Maria Cezar (in PM) wrote:If the Apostle did not discuss quantity, is it correct to assume he was only focused on quality in this verse?
In a way he may disussing quantity when he mentions διὰ δὲ τὰς πορνείας. If πορνεία is read as "going to prostitutes for sex", then conceptually (rather than grammatically) he is mentioning plurality. Contrasted with that, the ἕκαστος and ἕκαστη refer quite definitely to individuals.
As for the quality, that is what my post quoting Longus moved on to discuss. Language always comes down to guessing, and we do that on either side of translating. Something simple like, "Pass me my glasses." leaves people guessing whether I want the house glasses, the going out ones or sunglasses. By introducing the discussion based on Longus, I was suggesting some guidelines to enhance the success of the guessing. I'm quite open about saying that we guess, because I believe our minds can't help comstructing a meaning anyway, so as to understand at least something.
One helpful way of exploring meaning is a skewd translation. You may have heard people say that all of one language can't be expressed through translation into another language. To deal with that, we can emphasise one feature in the source language - something like the Amplified Bible, but just amplifying just one point. They are just going to aid discussion. Here are some other examples of these words to aid our guessing - you are probably going to have to take a while to go through this, because it is heavy on the Greek:
Luke 6:41 wrote:τὴν δὲ δοκὸν τὴν ἐν τῷ ἰδίῳ ὀφθαλμῷ οὐ κατανοεῖς;
, don't you even notice the beam in the eye which you yourself could do something about?
We are ecpecting another action to happen ... he should clean out his eye.
Acts 1:7 wrote:Οὐχ ὑμῶν ἐστιν γνῶναι χρόνους ἢ καιροὺς οὓς ὁ πατὴρ ἔθετο ἐν τῇ ἰδίᾳ ἐξουσίᾳ.
by the authority which he (alone) has the power to wield.
God had that "own" power of his, and he used it to set times and seasons.
Galatians 6:5 wrote:Ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει.
don't expect anybody else to do it for you.
Let's look at the other option:
Luke 11:21 wrote:Ὅταν ὁ ἰσχυρὸς καθωπλισμένος φυλάσσῃ τὴν ἑαυτοῦ αὐλήν, ἐν εἰρήνῃ ἐστὶν τὰ ὑπάρχοντα αὐτοῦ·
The courtyard, which he has the right and privilage to use (for the storage of goods). The relationship between the guy and his yard doesn't suggest that he needs to do something because of it. By using ἑαυτοῦ we just know that he has the enjoyment and use of it.
Romans 5:8 wrote:Συνίστησιν δὲ τὴν ἑαυτοῦ ἀγάπην εἰς ἡμᾶς ὁ θεός,
God has the love in himself, the love which he himself expresses, or has (for us)
1 Corinthians 13:5 wrote:οὐ ζητεῖ τὰ ἑαυτῆς,
The things which are only for its enjoyment and benefit.
There are those that seem to suggest that ἴδιος means ownership, but I think that meaning derives from the inherent relationship between the parties, not from this word. In this verse:
Luke 19:13 wrote:Καλέσας δὲ δέκα δούλους ἑαυτοῦ, ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς δέκα μνᾶς, καὶ εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτούς, Πραγματεύσασθε ἕως ἔρχομαι.
they are the slaves that he has the right to enjoy a reward and benefit from, while
1 Corinthians 11:21 wrote:Ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον δεῖπνον προλαμβάνει ἐν τῷ φαγεῖν, καὶ ὃς μὲν πεινᾷ, ὃς δὲ μεθύει.
The dinner which that person has, but another doesn't - within the right social context, that could be termed "ownership".
Matthew 25:14 wrote:Ὥσπερ γὰρ ἄνθρωπος ἀποδημῶν ἐκάλεσεν τοὺς ἰδίους δούλους, καὶ παρέδωκεν αὐτοῖς τὰ ὑπάρχοντα αὐτοῦ·
He was going out 9f town, but they would still do his things.