[B-Greek] 2 Thess 2:15
lightmanmark at yahoo.com
Thu Dec 30 13:52:21 EST 2010
< On the other hand, it is alleged
by whom? "It is alleged" has the air of a "divine passive." Was that the
No, that was not my intent, although I do think that the grammarians were
created a little lower than the angels. How much lower is a matter of opinion.
I phrased it that way I did because I forgot where I read that, and I don't
really know whether it is true.
<It really would be funny if Paul had written δι’ τῆς ἐπιστολῆς ἡμῶν [DI' THS
EPISTOLHS hHMWN] -- how frequently is an alpha elided before a tau?>
Yes, a good point. I was cutting and pasting too. So, including the article
would add TWO syllables. I really do believe that the presence of the definite
article, like some other things in Greek--word order, which connective is used,
even the tenses, is often more a matter of euphony than semantics. Thus, any
way, it is alleged.
From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>
To: Mark Lightman <lightmanmark at yahoo.com>
Cc: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>; "Ehrman, Bart D"
<behrman at email.unc.edu>; "b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org" <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Thu, December 30, 2010 11:27:09 AM
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] 2 Thess 2:15
On Dec 30, 2010, at 1:10 PM, Mark Lightman wrote:
> On the other hand, it is alleged
by whom? "It is alleged" has the air of a "divine passive." Was that the intent?
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
> that in Koine a noun in a prepositional phrase
> may omit the article even if a definite reference is intended. εἴτε δι' τῆς
> ἐπιστολὴς ἡμῶν may have sounded funny with the extra syllable, but there is a
> chance that that is what Paul meant.
It really would be funny if Paul had written δι’ τῆς ἐπιστολῆς ἡμῶν [DI' THS
EPISTOLHS hHMWN] -- how frequently is an alpha elided before a tau?
> From: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>
> To: "Ehrman, Bart D" <behrman at email.unc.edu>; "b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org"
> <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Sent: Thu, December 30, 2010 10:32:08 AM
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] 2 Thess 2:15
> Ἄρα οὖν, ἀδελφοί, στήκετε καὶ κρατεῖτε τὰς παραδόσεις ἃς ἐδιδάχθητε εἴτε διὰ
> λόγου εἴτε διʼ ἐπιστολῆς ἡμῶν.
> ARA OUN, ADELFOI, STHKETE KAI KRATEITE TAS PARADOSEIS hAS EDIDAXQHTE EITE DIA
> LOGOU EITE DI' EPISTOLHS hHMWN.
> It is generally understood that mentioning an item with an article indicates
> that the subject is known to the reader. Whether one can therefore say that
> when there is an absence of an article it indicates an item which is not known
> to the reader might be a bit questionable. In this case I would think that
> while it does not point to any specific letter (despite the fact that this is
> known as 2nd Thess), but rather it must be understood in the same way that DIA
> LOGOU is to be understood. It is not some specific statement to which
> is made but rather to whatever ORAL tradition he may have imparted. So DI'
> EPISTOLHS would reference any written communication.
> From: "Ehrman, Bart D" <behrman at email.unc.edu>
> To: "b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org" <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Sent: Thu, December 30, 2010 10:12:55 AM
> Subject: [B-Greek] 2 Thess 2:15
> In his commentary on 2 Thessalonians, W. Marxsen claims that since 2:15 εἴτε
> δι' ἐπιστολὴς ἡμῶν lacks an article (as in εἴτε δι' τῆς ἐπιστολὴς ἡμῶν) it does
> not refer back to a specific letter (e.g., to 1 Thessalonians) but is meant in
> general sense to refer to any ole letter that he may have written (or not). If
> he had wanted to refer to 1 Thessalonians in particular, he would have used the
> article. I’m interested in the grammatical question. What do y’all think?
> n Bart Ehrman
> Bart D. Ehrman
> James A. Gray Professor
> Department of Religious Studies
> University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
More information about the B-Greek