cwconrad wrote:John, you’ve told us in your introduction “I'm learning Koine and I know no one who knows Greek! So I need to get plugged in to a forum like this.” It would be helpful, in view of the questions you’re raising about translation, for us to have a better sense of where you are in the process of learning Koine. In this forum we tend to think of translation as a secondary process of converting an understood text into a second language; that conversion process is a distinct art requiring special skills in both languages. Our concern here is more strictly with understanding what the original (Greek) text means and how/why it conveys that meaning. There's no way of judging the adequacy of a translation without assessing both what the original text means and how that meaning is best conveyed in the target language. You are in a Beginners' Forum here; the ordinary focus in the Beginners' Forum is with learning the language and discussing the kinds of questions about the Biblical Greek text that beginners are grammatically equipped to discuss.
I'm a complete newbie, but I'm giving it my best go with what I currently know. I currently understand person/number/voice/mood/tense of verbs http://www.ntgreek.org/learn_nt_greek/verbs1.htm
, though, I have been relying on blue letter bible to identify these. And with non-finite verb forms I understand that case and gender are added to that. I understand the number/gender/case of nouns http://www.ntgreek.org/learn_nt_greek/nouns1.htm
, though I also have to rely on blue letter bible for that too. I'm starting to see the endings myself, but only starting. I cannot pronounce anything yet.
I'm not equipped to discuss the grammatical ins and outs in Koine, but I'm begginning to understand them in English because of you guys. You're giving me a foundation and prompting me to dig in deeper and actually learn Koine.
Jonathan Robie wrote:
jdhadwin wrote:My hope is to show whether the Koine in 1st Corinthians 14:14 & 19 allows for the personal understanding spoken of in verse 14:4 ––and also the thoughts in tongues spoken of in 14:28. From what I'm seeing and hearing, it seems that μου does allow for this if it is not necessarily possessive. According to my current understanding of Koine, μου does not have to be possessive...
If you use Greek mainly in the service of theological beliefs you want to support, you won't get good at Greek or at interpreting texts honestly. Lots of people do that, and that's one of the big reasons we don't delve into the theology here. I also think context is important. And so far, we've been discussing individual verses taken out of context. Proof texting leads naturally to taking things out of context and eisegesis.
Well, you've already proven to me that 1st Corinthians 14:34 cannot be a squinting construction, and I'm very appreciative. That's why I'm trying to learn Koine, because I read the scripture and I think, I'll bet he is really getting at the same thing he was getting at over in such-and-such-a-chapter-and-verse
, and I want to find out whether My theory is right or wrong. I think that if I wanted to learn Greek to prove my theory, then I would land at eisegesis, but I am learning in order to know whether to correct myself or not. I agree that lots of people do eisegetical work, and therefore, it is more than likely that we shall find that we all hold such eisegetical persuasions... When I think I have found such persuasions in "traditional interpretation," I get interested for obvious reasons. My end goal is to know what is possible and what is not possible, not to assume that the traditional interpretation is the best. It may be that the traditional interpretation came to us through eisegesis. I am asking/learning in order to examine such things.
I would not like to not only cite the one verse, but I'm uncertain where the line that divides context and exegesis is perceived to be and I wanted to try to honor protocol... looks like I need more contiguous scripture and less scripture from other chapters/books. I will keep that in mind. The reason I started looking at Koine is actually to defend against English proof texters. Often, the verses I'm examining are ones which seem to present a meaning that is out of context with the contiguous English translation, as well as many other prominent scriptures throughout the new testament. My hope is to correct my understanding from all the eisegetical nonsense that I've been taught throughout the decades.
Jonathan Robie wrote:To me, at least, you haven't demonstrated that ὁ νοῦς μου can have the meaning you want it to. Showing me other places where that same phrase is used with the desired meaning would be more convincing.
I'm not particularly trying to demonstrate anything: just trying to point out that μου does not have to be possessive. It's not that I want it to have that meaning, it's that that is the only meaning that makes sense to me, both from experience and from the surrounding points Paul makes which I mentioned above. If it simply cannot be, then I will drop my position because it is not possible, and, although I would be very confused (personally), I would always set out to reconcile myself to the scripture —and I would not set out to reconcile the scripture to myself. I've had to do this with 1st Cor 14:34 already —if I insisted that it was a squinting negative modifier after you proved it, then I would be an eisegete. —but I'm the newbie, and newbies can't learn without changing. I simply start with a hypothesis, and though sometimes I am more confident than others, when I am disproven, I will change
My point did not hinge on whether ὁ νοῦς μου can be used as I implied it was being used in Philippians. My theory hinges on whether μου is requred to be a possessive pronoun or whether it can be a normal personal pronoun. Everything hinges on that.
Jonathan Robie wrote:In context, I think μου means the same thing in τὸ πνεῦμά μου and ὁ νοῦς μου.
I definitely agree with you that τὸ πνεῦμά μου and ὁ νοῦς μου accomplish the same things and that the Genitive μου applies to both in the same way. But my theory still stands, because when we think of the genitive personal pronoun as "of me", everything still works and still makes sense... "ἐὰν γὰρ προσεύχωμαι γλώσσῃ τὸ πνεῦμά μου (the spirit of me) προσεύχεται ὁ δὲ νοῦς μου (but the understanding of me) ἄκαρπός ἐστιν"
In this, τὸ πνεῦμά μου still retains it's necessary possessive quality, while ὁ νοῦς μου could be thought of in either way (possessive or not). Given the context of Paul's surrounding points about edification, it seems obvious to me that we should expect the μου in ὁ νοῦς μου to not act as a possessive personal pronoun.
