dwashbur at nyx.net
Wed Mar 28 10:40:21 EST 2001
> At 11:11 PM 3/27/01 -0500, you wrote:
> >BDAG also cites Gen. 38:24 LXX, which says "EKPEPORNEUKE *QAMAR hH
> >NUMFH SOU, KAI IDOU EN GASTRI ECEI EK PORNEIAS." Given that Tamar's
> >behavior, which is characterized by EKPORNEUW, resulted in her be-
> >coming pregnant, I'd say that if EKPORNEUW has any connection to the
> >notion of inhospitality, it is that Tamar was all too hospitable.
> >According to Hatch & Redpath's LXX Concordance, this verb shows up
> >about 45 times in the LXX.
> would you have us believe that every occurance of a word always carries the
> same meaning? Does context mean nothing? Does "light" always mean "not
> heavy, not obese"? Given your supposition about Tamar are you suggesting
> that every occurance of ekporneuw results in pregnancy? You must, since you
> imply that words always mean the same thing in spite of context.
Come on, Jim. That's not what he said and you know it. The point
was that this word pretty much always has sexual overtones of
some kind, and it's doubtful that it can be manipulated to denote
the matter of "hospitality." It's very politically correct to claim that
inhospitality was the sin of Sodom, but that's not what the text
says, and it certainly isn't what EKPORNEUW means. Where
political correctness contradicts the actual words of the text, I go
with the text.
"No study of probabilities inside a given frame can ever
tell us how probable it is that the frame itself can be
violated." C. S. Lewis
More information about the B-Greek