b-greek-digest V1 #902

b-greek-digest           Wednesday, 11 October 1995     Volume 01 : Number 902

In this issue:

        DIO in 2 Co 5:9
        Re: A.T.Robertson & Extra-NT Greek 
        BibAnsMan and "Tongues" 
        Mime-Version: 1.0
        1 Cor. 1:5-7
        Re: 1Cor. 14:14 Tongues
        Online Bible 
        Beginning Grammars
        Greek-Hebrew Bible Software 
        Ray Summers' ENT 
        Re: 1Cor. 14:14 


From: "L. E. Brown" <budman@sedona.net>
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 17:19:54 GMT
Subject: DIO in 2 Co 5:9

#1 - Scope of DIO

The conjunction DIO in 2 Co 5:9 is drawing an inference or a
conclusion based upon what has preceded. My question is, how broad is
the scope of this particular conjunction? Does it encompass only those
arguments adduced in vv. 6-8 (which is itself a conclusion "OUN"), or
does it extend all the way back to encompass everything in vv. 1 &ff?

#2 - Significance of KAI

Is the KAI adverbial, indicating that the conclusion or inference is
an obvious one -- sort of a 'slam dunk' deduction?

L. E. Brown, Jr.       West Sedona Baptist Church
                                      Sedona, Az.
"Fresh Sermon Illustrations:"


From: BibAnsMan@aol.com
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 14:47:28 -0400
Subject: Re: A.T.Robertson & Extra-NT Greek 

In a message dated 95-10-10 11:27:00 EDT, Edward Hobbs writes:

>The claim that Robertson, in contrast to "liberal" scholars, did not use
>Greek outside the New Testament to interpret that Greek is so preposterous
>as not to deserve answering.  

This whole discussion (as well as others) have spawned off of a total
misunderstanding of what I was saying.  I NEVER said that A.T. Robertson did
not use extra-biblical evidence.   I merely said that it was not the FIRST
line of defense.  Rather, he went to the context of Scripture first, then
other texts second in order to understand the translation of any given word.
  That's all.

I know Edward is responding to a note that another person responded with,
misunderstanding my response.  So it is not his fault.
Let us all understand what others are saying before we respond against
someone.  That is a mark of true scholarship.  Now please, I hope no one
misuderstands this and responds to it wrongly also!

May God's grace and mercy reign,

Jim McGuire


From: Eric Weiss <eweiss@acf.dhhs.gov>
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 95 14:48:57 -24000
Subject: BibAnsMan and "Tongues" 

This discussion on glossolalia seems to be getting outside the range of Greek 
exegesis and interpretation into the always heated theological debate of 
whether or not the "gift" of speaking in unknown (to the user) languages is a 
valid charisma for today.  BibAnsMan's mention that he is following and 
recommending John MacArthur's teaching on this explains a lot, especially the 
almost hostile tone in some of his posts.  MacArthur's book on this issue, 
CHARISMATIC CHAOS (NOT a "scholarly" work), is far from an objective 
evaluation of the issue--he creates straw men and then blows them down, 
taking texts out of context and misrepresenting the teachings of those he 
wishes to paint as less than orthodox.  If the tone of this discussion 
continues a-la-MacArthur, it will not be pleasant.

	- Charis humin (kai eirhnh)


From: Bill Renner <WILLARD@univscvm.csd.scarolina.edu>
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 95 15:05:02 EDT
Subject: [none]

Isn't it interesting that someone who posted that the bible was "the
inspired and inerrant word of God" would use an outside agent. How can
you refute inerrant if you are using Greco-Roman culture to prove itis
not inerrant.

Bill Renner
1427 Cardinal Dr.
West Columbia, SC  29169
email: BILLYRAY@sc.edu


From: BibAnsMan@aol.com
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 15:26:22 -0400
Subject: Inerrancy 

In a message dated 95-10-10 15:10:46 EDT, you write:

On 10-10-95, Bill Renner responded:

>Isn't it interesting that someone who posted that the bible was "the
>inspired and inerrant word of God" would use an outside agent. How can
>you refute inerrant if you are using Greco-Roman culture to prove itis
>not inerrant.

I believe in the historical-grammatical interpretation of Scripture.  The
Greco-Roman culture helps us to interpret what Scripture says.  There is much
valuable information in culture, history, extra-biblical documents, etc.  But
these things are to be used carefully so as to preserve the original intent
of Scripture and not foist some foreign meaning upon it.
What I am coming against is the misuse and sometimes overuse of these things.
 Many times, the context of Scripture is more than sufficient.  We should not
ignore outside sources, but allow the context to rule first.

Jim McGuire


From: "John F. Godfrey" <john@spirit.spirit.org> 
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 16:01:44 -0400
Subject: Mime-Version: 1.0


Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

I thought that this message from the list `mandate' would be interesting in 
light of the recent exchanges concerning tongues.

