emory2oo2 at hotmail.com
Wed Jun 5 16:59:44 EDT 2002
>In theory yes, but in actual fact probably not. The
>Greek is KURIAKH hHMERA. Whenever the "day of the
>Lord" is referred to in the NT it is in the form of hH
>hHMERA (TOU) KURIOU. All of this begs the question as
>to why John uses such a striking different formular
I really do not think this expression is strikingly different.
It IS different if one looks at the GNT only, but to the readers
and hearers of the first/second centuries, this would have been a
It is a simple reference to the first day of the week
during which the early church celebrated a festival commemorating
See for example, Dionysius of Corinth, Eus. 4.24; see also
Epiphanius, Haer. lxxv 7, pg. 910; Clement of Alexandria uses
the following expression: KURIAKHN EKEINHN THN hHMERAN POIEI.
And finally, Julius Africanus uses the same expression, without
the definite article, KURIAKHN hHMERAN (de temp. 5)
(This last paragraph is largely taken from H. Alford's commentary
Note A. T. Roberson's comments:
On the Lord's Day (en th kuriakh hmerai). Deissmann has proven (Bible
Studies, p. 217f.; Light, etc., p. 357ff.) from inscriptions and papyri that
the word kuriakoß was in common use for the sense "imperial" as imperial
finance and imperial treasury and from papyri and ostraca that hmera Sebasth
(Augustus Day) was the first day of each month, Emperor's Day on which money
payments were made (cf. 1 Corinthians 16:1). It was easy, therefore, for the
Christians to take this term, already in use, and apply it to the first day
of the week in honour of the Lord Jesus Christ's resurrection on that day
(Didache 14, Ignatius Magn. 9).
Other's thoughts :o )
Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
More information about the B-Greek