[B-Greek] John 4:34

George F Somsel gfsomsel at yahoo.com
Fri Dec 22 15:55:51 EST 2006


No, that is not correct.  If it were EGW rather than EMOS then it would have been 

LEGEI AUTOIS hO IHSOUS TO BRWMA MOU ESTIN hINA POIHSW TO QELHMA TOU . . .
 
george
gfsomsel
_________



----- Original Message ----
From: Richard Lindeman <oblchurch at msn.com>
To: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
Cc: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, December 22, 2006 3:49:56 PM
Subject: RE: [B-Greek] John 4:34


George:
 
You are missing the point. I am not at all attempting to speculate a “new interpretation” of scripture. You have correctly pointed out that  EMON is a possessive pronoun which qualifies BRWMA. I accept that. But now I am simply attempting to discover the full extent of my errors. Doing this helps me to get a better grasp of the language. 
 
I incorrectly read EMON as if it were a personal pronoun in the accusative case.  If it were EME rather than EMON, then it would read as follows:
 
LEGEI AUTOIS hO IHSOUS EME BRWMA ESTIN hINA POIHSW TO QELHMA TOU PEMYANTOS ME KAI TELEIWSW AUTOU TO ERGON 
 
Would this be correct Greek usage? If so, then I would translate EME as the subject of hINA + subjunctive and I would take BRWMA as the object of ESTIN. 
”Jesus said to them, with respect to me it is bread to do the will of the one who sent me and to complete his work.” 
 
Of course this is not what the actual text in John says, but since I was wrong in taking EMON as an accusative of general reference, were there other mistakes I made in my thought process?  
 
Thanks!
 
Rich Lindeman 
 



From: George F Somsel [mailto:gfsomsel at yahoo.com] 

Sent: Friday, December 22, 2006 12:40 PM
To: Richard Lindeman; b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] John 4:34
 
Rich,
 
If you were to change EMON to ME or to EME, it would then indeed be the accusative of a personal pronoun -- either emphatic or unemphatic.  It would no longer be a possessive pronoun qualifying BRWMA.  The question then would be regarding how this would functioin in the sentence.  Since the verb here is a copulative, there would be no accusative unless it were as the object of a preposition.  Do you see one here?  I prefer to not get involved in speculating how something might have been said.  There are many ways in which anything can be expressed, and we could sit here all day constructing ways in which something might have been said.  The fact is that this is the way in which it was expressed by our writer.  
 
A word of caution regarding translation (one's own).  We have many good translations of the Biblical writings in English.  Generally they will differ slightly in one way or another from other translations.  Sometimes this simply depends upon the translation philosophy of the person or committee making the translation.  Occassionally one will find a translation which is motivated by a particular viewpoint which requires that one recognize the fact and allow for it if that translation is used.  That aside, most of the main translations are good.  Pick up your Greek NT and look at that same passage in the English version that you keep underneath it.  If your translation differs markely from that, you're probably on the wrong track.  Great discoveries regarding the meaning of a text are few and far between.  This does not mean that the study of the original language is without value.  Sometimes one will note an ambiguity that doesn't translate well or the usage of a particular
 word which may also be used in another context.  There is much gold to be mined from the study of the original.  Beware, however, of thinking that you are going to completely overturn the fundamental way in which it is understood.
 
george
gfsomsel
_________ 

----- Original Message ----
From: Richard Lindeman <oblchurch at msn.com>
To: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
Sent: Friday, December 22, 2006 12:28:30 PM
Subject: [B-Greek] John 4:34


John 4:34 
LEGEI AUTOIS hO IHSOUS EMON BRWMA ESTIN hINA POIHSW TO QELHMA TOU PEMYANTOS ME KAI TELEIWSW AUTOU TO ERGON 

"Jesus said to them, 'My food is to do the will of him who sent me and to accomplish his work.'"

I noticed that EMON is found in accusative masculine singular here and serves as the subject of hINA POIHSW and also as the subject of (hINA) TELEIWSW  In this verse, is this an exact equivalent of an accusative subject for an infinitive? In other words, if John had written aorist infinitives here instead of hINA + aorist subjunctives, would that be good Greek? And would that change the function of EMON in any way or the meaning of the sentence? 

Blessed Christmas to all!

Rich Lindeman
---
B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
B-Greek mailing list
B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
[truncated by sender]
 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


More information about the B-Greek mailing list