Jonathan Robie wrote:The categories are there to help you understand the usage. In this case, you understand the usage.
Stephen Carlson wrote:I love this statement. I am so stealing it.
Jonathan Robie wrote:At any rate, if the hardest part is figuring out the category, don't sweat the category. As long as you understand the usage.
Scott Lawson wrote:Jonathan Robie wrote:At any rate, if the hardest part is figuring out the category, don't sweat the category. As long as you understand the usage.
He didn't understand the usage and I think that was Mr. Anderson's point in asking. If I'm not very much mistaken the doctrine of Transubstantiation is built upon this sort of construction that Mr. Anderson was perspicacious enough to notice. I say keep developing that sharp eye for the little differences. Look at what an interesting discussion has been had over Stephen's keen eyed observation that λάθρᾳ could be construed differently than traditionally thought. A good teacher points out differences in things that are similar and if Mr. Anderson has that innate ability then more power to him!
Well that's my λεπτὰ δυό. I'm not as rich in wisdom as Jonathan or Stephen so I can't offer δραχμή.
Copular meanings ...!!! SNIP !!!
- Identity: "I only want to be myself." "When the area behind the dam fills, it will be a lake." "The Morning Star is the Evening Star." "Boys will be boys."
- Class membership. To belong to a set or class: "She could be a nurse." "Dogs are canines." "Moscow is a large city." Depending on one's point of view, all other uses can be considered derivatives of this use, including the following non-copular uses in English, as they all express a subset relationship.
- Predication (property and relation attribution): "It hurts to be blue." "Will that house be big enough?" "The hen is next to the cockerel." "I am confused." Such attributes may also relate to temporary conditions as well as inherent qualities: "I will be tired after running." "Will you be going to the play tomorrow?" but please note that a linking verb has nothing to do with these so called "Be"- verbs (see below).
To be" also has a non-copular use meaning "to exist" (existential verb): "I want only to be, and that is enough." "To be or not to be, that is the question." "I think therefore I am."
WAnderson wrote:Matt. 13:37 "The one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man"; and Rev. 1:20 "the seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands are the seven churches."
All the world’s a stage,
And all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances
These verbs seek to explain the meaning of events, sayings, or parables from the theological perspective. They differ from explanatory presents, which explain more technical matters of language or custom.
Thus estin in Matthew 3:3 is interpretive, "This is that which was spoken through Isaiah," and in 7:12, "This is the law and the prophets." Matthew 11:14 provides an important interpretive use as well: "and if you wish to receive (it), he is Elijah who is about to come." Often this present is used in the explanation of parables--e.g., "The one sowing the good seed is the son of man" (Mt. 13:37). This author included the crucial passage Matthew 26:26 in this category: "Take, eat, this is my body." The identity of the bread with Christ's body springs from theological truth and symbolism, not physical equality (Jn. 6:63). Sometimes the wording of the passage causes another verb to be used besides estin, as Mark 4:14, "The sower sows the word."
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests