Archive for the 'Greek' Category
May 23, 2008 by Phil Gons
Dan Phillips, who blogs at Biblical Christianity and Pyromaniacs, emailed me about a month ago and asked me about making Henry Alford’s The Greek Testament: With a Critically Revised Text; a Digest of Various Readings; Marginal References to Verbal and Idiomatic Usage; Prolegomena; and a Critical and Exegetical Commentary available for Libronix. In that email he told me that “John Piper names it as the one he always consults.” Recently I asked him if he knew the source for Piper’s statement. He didn’t, but said he’d do some hunting. He asked his blog readers for help, and it was Pilgrim Mommy to the rescue.
I think it might be . . . during the Q&A at the end of Piper’s talk on John Owen.
I just listened to the end of Piper’s biographical lecture on Owen, and here’s what he says in the Q&A in response to a question about commentaries that he finds helpful:
Continue reading ‘“When I’m stumped . . . I go to Henry Alford.”’
February 10, 2008 by Phil Gons
At BibleTech:2008 James Tauber of MorphGNT.org gave the opening presentation in Room 1, “MorphGNT and the Building of Linguistic Databases for New Testament Greek,” during which he shared a little bit about his work on a graded Greek reader. Unfortunately, he ran out of time and had to rush through his material. The MP3 audio is available at the BibleTech Conference website. He discusses the graded reader at the tale end of his presentation (50:15–55:30).
Continue reading ‘James Tauber’s Graded Greek Reader’
October 23, 2007 by Phil Gons
Rod Decker, Professor of Greek and New Testament at Baptist Bible Seminary, Clarks Summit, Pennsylvania, recently blogged about how new Vista fonts Cambria, Calibri, Candara, Consolas, Constantia, and Corbel unfortunately do not support polytonic Unicode Greek. Be sure to check out the PDF where he evaluates them.
In a comment, I noted that another new Vista font, Segoe UI, does support polytonic Unicode Greek. I also mentioned some nice polytonic Unicode Greek fonts that come with Adobe’s Creative Suite: “Arno Pro (serif), Garamond Premr Pro (serif), and Hypatia Sans Pro (sans serif)—a free gift downloadable after registering the product.” Decker responded and asked if I would post a PDF with samples, so that’s what I’m doing.
Continue reading ‘Fonts Supporting Polytonic Unicode Greek’
August 31, 2007 by Phil Gons
David Instone-Brewer (also here and here), the Technical Officer and Senior Research Fellow in Rabbinics and the New Testament at Tyndale House, has posted his review of version 2 of the Stuttgart Electronic Study Bible (SESB).
Here are some selections from his section “Overall Usefulness: much better than paper”:
Continue reading ‘David Instone-Brewer Reviews SESB 2′
May 21, 2007 by Phil Gons
A friend recently asked me how to get the most out of some of the great resources in SESB (now in version 2). My response was that he should create two workspaces—one for OT studies and one for NT studies—and integrate the texts and apparatuses with his other language tools. That led me to revisit my NT workspace and tweak it to take advantage of some newly acquired resources. Here’s a screenshot of my NT workspace, which was inspired by Rick Brannan’s workspace. I’m able to fit three columns comfortably on my 22″ Acer. I haven’t tried this on my 15″ laptop screen, but I imagine it would be a little cramped.
Continue reading ‘My NT Logos Workspace’
February 2, 2007 by Phil Gons
While reading Romans 5 today I was struck with something that I had never seen before in verse 3. At the end of verse 2, Paul says, “We rejoice in hope of the glory of God.” Then in verse 3 he says, “More than that, we rejoice in our sufferings.” We rejoice more in our sufferings than in the hope of the glory of God? Hmm. Why had I missed that all the previous times I read through Romans? I was curious. I immediately went to the Greek, which reads, “καυχώμεθα ἐπʼ ἐλπίδι τῆς δόξης τοῦ θεοῦ. οὐ μόνον δέ, ἀλλὰ καὶ καυχώμεθα ἐν ταῖς θλίψεσιν.” The phrase οὐ μόνον δέ, ἀλλὰ καὶ would be literally translated, “And not only [this], but we also . . . .” So Paul is not saying that we rejoice in sufferings more than we rejoice in the hope of God’s glory. He’s simply saying we also rejoice in sufferings.
