Return to Answer

Regarding Mark 13:20, there is the matter of Divine Person.

If Deity, as such (that is to say divine nature) is being referred to, then an article may not be suitable, since there is no identification of Person.

But if a specific Divine Person is in view, then the article may be suitable. That may well be the reason for the article sometimes to be used and sometimes not (as you point out in Mark 13:20).

And I have to add that if there be a misunderstanding of the nature of Deity and of the matter of Person within Deity, there will also be a misunderstanding of why the Greek is presented to us, by the Apostles of Jesus Christ, in the way in which it is presented.

There needs to be a sensitivity to the Lord himself, his nature and his being and his Person, in order to appreciate what has been done with Greek grammar in order to represent invisible things with visible words.

Daniel B Wallace has 85 pages on the article (it is not 'the definite article', it is 'the article') in his book 'Beyond the Basics'. The italics are his, not mine :

One of the greatest gifts bequeathed by the Greeks to Western civilization was the article. [p207.]

 

The function of the article is not, primarily, to make something definite. [p209.]

 

The article intrinsically has the ability to conceptualize. [p209]

 

... whatever is conceived by the mind - so it would appear - becomes a concept as a result of one's faculty to call it by name. [p209.]

 

... in terms of predominant function, it identifies. [p209.]

Concept and identification are what is being drawn attention to, I note.

That which can be named, says Wallace, is in view, conceptually.

Thus the absence of article does not pre-suppose a copyist error and the necessity of adding a name to the text, without authorisation. Quite the opposite, the absence of article indicates that a name is unsuitable (conceptually).

And thus Nature is in view, not Person.

If the article be absent, then Deity is being drawn attention to, in a unified composite way. No identification of a particular Person is being made.

Regarding Mark 13:20, there is the matter of Divine Person.

If Deity, as such (that is to say divine nature) is being referred to, then an article may not be suitable, since there is no identification of Person.

But if a specific Divine Person is in view, then the article may be suitable. That may well be the reason for the article sometimes to be used and sometimes not (as you point out in Mark 13:20).

And I have to add that if there be a misunderstanding of the nature of Deity and of the matter of Person within Deity, there will also be a misunderstanding of why the Greek is presented to us, by the Apostles of Jesus Christ, in the way in which it is presented.

There needs to be a sensitivity to the Lord himself, his nature and his being and his Person, in order to appreciate what has been done with Greek grammar in order to represent invisible things with visible words.

Daniel B Wallace has 85 pages on the article (it is not 'the definite article', it is 'the article') in his book 'Beyond the Basics'. The italics are his, not mine :

One of the greatest gifts bequeathed by the Greeks to Western civilization was the article. [p207.]

The function of the article is not, primarily, to make something definite. [p209.]

The article intrinsically has the ability to conceptualize. [p209]

... whatever is conceived by the mind - so it would appear - becomes a concept as a result of one's faculty to call it by name. [p209.]

... in terms of predominant function, it identifies. [p209.]

Concept and identification are what is being drawn attention to, I note.

That which can be named, says Wallace, is in view, conceptually.

Thus the absence of article does not pre-suppose a copyist error and the necessity of adding a name to the text, without authorisation. Quite the opposite, the absence of article indicates that a name is unsuitable (conceptually).

And thus Nature is in view, not Person.

If the article be absent, then Deity is being drawn attention to, in a unified composite way. No identification of a particular Person is being made.

Regarding Mark 13:20, there is the matter of Divine Person.

If Deity, as such (that is to say divine nature) is being referred to, then an article may not be suitable, since there is no identification of Person.

But if a specific Divine Person is in view, then the article may be suitable. That may well be the reason for the article sometimes to be used and sometimes not (as you point out in Mark 13:20).

And I have to add that if there be a misunderstanding of the nature of Deity and of the matter of Person within Deity, there will also be a misunderstanding of why the Greek is presented to us, by the Apostles of Jesus Christ, in the way in which it is presented.

There needs to be a sensitivity to the Lord himself, his nature and his being and his Person, in order to appreciate what has been done with Greek grammar in order to represent invisible things with visible words.

Daniel B Wallace has 85 pages on the article (it is not 'the definite article', it is 'the article') in his book 'Beyond the Basics'. The italics are his, not mine :

One of the greatest gifts bequeathed by the Greeks to Western civilization was the article. [p207.]

The function of the article is not, primarily, to make something definite. [p209.]

The article intrinsically has the ability to conceptualize. [p209]

... whatever is conceived by the mind - so it would appear - becomes a concept as a result of one's faculty to call it by name. [p209.]

... in terms of predominant function, it identifies. [p209.]

Concept and identification are what is being drawn attention to, I note.

That which can be named, says Wallace, is in view, conceptually.

Thus the absence of article does not pre-suppose a copyist error and the necessity of adding a name to the text, without authorisation. Quite the opposite, the absence of article indicates that a name is unsuitable (conceptually).

And thus Nature is in view, not Person.

