[B-Greek] John 2:15--PANTAS ... TA TE PROBATA AND TOUS BOAS

Leonard Jayawardena leonardj at live.com
Thu Nov 18 04:45:08 EST 2010




----------------------------------------
> From: iver_larsen at sil.org
> To: leonardj at live.com
> CC: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] John 2:15--PANTAS ... TA TE PROBATA AND TOUS BOAS
> Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 07:08:35 +0300
>
>> IL:
>>
>>> In v. 14 we are told that Jesus discovered all the traders and moneychangers.
>>> He
>>> also saw the cattle, sheep and doves on sale as well as the coins on the
>>> tables.
>>> He then made a whip and chased them all out of the temple compound. The
>>> object
>>> is the masculine PANTAS which probably refers to both traders and their
>>> animals
>>> (not the doves and coins).
>>
>>
>> LJ: And why do you exclude the doves and the coins? Isn't that arbitrary?
>
> No, it is not arbitrary. It is based on two things: context and common sense.
>
> Jesus asked the dove sellers to take their cages out of the compound. He did not
> chase or drive the doves out, which he might have done by forcing the cages
> open, not by whipping them.
> And do you imagine Jesus driving the coins out of the compound by using a whip?
> He only scattered them on the ground. It was the money changers he wanted out.
>
> I have no further comment.
>
> Iver Larsen
>

LJ: You are not being fair by me by quoting only a tiny part of what I wrote. This is what I wrote in full:

Quote
 
And why do you exclude the doves and the coins? Isn't that arbitrary? If PANTAS includes the traders and the sheep and the oxen, then logically the doves and the coins too must be included, since they, too, are part of what Jesus "saw," as you said. If in answer you say that in the next clauses we are told that Jesus poured out the coins and told the owners of doves to take them away and therefore they are to be excluded, then your understanding of PANTAS, too, is conditioned by something in the following context, as mine is, and hence commands no premium over my interpretation as being a more "logical" or "natural" interpretation of PANTAS, if that is what you think. The masculine gender of PANTAS can, of course, be explained by BOAS, which is masculine.

unquote

As you can see, I already knew your reasons for excluding the doves and the coins from PANTAS, so what you have written above is nothing new to me. One of my points was, as you have just confirmed above, your understanding of PANTAS is conditioned by the words following PANTAS, just as mine is, which has grammar on its side to boot. You have now included the unlikelihood of Jesus using a whip to put the doves or coins out of the temple. Exactly! In my interpretation, the humans are also included in the category of those objects on which Jesue is unlikely to have used a whip.
 
So I ask again, Why do you still want to include the merchants in PANTAS?
 
Leonard Jayawardena 
 
  		 	   		  


More information about the B-Greek mailing list