[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
b-greek-digest V1 #36
b-greek-digest Friday, 8 December 1995 Volume 01 : Number 036
In this issue:
Re: Women, etc.
Marcan anomaly/solecism? (mercifully short!)
Re: Women, etc.
1 Timothy 2:12 possible use of "or" as "that is"
Re: Marcan anomaly/solecism? (mercifully short!)
Re: Marcan anomaly/solecism? (mercifully short!)
Re: GOOD Greek Correspondence Courses?
RE: THE PRESERVATION OF THE ...
Omnipotence
confused
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bill Mounce <billm@teknia.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 10:41:33 -0700
Subject: Re: Women, etc.
Ellen,
>>I really don't think that using emotionally charged and incorrect language
>>like "chauvanist" is helpful or correct.
>
>Good point. I must learn to word things more discretely.
Thanks Ellen, I appreciate it.
>By the way, you teach Greek, presumably to students of both genders. Just
>out of curiousity, how do you counsel women involved in Biblical studies
>concerning their options in ministry?
I stopped teaching three years ago and left to have time with my family (my
kids are 1.5, 5, and 7). They were growing up and I was working two jobs in
order to have the "privilege" to teach at a Christian university in
southern California. HA! I am now finishing up my fifth and sixth writing
projects, pastoring at the church, learning what ministry is really about,
playing with my children, and being a husband to my wife. What a life!
Anyway, to answer your question, back then I encouraged the women to be as
active in ministry as the women in Scripture were active :-) and pleaded
that some do what TItus 2 requires and yet is almost uniformly passed over.
(which makes me wonder whether the issue for some is power and not
service). I always encouraged them to hold their conclusions for Biblical
reasons, not cultural, and if they came to a different conclusion than I,
then I was still their teacher and friend and would support them as I
could. This isn't a watershed issue for me, and we are all so tied up with
presuppositions and biases that in all honesty I think that we have to hold
out the possibility we are wrong on these issues that are not part of
orthodoxy.
Having said that, and having pastored for three years now, I can see the
devastation on marriages and families, and consequently the church and
society, when husbands aren't husband and fathers, and women aren't wives
and mothers. I am not attempting to define what those roles are for
everyone, or even for anyone. But our families are disintegrating from the
inside out, and if we Greek Geeks and others don't step up to the plate and
take a stand, the devastation will not soon cease.
And with that comment I will get back to proof-reading my second year
grammar. Oh what joy! Right now I would rather be preaching.
Bill Mounce
Teknia Software, Inc.
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: "Carl W. Conrad" <cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu>
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 14:34:05 -0600
Subject: Marcan anomaly/solecism? (mercifully short!)
I've been thinking some more about the weird construction in Mk 2:20 and
Mt's parallel 9:15): ELEUSONTAI DE hHMERAI hOTAN APARQHi AP' AUTWN hO
NUMFIOS, KAI TOTE NHSTEUSOUSIN EN EKEINHi THi hHMERAi. It's pretty clear
that the way Mark phrases this, the last clause is independent
grammatically, while ELEUSONTAI hHMERAI and hOTAN APARQHi NUMFIOS are
intimately linked. Yet it cannot be said that the latter clause is the
protasis of a condition, nor the former clause an apodosis. We cannot
really translate hOTAN here as "whenever," despite the fact that it is used
with an aorist subjunctive.
BAGD say, "... where hHMERAI hOTAN, 'days when,' belong together and TOTE
is connected with KAI)," admitting that this cannot be construed as an
instance of the common hOTAN w/ subjunctive constructions (what I have
called in my earlier post, in accordance with one common terminology,
"future more vivid" and "present general" conditional constructions.
So what is it? The comment by BAGD is correct, that hHMERAI hOTAN belong
together here and the hOTAN + subj. clause is not linked in a conditional
construction with ELEUSONTAI hHMERAI. I'm not a linguist, but as a
grammarian I'd say that the hOTAN APARQHi clauses can only be understood as
a relative clause--and an adjectival clause wherein hOTAN really is
equivalent to EN hAIS. Is there a better way to understand the function of
this clause?
Where does this usage come from? Can it be accounted for as a Semitism? I
don't know any Aramaic and I don't know enough Hebrew to judge whether the
hOTAN could serve in the place of a relative-clause link such as Hebrew
ASHER. Any enlightenment on this?