Jonathan Robie wrote:
13 Διὸ ὁ λαλῶν γλώσσῃ προσευχέσθω ἵνα διερμηνεύῃ. 14 ἐὰν γὰρ προσεύχωμαι γλώσσῃ, τὸ πνεῦμά μου προσεύχεται, ὁ δὲ νοῦς μου ἄκαρπός ἐστιν. 15 τί οὖν ἐστιν; προσεύξομαι τῷ πνεύματι, προσεύξομαι δὲ καὶ τῷ νοΐ· ψαλῶ τῷ πνεύματι, ψαλῶ δὲ καὶ τῷ νοΐ· 16 ἐπεὶ ἐὰν εὐλογῇς πνεύματι, ὁ ἀναπληρῶν τὸν τόπον τοῦ ἰδιώτου πῶς ἐρεῖ τὸ Ἀμήν ἐπὶ τῇ σῇ εὐχαριστίᾳ; ἐπειδὴ τί λέγεις οὐκ οἶδεν· 17 σὺ μὲν γὰρ καλῶς εὐχαριστεῖς, ἀλλ’ ὁ ἕτερος οὐκ οἰκοδομεῖται. 18 εὐχαριστῶ τῷ θεῷ, πάντων ὑμῶν μᾶλλον γλώσσαις λαλῶ· 19 ἀλλὰ ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ θέλω πέντε λόγους τῷ νοΐ μου λαλῆσαι, ἵνα καὶ ἄλλους κατηχήσω, ἢ μυρίους λόγους ἐν γλώσσῃ.
In the next sentence, Paul draws this conclusion: προσεύξομαι τῷ πνεύματι, προσεύξομαι δὲ καὶ τῷ νοΐ. It's hard to argue that the traditional understanding of ὁ νοῦς μου forbids προσεύχεσθαι τῷ πνεύματι.
Unless we are reading our belief that "Paul did not understand the words out of his own mouth", then verse 15 does not conclude the matter. If what I've pointed out about verse 14 can be true, then the "hearer" which is implied if ὁ νοῦς μου means (the understanding of me [via the hearer]) is only carried over into verse 15. This even makes more sense, meaning that he will pray in the spirit and that he will pray in such a way that reveals his understanding (his mind) to the hearer, so that both he AND the hearer may be edified because of understanding.
And this implied "hearer" should not be so unbelievable, in verse 14 or 15, because the hearer is explicitly mentioned in verse 16, which seems to offer more solid evidence for my case than previously realized. Below, I've underlined the parts of the verses that contextually correspond to the spirit and emboldened the parts that refer to the understanding. From the context confirmed in verse 16, it is clear to me that "the hearer" is the one whom Paul is talking about when he talks about νοῦς in these verses. we could even go further before and after these verses in context and find that the broader context is οἰκοδομή. Thus, we could go through from verse 2 to somewhere well beyond verse 19, underlining and emboldening, showing that the context of "understanding" in this text belongs to the hearer and that the speaker of the tongue possesses understanding himself in that in doing so ἑαυτὸν οἰκοδομεῖ.
14 ἐὰν γὰρ προσεύχωμαι γλώσσῃ τὸ πνεῦμά μου προσεύχεται ὁ δὲ νοῦς μου ἄκαρπός ἐστιν
15 τί οὖν ἐστιν προσεύξομαι τῷ πνεύματι προσεύξομαι δὲ καὶ τῷ νοΐ ψαλῶ τῷ πνεύματι ψαλῶ δὲ καὶ τῷ νοΐ
16 ἐπεὶ ἐὰν εὐλογήσῃς τῷ πνεύματι ὁ ἀναπληρῶν τὸν τόπον τοῦ ἰδιώτου πῶς ἐρεῖ τὸ Ἀμήν ἐπὶ τῇ σῇ εὐχαριστίᾳ ἐπειδὴ τί λέγεις οὐκ οἶδεν
17 σὺ μὲν γὰρ καλῶς εὐχαριστεῖς ἀλλ᾽ ὁ ἕτερος οὐκ οἰκοδομεῖται
18 εὐχαριστῶ τῷ θεῷ μου, πάντων ὑμῶν μᾶλλον γλώσσαις λαλῶν
19 ἀλλ᾽ ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ θέλω πέντε λόγους διὰ τοῦ νοός μου λαλῆσαι ἵνα καὶ ἄλλους κατηχήσω ἢ μυρίους λόγους ἐν γλώσσῃ
Can you see my point?
Jonathan Robie wrote:
cwconrad wrote:Our concern here is more strictly with understanding what the original (Greek) text means and how/why it conveys that meaning. There's no way of judging the adequacy of a translation without assessing both what the original text means and how that meaning is best conveyed in the target language. You are in a Beginners' Forum here; the ordinary focus in the Beginners' Forum is with learning the language and discussing the kinds of questions about the Biblical Greek text that beginners are grammatically equipped to discuss.
I see what you guys mean. I'm not gramatically equipped myself, and I've been asking questions that are perhaps out of my league. But boy, am I learning a lot.
Thank you all,