Continue reading ‘ESV, RSV, and Romans 5:3′
January 31, 2007 by Phil Gons
I just came across this really cool website that allows you to read and compare many of the extent manuscripts of the Greek New Testament. Someone has obviously spent a lot of time building this (understatement!). Check out the guide for more information on how to use it, and then try it out yourself.
Continue reading ‘New Testament Transcripts Website’
September 30, 2006 by Phil Gons
If you read my previous post about the function of καί and its implications for the various interpretations of τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ, you may have been left with some lingering questions—as was I. In addition, I was missing one vital piece of information that makes view #1 slightly more plausible. Since I don’t think I expressed the issues quite cogently enough the first time, I’m going to take another shot at it.
The two questions that I was left asking myself were:
1. If the interpretation which understands καί to mean and is so clearly wrong, why do the majority of English translations translate it that way?
2. Is the English word and capable of being used to join two items when the former encompasses the latter? E.g., is and being used properly in this statement: I love food and pizza? Or does and—to be used properly—have to join two distinct items?
Allow me to (1) recap, (2) revisit the view that understands καί to mean and, and then (3) answer the two questions posed above.
Recap
There are three possible ways to handle καί. The first translates it as and, the second as even (or that is), the third as especially. Views #1 and #3 share the same conclusion—that τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ refers to ethic Jews. They arrive at that conclusion in different ways. The second interpretation maintains that Paul applies the label τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ to the whole church composed of Jews and Gentiles. (As we’ll see below, views #2 and #3 agree that the first group Paul addresses is not limited to Gentiles.)
View #1 Revisited
The first view argues that καί should be understood in its most natural sense of and. The point that I was missing in Benware’s argument is that he maintains that ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν and αὐτοὺς refer to Gentiles only. Thus, he can maintain the meaning of and for καί. This limitation of ὅσοι and αὐτοὺς is necessary to make sense out of and, or, as O. Palmer Robertson so aptly demonstrates, we have Paul pronouncing a blessing on those Jews who refuse to obey his rule (whom he wishes would castrate themselves!). But is this limitation warranted? Does not Paul intend for believing Jews to obey this rule, or is this merely for Gentiles? Surely to ask such a question is to answer it. Paul is not concerned only that the Gentiles not submit to circumcision, but that the Jews correct their faulting thinking and stop insisting that Gentiles Judaize. So I still think that this view has little to commend it, but it is slightly more viable than the way I first presented it.
(A different form of this view sees τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ as a reference to Jews who would be saved in the near future or in the eschaton, so that Paul’s pronouncement of blessing becomes a prayer for God to have mercy on Israel. This view doesn’t seem to fit the flow of thought well, but it does escape the problems above.)
Two Questions
What about the fact that most of the translations go with and? Is and a possible translation if one follows interpretation #3, or does and necessitate interpretation #1. To put it another way: is and capable of joining two items when the latter is a subset of the former?
1. My guess is that many English translations go with and, not to identify with view #1, but in an attempt not to get too involved in the task of interpretation. And, they feel, is the best way to avoid taking a side on this debated passage. I make this speculation based on the NET Bible note on this passage, which says,
The word “and” (καί) can be interpreted in two ways: (1) It could be rendered as “also” which would indicate that two distinct groups are in view, namely “all who will behave in accordance with this rule” and “the Israel of God.” Or (2) it could be rendered “even,” which would indicate that “all who behave in accordance with this rule” are “the Israel of God.” In other words, in this latter view, “even” = “that is.”