And what if it's NOT a Semitism? I've not explored any farther than this,
but I'm wondering whether this IS found anywhere else in the Koine, or if
it really is a Marcan solecism. I've wondered whether this is somehow akin
to the development of hINA + subjunctive clauses independent of the older
Attic standard limitation to purpose constructions to the point where it is
already becoming in Koine what NA + subjunctive is in Modern Greek: an
infinitive that is conjugated for person and number.
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: Eric Vaughan <jevaughan@sauaca.saumag.edu>
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 1995 14:41:18 CST
Subject: Re: Women, etc.
Bill Mounce <billm@teknia.com>
> Having said that, and having pastored for three years now, I can see the
> devastation on marriages and families, and consequently the church and
> society, when husbands aren't husband and fathers, and women aren't wives
> and mothers. I am not attempting to define what those roles are for
> everyone, or even for anyone. But our families are disintegrating from the
> inside out, and if we Greek Geeks and others don't step up to the plate and
> take a stand, the devastation will not soon cease.
Amen!! If I agreed any more, I'd be you!
Eric Vaughan
------------------------------
From: David John Marotta <djm5g@virginia.edu>
Date: 07 Dec 95 14:10:10 EST
Subject: 1 Timothy 2:12 possible use of "or" as "that is"
I would like to ask a question and circumscribed the ensuing discussion.
This is a dangerous thing to ask, but as list keeper I am intitled to
take certain liberties (don't the rest of you try this).
WITHOUT getting into all of the debate associated with 1 Timothy 2:12,
one possible understanding of Paul's use of "or" in the passage
is, "I do not allow a woman to teach THAT IS to have authority over men."
as opposed to it being a logical or, "I do not allow a woman to teach.
I do not allow a woman to have authority over men."
I would like to ask the question, "Are there clear examples (Biblical
perferred) of "or" being used to further clarify what was meant where
it doesn't make sense to take it as a logical or."
Copy both me and the list if you have examples. Thanks!
David John Marotta, Medical Center Computing, Stacey Hall
Univ of Virginia (804) 982-3718 wrk INTERNET: djm5g@virginia.edu
Box 512 Med Cntr (804) 924-5261 msg PRODIGY: KCMR45A
C'ville VA 22908 (804) 296-7209 fax IBM US: usuvarg8
------------------------------
From: Bruce Terry <terry@bible.acu.edu>
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 1995 19:12:38 CST
Subject: Re: Marcan anomaly/solecism? (mercifully short!)
On Thu, 7 Dec 1995, Carl W. Conrad wrote:
>I've been thinking some more about the weird construction in Mk 2:20 and
>Mt's parallel 9:15): ELEUSONTAI DE hHMERAI hOTAN APARQHi AP' AUTWN hO
>NUMFIOS, KAI TOTE NHSTEUSOUSIN EN EKEINHi THi hHMERAi. It's pretty clear
>that the way Mark phrases this, the last clause is independent
>grammatically, while ELEUSONTAI hHMERAI and hOTAN APARQHi NUMFIOS are
>intimately linked. Yet it cannot be said that the latter clause is the
>protasis of a condition, nor the former clause an apodosis. We cannot
>really translate hOTAN here as "whenever," despite the fact that it is used
>with an aorist subjunctive.
>
>BAGD say, "... where hHMERAI hOTAN, 'days when,' belong together and TOTE
>is connected with KAI)," admitting that this cannot be construed as an
>instance of the common hOTAN w/ subjunctive constructions (what I have
>called in my earlier post, in accordance with one common terminology,
>"future more vivid" and "present general" conditional constructions.
>
>So what is it? The comment by BAGD is correct, that hHMERAI hOTAN belong
>together here and the hOTAN + subj. clause is not linked in a conditional
>construction with ELEUSONTAI hHMERAI. I'm not a linguist, but as a
>grammarian I'd say that the hOTAN APARQHi clauses can only be understood as
>a relative clause--and an adjectival clause wherein hOTAN really is
>equivalent to EN hAIS. Is there a better way to understand the function of
>this clause?
Carl, I think you are on to something. The word "when" can be used as a
pronoun in English where the antecedent is a time noun. I'm not sure I want
to call it a relative pronoun, since it fills an adverbial slot, not a noun
slot (i.e. subject or object). On reflection, my example was poorly chosen
because the hOTAN clause is modifying hHMERAI in an adjectival relationship,
limiting the meaning of "days." It is not in an adverbial relationship to the
clause ELEUSONTAI hHMERAI; this is easily seen because it cannot be moved to
precede this clause and still mean the same thing.
The reason why you aren't comfortable translating hOTAN "whenever" here is
bacause in English "when" can be used as a pronoun, but "whenever" is not.
I doubt that this is either a solecism or a Semitism since the same kind of
construction occurs in English. The possibility exists that it may have been
introduced to English via the translation of the Bible into English, but I
suspect that it is a feature of Indo-European grammars (of course, it would
have rather restricted usage, only occurring when the noun antecedent is a
time word). Can anyone give examples from other languages? Also, does the
same thing happen with hOTE in Greek?
Thanks for smashing my example, since it was ill-chosen; however, "future more
vivid" construction or not, I still am not convinced that I Cor. 13:10 says
that the thing in part will be done away with *after* the perfect comes.
********************************************************************************
Bruce Terry E-MAIL: terry@bible.acu.edu
Box 8426, ACU Station Phone: 915/674-3759
Abilene, Texas 79699 Fax: 915/674-3769
********************************************************************************
------------------------------
From: Carlton Winbery <winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 20:22:46 +0400
Subject: Re: Marcan anomaly/solecism? (mercifully short!)
Carl W. Conrad wrote:
>I've been thinking some more about the weird construction in Mk 2:20 and
>Mt's parallel 9:15): ELEUSONTAI DE hHMERAI hOTAN APARQHi AP' AUTWN hO
>NUMFIOS, KAI TOTE NHSTEUSOUSIN EN EKEINHi THi hHMERAi. It's pretty clear
>that the way Mark phrases this, the last clause is independent
>grammatically, while ELEUSONTAI hHMERAI and hOTAN APARQHi NUMFIOS are
>intimately linked. Yet it cannot be said that the latter clause is the
>protasis of a condition, nor the former clause an apodosis. We cannot
>really translate hOTAN here as "whenever," despite the fact that it is used
>with an aorist subjunctive.
>
>BAGD say, "... where hHMERAI hOTAN, 'days when,' belong together and TOTE
>is connected with KAI)," admitting that this cannot be construed as an
>instance of the common hOTAN w/ subjunctive constructions (what I have
>called in my earlier post, in accordance with one common terminology,
>"future more vivid" and "present general" conditional constructions.
>
>So what is it? The comment by BAGD is correct, that hHMERAI hOTAN belong
>together here and the hOTAN + subj. clause is not linked in a conditional
>construction with ELEUSONTAI hHMERAI. I'm not a linguist, but as a
>grammarian I'd say that the hOTAN APARQHi clauses can only be understood as
>a relative clause--and an adjectival clause wherein hOTAN really is
>equivalent to EN hAIS. Is there a better way to understand the function of
>this clause?
Carl,
Jim Brooks and I dealt with this kind of clause (hOTAN APARQHi AP' AUTWN hO
NUMFIOS) as a "temporal clause." Usually there is uncertainty as to
realization, but the main function is to signify time. I have done a quick
search for another instance using hOTAN, EPAN, or hHNIKA, but I have not
found one where there seems to be no contingency at all. I think that I
would say that the writer used the subjunctive because the time was
indefinite not because the outcome was in doubt.
Calton L. Winbery
Prof. Religion
LA College, Pineville, La
winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net
------------------------------
From: Rod Decker <rdecker@inf.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 20:21:36 -0600
Subject: Re: GOOD Greek Correspondence Courses?
Mark Gillett wrote:
>Can someone please recommend some good correspondence or distance learning
>courses to learn biblical greek. I've read a number of beginning greek books,
>like "Basic Greek in 30 Minutes a Day" and another by Davis (yech!, too dry),as
>well as "Manual Grammar" by Dana and Mante. I'd like to kick my greek to the
>advanced stage but I'm sure like nobody else in this forum, I do not have the
>schedule to attend formal classrooms.
Mark,
I not aware of any formal courses, but if you've already read Basic Greek,
Davis, and Dana & Mantey--assuming that you have some degree of confidence
with what you learned there, then I doubt that there are any particular
courses that will be of great help to you. I'd suggest two alternatives,
depending on what your confidence level is.
1. If you're not too sure of your foundation, then I'd suggest getting Bill
Mounce's _Basics of Biblical Greek_ (Zondervan) and the workbook. If your
foundation is somewhat shaky, this will shore it up. If you have more than
you think, working through the workbook in conjunction with the text will
strengthen it considerably. The workbook is almost entirely NT translation
with help provided as needed. Anyone who mastered this would be ready to
tackle a good chunk of the NT. (And Mounce is NOT "dry"! You will enjoy his
style.) Once you complete this, then go on to #2.
