[B-Greek] question regarding 1 Tim 6:10

George F Somsel gfsomsel at yahoo.com
Sat Apr 3 11:12:09 EDT 2010


Colwell's rule?
 george
gfsomsel 


… search for truth, hear truth, 
learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, 
defend the truth till death.


- Jan Hus
_________ 




________________________________
From: Mark Lightman <lightmanmark at yahoo.com>
To: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org; Rod Rogers <rngrogers at embarqmail.com>
Sent: Sat, April 3, 2010 5:25:59 AM
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] question regarding 1 Tim 6:10

Rod wrote
 
<Second, hRIZA is anarthrous and therefore you need 
to have a good reason for placing the article in the English 
translation if you do. I see no good reason for doing so.>
 
Hi, Rod,
 
On reason is that to leave the article out may not be
real English.  If I say to you "Asthma is the bane of my
existence," you understand that I do not mean to imply
that other things in life do not cause me to suffer.  It might
be more precise to say "Asthma is a bane of my existence,"
but no one would ever say that.  If no one would ever say that,
it is not real English.
 
The analogy is not precise, and since "A root of all evil" is
(a) what Paul means and (b) what the Greek says, I would
never say it is a "wrong" translation.  But this may be the
thinking of the other side.  I guess what I am saying is that
I don't think anyone would formulate such a dictum in 
English and not use "the."  That's why some folks would include
it in the translation.  You would never say "the Designated
Hitter rule is A (as opposed to "the") start of when everything
went wrong with baseball."  You would not say this, even if this
is what you meant.
 
The real point, which Yancy and this thread have really
hammered home to me, is the the absence of the definite article
can mean really different things in English and in Greek.

 
cheers.
 

Mark L


FWSFOROS MARKOS

--- On Fri, 4/2/10, Rod Rogers <rngrogers at embarqmail.com> wrote:


From: Rod Rogers <rngrogers at embarqmail.com>
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] question regarding 1 Tim 6:10
To: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
Date: Friday, April 2, 2010, 11:04 PM


Yancy, if I understand you correctly here, we may have to 
disagree agreeably. When I come to a clause such as the first 
clause in 1 Tim 6:10, hRIZA GAR PANTWN TWN KATWN ESTIN hH 
FILARGURIA, I do so after having read verses 1-9 and especially 
6-9. I'm not trying to be a smart-aleck here but I'm sure you 
have read comments on this list and it was obvious that they had 
not considered the context in which the verse is in found. When 
someone asks a question about how to translate a verse, in this 
case 1 Tim 6:10, it is easy to stare at the tree and miss the 
obvious forest.

Wallace has stated that he sees six possibilities in translating 
the first clause of this verse.

(1) “the love of money is a root of all evils,”
(2) “the love of money is the root of all evils,”
(3) “the love of money motivates all evils,”
(4) “the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils,”
(5) “the love of money is the root of all kinds of evils,”
(6) “the love of money motivates all kinds of evils.”

As you know, I personally think that scripture is it's best 
commentary and therefore I can eliminate the first three 
possibilities. Second, hRIZA is anarthrous and therefore you need 
to have a good reason for placing the article in the English 
translation if you do. I see no good reason for doing so. That 
leaves the possibility of #4 and #6. While I don't see a 
significant difference between "root" and "cause" I would chose 
#4 because of the predicate nominative construction and the 
equative verb.

That is how I would go about exegeting this clause but that is 
not enough. Is my conclusion consistent with the context and then 
consistent with scripture at large. That is the final question I 
would ask. In verse 10 Paul gives another "possibly perplexing" 
command, "flee these things". What things? Foolish and hurtful 
lusts, the "all kinds of evils". So, here again, I don't think 
that this clause is that demanding. I have no problem dismissing 
that which scripture has already rejected as an option.

rod rogers
bargersville, in





----- Original Message ----- 
From: <yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net>
To: "greek B-Greek" <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 9:47 AM
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] question regarding 1 Tim 6:10


No offense taken. Hope my dense and insubstantial comments don't 
continue to cause irritation.
I think we are probably in agreement with Wallace that hRIZA 
PANTWN is most likely definite. But, independent of the question 
of the definiteness of hRIZA, the textual meaning represents an 
exaggeration which the audience were warranted to read as such. 
That is why I think Wallace is warranted to give the "idea" 
represented by the text (as distinct from the textual meaning). 
His discussion is not helpful as to why the mismatch between 
meaning and form. That is a general weakness of a formalist 
approach.

Skewing of verbal form and speaker meaning is particularly a 
feature of quoted, proverbial speech. And so is the definite use 
of  article preverbal nouns (anarthrous, preverbal nouns). 
Summaries or general statements, or resumptive statementsall of 
which can be seen as a form of self-quotation or Michael Aubrey's 
redundancy, also feature definite -article nouns. The 
definite -article preverbal noun is often confusing to new 
readers. -article definiteness is also found in Spanish in 
similar instances.
I simply assumed this in my previous posts, but here are other 
examples:

Heb 9:15 DIAQHKHS KAINHS MESITIHS ESTIN
Eph. 5:23 ANHR ESTIN KEFALH THS GUNAIKOS
1 Cor 11:3 KEFALH DE GUNAIKOS O ANHR
John 3:29 O ECWN THN NUMFHN NUMFIOS ESTIN
Mark 2:28 KURIOS ESTIN O UIOS TOU ANQRWPOU KAI TOU SABBATOU

I'm sure we could find others. All this shows that, while article 
use/non-use in KOINH Greek share features with English, we should 
guard against thinking that use/non use of the definite article 
has the same meaning accross languages.

Yancy Smith, PhD
yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net
Y.W.Smith at tcu.edu
yancy at wbtc.com
5636 Wedgworth Road
Fort Worth, TX 76133
817-361-7565






On Apr 1, 2010, at 10:39 PM, Rod Rogers wrote:

> I'm afraid I was overly rash in my comments to Yancy. I should
> not have said to "pay attention". I'm sure Yancy is better than 
> I
> at concentrating. I also realize that the thread took of on a
> different aspect than what I had originally commented on. What 
> I
> said I believe to be true I only should learn to be more kind 
> in
> my responses. Sorry if this causes any problems for you. I 
> guess
> I touchd myself.
>
>
> rod rogers
> bargersville, in
>
>
> ---
> B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
> B-Greek mailing list
> B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek

---
B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
B-Greek mailing list
B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek


---
B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
B-Greek mailing list
B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek



      
---
B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
B-Greek mailing list
B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek



      


More information about the B-Greek mailing list