[B-Greek] Re: Luke on KATALUMA
Polycarp66 at aol.com
Polycarp66 at aol.com
Tue Dec 30 19:10:11 EST 2003
In a message dated 12/30/2003 6:21:45 PM Eastern Standard Time,
waldoslusher at yahoo.com writes:
gfsomsel wrote:
> I don't know what you're doing here. What has the
> KATALUMA in Lk 22 have to
> do with the KATALUMA in Lk 2 other than being
> designated by the same term? To
> assume that ANAGAION refers to the KATALUMA in Lk 2
> is really a stretch.
I'm not following your reasoning here. What exactly is
your concern?
______
Let's put it this way. In Mt 10.2, 3 (just read it in English) it speaks of
James twice. Is it the same James. Does what one says about one James
instance apply to the other as well? James the son of Zebedee in 10.2 and James the
son of Alphaeus in 10.3. Surely you will say "No, what applies to one
doesn't apply to the other. They are different persons." So also the KATALUMA in
Lk 2 is not the same as the KATALUMA in Lk 22. Therefore the term ANAGAION
does not apply to the KATALUMA in Lk 2 (or if it is also ANAGAION this is not
stated or a necessary part of the description). The point is that one word can
apply to different items which may have nothing in common other than the
ability to be designated by the same term. I one PLOION is black, that doesn't mean
that every item which can be designated as a PLOION is black. Returning to
our passage(s): If the KATALUMA of Lk 22 can be designated ANAGAION "an
upstairs room" (and it is), this doesn't mean the KATALUMA in Lk 2 is likewise
upstairs (Were you not saying that it was? Did I misunderstand you?). What I am
driving at is that it is wrong and even productive of error to conclude that a
word is used in all cases in the same way and with the same associations.
gfsomsel
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list