b-greek-digest V1 #510

b-greek-digest           Tuesday, 13 December 1994     Volume 01 : Number 510

In this issue:

        Re: IMHO
        Re: Cephas (Weeden) 
        Greek fonts
        IMHO and Thanks 
        Luke 13:16b 
        Pauline Mystery
        Re: Luke 13:16b 
        son of man


From: "R. Glenn Wooden" <glenn.wooden@acadiau.ca>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 12:39:29 ADT
Subject: Re: IMHO

Anthony (and all the others who wanted to ask)

> Sorry to ask what must seem basic--but what is "IMHO"?

IMHO="In My Humble/Honest Opinion"

Glenn Wooden
Acadia Divinity College
Wolfville N.S.



From: Bruce Terry <terry@bible.acu.edu>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 13:12:05 CST
Subject: Re: Cephas (Weeden) 

Steve Johnson wrote:

>Second, there is resurrection in Mark.  The youth says so.  True, we don't know
>from the text if the body has been resurrected.  But so what?  So Mark might
>believe in the resurrection of a spiritual body.  That, of course, is no sur-
>prise, or would be no surprise, since Paul doesn't believe in a physical resur-
>rection of the body either.
>Personally, judging by what we know of first-century anthropological 
>conceptuality, it would seem to me that the resurrection of the Spirit in 
>Jesus would be more convincing and persuasive than a bodily resurrection.


I am a little confused as to exactly what you mean by the above, specifically
by the term "resurrection of a spiritual body" and "a physical resurrection of
the body."  If by "Paul doesn't believe in a physical resurrection of this
body", you mean that he doesn't believe in a resurrection of this swma 
psuchikon [my apologies to those of you who want to spell this "yuxikon"], I 
agree.  But if you want to follow the RSV in translating psuchikon as physical, 
and then via English come to the meaning "material," I must cry foul.  Paul 
does not talk about the resurrection of the pneuma, but the resurrection of a 
swma pneumatikon (1 Cor 15:44).  Paul does not want to put off this earthly
body; that would leave us gumnoi.  Rather, he wants to put on over it [dare I
say] another body, so that to thnhton will be swallowed up by life 
(2 Cor 5:3-4).

Even Mark has the body of Jesus gone from the tomb.  It was the body which was
raised, not the spirit.  But then it was the body which died.  

Bruce Terry                            E-MAIL: terry@bible.acu.edu
Box 8426, ACU Station		       Phone:  915/674-3759
Abilene, Texas 79699		       Fax:    915/674-3769


From: rod.j.decker@uwrf.edu
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 18:27:19 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Greek fonts

I received the info today re. the Greek fonts from EcoLinguistics that 
were mentioned here last week. For those that might be interested, the 
font samples look quite sharp. They would be adequate for many purposes. 
The one major omission for use in biblical studies is that it does not 
include any characters others that the alphabet, accents, and breathing 
marks. There are none of the text-critical symbols from Nestle-Aland. For 
more technical work, the Graeca font from Linguists Software is far 
better. The quality is equal to this one, plus it comes with a wider 
variety of styles, is avail. for Windows and OS2 as well as Mac, and even 
has an automatic final sigma (type a regular sigma [s key] and if it is 
followed by a space or a punctuation mark, it is automatically converted 
to a final form; this can be bypassed for those instances where a regular 
sigma is wanted in those positions).

Rod Decker
Calvary Theological Seminary
Kansas City, MO


From: dbs@cunyvms1.gc.cuny.edu
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 21:49:01 EST
Subject: IMHO and Thanks 

Quite a number of you responded to my query about the 
meaning of IMHO. Thank you! IMHO you may stop now. :-)
D. Anthony Storm


From: DDoyle1049@aol.com
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 22:01:19 -0500
Subject: Luke 13:16b 

I have a question that I would appreciate some help on.
Luke 13:16b has the following text: "ouk edei luthynai apo tou desmou toutou
ty hymera tou sabbatou"

I am wondering what the "edei" usually translated "ought" or "should" goes

Does it modify "freed" so the correct translation would be that the woman
ought to be freed, and that the matter of the sabbath is irrelevant?

Does it modify both "freed" and "sabbath" so that the correct translation
would read something like "the woman ought to be freed especially on the

Or does it go with something I haven't thought of yet?

I am dealing with the sabbath and am trying to understand if Jesus is saying
that this freeing is proper sabbath behavior, or if Jesus is saying that the
freeing is proper behavior and that it happens on the sabbath is incidental.

Dave Doyle


From: Pete Cepuch <pcepuch@diag1.iac.honeywell.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 94 20:08:05 MST
Subject: Pauline Mystery

 Is it not possible that Paul's use of MYSTERY was a way of communicating
 his message to a gentile world which had little knowledge/respect for
 anything even remotely Jewish? If one believes that he received his gospel
 by revelation then it would follow that he would communicate it in terms
 that could be understood. The mystery religions at the time included
 initiations into the myteries(secrets)that would enable the devotee to
 "experience" the divine etc.

 Paul  uses many of the terms/ideas, perhaps, but not in the sense of
 copying but in the sense of re-defining their meaning along the lines of 
 epiginoskO--accurate/full knowledge or acknowledgement--of the truth according
 to God's secret .
 If a message is to be successfully transmitted does it not make sense to
 employ terminology that the hearers will recognize
                                          Peter Cepuch


From: "Dan G. McCartney, Westminster Semin" <dmccartney@shrsys.hslc.org>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 23:36:01 EST
Subject: Re: Luke 13:16b 

Dave Doyle asks:
>I have a question that I would appreciate some help on.
>Luke 13:16b has the following text: "ouk edei luthynai apo tou desmou toutou
>ty hymera tou sabbatou"
>I am wondering what the "edei" usually translated "ought" or "should" goes
>Does it modify "freed" so the correct translation would be that the woman
>ought to be freed, and that the matter of the sabbath is irrelevant?
>Does it modify both "freed" and "sabbath" so that the correct translation
>would read something like "the woman ought to be freed especially on the
>Or does it go with something I haven't thought of yet?

First, Jesus is asking a (rhetorical) question.  "Ought not this woman be freed
on the sabbath?"  (expecting a positive answer).  Second, the *edei* does not
modify anything; it is the main verb.  It does connect closely with the
infinitive *luthEnai* however.

Jesus point of course was that it was entirely appropriate a proper to free
someone from bondage to Satan on the Sabbath.  To do otherwise would make the
Sabbath an ally of Satan.  Notice that Jesus' opponents were abashed by this
answer (v. 17).

**  Dan G. McCartney                   |        I'net: DMCCARTNEY@HSLC.ORG  **
**  Assoc. Prof. of NT                 |          WTS: 215 887 5511         **
**  Westminster Theol Seminary         |       Office: 215 572 3818         **
**  Box 27009, Chestnut Hill           |          Fax: 215 887 5404         **
**  Philadelphia, PA  19090            |         Home: 215 659 7854         **


From: Pete Cepuch <pcepuch@diag1.iac.honeywell.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 94 22:06:05 MST
Subject: son of man

 I've been reading the John 8 thread and I think a few things need to be said.
 We all tend to read the "gospels" through "hellenized-eyes". It's only when
 we view Jesus in these accounts in His Hebraic context that we begin to
 understand exactly who He was claiming to be. To the Jewish mind, who can
 forgive sin? only God. The Hebrew word for forgive is SeLaCH. In modern
 Hebrew it is used for either God's forgiveness or man forgiving his fellow
 man. Not so in second temple-times. In fact, a perusal of the TaNaK will
 show that only God Himself uses this term. The fact that Jesus stirs up
 such controversies by forgiving sins is evidence of Him using terminology
 that is only used by God. There are many such examples. The statement that
 He is the GOOD SHEPARD is a direct allusion to Ezekial 34 where GoD ,Himself
 states that He will seek His sheep ... Check it out.
 Anyway, The reason I got to writing this is the statement by G. Jordan:
 ...and huios tou anthrOpou surely emphasizes his humanity..." This is an
 example of not understanding Jesus' intent in using this term. TYhis seems
 to have baffled many. I think those listening to Jesus,in that time knew
 exactly to what He was refering. Firstly, He called Himself ho huios tou
 anthrOpou i.e. THE son of man. Secondly, we are reading a Greek translation
 of His words. Many say He spoke Aramaic which obviously He did but IMHO
 that He spoke HeBrew(and some Aramaic--that's for anther thread though:))]
 In Daniel we read of one coming with the clouds of heaven as-son -of man
 KI BaR-eNaSH etc. It is a very powerful picture we get of this son of man
 of whose kingdom there will be no end etc. So if we understand that
 Jesus is calling Himself HaBaR-eNaSH that His listeners know that He is
 refering to this son of man in the book of Daniel, which,by the way is the
 only occurance of this Aramaic Bar-eNasH. Pretty powerful!!
 Anyway, from what I've seen of modern scholarship's handling this as an
 indication of His humanity etc. is just a misunderstanding of the Hebraic
 nature of the "gospels". If we look at Jesus as a second-temple era Rabbi
 whose teachings are in accordance with TORaH , plus looking at exactly
 who He was claiming to be in a very "rabbinic" way He leaves no room for
 confusion. You either believe Him or you don't. It's our problem or challenge  to dig through 2000 years of silly-theological-mishmash to get it.
   Pretty long-winded,heh? :)                 Peter Cepuch


End of b-greek-digest V1 #510


To unsubscribe from this list write


with "unsubscribe b-greek-digest" as your message content.  For other
automated services write to the above address with the message content

For further information, you can write the owner of the list at


You can send mail to the entire list via the address: