From: Carl W. Conrad (cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu)
Date: Tue Feb 23 1999 - 12:31:13 EST
At 9:46 AM -0600 2/23/99, james m smith wrote:
>On 02/07/99, ""Carl W. Conrad" <cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu>" wrote:
>> At 4:34 PM -0600 2/6/99, William B. Steidtmann wrote:
>> >In "Figures of Speech Used in the Bible" by E.W. Bullinger (Baker Book
>> >House, Grand Rapids, Michigan) a disscussion of the phrase "this is my
>> >body" from Matthew 26:26 is taken up (pp. 738-739) as it relates to a
>> >"simple law of figurative language". The argument is as follows: the
>> >pronoun "this" in the Greek is TOUTO and the gender is neuter. If the
>> >statement "this is my body" were meant to be taken in a literal sense the
>> >pronoun would have taken the gender of the noun it replaces which in this
>> >case is "bread", in the Greek ARTOS, and is masculine. But the pronoun
>> >TOUTO is not masculine, rather it has taken the neuter gender of the noun
>> >"body" (SOMA) to which the meaning is "carried across" the verb. This "at
>> >once shows us that a figure is employed" and is not meant to be taken
>> >literally; it is a metaphor.
>> > Being a person who is but a "Little Greek" can anyone cite
>> >references/examples that would confirm/deny this law?
>>
>> I'd like to see evidence for such a law, too? I really doubt seriously
>> there is any such "law" --or that the reader is given any sort of
>> self-explanatory code to determine where the sense is literal and where it
>> is metaphorical.
>
>Is it reasonable to assume that no such "law" exists? Would it not be more
>profitable to exhibit obvious cases that would show its failure? Many
>clear examples can be given to support this "law" but clear examples to
>disprove it are elusive. Can anyone debunk this "law" citing unambiguous
>cases? Please.
I would have thought that the burden of proof lies on one who asserts the
existence of such a law. Nevertheless, it's occurred to me to ask how, on
the basis of the above description of the "law," one is supposed to judge
Jesus' self-identification as the "bread of life" in John 6:51 as
figurative?
EGW EIMI hO ARTOS hO ZWN hO EK TOU OURANOU KATABAS: EAN TIS FAGHi EK TOUTOU
TOU ARTOU ZHSEI EIS TON AIWNA, KAI hO ARTOS DE hON EGW DWSW hH SARX MOU
ESTIN hUPER THS TOU KOSMOU ZWHS. I think it is safe to say that all the
modifiers and pronouns referring to ARTOS in this verse are masculine
singular. To be sure, this ARTOS is identified with Jesus' SARX that must
be eaten if one is to have life. Does the "simple rule" cited above help to
demonstrate that this is a metaphor rather than a real identification?
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics/Washington University
One Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018
Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu OR cconrad@yancey.main.nc.us
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
--- B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-329W@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:18 EDT