2. If you're fairly confident with a beginning/first year level, then I'd
suggest some specific reading to take you towards the next level. First,
read Moises Silva's very helpful book _God, Language and Scripture_
(Zondervan). This is not a grammr or syntax book per se, but will provide
the perspective on the language that will compensate for not having been
able to sit under a good teacher (where you would absorb a lot of his
language philosophy in the process of learning Greek). You will also learn
a lot more about how NT Greek works, and yes, some grammar along the way.
It's one of the most helpful books available for someone at about the
"second-year level." Then I'd suggest that you go on to an intermediate
grammar. Again, because of your self-taught background, you want one that
isn't too "dry" and mechanical and you also want one that has some sort of
textbook/workbook design to it if possible. For self study, this allows you
to test yourself as well as laying out a reasonably obvious approach to
studying the book. My preference here is for Richard Young's new vol.:
_Intermediate NT Greek_ (Broadman/Holman, 1994). It is a well-written
grammar that covers a wealth of material that you're ready for at this
point and also includes helpful exercises at the end of each chapter that
will allow you to test your knowledge of the content before you move on to
the next chapter. (There is an answer key, but it is published separately
and may only be available to teachers. If you go this route, I can give you
an email address for the editor or author so you can check out that
possibility.)
Rod
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rodney J. Decker Calvary Theological Seminary
Asst. Prof./NT 15800 Calvary Rd.
rdecker@inf.net Kansas City, Missouri 64147
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
------------------------------
From: Carlton Winbery <winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 20:38:22 +0400
Subject: RE: THE PRESERVATION OF THE ...
Jim Beale wrote;
>I'll just say that for me, the presupposition of inerrancy of the
>autographs forms the basis for my worldview. It is not appropriate, IMHO,
>to approach Scripture with the philosophical presupposition of errancy.
>That sets the human mind over the Biblical revelation, in deciding which
>sentence, or clause, or jot or tittle is inspired, and which is not. I
>would be willing to defend the claim that this leads to pure subjectivism.
Jim,
The next to the last sentence just won't hold up. This speaks as though
the person who sees an inconsistency in the text decided where that
inconsistency was going to be. The text itself determines where such
problems are located not the person who points them out. I had nothing to
do with the fact that Stephen said (in the power of the Spirit) that
Abraham left Haran _after his father died_ and that this is at odds with
Gen. 11 and 12. I didn't decide one day that this problem existed, I found
it in the text. In honesty I must point it out and if my presupposition
about Scripture won't stand in the face of it, I will change my
presupposition not the text. My faith is not dependent upon my being able
to explain away this text for I know God can use human beings who do not
always get it right to get his message through. Stephen's message still
stands in spite of several historical problems in his Spirit inspired
sermon.
Calton L. Winbery
Prof. Religion
LA College, Pineville, La
winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net
------------------------------
From: Carlton Winbery <winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 20:51:11 +0400
Subject: Omnipotence
Eric Vaughan wrote;
>Anyone who doesn't believe in the inerrancy of the scriptures DOESN'T believe
>in Christ, or God for that matter. Part of believing in Christ, is believing
>his divinity, which includes the characteristic of omnipotence. How could an
>omnipotent being fail at anything, including giving us a nonerrant scripture?
>I think you may be confused on what it may mean to believe in Christ.
I just must comment on this even tho we are way off base here. I am a
believer in the Chalcedonian statement about Christ, but I don't think I
have heard anyone talk of the omnipotence of Christ. We normally talk of
God according to his attributes of omniscience, omnipresence, and
omnipotence. But Mark said that Jesus could not do a mighty work in
Nazareth because of their unbelief. Lazarus died because Jesus was not
there. And Jesus himself said that neither he nor the angels in heaven
knew when the parousia. Can you believe in the divinity of Christ and
still confess his humanity? If you can, then I would say that you are a
New Testament Christian.
Calton L. Winbery
Prof. Religion
LA College, Pineville, La
winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net
------------------------------
From: Carlton Winbery <winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 21:07:06 +0400
Subject: confused
It's a slow night. I am a bit confused. I am being told that there must
be an inerrant text of Scripture or I have nothing to base my faith on.
Some even say I can't be a Christian without believing (I suppose that
means give mental assent to) in an inerrant text. But they also tell me
that the texts that are inerrant are the original autographs which I can't
quite get to. Woe is me for I am in a pickle. I can't be saved without an
inerrant text and we haven't yet found the autographs. If anyone finds
them, fax them to me quick!
Calton L. Winbery
Prof. Religion
LA College, Pineville, La
winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net
------------------------------
End of b-greek-digest V1 #36
****************************
** 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