meta user
network profile
| bio | website | rockadoodee.com |
|---|---|---|
| location | Chicagoland | |
| age | ||
| visits | member for | 1 year, 3 months |
| seen | 3 hours ago | |
| stats | profile views | 23 |
Orthodox Christian interested in religious/ecclesiastical history, Patristics, music, digital forensics, technology, NLP/CL, Python, etc.
|
Apr 14 |
comment |
Does Paul refer to his past or present evil/sin in Romans 7 Keep in mind that there is no past tense in Greek. The tenses in Greek have to do with aspect, not with time. This is hard for us to grasp since we have no equivalent in modern English, but is essential for understanding Greek. This is why the aorist is sometimes translated in past or present tense in English. |
|
Apr 12 |
comment |
How should James 2:18 be translated? +1 slow clap. This is the best analysis of these verses I've ever read. |
|
Apr 12 |
comment |
God and Passive Hebrew tense and aspect @caseyr547 but keep in mind software is no substitute for knowledge. I would highly encourage you to take a course in Hebrew as it seems you often confuse the grammatical categories (e.g. you clearly misunderstand the passive voice in this question). I mean no disrespect by this, as you are clearly truly trying to understand the text, which is commendable. But software will do you no good if you don't understand the morphology, grammar, syntax, etc. once it is given to you. |
|
Apr 11 |
comment |
Why does the Peshitta use the word ‘baptism’ for ‘enlightened’ in Hebrews 6:4? I was going to answer this question, but you pretty much nailed it. The Peshitta often takes some liberty and adds commentary for clarification. Especially in the book of Hebrews. Another example is Hebrews 4:8, where "son of Nun" is added to clarify that Joshua is the subject of the verse, not Jesus. Great job. |
|
Apr 10 |
comment |
Is Jesus equal to or less than the Father I think that this question belongs on C.SE. While it appears to begin from the text, it is actually a thinly veiled theological/philosophical question about the godhead. |
|
Mar 31 |
comment |
“the first day of the week” in 1 Corinthians 16:2 @brilliant I meant that the spelling of the word has nothing to do with its grammatical number in Syriac Aramaic. Only the diacritics influence its number. I haven't had a chance to look at it yet (Happy Easter!) |
|
Mar 31 |
comment |
“the first day of the week” in 1 Corinthians 16:2 grammatical number = singular/plural |
|
Mar 31 |
comment |
Grammar-Literal Translation of Genesis 1:3 and 12:3 @caseyr547 I would argue that there are no direct correlations in English for any Hebrew grammatical categories. We simply must approximate as best as possible. Glad you found the answer helpful. |
|
Mar 31 |
comment |
Grammar-Literal Translation of Genesis 1:3 and 12:3 Your discussion/contention seems more philosophical than grammatical/textual. I am responding solely to the latter. |
|
Mar 31 |
comment |
Grammar-Literal Translation of Genesis 1:3 and 12:3 @caseyr547 It's just a simple finite verb. With Qal, the subject of the verb is is the agent/actor (active). The problem with saying that "God caused himself to say" is that this is precisely what the Hiphil conveys. You would thus be reading the Hiphil sense into the Qal. Remember that we are attempting to approximate Hebrew grammar, there are at times no direct correlations in the English language. we cannot read one category into another (i.e. the Hiphil into the Qal). "God said" is the best translation for this reason. To say more is a confusion of grammatical categories. |
|
Mar 31 |
comment |
“the first day of the week” in 1 Corinthians 16:2 I need to look at that again. Thanks for pointing that out. But even so, that doesn't affect number I don't believe. |
|
Mar 30 |
comment |
“the first day of the week” in 1 Corinthians 16:2 @brilliant The diacritics are the only way to differentiate number (sing./pl.) in the Syriac dialect of Aramaic used in the Peshitta, and those weren't added until later. So yes, we can distinguish them now, because we have the diacritics. |
|
Mar 30 |
comment |
Grammar-Literal Translation of Genesis 1:3 and 12:3 Casey, let me know if my answer clears this up for you. I'm not really sure if it answers your question or not (I'm not really sure what your question is if not). |
|
Mar 30 |
comment |
Grammar-Literal Translation of Genesis 1:3 and 12:3 actually, some folks really like this question, so don't let the downvotes dissuade you. I just can't figure out what specifically you are looking for as an answer. Confusing. I'm not sure what to make of it. You sound as though you know Hebrew well enough to answer your own question, but at the same time you misunderstand a lot of grammatical categories. Hard to put my finger on it. I'll attempt to answer, that will open up more discussion at least. We'll see if I'm on the same page or not. |
|
Mar 28 |
comment |
What arguments exist that would refute the theory concerning Aramaic primacy of the New Testament? @FrankLuke I awarded a bounty for your effort in this question (and following it in chat) |
|
Mar 26 |
comment |
Waltke/O'Connor qal causation references @caseyr547 actually if you look in the footnotes for the examples following the introduction in Waltke/O'Connor, he references several other books that should corroborate their points. |
|
Mar 25 |
comment |
Waltke/O'Connor qal causation references It looks like you got your answer on this question, what more are you looking for? |
|
Mar 25 |
comment |
Waltke/O'Connor qal causation references For your benefit, I'll just comment and say that in the (biblical) Hebrew language, the Hiphil and the Hophal carry a causative connotation. The Qal does not, however. Waltke and O'Connor are subject-matter-experts on this, but many other scholars on biblical Hebrew also support this (just about any introductory or intermediate grammar on biblical Hebrew addresses this). |
|
Mar 25 |
comment |
Waltke/O'Connor qal causation references OK so after determining that this is likely the context for this question, it appears to be a question about the Hebrew language itself, which would be off topic for BH.SE (since the question does not begin with the text - consider asking for clarification on your other question). |
|
Mar 16 |
comment |
What is the proper translation of Hosea 11:12? @FrankLuke thanks, that means a lot coming from you. I appreciate the feedback. |
