Question on Mt. 7:22

The forum for those who still struggle with morphology, syntax, and idiom, or who wish to discuss basic questions about the meaning of Greek texts, syntax, or words.
Forum rules
This is not a place for students to ask for the answers to their homework assignments. Users who do that may be banned.
Jonathan Robie
Posts: 3491
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Re: Question on Mt. 7:22

Post by Jonathan Robie » January 9th, 2018, 9:44 am

Ed Martirosyan wrote:
January 8th, 2018, 10:43 pm
Jonathan Robie wrote:
January 8th, 2018, 6:24 pm
You seem to think that one particular gloss is the "true meaning" of the verb, and trying to force fit it into that gloss. Perhaps you are doing this because that gloss matches the parts of the word.

Do you know what "root fallacy" or "etymological fallacy" means? The English word 'decimate' once meant 'cut into 10 pieces', but that's not the 'true meaning' of the word today. The English word comes from a word meaning ἀπολογία, a speech in defense, but that's not the 'true meaning' of the word today. And you have to look at context - the words 'grow' and 'climb' have very different meanings in phrases like 'grow smaller' or 'climb down'.
Yes, languages evolve and meanings become fluent.
That is why I refer to the word meanings in Koine as defined by English translators and workers.
But you do not. You reject every translation of this verse from sources generally considered reliable because you insist that one particular gloss is the 'true meaning' of the word in the Koine period. And you did not look this verse up in the BDAG lexicon to see what meaning Danker believes it has in this context - Barry did, and he posted the answer here, sense 4 is the one that lists this particular verse as an example. And when I pointed out that the word is not translated that way even once in the ESV translation of the New Testament, you responded by selecting a few examples where it perhaps could have been. You are not referring to the word meanings as understood in translations or lexicons. And you have not convinced us that you have a better way of establishing these meanings than they do.
Ed Martirosyan wrote:
January 8th, 2018, 10:43 pm
I would not refer to English King James rendition because the English of 1600 no longer carries the true meaning of English of today.
I agree. And nobody here relies on the KJV for that kind of thing. For what it's worth, Strong's lexicon does precisely that, defining Greek words by the glosses used in the KJV translation.
Ed Martirosyan wrote:
January 8th, 2018, 10:43 pm
My intent is not to attack. However, I see that some folks are getting irritated. It is not my intent. If I press against the well-being of this forum I can move on, no problems. Really.
I do have other questions similar in nature, but I can move on.
Here's what I have found irritating: I don't get the impression that you are responding to our answers by taking them as serious possibilities and spending time carefully reading what we say together with examples taken from the text and asking whatever questions come up. It feels as though you have your mind made up before the conversation starts, and are looking for support for your position rather than a deeper understanding of how the language works. Your main response to what we say is to attempt to refute it, and we don't find your arguments convincing.

If your questions are actually questions, and you want to take the time to carefully weigh the responses you get and respond in a way that shows that you have taken that time and done that work, keep asking your questions. There are quite a few people here who have a fairly deep knowledge of the language and want to help. But we are here to explore possible meanings together, taking advantage of the knowledge in our community. And you will feel us pushing you in that direction if you post here.
0 x


ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/

Barry Hofstetter
Posts: 1334
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm

Re: Question on Mt. 7:22

Post by Barry Hofstetter » January 9th, 2018, 2:10 pm

I was going to write something quite similar to Jonathan's last post, but he said it better than I would have, and maybe a bit nicer (I'm getting a bit curmudgeonly these days). Essentially you appear to be pontificating and doing so from a weak understanding of the Greek and a weak understanding of the way semantics work in general. People will be glad to answer questions, but this is a learning forum, with people of all ability levels, including a number who are at the advanced and expert levels. You would do well seriously to consider the responses and revise your understanding accordingly.
0 x
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
Χαίρετε ἐν κυρίῳ πάντοτε· πάλιν ἐρῶ, χαίρετε

Ed Martirosyan
Posts: 13
Joined: January 5th, 2018, 11:41 am
Location: Queens, NY

