From: James H. Vellenga (email@example.com)
Date: Tue Feb 04 1997 - 09:38:36 EST
> NOW I think I do understand you. Apart from the curious theoretical
> question regarding whether Paul would have urged anyone to talk or sing to
> himself (my wife says that the only way to be sure you get the right
> answers is to put the question to yourself), I don't think the manner of
> doing it is problematic: I think the SINGULAR imperative, probably in the
> 3rd sg., would be most appropriate here: hEKASTOS hEAUTWi (/PROS hEAUTON)
> LALEITW/AiDETW/DIALEGESQAI; cf. 1 Thess 4:3-4 where the idea is expressed
> in an infinitive phrase in vs. 4: (3) TOUTO GAR ESTIN QELHMA TOU QEOU, hO
> hAGIASMOS hUMWN, APECESQAI hUMAS APO THS PORNEIAS, (4) EIDENAI hEKASTON
> hUMWN TO hEAUTOU SKEUOS KTASQAI EN hAGIASMWi KAI TIMHi ... Note that he's
> still addressing everybody and urging everybody in the community to behave
> thus, but they are urged to act thus individually.
Thanks. A very clear answer.
But now I have to raise the question that, since we have already
established this morning that "speak to yourselves" has a different
meaning in English to two different people who grew up speaking the
language, whether LALOUNTES hEAUTOIS (in Eph 5.19) could have had
a similar ambiguity to the original addressees.
What is your sense on that?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:04 EDT