[B-Greek] Periphrastic constructions in Mat 10 (Joseph Justiss)

Justin Chamberlain justin4jesus at verizon.net
Thu Aug 19 07:42:54 EDT 2010

It has in fact been argued, and the argument for a complete Aramaic Mathew
original has also been suggested. Unfortunately there is little evidence to
support these ideas apart from conjecture. Rather most of these issues can
understood from Jewish style and Mathew's poetic license.

Just my .02
Justin Chamberlain
Santa Maria, CA

-----Original Message-----
From: b-greek-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org
[mailto:b-greek-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Justiss
Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 9:12 AM
To: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: [B-Greek] Periphrastic constructions in Mat 10 (Joseph Justiss)

In reading through Matthew I noticed that an abnormally large concentration
of periphrastic constructions with a form of eimi + a participle shows up in
chapter 10 (e.g. vv20, 22, 26, 30). Has anyone argued, or would it be
possible to argue, that this is due to the more literal translation here at
this point in the text from an original Aramaic source into Koine Greek? In
other words, could the source of this piece of discourse from Jesus in
Matthew 10 have originally been penned in an Aramaic very similar to what
Jesus may have actually said and then subsequently translated into Greek in
a very literal fashion? My reasoning assumes that 1st Century Palestinian
Aramiac was more fond of the periphrastic construction than 1st century
Koine. Is this a valid assumption?

Joseph Justiss
B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
B-Greek mailing list
B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org

More information about the B-Greek mailing list