[B-Greek] John 2:15--PANTAS ... TA TE PROBATA AND TOUS BOAS
George F Somsel
gfsomsel at yahoo.com
Thu Nov 18 09:08:12 EST 2010
I think that rather than apposition Carl might have meant epexigetical. For
those of you in Rio Linda I'll give the advice a teacher I had in junior high
was fond of dispensing -- "look it up in the dictionary." I hesitate to enter
this over-the-top discussion since I think it should have ended long ago. Can
we please stop now?
george
gfsomsel
… search for truth, hear truth,
learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
defend the truth till death.
- Jan Hus
_________
________________________________
From: Leonard Jayawardena <leonardj at live.com>
To: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
Sent: Thu, November 18, 2010 1:33:59 AM
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] John 2:15--PANTAS ... TA TE PROBATA AND TOUS BOAS
----------------------------------------
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] John 2:15--PANTAS ... TA TE PROBATA AND TOUS BOAS
> From: cwconrad2 at mac.com
> Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 07:59:09 -0500
> CC: iver_larsen at sil.org; b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> To: leonardj at live.com
>
> I'm going to delete intervening parts of this confoundedly and confoundingly
>lengthy discourse
> and cut to the chase. And I do not expect to be commenting further on this
>matter.
>
> On Nov 17, 2010, at 6:57 AM, Leonard Jayawardena wrote:
>>
>> Actually, if you read only up to PANTAS (let's ignore the bit about the whip
>>for the moment), its most logical antecedent is not even the merchants plus all
>>the types of wares mentioned, including the doves and coins, but ONLY THE
>>MERCHANTS, with the removal of their wares from the temple only implied as a
>>natural consequence of Jesus putting out the merchants, since when they go out
>>they take their wares out with them. Grammatically, there are really only two
>>possibilities of understanding PANTAS EXEBALEN EK TOU hIEROU TA TE PROBATA KAI
>>TOUS BOAS:
>>
>> A. He put all out of the temple, both the sheep and the oxen (my preference),
>>in which case TA TE PROBATA KAI TOUS BOAS is in apposition to PANTAS; or
>>
>> B. TA TE PROBATA KAI TOUS BOAS is an addition to PANTAS and is translated "and
>>the sheep and the oxen," as it is in the KJV, which is more idiomatically
>>rendered in some such manner as 0"with the sheep and the oxen" (e.g., ESV). On
>>this interpretation, PANTAS refers to the merchants and TE has the semantic
>>force of KAI as a connective (coordinate) conjunction and effectively joins the
>>sheep and the oxen to PANTAS as an additional object of EXEBALEN,i.e., "he put
>>PANTAS (= the traders) and the sheep and the oxen out of the temple."
>
>> Translations adopting the view (B) are in a slight majority.
>>
>> From the foregoing it will be seen that, with your understanding of PANTAS,
>>you--and Carl W. Conrad--are neither here nor there!
CWC:
> I"ll speak only for myself; I had thought I had made myself sufficiently clear:
>I understand the passage in the sense of those versions you've cited in B above.
>I do not see TA TE PROBATA KAI TOUS BOAS as an additional object; rather I see
>them as a clarifying addendum; I think that CEV has the sense right: "together
>with their sheep and cattle" If I were to phrase it myself, I would make it more
>simply, "he drove them all out, including the sheep and cattle."
LJ: I think this discussion has descended to a ridiculous level with some of us
not understanding even English translations properly (a fat chance that we will
ever be able to sort out John 2:15 in the Greek!). None of the 15 translations I
cited, including CEV, agrees with the way you understand John 2:15. In all these
translations PANTAS refers only to the merchants, whether or not they see TA TE
PROBATA KAI TOUS BOAS as being in apposition to PANTAS. In none of these
translations are the sheep and the oxen included in PANTAS as they in your
interpretation (and that of Iver Larsen).
John 2:15 reads in the CEV in part:
"So he took some rope and made a whip. Then he chased everyone out of the
temple, together with their sheep and cattle"
According to my dictionary, "everyone" (or "everybody") means "every person."
And "together" as an adverb means, inter alia, "with someone or something else;
in company." Therefore "he chased everyone out of the temple, together with
their sheep and the oxen" means "he chased every merchant out of the temple with
or in the company of the sheep and the oxen." The sheep and the oxen are not
INCLUDED in "everyone." Surely, as a native speaker of English you should know
that "together" does not mean "including."
CWC:
> I thought I had made this clear enough, but I will repeat one last time what I
>wrote yesterday.
>
> On Nov 15, 2010, at 7:23 AM, Carl Conrad wrote:
>>
>> I guess that I have been using "apposition" in a sense that doesn't conform
>>quite to that strict definition; I certainly think that TA TE PROBATA KAI TOUS
>>BOAS indicates that these creatures were also to be understood as among the
>>"PANTAS" that functions as the direct object of EXEBALEN. I'm sorry if I didn't
>>make that clear. If you want to quibble about the word "apposition," then I will
>>withdraw my acknowledgement that TA TE PROBATA KAI TOUS BOAS stands in
>>apposition to PANTAS and simply state that I believe TA TE PROBATA KAI TOUS BOAS
>>are indicated as included among the general PANTAS. I had assumed that you
>>understood pretty well what I meant. Perhaps I was in error about that ;-).
LJ: I understood your interpretation, i.e., PANTAS includes the sheep and the
oxen, well enough from the beginning, But then you agreed with me that there was
apposition between PANTAS and TA TE PROBATA KAI TOUS BOAS and I needed to get
your clarification.
CWC:
> I might add that I am reminded of an analogy made by George Bernard Shaw once.
>He was talking about prophetic clarifications of the OT image of God, but he
>explained the historical process as akin to the pouring of progressively cleaner
>water into a pail with very muddy water in the bottom of it; repeated additions
>of cleaner water never failed to leave some murkiness in the liquid contained by
>the pail. That's what this thread reminds me of.
>
> Carl W. Conrad
> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
>
LJ: I would not consider the theological views of a writer of fiction as worthy
of comment, so I will pass this one.
Leonard Jayawardena
---
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
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list