From: Edgar Foster (email@example.com)
Date: Fri Apr 03 1998 - 13:43:35 EST
---"Paul S. Dixon" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Apr 1998 17:49:34 +1000 McKay family <email@example.com>
> >O.K. I have a silly Greek question.
> >Has this verse been discussed before?
> >Luke 23:43
> >KAI EIPEN AUTWi, AMHN SOI LEGW, SHMERON MET' EMOU ESHi EN TWi
> >This is the way it is written in my Greek NT. [O.K. Uses a much
> >better-looking font!]
> >Is it equally legitimate to put the comma after SHMERON, or is this
> >usual break up more likely to be correct?
> >I hope it is kosher for me to say that the people who want the comma
> >after SHMERON, seem to have theological, not grammatical reasons.
> What would be the sense if a comma goes after SHMERON? "Truly I say
> you today, you shall be with Me in paradise." This seems to suggest
> tomorrow, or the next day, He may say something else about it. Not
> exactly an encouraging interpretation of the words for the dying
Dear Paul, while one could extract this meaning from Jesus' words so
translated, it is not necessary to view Jesus' speech as contingent if
he did in fact say: :I say to you today, you shall be with me." Jesus
could well have spoken those words THAT DAY with no contingency
implied. In the OT when YHWH speaks "today", His word does not return
to Him void (i.e., it is not per se contingent). Since Jesus is the
Amen, even though he speaks today, his word stands today AND tomorrow.
> Besides, this punctuation would render SHMERON superfluous. Of course
> Christ was saying these words that day. When else would He be saying
And what is so superfluous about SHMERON EAN THS FWNHS AUTOU AKOUSETE?
> No, it makes excellent sense with the comma before >SHMERON. It makes
> SHMERON non-superfluous and critical. Christ's words >are for
> encouragement - today you shall be with Me in paradice.
Even if we place the comma AFTER SHMERON, Christ's words are still
encouraging. The thief WILL be with the Lord in PARADEISW (no
> I was not aware anybody was putting the comma after the SHMERON. If
> then I would tend to agree with your suspicions.
I have read certain commentators with no particular axe to grind that
I know of, recommend that the comma be placed after SHMERON. The
context of Luke and the NT book of Acts seems to favor the comma after
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:21 EDT