- - ------- Forwarded Message

Received: from dag.XC.Org (dag.XC.Org []) by spirit.spirit.org 
(8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA06838 for <john@spirit.spirit.org>; Tue, 10 
Oct 1995 15:40:30 -0400
Received: by dag.XC.Org (8.6.9+revalias#3/95032201)
	id PAA26985; Tue, 10 Oct 1995 15:54:22 GMT
Received: by dag.XC.Org (8.6.9+revalias#3/95032201)
	id PAA26526; Tue, 10 Oct 1995 15:52:10 GMT
Received: by dag.XC.Org (8.6.9+revalias#3/95032201)
	id LAA26519; Tue, 10 Oct 1995 11:52:09 -0400
Message-Id: <199510101552.LAA26519@dag.XC.Org>
Date: Saturday, September 30, 1995 9:00PM
Sender: owner-mandate@XC.Org
Reply-To: mandate@XC.Org
Subject: Re: Tongues in English
From: mandate@XC.Org (Bruce Braithwaite)
X-Originally-From: BBraithwaite@XC.Org (Bruce Braithwaite)
To: mandate@XC.Org

Originally from: BBraithwaite@XC.Org (Bruce Braithwaite)
Originally dated: Saturday, September 30, 1995 9:00PM

I read with interest Terry Tipps' and Mike Johnson's comments about
witnessing people speaking in tongues in English.  I thought I'd jump
in and add a personal experience.  When I was a teenager, growing up in
a pastor's home in Wisconsin, I was struggling with the idea of
speaking in tongues.  I had spoken in tongues, but I was being plagued
by doubts.  As a C.A. rally (that dates me) in Janesville, Wisconsin, a
number of deaf teens were in the congregation who could neither hear
nor speak.  As I sat in the pew earnestly asking God for some assurance
that speaking in tongues was from Him and not something I made up,
several of the deaf young people began to speak in tongues.  They spoke
beautiful, clear, unaccented English with excellent voice inflections,
tone, and vocabulary, etc.  One in particular spoke for about ten
minutes assuring all who were there that the baptism of the Holy Spirit
was of God, that it was a miracle and a gift from God which made
perfect sense to those who spoke that language, and that God could be
trusted not to deceive those who willing to follow Him.  Needless to
say, my doubts were stilled.  Though I didn't know the deaf teens well,
we had have enough contact over several years in a variety of
situations that I knew they could not speak.  Their communication was
limited to sign language and some inarticulate noises.

Karen Braithwaite,
Missionary to Brazil

- - ------- End of Forwarded Message

John F. Godfrey, Pastor
Grandville Assembly of God, Grandville, Michigan, USA
``Jesus said to him, `I am the way and the truth and the life.  No man
comes to the Father except through Me' ''(John 14:6).
PHONE: +1.616.667.2428 (home) +1.616.531.0010 (office)
NET ADDRESS: john@spirit.spirit.org 

Version: 2.6.2



From: David Moore <dvdmoore@dcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us>
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 17:45:42 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: 1 Cor. 1:5-7

cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu (Carl W. Conrad) wrote:

>The only point I would like to make here, however, and I may be sticking my
>neck way out, is that I believe the passage you've cited in the paragraph
>above, 1 Cor 1:5-7, is one of the most ironic in the entire letter, and
>particularly the statement in 1:7, hWSTE MH hUSTEREISQAI EN MHDENI
>KAI PASHi GNWSEI. It seems to me that he displays what he really thinks
>about the spiritual accomplishments of the Corinthian congregation in
>OUDE ETI NUN DUNASQE, ETI GAR SARKINOI ESTE ... Chapter 2 bashes their high
>regard for rhetoric and wisdom, and he continues throughout the letter to
>push AGAPH wherever the Corinthians seem to be promoting GNWSIS.


	Since you've said you don't want to go on with a discussion of
1Cor. 12-14, I'll try to limit my comments to your hypothesis of Paul's
irony relating to the spiritual gifts especially concentrating on the
passage mentioned above in 1Cor. 1:5-7. 

	The position that Paul is praising the Corinthians facetiously in
this passage is not widely held.  The only reference I could find for it
in the commentaries on 1Cor. that I have at hand (Barret, Fee, N. Hilyer,
S. L. Johnson, Murphy-O'Connor) is a negative mention of the idea, by
Hilyer - although Murphy-O'Connor suggests that Paul is "damning them with
faint praise." (But cf. M-O's comment on v. 7: "The Corinthians are
adequately equipped with spiritual gifts" [Jerome Murphy-O'Connor, "The
First Letter to the Corinthians," _ad loc._, in _Jerome Biblical

	Since a thanksgiving section was characteristic of many Helenistic
letters and is especially characteristic of Paul, we should probably see
this thanksgiving passage as functioning essentially as it does in his
other letters.  (Although Galatians lacks such a section, presumably it is
because Paul was too overburdened with the situation in the Galatian
churches to take time for conventional forms.) This epistolary convention
is well documented, and in the case of Paul's letters, has been studied in
some depth. (See William G. Doty, _Letters in Primitive Christianity_,
[Philadelphia: Fortress, 1973], pp. 31-33; see also, Paul Schubert, _Form
and function of the Pauline Thanksgivings_ [Cited by Doty, p. 31].) Since
"Paul generally gives thanks that things are going well, and sees this as
evidence of the power of God working through the churches" (Doty, p.33),
it would appear that the Apostle is mentioning the good things that he can
about them, in spite of their other problems.  Note that, in other
epistles, he gives thanks for the love and stability in the faith that the
recipients have shown.  Thanksgiving for these things is not mentioned in
reference to the Corinthians in Paul's first letter to them, but in 2 Cor.
8:7 we do find them among the list of the Corinthian's virtues. 

	It may be significant to note that in this same passage (2Cor.
8:7) we also find "word and knowledge" (LOGOS KAI GNWSIS) which figures in
1Cor. 1:5.  The favorable mention of these in the 2Cor. passage probably
means that we should not take GNWSIS in 1Cor. 1:5 in the negative and
pagan sense it may have in other contexts.  Also, the favorable mention of
"word and knowledge" in the 2Cor. passage is a strong indication that
Paul's language in 1Cor. 1:5 is not ironic or facetious, but sincere in
praising the Corinthians for what they may be praised. 

	Another matter that indicates that this passage should be taken as
a serious, rather than facetious, statement of thanksgiving is Paul's
reference to the Parousia in v. 7.  His mentioning their expectation of
the coming of Christ makes clear that their charismatic gifts do not
constitute the fullness that God has for them but that such fullness is
still future and dependent on Christ.  (Cf. 13:9,10; 15:12-23.) Paul is
willing to recognize their gifts, but he doesn't want them to go to their
heads.  Their gifts are motive for his thanksgiving, but their carnality
in the use of the gifts, and in other matters, elicits his rebuke and
loving correction. 

David L. Moore                             Southeastern Spanish District
Miami, Florida                               of the  Assemblies of God
dvdmoore@dcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us           Department of Education


From: "Larry W. Hurtado" <hurtado@cc.umanitoba.ca>
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 17:00:18 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: 1Cor. 14:14 Tongues

On Mon, 9 Oct 1995 BibAnsMan@aol.com wrote:
(in part, much deleted):

>      The term "GLWSSAIS LALEIN" was a term used by the Greco-Roman culture to
> refer to the pagan language of the gods produced through people in an
> ecstatic trance.  This was always gibberish.  It was not a known language.

Could you please cite the refs. where "Greco-Roman culture" used the 
expression as you claim?  And, by the way, Paul's discussion of tongues 
in 1 Cor 12-14 shows that (a) he approved of the phenomenon and practiced 
it himself, and (b) he insisted that it was *not* ecstatic but thoroughly 
under the control of the huma speaker (thus, *not* at all the mantic 
model of speech we find, e.g., in the Delphi oracle etc.).
	The larger, deleted portion of the above posting turned to 
hortatory sentiments about current religious practices.  While we all 
may have our own sentiments, they should not cloud our reading of NT 
texts.  My immediate concern is not whether this or that group wishes to 
encourage or discourage what it regards as "tongues-speaking", but what 
it was Paul said!

Larry Hurtado, Religion, Univ. of Manitoba


From: DearPastor@aol.com
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 21:10:30 -0400
Subject: Online Bible 

Many of you may be familiar with the Online Bible in its earlier forms, but
have you seen it lately?

The entire TR has been parsed, and the Byz and Nestle texts are next.  It may
be the fastest searching program available.  For instance, if you want all
anarthrous aorist active patriciples in the NT, you would search for * T * *
V-AAP (the first * highlights the greek article, the T is the article
identifier, the second * allows for any combination of case-number-gender,
the third * allows for any greek verb, and the V-AAP identifies an aorist
active participle).  The search takes about five seconds and finds 131 of
them in 129 verses.

The CD costs around $25.  It includes a plethora of english versions, 4
Greek, 2 Hebrew, Thayers & BDB (keyed to strongs numbers), Bible
dictionaries, several commentaries (including Robertson's Word Pictures), the
Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, other language versions, and the TR of the
GNT is parsed.  It has even more features, but I do not have time to extoll
them all.  If you do not have a CD-ROM various portions are available to put
on your hard disk, although this is more expensive and takes up a fair amount
of room.  A strictly windows version will be coming out soon as well.

If you would like more information, e-mail me at DearPastor@aol.com

Mark T. Billington
Pastor and Student
Fayetteville, NC


From: Bill Renner <WILLARD@univscvm.csd.scarolina.edu>
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 95 21:38:03 EDT
Subject: Brithday

I want to wish a Happy 69th birthday. My 70th will be coming up in March.

Bill Renner
1427 Cardinal Dr.
West Columbia, SC  29169
email: BILLYRAY@sc.edu


From: Terry Austin <terrydeb@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 20:25:22 -0700
Subject: Beginning Grammars

Hi all,
This is my first posting in this group and I must say that the "heat" 
generated by this topic has captured my attention-enough to even 
venture my first message!  

Going past the controversy, I'd like to put in my vote for the best 
beginning grammars.  I've gone through quite a few for personal study 
and for teaching beginners.  There are two first class grammars on the 
market that I would highly recommend:  The Basics of Biblical Greek by 
Bill Mounce and Learn to Read New Testament Greek by David Alan Black.  
I don't think a person could do much better than either of those.

Scholarship doesn't stand still.  It's seems natural to me that we must 
keep learning and pushing ourselves to new horizons.  If we hadn't 
pushed ourselves in the technological world, we wouldn't be 
communicating as we are now.  How much more can this be true of 
biblical scholarship?  We don't ignore the advancements of the past (or 
stay there)-we build on them.  I think we should all applaud the 
efforts (and thank the Lord's grace) of those who devote great portions 
of their lives to further knowledge in these areas.

Terry Austin


From: KevLAnder@aol.com
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 23:50:19 -0400
Subject: Greek-Hebrew Bible Software 

The recent stir about Logos' technical support has rekindled the question in
my mind concerning what Bible software would be the best for me to buy. After
looking at what is out there (for Windows, of course!) I have narrowed my
selection down to the latest CD versions of (1) Logos and (2) Bible Works for
Windows (Hermeneutika). I have been leaning towards the latter, largely
because it seems to offer the original language capabilities as well as other
useful features at a more economical price. Logos, on the other hand, appears
to be a very good product, but it has a lot of useless add-ons that don't do
anything for me except inflate the price I will have to pay.

I have two other concerns:
(1) My understanding is that with Bible Works one can paste multi-lingual
text quite seamlessly into Microsoft Word, but for some reason WordPerfect
(at least 6.0a) will not properly do this. Of course, this is probably
WordPerfect's problem. Is there a similar problem with Logos?
(2) Are there any problems running either Logos or Bible Works under Windows
95? Even if not, would I still be wiser to hold out until Bible software
designed to fully take advantage of Win95 is released?

Thank you for any assistance you might be able to give me.

Kevin L. Anderson
Ph.D. student, GTU


From: KevLAnder@aol.com
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 23:50:41 -0400
Subject: Ray Summers' ENT 

I heard that there is a new edition of Ray Summers' ESSENTIALS OF NEW
TESTAMENT GREEK. Has anyone had a chance to look at it?


From: KevLAnder@aol.com
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 01:13:47 -0400
Subject: Re: 1Cor. 14:14 

Allow me to make a few brief points about this whole issue of whether or not
"tongues" (GLWSSAI) in 1 Cor 12-14 refers to "ecstatic utterance."

(1) The word GLWSSA in Biblical Greek (LXX and NT) does not anywhere appear
to carry this notion of ecstatic speech. It first of all refers to the human
organ called the tongue, and then also by extension it refers to human
speech. Nowhere in the Biblical Gk is this word used of "ecstatic utterance."
This also appears to be the case in 1 Cor 12-14 since . . .
(2) Paul expressly speaks of the "interpretation" of tongues. The terms
hERMENEUW and DIERMENEUW are commonly used in the LXX and NT of the
explanation or translation of language. It is a contradiction in terms to
even fathom such a thing as interpretation of an ecstatic utterance. Paul
would have been mad to urge the Corinthians to pray that they might also
interpret (14:13), unless he felt that the utterances could in fact be
(3) I will grant that what was going on at Corinth may, to Paul's chagrin,
have been shaped by the ecstatic speech known to these former pagans (as
Conrad has pointed out, 12:2); but I do not believe that Paul was willing to
allow the pagan and the Xn to be blurred. After all, that is why he took up
this space in 1 Cor to write about it. I am not convinced that Paul's concept
of GLWSSAI ought to be understood as something appreciably different from
what we find in Acts (particularly Ac 2).

See Robert H. Gundry, "'Ecstatic Utterance' (N.E.B.)?" Journal of Theo'l
Studies 17.2 (October 1966): 299-307.


End of b-greek-digest V1 #902


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: