct discussion of theological issues
>themselves. That sort of discussion--which focuses precisely on
>those issues upon which we disagree, and perhaps very intensely--is
>precisely what is most likely to disrupt the sort of community we
>have carefully tried to build on this list.
I agree entirely with your comments... I certainly have no desire to
see this become a theology list. I guess my basic comment was to
note that at some point our theological views of the text will impact
our exegesis and interpretation, but this is not something y'all don't
know already. (Perhaps I was just reminding myself!) Anyway, I
agree that there are other forums for dealing directly with these
types of theological questions. I appreciate your desire to see this
list profit through what we all have in common (a love of the Greek
text of the NT), rather than become a dull exchange of salvos centred
around what we disagree upon.
Mark O'Brien
Grad. student
Dallas Theological Seminary
------------------------------
From: JDANIELS@asc.scottlan.edu
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 10:58:05 EST
Subject: Re: Basic Foundation
Subject: Re: Basic Foundation
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 09:13:55 CST
From: Mark O'Brien <Mark_O'Brien@dts.edu>
To: B-GREEK@virginia.edu
Organization: Dallas Theological Seminary
Original message sent on Tue, Nov 28 6:33 PM by cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu (Carl
W. Conrad) :
>At 5:05 PM 11/28/95, Mark O'Brien wrote:
>>However, it strikes me that very few of us are able to approach the
>>exegesis of the text without some reference to our presuppositions
>>concerning the reliability or veracity of the text. I know that we
>>would like to let ourselves think that our exegesis fully drives our
>>theology, but I have a strong feeling that this is not reality! (Take, for
>>example, the recent discussion regarding 1Co 13.)
>This is unquestionably true, but it is another thing altogether to start
>talking about biblical inerrancy. Some of us hold to such a doctrine
>while others do not. To start a discussion on that topic is most likely
>to bring us to start flaming each other rather than helping each other
>out in matters where we CAN be helpful to each other. Theology
>cannot help but intrude into discussions of the Greek text, but it is
>the Greek text that is our primary focus, as was clearly indicated in
>the description of the list sent out to all of us, and I think it is only at
>great risk that we embark upon direct discussion of theological issues
>themselves. That sort of discussion--which focuses precisely on
>those issues upon which we disagree, and perhaps very intensely--is
>precisely what is most likely to disrupt the sort of community we
>have carefully tried to build on this list.
I agree entirely with your comments... I certainly have no desire to
see this become a theology list. I guess my basic comment was to
note that at some point our theological views of the text will impact
our exegesis and interpretation, but this is not something y'all don't
know already. (Perhaps I was just reminding myself!) Anyway, I
agree that there are other forums for dealing directly with these
types of theological questions. I appreciate your desire to see this
list profit through what we all have in common (a love of the Greek
text of the NT), rather than become a dull exchange of salvos centred
around what we disagree upon.
Mark O'Brien
Grad. student
Dallas Theological Seminary
Although it might be beneficial to allow discussion of the original
language, the task of textual criticism, and even the intricacies and
ramifications of the textual apperatus of the Nestle-Aland 26th
ed.--particularly as these subjects are relevant to one's translation
of the text. I do not think that such discussion should necessarily
fall under the subject heading "theology".
Jack Daniels
Grad. Student
The University of London
------------------------------
From: Kenneth Litwak <kenneth@sybase.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 08:51:35 +0800
Subject: Textual Problems in Mark 7:24, 28
I'm wondering about a couple of textual problems I'm looking at in
Mark 7. The presence of "Sidon" in 7:24 and nai in 7:28 in many
important, Alexandrian-type witnesses, leads me to really wonder about the
rejection of these words in NA27. While Metzger has a point that these
could be due to harmonization with Matt 15, I wonder if that's reasonable
given the substantial evidence for their presence in both verses. In
7:28, the only major witnesses that omit nai are P45 W and Theta.
While P45 is important, I don't think we want to take it as superior to
Aleph, A, B, 33 etc without other reasons. Furthermore, I can't see how
the Alexandrian reading in v.28 could have arisen from the version in
P45. So in both of these instances, I am inclined to go against the
NA27, even though the issue in v.24 might be influenced by the dictum of
taking the shorter text. I would like to know what others think.
Thanks.