Re: Question on Mt. 7:22

Post by Ed Martirosyan » January 9th, 2018, 6:34 pm

Eeli Kaikkonen wrote:
January 9th, 2018, 5:45 am
As a one who has for a long time followed this forum I believe that everyone here agrees with Jonathan and Barry. It's very difficult to answer to you because you don't believe those who know quite much Greek, here or elsewhere. You seem to have have faulty presuppositions and methodologies and it's very difficult to refute them because you don't know the correct ones nor seem to be able to accept them.
Yet I thought I was clear what I was asking, posting and doing.
I never questioned I knew Greek less than most of you by several levels. That is why I posted here to understand if that what I pre-supposed was incorrect and why it was incorrect.
Now, if anyone would say that I should listen just because they say so, then that is not why I asked.
From what I see the main objection to what I say is the context. My question revolved mainly concerning grammar.
Concerning the context, I do know the Bible quite well and prepared to talk about this as well.
Thanks,
Ed
0 x

Ed Martirosyan
Posts: 13
Joined: January 5th, 2018, 11:41 am
Location: Queens, NY

Re: Question on Mt. 7:22

Post by Ed Martirosyan » January 9th, 2018, 6:41 pm

Jonathan Robie wrote:
January 9th, 2018, 9:20 am
I'm fishing around for other possible sources of confusion - why is it that you find it so hard to see this as a question? - and I found this:
Ed Martirosyan wrote:
January 5th, 2018, 8:23 pm
I do not see any interrogative pronouns in the Greek text nor the ἆρα (687 Strong's) to suggest the sentence to be in a question format.
Perhaps you think that questions in Greek normally require an interrogative pronoun? That's not the only thing that suggests a question in Greek. Here are a few more questions in very similar form to Matthew 7:22, again without the interrogative pronoun:

Matt.13.55 οὐχ ἡ μήτηρ αὐτοῦ λέγεται Μαριὰμ καὶ οἱ ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ Ἰάκωβος καὶ Ἰωσὴφ καὶ Σίμων καὶ Ἰούδας;
Matt.6.25 οὐχὶ ἡ ψυχὴ πλεῖόν ἐστιν τῆς τροφῆς καὶ τὸ σῶμα τοῦ ἐνδύματος;

And questions without relative pronouns are quite common in New Testament Greek, this kind of negation is one of the more common ways to phrase a question. These examples are in Matthew because I started looking at the beginning.

Matt.5.46 οὐχὶ καὶ οἱ τελῶναι τὸ αὐτὸ ποιοῦσιν;
Matt.5.47 οὐχὶ καὶ οἱ ἐθνικοὶ τὸ αὐτὸ ποιοῦσιν;
Matt.6.26 οὐχ ὑμεῖς μᾶλλον διαφέρετε αὐτῶν;
Matt.6.30 εἰ δὲ τὸν χόρτον τοῦ ἀγροῦ σήμερον ὄντα καὶ αὔριον εἰς κλίβανον βαλλόμενον ὁ Θεὸς οὕτως ἀμφιέννυσιν, οὐ πολλῷ μᾶλλον ὑμᾶς, ὀλιγόπιστοι;
Matt.10.29 οὐχὶ δύο στρουθία ἀσσαρίου πωλεῖται;
Matt.12.3 Οὐκ ἀνέγνωτε τί ἐποίησεν Δαυεὶδ ὅτε ἐπείνασεν καὶ οἱ μετ’ αὐτοῦ;
Matt.13.27 Κύριε, οὐχὶ καλὸν σπέρμα ἔσπειρας ἐν τῷ σῷ ἀγρῷ;
Matt.13.55 οὐχ οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ τοῦ τέκτονος υἱός;
Matt.13.56 καὶ αἱ ἀδελφαὶ αὐτοῦ οὐχὶ πᾶσαι πρὸς ἡμᾶς εἰσιν;

Or with Μὴ:

Matt.9.15 καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς ὁ Ἰησοῦς Μὴ δύνανται οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ νυμφῶνος πενθεῖν ἐφ’ ὅσον μετ’ αὐτῶν ἐστιν ὁ νυμφίος;
Matt.11.23 καὶ σύ, Καφαρναούμ, μὴ ἕως οὐρανοῦ ὑψωθήσῃ;
Matt.12.23!1 καὶ ἐξίσταντο πάντες οἱ ὄχλοι καὶ ἔλεγον Μήτι οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱὸς Δαυείδ;

