b-greek-digest V1 #689

b-greek-digest              Tuesday, 2 May 1995        Volume 01 : Number 689

In this issue:

        Re: ARETH???
        Re: ARETH???
        Re: ARETH???
        Irish Biblical Association Proceedings #17  
        Re: B-Greek assumptions?
        More help 
        Re: ARETH???
        James 1:20, Contra NIV 
        need some direction 
        NA26 and NA27 changes? 
        The Lame Man in John 
        imperative clause
        Re: LXX, NT and Apostolic Fa. Word lists
        Re: Scholia on NT
        Re: Jn 19:39 -- Altered Reality 


From: Larry Swain <lswain@wln.com>
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 1995 23:13:40 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: ARETH???

You have hit on a very difficult word.  ARETH is  excellence, originally 
in epic a warrior's excellence as a being.  Thus virtue, skill, ability 
are included in the linguistic range.  InIn an honor/shame society, ARETH 
is what one seeks to expand  and keep.  Thus, the LXX use of "praise" is 
an extension of this: one's ARETH garners the praise of others, although 
the LXX translators used it to translate 2 different words: hod, glory; 
and tehilah, another word for praisebased  probably on this extension.  

And so in II Pt 1, we have faith, excellence, knowledge, .... listed as 
the "virtues" that the Christian should display,.  Not as clear as I 
would like, but I hope it helps.

Larry Swain
Parmly Billings Library


From: Timothy Bratton <bratton@acc.jc.edu>
Date: Mon, 1 May 1995 01:53:01 -35900
Subject: Re: ARETH???

On Sun, 30 Apr 1995, Mike Adams wrote:

> With all diligence we are to add to our faith areth and to areth 
> knowledge (gnwsis), etc... Whatever this areth stuff is, it is so 
> elementary that it is the first quality the fledgling Christian should 
> incorporate into his character after conversion. It is a key element to 
> developing the other qualities listed afterwards.
> But what is it? This little word is used in three other places in the 
> NT and in KJV is translated "virtue" in all except I Peter 2:9 where it 
> is translated "praise". In this instance, it's a quote from the 
> Septuagint. I have no Septuagint, so I visited a nearby library and 
> found several occurances of areth translated as "praise". I know of no 
> linguistic "cousins" which might shed more light on this little word. 
> I'm having a hard time reconciling the meaning "praise" with the 
> meaning "virtue", and especially a difficult time in a applying it 
> practically in this sequence.

Dr. Timothy L. Bratton			bratton@acc.jc.edu
Department of History/Pol. Science	work: 1-701-252-3467, ext. 2022 
6006 Jamestown College			home: 1-701-252-8895
Jamestown, ND 58405		        home phone/fax: 1-701-252-7507

Dear Ellen and/or Mike:
     In classical Greek, _areth_ referred to "goodness,
excellence, or prowess."  It implied outdoing everybody else; a
typical example would be that the _areth_ of an athlete would be
shown by his winning the Olympic Games by leaving his rivals in
the dust.  Plato sometimes used it in this sense, but he applied
it also to morality to describe personal "goodness, virtue,
character for merit," etc.  I am relying on my ancient Liddell
and Scott's _An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon_ (Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1889; repr., 1968), page 115, column 2.  There
are other meanings as well, but I would guess that in a Christian
context the emphasis would be on the believer trying to excel in
moral goodness.  I imagine that Prof. Conrad will give you a more
complete explanation, but this may serve for the time being.

                                        Best regards,


From: Kent Sutorius <kassutor@clark.net>
Date: Mon, 1 May 1995 07:24:29 +0500
Subject: areth??

To Mike and others, 

   This is an intriquing word.  I have never been satisfied with the glosses 
that say "moral goodness" for this word.  Does the new nature just keep us 
in the realm of good moral living.  (For example, do we live in moral light 
or spiritual light?)  Anyway, could ARETH mean spiritual integrity? 

Kent A. Sutorius
Maryland Bible College and Seminary


From: Carl W Conrad <cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu>
Date: Mon, 1 May 1995 06:25:17 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: ARETH???