Ken Litwak
GTU
Bezerkley, CA
------------------------------
From: Kenneth Litwak <kenneth@sybase.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 08:53:48 +0800
Subject: Vocabulary books for <10 X in the NT
Does anyone have suggestions for a book to get or avoid to learn the
Greek vocabulary of the NT which occurs less than 10X? I've got
Metzger's lexical aids to do 10X or more, but nothing that is a
vocabulary book to learn the less-frequent vocab. I know of a couple of
titles but our bookstore only has one so I can't compare them.
Thanks.
Ken Litwak
GTU
Bezerkley, CA
------------------------------
From: Bill Mounce <billm@teknia.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 10:32:05 -0700
Subject: Answer sheets for BBG
I am trying to decide whether to release the answer sheets to the workbook
for Basics of Biblical Greek through my web page. How do you feel about
students being able to get the answers to both parsing and exercises. The
answers to the exercises are no big deal since students can read the verse
in the Bible. And the answers to the parsings are actually in ParseWorks.
Are any of you still using the quizzes I included with the Teacher's
Packet? I may want to release those as well so the students can practice.
Bill Mounce
- -------------------------------
Teknia Software, Inc.
1306 W. Bellwood Drive
Spokane, WA 99218-2911
Internet: billm@teknia.com (preferred)
AOL: Mounce
CIS: 71540,2140 (please, only if necessary)
"It may be Greek to you, but it is life to me."
------------------------------
From: fitchel bandy <who@usa.pipeline.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 14:08:51 -0500
Subject: Re: Bible study software? (fwd)
Sir the chestnut cd bibles&religion can be bought for $10 at
crazy bobs 800 776 5865 it is a old ver of online bibles it can be
upgraded free by down loading a file at http://www.vir.com/bp/bp_olb.htm
Bible software I upgraded mine
it is the best Bible program I have 6-7 English and 3 Greek Bibles
it has all search,notes,meany references ect. I highly reckon mend it.
- --
Fitchel BANDY
tn nuepa tou kupiou nuwv
------------------------------
From: David Moore <dvdmoore@dcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 15:13:31 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Basic Foundation
On Wed, 29 Nov 1995, Mark O'Brien wrote:
>
> Original message sent on Tue, Nov 28 6:33 PM by cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu (Carl
> W. Conrad) :
>
> >At 5:05 PM 11/28/95, Mark O'Brien wrote:
> >>However, it strikes me that very few of us are able to approach the
> >>exegesis of the text without some reference to our presuppositions
> >>concerning the reliability or veracity of the text. I know that we
> >>would like to let ourselves think that our exegesis fully drives our
> >>theology, but I have a strong feeling that this is not reality! (Take, for
> >>example, the recent discussion regarding 1Co 13.)
>
> >This is unquestionably true, but it is another thing altogether to start
> >talking about biblical inerrancy. Some of us hold to such a doctrine
> >while others do not. To start a discussion on that topic is most likely
> >to bring us to start flaming each other rather than helping each other
> >out in matters where we CAN be helpful to each other. Theology
> >cannot help but intrude into discussions of the Greek text, but it is
> >the Greek text that is our primary focus, as was clearly indicated in
> >the description of the list sent out to all of us, and I think it is only at
> >great risk that we embark upon direct discussion of theological issues
> >themselves. That sort of discussion--which focuses precisely on
> >those issues upon which we disagree, and perhaps very intensely--is
> >precisely what is most likely to disrupt the sort of community we
> >have carefully tried to build on this list.
>
> I agree entirely with your comments... I certainly have no desire to
> see this become a theology list. I guess my basic comment was to
> note that at some point our theological views of the text will impact
> our exegesis and interpretation, but this is not something y'all don't
> know already. (Perhaps I was just reminding myself!) Anyway, I
> agree that there are other forums for dealing directly with these
> types of theological questions. I appreciate your desire to see this
> list profit through what we all have in common (a love of the Greek
> text of the NT), rather than become a dull exchange of salvos centred
> around what we disagree upon.
>
Some have talked about this dialogue between the interpreter and
the text as the "hermeneutic circle." The text gives me information
which, in turn affects my understanding of the text which influences my
exegesis of the text.... and so on.
David L. Moore Southeastern Spanish District
Miami, Florida of the Assemblies of God
dvdmoore@dcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us Department of Education
------------------------------
From: James Kuiper <kuiper@mayo.edu>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 15:17:46 -0600
Subject: Basic Foundation
David Moore wrote...
> Some have talked about this dialogue between the interpreter and
> the text as the "hermeneutic circle." The text gives me information
> which, in turn affects my understanding of the text which influences my
> exegesis of the text.... and so on.
>
Grant Osborne's The Hermeneutical Spiral deals with this issue brilliantly.
He also included two fabulous appendices on the nature of meaning.
(Slightly off topic, I know. Sorry Carl, I couldn't resist)
James Kuiper
Rochester, Mn
cold and snowy
------------------------------
From: Nichael Cramer <nichael@sover.net>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 17:16:27 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Bible study software? (fwd)
On Wed, 29 Nov 1995, fitchel bandy wrote:
> Sir the chestnut cd bibles&religion can be bought for $10 at
> crazy bobs 800 776 5865 it is a old ver of online bibles it can be
> upgraded free by down loading a file at http://www.vir.com/bp/bp_olb.htm
> Bible software I upgraded mine
> it is the best Bible program I have 6-7 English and 3 Greek Bibles
> it has all search,notes,meany references ect. I highly reckon mend it.
It should be noted, however, that many/most(all?) of the systems listed
during this thread support only text-only Greek or Hebrew modules; i.e. no
critical apparatus, no variant readings, etc. and as such are of limited
use. Similarly no accents, breathing marks, etc.
Likewise the search engines in many of the systems are quite simple; for
example in the On-Line Bible were one do a search in Greek on "XAPIS", the
system will not find matches of the form "XAPIC" (i.e. different forms of
the final sigma).
N
------------------------------
From: "Alan D. Bulley" <s458507@aix1.uottawa.ca>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 19:53:29 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Bible study software? (fwd)
On Wed, 29 Nov 1995, Nichael Cramer wrote:
> It should be noted, however, that many/most(all?) of the systems listed
> during this thread support only text-only Greek or Hebrew modules; i.e. no
> critical apparatus, no variant readings, etc. and as such are of limited
> use. Similarly no accents, breathing marks, etc.
>
> Likewise the search engines in many of the systems are quite simple; for
> example in the On-Line Bible were one do a search in Greek on "XAPIS", the
> system will not find matches of the form "XAPIC" (i.e. different forms of
> the final sigma).
Nichael is quite right -- a lot of the Bible software out there is next
to useless for any serious work. This is why I'll be saving my pennies
for the Gramcord Institute's acCordance programme. It contains the most
powerful search engine I have seen for a Bible programme and is able to
perform multiple levels of lexical and grammatical searches using Boolean
patterns. Yet one thing is lacking in acCordance 1.1: the ability to read
the PHI and TLG disks. The Gramcord people tell me this is something they
are looking into, but not to hold my breath.
Sigh...
Alan D. Bulley
Faculty of Theology/Faculte de theologie |s458507@aix1.uottawa.ca
Saint Paul University/Universite St-Paul |abulley@spu.stpaul.uottawa.ca
Ottawa, Canada
Fax: (613) 782-3005
------------------------------
From: "Philip L. Graber" <pgraber@emory.edu>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 20:33:45 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Bible study software?
On Wed, 29 Nov 1995, Nichael Cramer wrote:
> It should be noted, however, that many/most(all?) of the systems listed
> during this thread support only text-only Greek or Hebrew modules; i.e. no
> critical apparatus, no variant readings, etc. and as such are of limited
> use. Similarly no accents, breathing marks, etc.
I don't recall what programs have been mentioned. I do know that Bible
Windows from Silver Mountain Software includes accents and breathing
marks. As of the most recent release (version 4.0), you can also search
on Hebrew vowels and accents in the BHS. Furthermore, since the texts are
tagged (Greek NT, LXX and BHS, that is) you can also find any form of a word
or any grammatical category regardless of its particular grammatical
manifestation. The search engine is quite powerful. Since it uses the
Friberg text, ambiguous forms will be found by any of the parameters that
match (the last time I used it, Gramcord did not include ambiguities in
the database itself, but choices were made; BTW, Bible Windows is also
considerably less expensive than Gramcord, but there is no Mac version of
Bible Windows).
Philip Graber Graduate Division of Religion
Graduate Student in New Testament 211 Bishops Hall, Emory University
pgraber@emory.edu Atlanta, GA 30322 USA
------------------------------
From: Ray Mattera <73067.2630@compuserve.com>
Date: 29 Nov 95 22:50:21 EST
Subject: Dative Direct Objects, Heb 1:6
I am trying to confirm some study I have been doing on dative direct
objects in the NT. As I understand it, when grammarians speak of a
transitive verb "with the dative" or "with the accusative," etc., they are
saying that the transitive verb takes an accusative or dative direct
object. For example, note these quotations from Robertson:
"With verbs in particular which were transitive the accusative was the
obvious case to use unless there was some special reason to use some
other. The other oblique cases with verbs (gen., abl., loc., instr., dat.)
came to be used with one verb or the other rather than the accusative,
because the idea of that verb and case coalesced in a sense." (p.
454[d].)
...................
"But we have (pp.330f.) observed that transitive verbs in Greek do not
always have the accusative. The transitiveness may be as clearly
expressed by a dative as with [akoloutheO]..." (p. 472; see also
539ff.)
I think that when grammarians speak of _intransitive_ verbs with a
particular Greek case, they are speaking of other nuances of meaning;
e.g., in the case of the dative, the dative of advantage or disadvantage, etc.
In particular, I understand that proskyneO, when transitive, often takes
a dative direct object. For instance, in Heb 1:6 I take the dative
pronoun autO to be the direct object of the aorist imperative
proskynEsatOsan.
Texts at times even shift between dative and accusative direct objects
with proskyneO. For example in John 4:23, I take the dative tO patri
to be the direct object of proskynEsousin and the accusative auton to
be the object of the participle tous proskynountas. Also in Rev 13:4, 8:
kai prosekynEsan tO drakonti...kai prosekynEsan tO thriO. In v 4
proskyneO occurs twice, in each instance taking a dative direct object.
However, in v 8 proskyneO takes the accusative auton (autO in some
ancient authorities).
There are many other instances where, as I understand it, proskyneO
takes a dative direct object. To list a few that are similar to Heb 1:6
(i.e., proskyneO with the dative autO as its direct object): Matt 2:2, 8,
Matt 28:9, and John 9:38.
Could someone please comment on these points to clarify if I have
misunderstood this matter.
Ray Mattera
73067.2630@compuserve.com
------------------------------
From: Carlton Winbery <winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 22:03:22 +0400
Subject: Re: Textual Problems in Mark 7:24, 28
Ken Litwak wrote;
> I'm wondering about a couple of textual problems I'm looking at in
>Mark 7. The presence of "Sidon" in 7:24 and nai in 7:28 in many
>important, Alexandrian-type witnesses, leads me to really wonder about the
>rejection of these words in NA27. While Metzger has a point that these
>could be due to harmonization with Matt 15, I wonder if that's reasonable
>given the substantial evidence for their presence in both verses. In
>7:28, the only major witnesses that omit nai are P45 W and Theta.
>While P45 is important, I don't think we want to take it as superior to
>Aleph, A, B, 33 etc without other reasons. Furthermore, I can't see how
>the Alexandrian reading in v.28 could have arisen from the version in
>P45. So in both of these instances, I am inclined to go against the
>NA27, even though the issue in v.24 might be influenced by the dictum of
>taking the shorter text. I would like to know what others think.
I would add to your major witnesses that omit NAI D and the old Latin. Also
the absense of NAI in vs. 28 and SIDWNOS in 24 is the best reading in that
they adequately account for the other readings, they originate by
harmonization. As Metzger pointed out the use of NAI is common in Matt.
but not in Mark. That seems weighty enough to me to prefer the shorter
readings here.
Calton L. Winbery
Prof. Religion
LA College, Pineville, La
winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net
------------------------------
From: "Wes C. Williams" <71414.3647@compuserve.com>
Date: 29 Nov 95 22:58:57 EST
Subject: Bible study software? (fwd)
I have been a software consultant for the last 16 years and have personally
experienced frustration with the limitations of performing greek searches such
as "give me all instances of predicate anarthrous nouns occurring before a
copulative verb" (in personal research of Harner (1961) and Colwell's rule.
This is especially challenging when there are an unknown number of adjectives
and/or attributes between the noun and the verb.
To end the frustration, I began writing my own bible research software several
years ago. I stopped when I found I had direct access to the programmer of
Bibleworks. I found him to be quite responsive to incorporating suggestions into
his product.
This is not an advertisement of Bibleworks. I am an independent greek
researcher who has used a variety of products. However, in the interests of
furthering the present limits of scriptual research, I would like to offer that
if anybody is hitting the limits of software research, I would be happy to pass
your suggestions on to the Bibleworks developer who will consider incorporating
it. It worked for me.
Sincerely,
Wes Williams
Software Consultant
------------------------------
From: Stephen Carlson <scc@reston.icl.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 22:51:54 EST
Subject: Re: Bible study software? (fwd)
Nichael Cramer wrote:
> Likewise the search engines in many of the systems are quite simple; for
> example in the On-Line Bible were one do a search in Greek on "XAPIS", the
> system will not find matches of the form "XAPIC" (i.e. different forms of
> the final sigma).
I use the On-Line Bible as well as Bible Windows. And although Bible
Windows is very good for sophisticated searches (and includes the LXX
as well), I really like the OLB because it is blindingly *fast*.
The problem with the final sigma doesn't crop up much in the OLB,
because no words end in a non-final sigma, so you just type it in:
like this: "cariv". If you want to search for more than the nominative
singular of XARIS, you would use the OR operator: "cariv | carit*".
Bible Windows is nice for letting me specify just the lexical form, but
it is slower, not to mention the Windoze start up time.
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: Nichael Cramer <nichael@sover.net>
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 00:04:22 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Bible study software? (fwd)
On Wed, 29 Nov 1995, Stephen Carlson wrote:
> Nichael Cramer wrote:
> > Likewise the search engines in many of the systems are quite simple; for
> > example in the On-Line Bible were one do a search in Greek on "XAPIS", the
> > system will not find matches of the form "XAPIC" (i.e. different forms of
> > the final sigma).
> The problem with the final sigma doesn't crop up much in the OLB,
> because no words end in a non-final sigma, so you just type it in:
> like this: "cariv".
Right, I do understand this point. My concern, however, was one of
a user-interface or usability issue.
The analogous issue here would be one of case-sensitivity in English.
That is, I find it as annoying that that the search algorithm
differentiates between final forms as I would if it wouldn't find "Moses"
if I typed in "moses" or "MOSES".
> If you want to search for more than the nominative
> singular of XARIS, you would use the OR operator: "cariv | carit*".
And if I want to search for all forms of <EIMI>? ;-)
N
------------------------------
From: "Todd J. B. Blayone" <chorus@bud.peinet.pe.ca>
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 00:18:11 +0000
Subject: Bible study software thread
Hi,
You are all invited to visit Harry Hahne's (Chorus sponsored) WWW
resource dedicated to bible-analysis packages. The URL is:
http://www.chorus.cycor.ca/Hahne/m003.html
If you like what Harry is doing and would like to contribute to this
resource as a reviewer, do not hesitate to contact him. There is still
much work to be done.
Best,
Todd
______________________________________________________________
Todd J. B. Blayone (chorus@peinet.pe.ca; MIME OK!)
Project Coordinator, Chorus / Ph.D. candidate, McGill
Address: 2480 Brock Rd. N., Pickering, ON, Canada, L1V 2P8
http://www.peinet.pe.ca:2080/Chorus/People/Todd_B/toddhome.html
________________________________________________________________
------------------------------
From: David Moore <dvdmoore@dcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us>
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 00:36:49 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Basic Foundation
On Wed, 29 Nov 1995, James Kuiper wrote:
>
> David Moore wrote...
>
> > Some have talked about this dialogue between the interpreter and
> > the text as the "hermeneutic circle." The text gives me information
> > which, in turn affects my understanding of the text which influences my
> > exegesis of the text.... and so on.
> >
>
> Grant Osborne's The Hermeneutical Spiral deals with this issue brilliantly.
> He also included two fabulous appendices on the nature of meaning.
>
And spiraling upward certainly sounds better than going in circles,
doesn't it ;)
David L. Moore Southeastern Spanish District
Miami, Florida of the Assemblies of God
dvdmoore@dcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us Department of Education
------------------------------
End of b-greek-digest V1 #20
****************************
** 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