But you don't need negation to create a question without an interrogative pronoun:

Matt.11.2 Σὺ εἶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος, ἢ ἕτερον προσδοκῶμεν;
Matt.3.14 Ἐγὼ χρείαν ἔχω ὑπὸ σοῦ βαπτισθῆναι, καὶ σὺ ἔρχῃ πρός με;
Matt.9.28 καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς ὁ Ἰησοῦς Πιστεύετε ὅτι δύναμαι τοῦτο ποιῆσαι;
Matt.13.51!1 Συνήκατε ταῦτα πάντα;
Yet my question is not why I find it hard to believe for it to be a question. My question is why it cannot be a non-question. Why must it be a question.
From what I read, grammatically speaking, this must not necessarily be in a question format. OK.
My follow up is that since in v.23 Christ uses a word "acknowledge" to that what they say in v.22, then v.22 should be in plain sentence format to accommodate the context of v.23. That is all what I am saying.
0 x

Ed Martirosyan
Posts: 13
Joined: January 5th, 2018, 11:41 am
Location: Queens, NY

Re: Question on Mt. 7:22

Post by Ed Martirosyan » January 9th, 2018, 7:02 pm

Jonathan Robie wrote:
January 9th, 2018, 9:44 am
But you do not. You reject every translation of this verse from sources generally considered reliable because you insist that one particular gloss is the 'true meaning' of the word in the Koine period. And you did not look this verse up in the BDAG lexicon to see what meaning Danker believes it has in this context - Barry did, and he posted the answer here, sense 4 is the one that lists this particular verse as an example. And when I pointed out that the word is not translated that way even once in the ESV translation of the New Testament, you responded by selecting a few examples where it perhaps could have been. You are not referring to the word meanings as understood in translations or lexicons. And you have not convinced us that you have a better way of establishing these meanings than they do.
I think this is unfair, probably misunderstanding. When you stated that the word is never translated as "agree" I referred to your own Tyndale website you attached where it is listed as 'acknowledge' number of times. It was your attachment.
What I am saying is that the word means "agree, acknowledge, not to deny".

... and BDAG Lexicon costs $150.


Ed Martirosyan wrote:
January 8th, 2018, 10:43 pm
My intent is not to attack. However, I see that some folks are getting irritated. It is not my intent. If I press against the well-being of this forum I can move on, no problems. Really.
I do have other questions similar in nature, but I can move on.
Jonathan Robie wrote:
January 9th, 2018, 9:44 am
Here's what I have found irritating: I don't get the impression that you are responding to our answers by taking them as serious possibilities and spending time carefully reading what we say together with examples taken from the text and asking whatever questions come up. It feels as though you have your mind made up before the conversation starts, and are looking for support for your position rather than a deeper understanding of how the language works. Your main response to what we say is to attempt to refute it, and we don't find your arguments convincing.

If your questions are actually questions, and you want to take the time to carefully weigh the responses you get and respond in a way that shows that you have taken that time and done that work, keep asking your questions. There are quite a few people here who have a fairly deep knowledge of the language and want to help. But we are here to explore possible meanings together, taking advantage of the knowledge in our community. And you will feel us pushing you in that direction if you post here.
You are partially correct in what you say. I came here with questions already formed and asking the specialists in a specialized forum like here if that what I say is grammatically incorrect.
The answers I received were that grammatically speaking that v.22 must not be in a question format. It could be in a plain sentence.
If any of you think that I came to learn Greek or to have a deeper knowledge of this language for the sake of learning linguistics, I am not here for that, since I already speak several languages. I have no time for that and no chance to practice. And I know languages, if you do not use it, you lose it.
I do want to know however, the proper meaning of the Koine NT. Did I make a grammatical mistake?
If not, if the objection is only contextual, then I have my answer to my question, since I can plainly show that the rendition of context I presented is also firm, since it relies on literal interpretation of v.23.

Does this make sense?

Thanks,
Ed
0 x

Jonathan Robie
Posts: 3491
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Re: Question on Mt. 7:22

Post by Jonathan Robie » January 10th, 2018, 9:06 am

Ed Martirosyan wrote:
January 9th, 2018, 7:02 pm
If any of you think that I came to learn Greek or to have a deeper knowledge of this language for the sake of learning linguistics, I am not here for that, since I already speak several languages. I have no time for that and no chance to practice.
Ah - I think I understand where the disconnect is coming from. B-Greek really isn't for that - this is our policy:
Jonathan Robie wrote:
May 6th, 2011, 9:46 am
B-Greek is about Greek texts and the Greek language, and most of the forums in B-Greek require a working knowledge of Biblical Greek; that is:
  • recognition of inflected forms of verbs, nouns, pronouns, adjectives, and adverbs
  • recognition of standard syntactic structures
  • a grasp of principal parts of common irregular verbs, and the ability to recognize them in a text
In the Beginner's Forum, we welcome beginners who do not yet have a working knowledge of Biblical Greek, and are actively working to learn the language. We want to help. Even basic questions about the meaning of the Greek text are welcome in the Beginner's Forum, and there's no shame in mistakes. Beginners will be gently pushed toward learning these structures over time, pointed to textbooks and other aids that will help them, and coached in how to see these structures in a text. Learning a language is all about learning the structure signals, so we will try to help you learn what these signals are and how to recognize them in a text.

Even in the Beginner's forum, general questions or opinions about doctrine or the meaning of the English text are not welcome. Sometimes we may encourage beginners to postpone questions that are over their head at their current level of understanding.
So I think we're trying to help you learn the language well enough to think about this question for yourself, providing examples and information that you could learn from, pushing you toward learning the language. If this isn't the direction you are interested in, B-Greek is not the right forum for you.
Ed Martirosyan wrote:
January 9th, 2018, 7:02 pm
I do want to know however, the proper meaning of the Koine NT. Did I make a grammatical mistake?
If not, if the objection is only contextual, then I have my answer to my question, since I can plainly show that the rendition of context I presented is also firm, since it relies on literal interpretation of v.23.

Does this make sense?
I really don't think so, and nobody who has responded so far thinks that your proposed translation is likely to be correct. It's not just context, grammatical issues have also been raised, and I can't find examples that look like this but can easily be translated the way you propose. And I also think the whole idea of trying to correct translations from a language you don't know is flaky. Greek is just like every other human language: if you don't know the language, you need to rely on people who do.
0 x
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/

Ed Martirosyan
Posts: 13
Joined: January 5th, 2018, 11:41 am
Location: Queens, NY

Re: Question on Mt. 7:22

Post by Ed Martirosyan » January 10th, 2018, 10:40 am

Jonathan Robie wrote:
January 10th, 2018, 9:06 am
Ed Martirosyan wrote:
January 9th, 2018, 7:02 pm
If any of you think that I came to learn Greek or to have a deeper knowledge of this language for the sake of learning linguistics, I am not here for that, since I already speak several languages. I have no time for that and no chance to practice.
Ah - I think I understand where the disconnect is coming from. B-Greek really isn't for that - this is our policy:
Jonathan Robie wrote:
May 6th, 2011, 9:46 am
B-Greek is about Greek texts and the Greek language, and most of the forums in B-Greek require a working knowledge of Biblical Greek; that is:
  • recognition of inflected forms of verbs, nouns, pronouns, adjectives, and adverbs
  • recognition of standard syntactic structures
  • a grasp of principal parts of common irregular verbs, and the ability to recognize them in a text
In the Beginner's Forum, we welcome beginners who do not yet have a working knowledge of Biblical Greek, and are actively working to learn the language. We want to help. Even basic questions about the meaning of the Greek text are welcome in the Beginner's Forum, and there's no shame in mistakes. Beginners will be gently pushed toward learning these structures over time, pointed to textbooks and other aids that will help them, and coached in how to see these structures in a text. Learning a language is all about learning the structure signals, so we will try to help you learn what these signals are and how to recognize them in a text.