Everything that Larry Swain and Timothy Bratton have already said about 
ARETH is valid and is probably all you need to know regarding the 
function of the word in 2 Peter. I would only like to add to what both 
have said that this is one of the most interesting words in the history 
of Greek thought in antiquity, particularly in the way its meaning 
expands as the culture becomes more complex and encompasses activities 
not originally deemed estimable.

ARETH is the noun cognate (not etymologically, but conceptually) to the 
adjective AGAQOS, and so means "goodness"--but goodness in the sense of 
competence at an activity that is esteemed by users of the word. In the 
earliest literature, the Homeric epics, it is pretty much limited to a 
warrior's prowess and a counselor's ability to give useful advice. Its 
antithesis, KAKIA, takes its precise coloration from the way the positive 
word is used, so originally means especially "cowardice" or "uselessness 
on the battlefield."

One of the interesting accretions of sense the word takes on is prowess 
in love-making--or I guess we do speak of "sexual prowess," and that's 
the idea. Already in the Iliad, the Trojan prince Paris, who carried off 
Helen from Sparta, boasts to Hector, who has accused him of cowardice 
(with some justification) that even if Hector is outstanding on the 
battlefield, Aphrodite has give him--Paris--sexual prowess (here the 
appropriate translation of ARETHN) and that it is as praiseworthy a 
competence as Hector's military prowess. This does recur in early Greek 
lyric poetry (this sense), and although it never is primary, it shows how 
the word is flexible.

I'm not sure exactly when the word ARETH comes to be equated with "moral" 
virtue, but this sense is certainly present in the later 5th c. B.C. and 
in Plato and Aristotle; there is a general agreement about four 
"cardinal" virtues--justice (DIKAIOSUNH), self-control (SWFROSUNH), 
courage (ANDREIA = "manliness"--the earliest sense of ARETH) and wisdom 

The decisive step in the progression is probably the identification of 
SWFROSUNH with ARETH, particularly as SWFROSUNH had been more of a kind 
of self-restraint, an observance of "thou shalt not's" (to put it in 
Judaeo/Christian terms) rather than an accomplishment for which one 
expects public esteem. SWFROSUNH is more a sense of the boundaries of 
legitimate selfhood that one ought not to exceed; it is sometimes 
translated as "continence," sometimes "prudence," sometimes  by the more 
literal "sound-mindedness." But inasmuch as "virtue" in our tradition so 
often refers to the restraint upon one's own behavior, this is really a 
decisive point in the evolution of the term.

I think that the passage in the NT that perhaps comes closest to 
explaining what ARETH means in the 2 Peter passage cited in the original 
question is that wonderful (although probably not distinctly Christian) 
summation Paul gives in Philippians 4:8: HOSA ESTIN ALHQH, HOSA 
included in this list in a final collective sense ("whatever virtue there 

Well, it's hard to do full justice to the word, especially as "virtue" in 
everyday English usage seems to have become a rather lusterless word.

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University
One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO 63130, USA
(314) 935-4018
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu  OR cwc@oui.com


From: Maurice O'Sullivan <mauros@iol.ie>
Date: Mon, 1 May 1995 12:31:41 +0100
Subject: Irish Biblical Association Proceedings #17  

The Irish Biblical Association has recently published No. 17 of 
its Proceedings.

The Contents are:

The Psalms in Jewish Worship: Michael Maher MSC

New Approaches to the Study of the Psalms: Erich Zenger

Communities in the Qumran Scrolls: Philip R. Davies

The Ethos of First-Century Galilee: Sean Freyne

Heart of Darkness: A Study of Qohelet 3:1-15: Francis T. 

Welsh Translations of the Pseudo-Mattheus: J.E. Caerwyn  

The price ( including postage ) is USD 15.00 , GBP 10.00.

Orders and remittances ( made payable to IBA Publications ) 
should be sent to:

Martin McNamara
Milltown Institute
Milltown Park 
Dublin 6

Maurice A. O'Sullivan [ Bray, Ireland ]



From: Gary Meadors <gmeadors@epix.net>
Date: Mon, 1 May 1995 08:20:41 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: B-Greek assumptions?

I concur.

I "unsubscribed" from the Bible list because of the problems you suggest 
we avoid.


From: Watkins Randy CDT <x74806h4@westpoint-emh2.usma.army.mil>
Date: Mon, 01 May 95 08:26:05 EDT
Subject: More help 

Could somebody do an exegesis of Rev. 3:2- what implications does this
verse have in regards to the relationship between Christ and the seven spirits?
 I'm trying to identify these seven spirits and their purpose.

please send me a response private email, as i am not subscribed right now.  
thank you.

In Christ,


CDT CPL Watkins, R. Paul  *CENTURIAN*  <USCC, USMA-West Point>
x74806h4@westpoint-emh2.usma.army.mil /  Room 5021 Scott Short
The branch is tender and bears its leaves- the summer is nigh!
The Day of Wrath is yet near. ***Even so, come, Lord Jesus.***


From: Gary Meadors <gmeadors@epix.net>
Date: Mon, 1 May 1995 09:45:20 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: ARETH???

On Sun, 30 Apr 1995, Ellen Adams wrote:

> I have a real question, (for a change). I was doing a study in II Peter 
> 1:5-11, on the progression in Christian growth that is described here. 
> It seems to be rich territory for practical application, because we are 
> to be personally and earnestly involved in this growth.
> With all diligence we are to add to our faith areth and to areth 
> knowledge (gnwsis), etc... Whatever this areth stuff is, it is so 
> elementary that it is the first quality the fledgling Christian should 
> incorporate into his character after conversion. It is a key element to 
> developing the other qualities listed afterwards.
> But what is it? This little word is used in three other places in the 
> NT and in KJV is translated "virtue" in all except I Peter 2:9 where it 
> is translated "praise". In this instance, it's a quote from the 
> Septuagint. I have no Septuagint, so I visited a nearby library and 
> found several occurances of areth translated as "praise". I know of no 
> linguistic "cousins" which might shed more light on this little word. 
> I'm having a hard time reconciling the meaning "praise" with the 
> meaning "virtue", and especially a difficult time in a applying it 
> practically in this sequence.
> My "tool chest" is very sparse. Anyone have anything on it?
> Just Ellen
> (Wife of Mike)

Others have already noted linguistic perspectives for ARETEN in 2P1:5, I 
would like to querry the symmetry of the list.

Ellen, draw a circle and place the objects in a clockwise fashion 
(Areten, gnosin, egkrateian, upomonen, eusebeian, philadelphian, 
agapen).  Then note how the prepositional phrases, all introduced by en, 
pick up the previous object and introduce the next element.  These 
phrases almost seem to drive the list.  Could these be understood in an 
instrumental sense:

	ADD virtue BY faith
	ADD knowledge BY virtue
	ADD self-control BY knowledge
	ADD patient-endurance BY self-control
	ADD godliness BY patient-endurance
	ADD brotherly love BY godliness
	ADD love BY brotherly love

The tricky term areten heads the list, but the greatest of all virtues 
closes it.  Did Peter see a tie between these terms?  The list seems to 
be very crafted.

I have a sermon on this text I call:  "Moral Sweat:  Peter's Key to 
Christian Living".  Note how SPOUDEN shows up throughout 2Pet.

Gary T. Meadors
Prof. Gk/NT
BapBibleSem of PA


From: Paul Moser <PMOSER@cpua.it.luc.edu>
Date: Mon, 01 May 95 10:36 CDT
Subject: James 1:20, Contra NIV 

One indication of an accurate translation is that it will
preserve ambiguity found in the Greek text (unless, of course,
the larger context removes ambiguity).  The NIV is often
too quick to remove ambiguity.  Witness its translation
of "dikaiosunen theou" as "the righteous life that God
desires" at James 1:20.  It's not obvious that James
is speaking just of the righteous life of an angry person;
he may very well have in mind certain practices or modes
of behavior prompted by anger.  The "righteousness of
God", in other words, may very well encompass considerations
that go beyond an individual's "righteous life".  The NIV
should not, in any case, have settled this matter via

On another topic, I wish I had had the following book
20 years ago when learning NT Greek:  W. J. Perschbacher,
*Refresh Your Greek* (Moody, 1989).  It saves intermediary
students from spending a lot of time fumbling through
lexicons and grammars, and enables them to put the focus
where it belongs: on reading Greek.  It has UBS3c and
includes helpful vocabulary and grammatical lists.
(Still, its beautiful Greek font does not quite justify
its high price.)--Paul Moser, Loyola Univ. of Chicago.


From: NormGoos@aol.com
Date: Mon, 1 May 1995 11:52:47 -0400
Subject: need some direction 

I was asked to look at a word/concept by me denom. for the purpose of
re-thinking membership requirements/prohibitions.  The following is the
preliminary results.  I would appreciate feedback from anyone who can spare
the time.
	To be a glutton (Hebrew root zalal) is not as we think in English.  It has
two primary meanings in the Bible which may be associated.  The first is "to
shake" (TWOT #553).  Examples are given of thing, such as mountains, quaking.
 The second meaning  is "to be worthless" (TWOT #554) and "to make light of"
(BDBG #2151).  The two may be tied together in thinking of a drunk, one
guilty of riotous living, as he staggers (shaking and quivering) down the
street (this may be pushing the point a bit!).  The first account of gluttony
(meaning #2) is Duet. 21:20 in a section known as the "law of the rebellious
son."  The section begins by describing the person as stubborn and
rebellious.  These words describe one who intentionally turns away from what
is right (Hebrew root carar) and one who is a bitter, unpleasant person
(Hebrew root marah).  Both words carry the meaning of one being
non-submissive to proper authority.   The Deuteronomy passage furthers the
picture by showing the parents aggressively correcting this behavior, but the
son intentionally continues to practice his poor, publicly embarrassing
behavior. It is publicly sociopathic, whatever else it may be.  The poor
behavior is further defined as involving drunkenness and gluttony.   Whatever
gluttony was, death by stoning was the penalty to be inflicted.  It would
have to be a behavior pattern that was pretty terrible for parents to take
their son before a tribunal, to consign him to death, and possibly be
obligated under Jewish law to throw the first stones at him.  To define this
behavior as over-eating would be wrong, especially in that we know of an
obvious over-eater in 1 Samuel 4:18, Eli, who was described as "heavy," but
was not chastened by God for this particular eating behavior.  Furthermore,
"heavy" is a neutral word in the OT, picking up it's meaning from the
context.  Even in a bad context, the picture is "burdensome" as in heavy
grieving.  Harris (TWOT) suggests that "riotous" or "vile" might be a better
synonym for glutton.  The LXX translates the word as sumbolokopon, meaning
"to be given to riotous feasting" (L&S, p. 1676).  It would seem that a
contemporary translation of zalal could be a "party animal," a loud,
uncontrolled person whose behavior might be found in the style of the Roman
orgy norm.  Proverbs 23:20-21 attaches it to food, but probably in the light
of orgy-type banquets common in paganism, especially as they were later
practiced in the worship of Baal.  The LXX translated this as pornokopos
which means ro prostitute one's self (Moulton, p. 337).  This behavior is
said to lead to business failure (Proverbs 28:7), something obviously not
caused necessarily by overeating, but certainly caused by continual
appearances on the "party scene" instead of working for a living.  The LXX
translated it here as aswtion, which means a person who has given himself
over to debauched/degenerated living" (Moulton, p. 58).  "Disgusting" might
fit it's use as "vile" in Lam. 1:8.  These same meaning occur in the

	Glutton appears in the NT twice, Matt. 11:19 and Luke 7:34, both being used
to describe Jesus by His enemies.  It is translated from phagos, from the
root esthio, or "to eat."  It is an intensified form of eating, or feasting,
 in its simplest definition.  The word that it is coupled with, oivopotas,
means "one given over to wine," or a "boozer" (EDNT).  This picture of
"partying" again comes to the forefront.  A NT picture might be the Prodigal
(Luke 15:11-32).  "Worthless" would then still seem to be the best definition
of the word, and it's attachment to food should be considered

	Accordingly, to declare an over-eater, or a person addicted to eating via an
emotional illness,  a glutton would clearly seem to be a misnomer.  Eating is
spoken of as pleasurable in Scripture, and no prohibition regarding quantity
was found as the result of a cursory survey via a computer.  The only problem
encountered in addictive eating is that of an emotional illness controlling
ones emotions.


From: "Rex A. Koivisto" <rexk@teleport.com>
Date: Mon, 1 May 1995 10:32:10 -0700
Subject: NA26 and NA27 changes? 

List members:
        I would like to refine a discussion a bit that has trailed off for
now.  I am looking for any examples of intentional or accidental changes
between NA 26 and NA 27.  Although NA 27 indicates in the preface that it
is exactly the _same_ text as that of NA27, and "with rare exceptions" the
paragraphing and punctuation remains the same.  It also indicates that it
is _identical_ in text to the UBS 4th edition.  However, this is not
precisely the case.  For example, in 1 Cor 6:3, NA26 and 27 both read "mhti
ge" (two words), while UBS 4 reads "mhtige" (one word).  Apparently this is
a typesetting error, but I am not sure.  I was just wondering whether
anyone noted any similar actual _text_ changes (error or not) between NA26
and NA27, since it is apparent there are some _text_ differences between
UBS4 and NA26-27, despite the assertions to the contrary.  These kinds of
changes influence the accuracy of computer-generated searches, and that is
the reason for the question.  Any other observations here?


Rex Koivisto

Rex A. Koivisto                                      Email: rexk@teleport.com
Dept. of Bible and Theology                     Voice: 503/255-0332x415
Multnomah Bible College, Portland, OR    FAX: 503/254-1268


From: Yirah@aol.com
Date: Mon, 1 May 1995 18:05:05 -0400
Subject: The Lame Man in John 

I am currently working on a series of articles on the signs of Jesus in John
and I've a difficulty that perhaps those on this list can help me with.

John 5:1-17 records Jesus healing the lame man at Bethesda ("house of
mercy"). It seems that there is quite a disagreement on the character of this
lame man--was he a pathetic victim of disease with no one to help and was
always just coming up short, or was he something of a scoundrel? I tend
toward the latter for the following reasons--

(1) The questioning he received (vv. 10-11) about breaking the Sabbath caused
him to place the blame on the one who healed him (viz Jesus).

(2) He failed to learn the identity of the one who healed him, although he
had been lame for 38 years. Indeed, he did not attempt to do so, Jesus had to
find him (v.14). And even when Jesus did, the man offered no thanks.

(3) When he learned Jesus' identity, he ingratiated himself to the religious
leaders by going back to them that it was Jesus who healed on the Sabbath.

(4) DA Carson stated that the man's reply to Jesus' question in vv. 6-7 are
"the crotchety grumblings of an old and not very perceptive man who thinks he
is answering a stupid question."

(5) Jesus indirectly (or directly?) links the man's condition to his own sin
in v. 14.

As the theology of the sign is developed, the character of the lame man
becomes an important issue. Any additional insights--or even disagreements?
Can anyone point me to resources that either directly deal with the man's
character? (Carson's commentary on John is the only one I"ve seen that
breeches the topic).

Also, does anyone have any information on how the superstition alluded to in
v. 3-4 got started or any other references to it?

Thanks in advance--

William Brooks
Port Angeles, WA

My modest (when compared to others) signature--

ThM, MDiv, BS (Mathematics), AA, HS Graduate, former 3rd Class Radarman in
the US Coast Guard, Member of the National Geographic Society, Ordained
Minister who is in that frustrating process of looking for a church to
pastor, currently employed as a computer instructor and consultant, Husband
of one, Father of two.


From: Shaughn Daniel <zxmli05@student.uni-tuebingen.de>
Date: Tue, 2 May 1995 03:17:34 +0000 
Subject: imperative clause

Dear b-greek members,

I've been in and around Gal 1.8f for about 3 years now. I'm beginning
another chapter in my endless thesis on "Curses in Paul". I am wondering if
anyone has some insight into the construction of Paul's so-called curse in
Gal. 1.8f.

Particularly, I'm interested in different functions of the imperative. I
don't think Paul is advocating "banning" the opponents in the OT sense of
anathema, since that would require stoning. Further, I find no intermediary
history which supports a weakening of the term. Likewise, if Paul is
cursing in Galatians, then there is some sense that he is breaking the
command of Jesus not to curse.

Basically, I need to know if Gal. 1.8f fits a category of an imperative of
condition (Brooks & Winbery term, p. 117); thus, rendered as:

        But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach
        to you a gospel other than what we preached to you,
        then he is accursed.

        As we have said, and now I repeat, if anyone preaches
        (is preaching) to you a gospel other than what you accepted,
        then he is accursed.


Shaughn Daniel
Tuebingen, Germany


From: "Edgar M. Krentz" <emkrentz@mcs.com>
Date: Mon, 1 May 1995 22:20:11 -0600
Subject: Re: LXX, NT and Apostolic Fa. Word lists

>   I have learned that I need to be able to sight read all the above
>litearture in Greek.  Unfortunately, I don't know where to go to=
>a vocab list to memorize for low-frequency words in the NT, let=
>the LXX or the Apos. Fathers.  Does anyone have any suggestions?=
  I almost
>decided against my PhD program next Fall because of this requirement.
>Thanks in advance.
>Ken Litwak
>Emeryville, CA

I am sorry it took me this long, but I have a few additional bibliographic
items for learning NT Greek vocabulary. One cam choose from a number=
books. The most complete is Trenchard, though its size makes it
threatening. The most useful may be Robinson.

Bruce M. Metzger. _Lexical Aids for Students of New Testament Greek._=
edition. Princeton, NJ: Theological Book Agency, 1983. Lists of all=
occurring ten or more times in the NT in Part I;Part II contains=
 lists of
words based on stems. Study of this section will increase one's vocabulary
geometrically. This was the standard for the first twenty years I=
Greek. It is now surpassed by the next three texts.

Thomas A. Robinson. _Mastering Greek Vocabulary._ Peabody: Hendrickson,
1990. A  very practical text. Robinson first gives a list of Greek=
that have become English vocabulary' then an extensive list of words
arranged by roots (cognate words);  next comes a list of "derived"=
words that will help one to learn Greek; fourth is an explanation=
 of Greek
prefixes and suffixes, i.e. principles of word formation. Careful=
continued use of this work will increase vocabulary immensely. 176=

Warren C. Trenchard. _The Student's Complete Vocabulary Guide to=
 the Greek
New Testament Complete Frequency Lists, Cognate Groupings & Principal
Parts._ Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992, 340 pp. Includes a complete
frequency list of all words in the GNT.

Robert E. Van Voorst. _Building Your New Testament Greek Vocabulary._=
Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1990. 110 pp.=20

A work that may give substantial help is

Richard M. Krill. _Greek and Latin in English Today. Wauconda, IL:
Bolchazy-Carducci, 1993. 250 pp., covering both Greek and Latin.

Kurt Aland, ed. _Vollst=E4ndige Konkordanz zum Griechischen Neuen=
 Vol. II: Spezial=FCbersichten. Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter,=
contains many useful lists: Complete statistical data for the text=
 of NA26.
Pp. 449-460 give a list of the words that are unique to each writing=
LEGOMENA). This is an extremely expensive set ($850.00) and so you=
find it only in major theological or university libraries.

There is no special list for the Apostolic Fathers. The closest one=
come is the _Index Patristicus_, edited by Edgar John Goodspeed years=
Alec Allenson reprinted it in the 1950s, I think, but it is long=
 out of

=46inally, if one has the patience, one will also learn a great deal=
working through a larger grammar's discussion of the formation of=
words. For this I recommend Herbert Weir Smyth, _A Greek Grammar._
Cambridge: Harvard University Press, reprint of a 1920 original with
corrections. This is the best grammar of classical Greek available=
English; it belongs on every NT scholar's shelves. Smyth also includes
citations from the NT and the LXX at times. Pp. 225-254 treat the
"Formation of Words." The section will not be exciting reading, but=
careful study.

There are much more substantial works in German whose titles I can=
 give to
anyone interested.

But finally, the very best way to learn vocabulary is to translate=
Greek each day. Begin with the New Testament, add some texts from=
Apostolic Fathers, mix in some Septuagint, and then move on to Greek
authors of the early empire: Musonius Rufus, Epictetus, some Lucian,=
Don't be arfraid to guess--and then check yourself against a good=
LSJ for the last group of authors. One learns by seeing the same=
 term in
many new contexts. We all began where you are, so don't despair.

I may be carrying owls to Athens with this communication. If so,=
 trash it.

Edgar Krentz
Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago
(Voice) Home: 312/947-8105; Off.: 312-753-0752


From: "Edgar M. Krentz" <emkrentz@mcs.com>
Date: Mon, 1 May 1995 22:20:20 -0600
Subject: Re: Scholia on NT

>Is there not a published volume with some such content?  It is rather aged
>and I might even possess a copy.
>David M.
>David L. Mealand            *    E-mail: David.Mealand@ed.ac.uk
>University of Edinburgh     *    Office Fax: (+44)-131-650-6579
>Scotland, U.K.  EH1 2LX     *    Office tel.:(+44)-131-650-8917 or 8921

There is a volume that bears the title. It is _Scholia Hellenistica in
Novum Testamentum Philone et Josepho Patribus Apostolicis aliisq. ecclesiae
antiquae scriptoribus nencon libris apocryphis maxime deprompta /
instrukxit atque ornavit Novi Testamenti Hellenistice illustrati recens
editor [i.e. E.G. Grinfield}.2 vol. London Gulielmus Pickering, 1848.

The copy I own was once the property of J. H. Thayer, the translator of the
Grimm Lexicon in the XIX century. 

In spite of the title, it does not do what I was wishing for, that is
gather the glosses, etc., inserted into texts and in the margins, or the
minimal commentary that are called scholia in classical scholarship. Rather
he cites parallels, primarily from LXX, Philo, Josephus, elsewhere in the
NT, and the Apostolic fathers. Rarely he cites the Etymologium Magnum or
some such text.

It is also not the same as a catena from the fathers.

If you can give me more precise bibliographic data on the text to which you
refer, I would be very grateful. The latest books are not always the best.

Edgar Krentz
Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago
(Voice) Home: 312/947-8105; Off.: 312-753-0752


From: JacksonMH@aol.com
Date: Tue, 2 May 1995 00:29:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Jn 19:39 -- Altered Reality 

The Reverend Graham raises some interesting questions.  Are there any
Egyptologists out there who can say with any degree of certainty how much
"preservative" was used in the mummification of a corpse?

My understanding has always been that the whole point of embalming was to
make a full-body poultice - to keep decay down as much as possible.  It is
also my understanding that myrrh is somewhat poisonous (thus its value as a
preservative - kills decay bacteria).  If this is true, would this not
militate against its revivifying properties?

Scientific considerations aside, Reverend Graham, do you really think the
text means exactly the opposite of what it says?  Do you think the Romans on
the crucifixion detail were so careless (at the risk of their own lives, no
less) that they would not make sure that their prisoners were, in fact, dead?
 What about the spear wound into the vital cavity?  Was it, to quote Monty
Python, "just a flesh wound?"  Given that it was a Roman striking a Jew (and
a condemned criminal at that), I doubt the soldier would be too gentle.

Martin Jackson
Candidate of Theology
Bethany Lutheran Seminary, Mankato, MN


End of b-greek-digest V1 #689


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: