Search found 1867 matches

by Barry Hofstetter
October 22nd, 2020, 3:47 pm
Forum: New Testament
Topic: Luke 7:4 παρεξει
Replies: 3
Views: 195

Re: Luke 7:4 παρεξει

Dear Forum-Members οι δε παραγενομενοι προσ τον ιησουν παρεκαλουν αυτον σπουδαιωσ λεγοντεσ οτι αξιοσ εστιν ω (RP:) παρεξει/ (NA:) παρεξη τουτο Could the RP-παρεξει here be an Attical form of παρέξῃ? (See Cambridge Greek Grammar 2019, § 12.7, Note 1; or BDF §27) Regards Jean Putmans First, "Att...
by Barry Hofstetter
October 17th, 2020, 6:45 am
Forum: New Testament
Topic: What is the effect of adding μέν to Romans 6:11?
Replies: 6
Views: 600

Re: What is the effect of adding μέν to Romans 6:11?

Thayers specifically points to this verse (Romans 6:11) as an example of the concessive usage: [...] I appreciate the feedback. I guess I'm on the horns of a bit of a dilemma here. I find Thayer's take more in line with how I read this context but I will take to heart your experience as well. Thank...
by Barry Hofstetter
October 15th, 2020, 4:50 pm
Forum: Other
Topic: Latin question for Greek word
Replies: 9
Views: 7994

Re: Latin question for Greek word

Had to leave quickly and didn't notice some of the misspellings. Here is the corrected version if anyone would like to help me understand this latin quote. Est tamen aliquid et secundum spiritalem intelligentium culpabiliter rapere, sicut illi laudabiliter 'rapiunt Regnum coelerum'. Ut verbi causa ...
by Barry Hofstetter
October 14th, 2020, 12:42 pm
Forum: New Testament
Topic: What is the effect of adding μέν to Romans 6:11?
Replies: 6
Views: 600

Re: What is the effect of adding μέν to Romans 6:11?

No, none of this. The μέν simply supplies the contrast to δέ, very standard Greek. In English the contrast is clear from context, and so most translations have no direct rendering of μέν, as is often the case for particles. What English translation renders it as "indeed?" I spot checked th...
by Barry Hofstetter
October 14th, 2020, 8:52 am
Forum: Syntax and Grammar
Topic: Meta Language
Replies: 23
Views: 1332

Re: Meta Language

Some of us removed the scaffolding some years back and now have become quite skeptical about the value of the scaffolding at any stage of learning. People who teach intro and intermediate often have a preoccupation with the scaffolding. Yeah, some of us have forgotten what it's like to be a new lea...
by Barry Hofstetter
October 12th, 2020, 11:45 am
Forum: Beginners Forum
Topic: Rev 12:11 and 13:14 - δια + acc as instrumental
Replies: 24
Views: 1743

Re: Rev 12:11 and 13:14 - δια + acc as instrumental

I can't find the Pindar reference (it's apparently found in a scholiast's note), but 2nd Macc 12:11 I think this is the Pindar reference: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text.jsp?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0161%3Abook%3DP.%3Apoem%3D9 Third last line at the bottom of the page. thx D This, righ...
by Barry Hofstetter
October 12th, 2020, 8:09 am
Forum: Beginners Forum
Topic: Rev 12:11 and 13:14 - δια + acc as instrumental
Replies: 24
Views: 1743

Re: Rev 12:11 and 13:14 - δια + acc as instrumental

For (1), this is the kind of question that requires a specialist in the study of the Greek of Revelation, not the general Greek reader. If I read BDAG right, there may be parallels in Pindar, 2 Macc 12:11, EpArist), but I'm worried that Rev does know how to use διά + gen. (1:1 and 21:24). I can't f...
by Barry Hofstetter
October 11th, 2020, 2:08 pm
Forum: Beginners Forum
Topic: Rev 12:11 and 13:14 - δια + acc as instrumental
Replies: 24
Views: 1743

Re: Rev 12:11 and 13:14 - δια + acc as instrumental

Which doesn’t answer my question in the original post :D Namely whether this usage in 12:11 and 13:14 is found in other texts in Koine / classical. And to be fair, with regards to the meta language - surely it is important to understand in what sense BDF / BDAG are using their terminology? Your loo...
by Barry Hofstetter
October 11th, 2020, 11:12 am
Forum: Beginners Forum
Topic: Rev 12:11 and 13:14 - δια + acc as instrumental
Replies: 24
Views: 1743

Re: Rev 12:11 and 13:14 - δια + acc as instrumental

I refuse to unravel that or interact with the the interpretation per se, but: 1) I note that BDAG refers to the usage as "efficient cause" and not means or instrumentality: ⓓ instead of διά w. gen. to denote the efficient cause we may have διά, by α. w. acc. of thing (schol. on Pind., N. 4...
by Barry Hofstetter
October 9th, 2020, 9:12 am
Forum: Grammar Questions
Topic: Romans 1:3. Own translation. Grammar check
Replies: 19
Views: 1591

Re: Romans 1:3. Own translation. Grammar check

Thank you, Please assume the the is included, as I have done. The remainder of my translation (obviously?) has an important possible interpretative option. To focus on my question, Is the Greek grammar compatible with the meaning of, having come into being out from the (crucified, dead and buried…)...

Go to advanced search