Even in the Beginner's forum, general questions or opinions about doctrine or the meaning of the English text are not welcome. Sometimes we may encourage beginners to postpone questions that are over their head at their current level of understanding.
So I think we're trying to help you learn the language well enough to think about this question for yourself, providing examples and information that you could learn from, pushing you toward learning the language. If this isn't the direction you are interested in, B-Greek is not the right forum for you.
Ed Martirosyan wrote:
January 9th, 2018, 7:02 pm
I do want to know however, the proper meaning of the Koine NT. Did I make a grammatical mistake?
If not, if the objection is only contextual, then I have my answer to my question, since I can plainly show that the rendition of context I presented is also firm, since it relies on literal interpretation of v.23.

Does this make sense?
I really don't think so, and nobody who has responded so far thinks that your proposed translation is likely to be correct. It's not just context, grammatical issues have also been raised, and I can't find examples that look like this but can easily be translated the way you propose. And I also think the whole idea of trying to correct translations from a language you don't know is flaky. Greek is just like every other human language: if you don't know the language, you need to rely on people who do.
OK. Thank you.
0 x

Barry Hofstetter
Posts: 1334
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm

Re: Question on Mt. 7:22

Post by Barry Hofstetter » January 10th, 2018, 10:52 am

Ed Martirosyan wrote:
January 9th, 2018, 7:02 pm
You are partially correct in what you say. I came here with questions already formed and asking the specialists in a specialized forum like here if that what I say is grammatically incorrect.
The answers I received were that grammatically speaking that v.22 must not be in a question format. It could be in a plain sentence.
If any of you think that I came to learn Greek or to have a deeper knowledge of this language for the sake of learning linguistics, I am not here for that, since I already speak several languages. I have no time for that and no chance to practice. And I know languages, if you do not use it, you lose it.
I do want to know however, the proper meaning of the Koine NT. Did I make a grammatical mistake?
If not, if the objection is only contextual, then I have my answer to my question, since I can plainly show that the rendition of context I presented is also firm, since it relies on literal interpretation of v.23.
This explains a lot. It does not explain why you continue to stick to your guns in the face of those who Greek is far more extensive than yours. Nor are you being asked to accept our conclusions based on authority -- you have been given excellent syntactical/grammatical reasons why your reading of the text is wrong, and good contextual reasons in addition.

Let me point out that practically no one is on this forum because they want want "a deeper knowledge of this language for the sake of learning linguistics." We are all on it because we want better to understand the NT in its original language, and a deeper knowledge of the language and linguistics helps us to accomplish that goal. As Jonathan pointed out, this is a learning community oriented toward that purpose. The occasional question from non-specialists is fine, but we expect such individuals to receive what we have to say with due respect and humility, even if they disagree, and I'm not seeing that from you. We can't help you if you don't want to be helped. Please keep this in mind if you decide to post other questions.
0 x
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
Χαίρετε ἐν κυρίῳ πάντοτε· πάλιν ἐρῶ, χαίρετε

Jonathan Robie
Posts: 3491
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Re: Question on Mt. 7:22

Post by Jonathan Robie » January 10th, 2018, 11:25 am

Barry Hofstetter wrote:
January 10th, 2018, 10:52 am
Nor are you being asked to accept our conclusions based on authority -- you have been given excellent syntactical/grammatical reasons why your reading of the text is wrong, and good contextual reasons in addition.
Yes, but I'm not sure how understandable these explanations would be to someone who doesn't know enough Greek to read the examples and think about them as Greek sentences. I suspect that's part of the disconnect.
0 x
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/

Bill Ross
Posts: 24
Joined: August 12th, 2012, 6:26 pm

Re: Question on Mt. 7:22

Post by Bill Ross » December 5th, 2018, 7:33 pm

I am convinced by the case made here that the appeal by the soon-to-be sent away is not a question. I don't see any reasonable doubt on that score.

But for καὶ τότε ὁμολογήσω αὐτοῖς ὅτι οὐδέποτε ἔγνων ὑμᾶς I wounder if he isn't saying something like "Well I never recognized you!"?

I mean, if someone says, "It's me, Joel, from Yeshiva!". The response I might give is, "Well, I must confess, I don't remember ever meeting you." Maybe since Jesus would not have the same memory issues as I have so his phrasing was a little different.

In fact, "I never at any time knew you" is odd because it almost sounds iterative, like an imperfect, no?
0 x
What I lack in youth I make up for in immaturity.

Post Reply