[B-Greek] Urban legends and Presuppositions
Blue Meeksbay
bluemeeksbay at yahoo.com
Tue Dec 8 17:49:50 EST 2009
I was reading an old post in the archives about where there was a discussion of John’s use of AGAPAW and FILEW in chapter 21. Some felt there was significance and others felt it was a stylistic lexical choice without any semantic difference. This was also referred to in the posts on “urban legends.” However, do not a lot of our decisions of the Greek really come from our presuppositions? If one begins with the presupposition of “verbal plenary inspiration,” where God inspired every word, one would be more apt to see a distinction. However, if one begins with the presupposition that the gospels are just literary works from the creative talents of the various authors without any divine “verbal inspiration,” then one would be more likely consider it a literary style.
The fact of the matter is, however, in John chapter 21, two different words are used in the dialogue. If one believes in VPI then one would be more likely to conclude the different words were used for a purpose. Such mindset is not new, but is rooted in the Midrashic hermeneutics of the first century, where every word was carefully scrutinized.
If one had to sign a contract written up by a lawyer, I think one would take notice if a lawyer used one word in one sentence and then, all of a sudden, replaced it with a different word in another sentence. One would want to know why he decided to utilize a different word. We would want to know what distinction he was trying to make, (if any).
Conversely if one does not hold to a verbal inspiration, then one might conclude, in John 21, this was just a stylistic choice, especially when one notices the use of AGAPA and FILEI in such verses as John 3:35 and John 5:20 respectively.
I do not want to get into any discussion on which presupposition is the correct, but it seems both conclusions would be just as legitimate in John 21 depending on which presuppositional view one believes is true.
Therefore, would not a “true” urban legend have to pass muster on both counts, out of mutual respect for one’s other presupposition? For instance, “The aorist tense always means ‘once and for all, never to be repeated.’” That would be a true “urban legend” because, objectively, that would not “pass muster,” no matter what presupposition one believes is true.
B.Harris
“The more counsel, the more understanding” – Hillel
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list