It is interesting to note that the translators see only two possible views here—my view #1 and view #2. But the point I want to make from this quote is that the they regard the translation of and as capable of either interpretation. So I doubt that all of the translations that go with and are necessarily taking a position. Rather, many are probably trying to stay out of the realm of interpretation—and being the safest way to do that.
2. I’m inclined to say that the English word and is not being properly used when it is joining two items that are not distinct, i.e., when the latter is a subset of the former. E.g., to say, “I love pizza and Pizza Hut pizza,” is a misuse of and. It would be more accurate to say, “I love pizza, and (or but) especially Pizza Hut pizza.” The Greek word καί is capable of both. I don’t think the English word and is. I’m willing to be proved wrong here. I haven’t had a chance to look at OED. My concise OED hardly deals in enough depth to make a judgment.
It seems like translators are in a difficult situation here. And doesn’t really have the breadth that they need to remain neutral, yet it’s the best option available. This may be a situation where it is necessary to pick a position and translate accordingly—noting the other options in a footnote.
September 29, 2006 by Phil Gons
This passage has been the subject of no small controversy in recent centuries. I don’t intend to solve it all with a brief blog post. But I would like to make a few comments on the use of καί and its implications for the possible interpretations. A friend asked me a question about it, so I figured I’d take the opportunity to put some theology on a blog that is supposed to be about theology!
There are three functions of καί that are possible candidates for this text. They follow in order of grammatical likelihood (i.e., not giving considering to contextual or theological factors).
The most basic meaning of καί is and—a coordinating conjunction that joins two or more distinct items. While this is the most likely meaning from a grammatical perspective, contextually, this is absolutely impossible. Paul pronounces peace and mercy on those who walk in accordance with his rule (κανών)—that Gentiles are equal to and on the same plain as Jews and that the former need not submit to circumcision, et al. in order to be right with God and be part of God’s covenant people. Verse 15 is a summary statement for the argument of the book. Ιt is absolutely inconceivable that Paul would be pronouncing a blessing on two distinct groups of people: those who obey his instructions and the Jews (who don’t obey them—the necessary implication if καί means and). Oddly enough, Paul Benware defends the meaning of and here in a very befuddled argument (see Understanding End Times Prophecy, 87-89). O. Palmer Robertson obliterates this view in his The Israel of God, 40ff.
The next most likely possibility for καί is the meaning even. In this sense, καί functions to introduce an appositive and is semantically equivalent to “that is.” Paul would be pronouncing a blessing on all those who obey his instruction, that is, the (true) Israel of God. This position has the most arguments in its favor. (1) It’s the more probable of the two viable functions of καί. (2) Paul’s argument and specific references in Galatians fit perfectly with this conclusion. (3) Paul’s theology elsewhere supports this. And (4) the broader theology of the NT makes this the most natural and probably meaning.
There is a third possibility here, which, unfortunately, O. Palmer Robertson doesn’t acknowledge or interact with. The function of καί could be especially. This is rare, but there are some examples where this seems to be the only possible function of καί. I came across one several months ago during my daily reading in the Greek New Testament (which has been put on hold until I finish my dissertation). In Mat 8:33, we read this: “The herdsmen fled, and going into the city they told everything, especially [καὶ] what had happened to the demon-possessed men.” The second component is clearly a subset of the first. Interestingly, this is the only place in the NT where the ESV translates καί as especially. (I found that out by using the data from Logos’s new ESV Greek-English Reverse Interlinear New Testament.) BDAG lists two NT passages and two LXX passages that support this meaning (see 1aγ). So I believe that it’s possible from a grammatical standpoint that Paul is addressing two groups: the first being all those who follow his rule and the second being a subset of the first group, namely, the ethnic Jews within that group who follow his rule. However, when the argument of the letter and the broader theology of Paul and the NT are brought into consideration, this view becomes improbable at best.
Note: There are a couple factors that I was unaware of and thus overlooked with reference to view #1. See my follow-up post for my improved (hopefully!) analysis.
