Why doesn't the detail show the 16:16 reference that is shown elsewhere? Showing 16:1 rather than 16:16 is not helpful.
This is because the label for that figure of speech covers the entire chapter, not just verse 16.
That doesn't make sense as the coding is supposedly that of Bullinger whose reference to chapter 16 in the article on Hypocatastasis referenced the chapter as a contrast not as an instance.
Matt. 15:26.—“It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs.” Here, the Lord Jesus, did not say to the woman of Canaan, Thou art a dog of the Gentiles (which would have been Metaphor), but He left out all reference to her, and only referred to her by implication, substituting a “dog” for herself. The woman, unlike the disciples (in chap. 16), at once saw and understood what the Lord implied, viz., that it was not meet to take that which belonged to Israel and give it to a Gentile (or a dog of a Gentile as they were called by the Jews), “And she said, Truth, Lord.” What she felt is clear: “It is quite true; Thou art perfectly right; I called Thee ‘the Son of David,’ and deserved no answer; I pleaded for ‘help’ and said: ‘Lord, help me’; but I made no confession as to who the ‘me’ was: no acknowledgment of my unworthiness and unmeetness as ‘a dog of the Gentiles.’ ” “Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their master’s table. Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith.” So, it is “great faith” to understand what the Lord implied by the use of this beautiful figure, and it is “little faith” not to understand it! even though the former was spoken of a Gentile woman, and the latter of the apostles of the Lord. See also under Synecdoche and Meiosis.Ethelbert William Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible (London; New York: Eyre & Spottiswoode; E. & J. B. Young & Co., 1898), 746.
Matt. 15:26.—“It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs.” Here, the Lord Jesus, did not say to the woman of Canaan, Thou art a dog of the Gentiles (which would have been Metaphor), but He left out all reference to her, and only referred to her by implication, substituting a “dog” for herself. The woman, unlike the disciples (in chap. 16), at once saw and understood what the Lord implied, viz., that it was not meet to take that which belonged to Israel and give it to a Gentile (or a dog of a Gentile as they were called by the Jews), “And she said, Truth, Lord.” What she felt is clear: “It is quite true; Thou art perfectly right; I called Thee ‘the Son of David,’ and deserved no answer; I pleaded for ‘help’ and said: ‘Lord, help me’; but I made no confession as to who the ‘me’ was: no acknowledgment of my unworthiness and unmeetness as ‘a dog of the Gentiles.’ ” “Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their master’s table. Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith.” So, it is “great faith” to understand what the Lord implied by the use of this beautiful figure, and it is “little faith” not to understand it! even though the former was spoken of a Gentile woman, and the latter of the apostles of the Lord. See also under Synecdoche and Meiosis.
Ethelbert William Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible (London; New York: Eyre & Spottiswoode; E. & J. B. Young & Co., 1898), 746.
Will you report it to the data team or should I create a new error report for them.
It appears there are two hypocatastasis labels labels present there. One covers the entire chapter of Mt 16, and the other covers Mt 16:12-16. Since we usually merge together overlapping references, I'm not surprised to see only the full chapter one displayed.
I have passed on the comment about the Mt 16 label, and I would expect that if that is removed, the other should show up as you expect.
If it isn't removed, I promise to throw a fit … not sure I can throw as far a Bellingham as I am in North Bend … but it is clearly a coding error.
Available Now
Build your biblical library with a new trusted commentary or resource every month. Yours to keep forever.
While studying with the study assistant I noticed that there are no listed references to the books of the Bible, so I decided to ask it why (see screenshot). Why is it not possible that a Bible software like Logos quotes the Bible? A study assistant is supposed to help me to study using resources, of which the Bible is the…
Any ideas on how to search for instances of Colwell's Rule in the Septuagint? Logos has provided tagging for Hebrew Grammatical Constructions in Rahlf's and Swete's versions of the Septuagint but they lack all of the tagging for Greek Grammatical Constructions. Any ideas would be appreciated.
I know that hermeneutics is interpretation of God's Word, but what am I missing? Am I missing anything? The best interpretation of the Bible comes from the Holy Spirit revealing the hidden meanings. I am halfway through my Pastoral Counseling and Addiction Recovery master's class. It is a shortened version rather than…
I'm not interested in a Topic search, rather, I am interested in knowing what Logos online search Topic selection will surface a particular resource/book. That is, more directly, given a particular book, what search Topic selection would find it? george. (Win11, latest.)
I had highlighted Romans 8:37. Just changed the color of the font to purple. Somehow I ended up with it highlighted as well. I don't know how I managed that. I went back and removed the highlight. However, I never could get the blue highlight to go away. When I went to remove the highlight the first time there was a prompt…
