Results 1 - 6 of 6
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | How significant is a Greek word ending? | Matt 21:12 | Morant61 | 73080 | ||
Greetings Ray! Two very good questions! 1) KATESTREPSEN or KATESTREPSE: As best as I can determine, this is an example of what is called a 'paragogic n' or a 'moveable n'. This refers to the practice of sometimes adding a 'n' to the end of certain forms. There is no set rule for this practice, but in general it occured most often in 3rd person, singular forms, especially when followed by a word which began with a vowel. However, the 'rules' on this practive seem to be disobeyed quite frequently. :-) I was not able to find any textual dispute about the word. All of the my Greek texts, except for the TR, have KATESTREPSEN. I'm not sure why the TR has KATESTREPSE, since I found no textual evidence that this was the original reading. However, to answer your question, there is no difference concerning the meaning of the two forms. They are both: Aorist, Active, Indicative, 3rd Person, Singular forms of KATASTREPHO. Both would be translated: "He overturned." 2) "Of God": There is textual support for both readings, but the older manuscripts seem to support the ommission of 'of God'. Considering that the parallel accounts (Mk. 11:15 and Luke 19:45) also lack the phrase would suggest that the copyists had no 'reason' to delete the phrase if it were originally present. Though, one could make a case for adding the word. In fact, in the UBS text, the word 'temple' occurs 72 times in 68 verses, and the phrase 'of God' is not found in a single instance. So, I would omit the phrase. However, I don't see that it really changes the meaning. Everyone knew 'whose' temple it was! :-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
2 | How significant is a Greek word ending? | Matt 21:12 | Ray | 73081 | ||
Hi Tim, Thanks again for sharing your knowlege of Greek. Isn't it great that for all the passage of time and the many copies of the Scriptures, that the differences are so slight. As I shared with CDBJ in #72030 above, I praise God that although the multitudes were seeing only a prophet at the first of the passage, at the end they were proclaiming Him as the Son of David. And we know whose Son He is. While I am talking with you may I ask another question or two? I was wondering if there is any publication of the differences found in the manuscripts. Have comparisons been made and noted in a published book? I also have a question about the level of consistency that can be accomplished concerning the translation of Strong's #3778, "houtos". What are the rules that determine if the word is translated "this, this one [One], or this man [Man]? Can there be consistency in the translation of the word? I am thinking of Matthew 21:10, "And when He had entered Jerusalem, all the city was stirred, saying, "Who is this?"" From the heart, Ray |
||||||
3 | How significant is a Greek word ending? | Matt 21:12 | Morant61 | 73083 | ||
Greetings Ray! A good Greek text (w/ textual apparatus) will list the differences between the major manuscripts. The only problem is that they take a little practice to read! :-) A textual commentary can be a good source of information. I use the one published by United Bible Society. It is called, "A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament". It basically explains the reasons for the choices that the committee made in their text. About 'houtos': 'Houtos' is simply a demonstrative pronoun. It can refer be masculine, feminine, or even neuter, depending upon the gender of its antecedent. Thus, the thought of 'one' or 'man' is really drawn from the antecedent. The pronoun itself simply means 'this' as opposed to another. So, in Mt. 21:10, the meaning of the question is: Who is this prophet as opposed to some other prophet? I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
4 | Catastrophy: Greek "katastropho" | Matt 21:12 | Ray | 73282 | ||
Hi Tim, Thanks for the information. Here is another question for verse twelve. Why is this a catastrophy? | ||||||
5 | Catastrophy: Greek "katastropho" | Matt 21:12 | Morant61 | 73295 | ||
:-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6 | Catastrophy: Greek "katastropho" | Matt 21:12 | Ray | 73342 | ||
Hi Tim, Webster's dictionary: catastrophe -Greek katastrophe, an overthrowing- 1. the culminating event of a drama, esp. of a tragedy, by which the plot is resolved; denouement. denouement 1. the outcome, solution, unraveling, or clarification of a plot in a drama, story, etc. 2. the point in the plot where this occurs 3.any final revelation or outcome. Tim, the more I study this passage the more I see that God is needed when the tables of men have to be turned. Yes, He turned the tables of men and brought glory to Himself. I ask why is this a catastrophy, this overthrowing. I am sure that the loss of profits of the money-changers was significant and catastrophic because of the millions of people in the city at the time. But that isn't the main definition of the word today in Webster's dictionary. The culminating event of this triumphant entrance by Christ into Jerusalem is this overturning of the tables in the temple. And yes, we receive the revelation or denouement that this is God's house and the Son of God is cleaning up His house and putting it in order. I think that someone put the "of God" in the description of the temple to make sure that the revelation would be expressed that this is indeed His house. It is understood that this temple was God's temple and it is "understood" in the Greek verb that 'He' overturned the tables. From the heart, Ray |
||||||