From: Carl W. Conrad (cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu)
Date: Fri Jan 19 1996 - 07:04:25 EST
At 6:21 AM 1/18/96, Kenneth Litwak wrote:
> I have looked through all the resources I have (GTU's library is on
>short hours in January and I can't get there) and made several educated
>guesses for what to look up iin BAGD, but I still can't seem to figuure out
>what (HNWMENH in IEph inscr. comes from. I looked under ANO- words,
>and ENO- words and ANW- words, etc. etc. Can someone please tell me
>what this is from? Go ahead and reply off-line. I doubt anyone else
>cares that
>I'm having parsing problems. ems.
Stephen Carlson is certainly right that this is a MP ptc. f. of hENOW. Of
course, the rough breathing would not appear in a transcription,just as it
does not appear in papyri. -W- in a pf. pass. stem (or aor. or fut. stem,
for that matter) indicates an O-contract verb.
> I would reply briefly to Edgar Krentz's note to me and say that I
>don't think
>that all NT Greek is the same. There's clearly a difference between
>1 John and 1 Peter. What I waas trying to suggest was that 1) The Postolic
>Fathers use Greek which to me is harder relatively; and 2) one might
>have expected the AP wwriters to try to follow NT styles just as NT writers
>seemm to have been influenced by the LXX. I know that's ageneralization
>so it's
>probably flase, but you know what I mean.
But it just ain't so! Even if the earliest disciples/apostles are credited
with being uneducated fishermen (I'm not even that confident about that
story being historical), it seems probable on the surface that church
leadership in the communities of the Greco-Roman church communities were
better educated and would write a more-or-less standardized educated Greek.
I have heard many sermons
>in my time (7 days til 40 --
A mere lad! There are one or two senior citizens among us, you must realize.
yikes) and many of them have been heavily
>colored by biblical terminology and idioms. One can debate the merits of
>that culturally, but I would have expected the AP wwriters to follow
>the NT writers, especially if the Ap writers came from communities which
>received NT writings. Don't you think that if your Christian faith was
>built arouund Paul's preaching and 1-4 Corinthians (the real 1-4, not
>the pseudepigrapha) that if you wrrote a summary of the Christian faith
>it might sound Pauline (you know, like Prisicilla did when writing hebrews,
>according to one book I have seen)?
This is an affectation, I believe--preaching in a deliberately colored
language alien to that of one's congregation--unless the congregation is
altogether isolated culturally from the (urban, not rural) community in
which it is situated--or chooses to isolate itself culturally. And as for
the distinction between canonical and non-canonical writings, that's not a
matter that was settled so early as that. (I'm teaching a course this term
on conflicting religions in late antiquity, and have billed it, in part, as
a study of the conflict between religious communities within and beyond
Christianity "before it had been determined what orthodoxy was going to
be.")
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:36 EDT