[B-Greek] hOS in 1 Timothy 3:16
Mark Lightman
lightmanmark at yahoo.com
Wed May 14 11:18:59 EDT 2008
Taking hOS as a demonstrative seems to solve
one very little problem (i.e why is hOS masculine?
But this is easily solved by assuming Paul is quoting
from a hymn) and creates a bigger problem, namley
how common is it for Paul or any other NT/Koine
writer to use hOS for hOUTOS? Just going off
memory, without looking anything up, it seems to
me to be rare. And would you not expect a KAI
or a DE or a GAR used a connective? It's an
interesting idea though.
George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com> wrote:
Â
καὶ á½Î¼Î¿Î»Î¿Î³Î¿Ï
μένÏÏ Î¼Î­Î³Î± á¼ÏÏὶν Ïὸ Ïá¿Ï εá½ÏÎµÎ²ÎµÎ¯Î±Ï Î¼Ï
ÏÏήÏιον·
á½Ï á¼ÏανεÏÏθη á¼Î½ ÏαÏκί,
á¼Î´Î¹ÎºÎ±Î¹Ïθη á¼Î½ ÏνεÏμαÏι,
ὤÏθη á¼Î³Î³Î­Î»Î¿Î¹Ï,
á¼ÎºÎ·ÏÏÏθη á¼Î½ á¼Î¸Î½ÎµÏιν,
á¼ÏιÏÏεÏθη á¼Î½ κÏÏμῳ,
á¼Î½ÎµÎ»Î®Î¼Ïθη á¼Î½ δÏξá¿.
KAI hOMOLOGOUMENWS MEGA ESTIN TO THS EUSEBEIAS MUSTHRION:
hOS EFANERWQH EN EQNESIN,
EPISTEUQH EN KOSMWi,
ANELHMFQH EN DOCHi.
This is perfectly understandable as it stands. ÎÌÌÏ [hOS] functions as a demonstrative pronoun.
Â
A.Demonstr. Pron., =οá½ÏοÏ, á½
δε [hOUTOS, hODE], this, that; also, he, she, it:
Liddell, H. G., Scott, R., Jones, H. S., & McKenzie, R. (1996). A Greek-English lexicon. "With a revised supplement, 1996." (Rev. and augm. throughout) (1259). Oxford; New York: Clarendon Press; Oxford University Press.
It does not refer specifically to the preceding εá½ÏÎµÎ²ÎµÎ¯Î±Ï Î¼Ï
ÏÏήÏιον [EUSEBEIAS MUSTHRION], but rather to Christ who IS the εá½ÏÎµÎ²ÎµÎ¯Î±Ï Î¼Ï
ÏÏήÏιον [EUSEBEIAS MUSTHRION].Â
 george
gfsomsel
⦠search for truth, hear truth,
learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
defend the truth till death.
- Jan Hus
_________
----- Original Message ----
From: Jonathan Bailey
To: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org; brian_d_fink at hotmail.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 3:34:54 PM
Subject: [B-Greek] hOS in 1 Timothy 3:16
Hello all,
I was wondering if the famous, or infamous, hOS in the critical text of 1 Timothy 3:16 is thought to possibly be referring to the MYSTHRION EUSEBEIAS earlier in thhe verse, as a kind of pesonification.
I'm familiar with laxity of gender concord throughout the GNT, and particularly common in John or really anywhere where the PNEUMA HAGION is referred to as masculine. I do seem to remember, just from personal reading, that hOS is found in a number of places where hON and hH would be thought to be found. But I am wondering how common this kind of construction is in Paul.
I've heard the break in 1 Timothy 3:16 be interpreted as a point at which Paul breaks into a quotation where the referent for the relative particle is just missing because it was not quoted. Is this understanding common? Is it really necessary? It seems you either need to emend the text to the Byzantine QEOS or to hON as is found in some manuscripts, or you need to come up with something to explain the lack of concorde such as being quoted from a hymn, or you can make meaning out of the text as it stands. What's wrong with the final option? Can this text just make sense leaving it at hOS and assuming it refers to the MYSTHRION? Does Paul ever do this sort of thing elsewhere? (Still in Iraq, still don't have Bibleworks, still need help).
Regards,
Jon
_________________________________________________________________
Get Free (PRODUCT) REDâ¢Â Emoticons, Winks and Display Pics.
http://joinred.spaces.live.com?ocid=TXT_HMTG_prodredemoticons_052008
---
B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
B-Greek mailing list
B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
---
B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
B-Greek mailing list
B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list