If the article be absent, then Deity is being drawn attention to, in a composite way. No identification of a particular Person is being made.

Regarding Mark 13:20, there is the matter of Divine Person.

If Deity, as such (that is to say divine nature) is being referred to, then an article may not be suitable, since there is no identification of Person.

But if a specific Divine Person is in view, then the article may be suitable. That may well be the reason for the article sometimes to be used and sometimes not (as you point out in Mark 13:20).

And I have to add that if there be a misunderstanding of the nature of Deity and of the matter of Person within Deity, there will also be a misunderstanding of why the Greek is presented to us, by the Apostles of Jesus Christ, in the way in which it is presented.

There needs to be a sensitivity to the Lord himself, his nature and his being and his Person, in order to appreciate what has been done with Greek grammar in order to represent invisible things with visible words.

Daniel B Wallace has 85 pages on the article (it is not 'the definite article', it is 'the article') in his book 'Beyond the Basics'. The italics are his, not mine :

One of the greatest gifts bequeathed by the Greeks to Western civilization was the article. [p207.]

The function of the article is not, primarily, to make something definite. [p209.]

The article intrinsically has the ability to conceptualize. [p209]

... whatever is conceived by the mind - so it would appear - becomes a concept as a result of one's faculty to call it by name. [p209.]

... in terms of predominant function, it identifies. [p209.]

Concept and identification are what is being drawn attention to, I note.

That which can be named, says Wallace, is in view, conceptually.

Thus the absence of article does not pre-suppose a copyist error and the necessity of adding a name to the text, without authorisation. Quite the opposite, the absence of article indicates that a name is unsuitable (conceptually).

And thus Nature is in view, not Person.

If the article be absent, then Deity is being drawn attention to, in a unified composite way. No identification of a particular Person is being made.

Regarding Mark 13:20, there is the matter of Divine Person.

If Deity, as such (that is to say divine nature) is being referred to, then an article may not be suitable, since there is no identification of Person.

But if a specific Divine Person is in view, then the article may be suitable. That may well be the reason for the article sometimes to be used and sometimes not (as you point out in Mark 13:20).

And I have to add that if there be a misunderstanding of the nature of Deity and of the matter of Person within Deity, there will also be a misunderstanding of why the Greek is presented to us, by the Apostles of Jesus Christ, in the way in which it is presented.

There needs to be a sensitivity to the Lord himself, his nature and his being and his Person, in order to appreciate what has been done with Greek grammar in order to represent invisible things with visible words.

Daniel B Wallace has 85 pages on the article (it is not 'the definite article', it is 'the article') in his book 'Beyond the Basics'. The italics are his, not mine :

One of the greatest gifts bequeathed by the Greeks to Western civilization was the article. [p207.]

The function of the article is not, primarily, to make something definite. [p209.]

The article intrinsically has the ability to conceptualize. [p209]

... whatever is conceived by the mind - so it would appear - becomes a concept as a result of one's faculty to call it by name. [p209.]

... in terms of predominant function, it identifies. [p209.]

Concept and identification are what is being drawn attention to, I note.

That which can be named, says Wallace, is in view, conceptually.

Thus the absence of article does not pre-suppose a copyist error and the necessity of adding a name to the text, without authorisation. Quite the opposite, the absence of article indicates that a name is unsuitable (conceptually).

And thus Nature is in view, not Person.

Regarding Mark 13:20, there is the matter of Divine Person.

If Deity, as such (that is to say divine nature) is being referred to, then an article may not be suitable, since there is no identification of Person.

But if a specific Divine Person is in view, then the article may be suitable. That may well be the reason for the article sometimes to be used and sometimes not (as you point out in Mark 13:20).

And I have to add that if there be a misunderstanding of the nature of Deity and of the matter of Person within Deity, there will also be a misunderstanding of why the Greek is presented to us, by the Apostles of Jesus Christ, in the way in which it is presented.

There needs to be a sensitivity to the Lord himself, his nature and his being and his Person, in order to appreciate what has been done with Greek grammar in order to represent invisible things with visible words.

Daniel B Wallace has 85 pages on the article (it is not 'the definite article', it is 'the article') in his book 'Beyond the Basics'. The italics are his, not mine :

One of the greatest gifts bequeathed by the Greeks to Western civilization was the article. [p207.]

The function of the article is not, primarily, to make something definite. [p209.]

The article intrinsically has the ability to conceptualize. [p209]

... whatever is conceived by the mind - so it would appear - becomes a concept as a result of one's faculty to call it by name. [p209.]

... in terms of predominant function, it identifies. [p209.]

Concept and identification are what is being drawn attention to, I note.

That which can be named, says Wallace, is in view, conceptually.

Thus the absence of article does not pre-suppose a copyist error and the necessity of adding a name to the text, without authorisation. Quite the opposite, the absence of article indicates that a name is unsuitable (conceptually).

And thus Nature is in view, not Person.

If the article be absent, then Deity is being drawn attention to, in a composite way. No identification of a particular Person is being made.