The word "For" in our English Bibles
I learned a few years ago that the word "for" (Greek "γάρ") in our Bibles can have one of three different meanings. This has completely changed the way that I read the Bible.
1. It most often means "because" and indicates a cause of the previous statement.
2. It can sometimes mean "as evidence" or "to prove this" making it a proof of the previous statement.
3. It can also mean "to explain" and be simply an explanation of the previous statement. (I understand that the reason this is typically translated with the word "for" is because it is the only English equivalent that can have all of these 3 meanings like the Greek γάρ.)
Since learning this, I constantly look at Greek morphologies when I read Scripture in order to find which use of the word is meant in any given circumstance. This becomes a little tedious though, and I find myself creating visual filters or making highlights so that I can see the differences more naturally as I read the text. (So much of the meaning is lost with the word "for", which means little more than the word "and" to most readers.)
I would love to find a Bible translation that actually translates the morphology of this word into the appropriate English word (or words; something like these three: 1. "because" 2. "as proof" or 3. "to explain") so that the reader has a clearer sense of what the author was trying to communicate. It seems that a translation that did this would hugely increase the average Bible readers comprehension of what was being said.
Does anyone know of an English Bible translation that actually does this consistently? I have several translations that sometimes translate it "because", sometimes "for", but the translation "for" doesn't have a consistent meaning, it can still mean "because".
Thanks all-
(I understand that I could just continue to use morphologies, but it seems to me that they are pretty often wrong and that some are made without much wrestling with the text. Also, the words "because" "as proof" "to explain" sometimes need a different expression that makes them fit into the context that a visual filter can't really provide. A translation would be the best solution.)
Comments
-
NJB is the closest to what you're talking about. But obviously, the distinction is pretty iffy, especially if you assume cultural usage. NAB/NABRE makes a run at it, but not like NJB.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Amplified Bible maybe. You didn't list any specific verses...
0 -
Liam Walsh said:
Since learning this, I constantly look at Greek morphologies when I read Scripture in order to find which use of the word is meant in any given circumstance.
You lost me here - how does the morphology help you? I'm not understanding what you want.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
The fact is that in many cases there is no agreement on which of 2, 3, or 4 possible meanings was intended when a given preposition is used in the Greek. "For" isn't the only one that causes trouble. Whole denominations exist because of the various possible ways certain Greek words are interpreted.
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
I too don't understand what the OP means by "morphologies".
As for γάρ, Steve Runge has an interesting discussion in A Discourse Grammar of the Greek New Testament. There was another book with a fairly detailed discussion about this word, but I can't remember the title off-hand. Perhaps it is not in Logos.
0 -
Liam Walsh said:
I would love to find a Bible translation that actually translates the morphology of this word into the appropriate English word (or words;
The NIV and the NLT are by far the most prolific with a translation other than "for"; which you can see from a search of interlinear bibles using lemma:γάρ NOTEQUALS for
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
I am very interested on conjunctions, because I can only understand the flow of thoughts and the structure of the text. I struggle most of the time to figure out from the context by reading carefully the sentences surrounding them. But if there would be any resource which can help that might be very helpful. I do the samething with "so that" as well ,since it is some times result and other times is purpose.
Blessings in Christ.
0 -
@Tes:
Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics (in bundle),
A Discourse Grammar of the Greek New Testament
and
Sentence Conjunctions in the Gospel of Matthew provide rich discussion on these oft-neglected words.0 -
Thank you Lee.
Blessings in Christ.
0 -
The diverse usage of γάρ has resulted in a wide variety of claims being made about it. Both Wallace and Young contend that it functions as both a coordinating and subordinating conjunction. BDAG describes it as expressing p 52 cause, clarification, or inference. Robertson advocates that it is best viewed as explanatory in nature, before making an appeal for other senses.53
Robertson’s "explanatory" assertion has largely been confirmed as the core constraint of γάρ in modern linguistic treatments. Heckert concludes that it introduces material that strengthens or confirms a previous proposition. Levinsohn states,
Background material introduced by γάρ provides explanations or expositions of the previous assertion (see Winer 1882:566–67, Robertson 1919:1190, Harbeck 1970:12). The presence of γάρ constrains the material that it introduces to be interpreted as strengthening some aspect of the previous assertion, rather than as distinctive information.
In other words, the information introduced does not advance the discourse but adds background information that strengthens or supports what precedes. Black also correlates the use of γάρ with background information, noting a tendency for it to be used with forms of εἰμί and imperfect-tense forms. She states, "Γάρ is used to direct the audience to strengthen a preceding proposition, confirming it as part of the mental representation they construct of the discourse."
Runge, Steven E. Discourse Grammar of the Greek New Testament: A Practical Introduction for Teaching and Exegesis, pp 51-52. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2010.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
In indicating material that is off-line with respect to the sequence of narrative events, both γάρ and οὖν are used to guide inferences the audience makes in discourse processing. The term 'inference' does not refer here only to explicitly logical operations. Rather than indicating logical relations between the contents of propositions, γάρ and οὖν signal discourse relations between the sentences themselves -- that is, how the sentences are to fit together in a mental representation of the discourse. By 'inferential' I mean that a mental representation is strengthened or otherwise enhanced by the integration of additional material, using pragmatic inferences in the Gricean sense rather than rules of inference from formal logic. As I explained in Chapter 2, Grice was one of the first to suggest that much of the process of making sense of conversation (and, by analogy, other discourse) relies on the hearer making a number of inferences not about the logical content of individual sentences, but about how the speaker intends a statement to be taken in the context of the unfolding conversation.
In Matthew's narrative framework, γάρ and οὖν are concerned with inferential relationships in discourse processing rather than just the recounting of narrated events. While καί, δέ, τότε and asyndeton guide the audience in various ways through a sequence of events in the narrative framework, γάρ and οὖν serve to help the audience make connections between additional information and the current thread of the narrative. Γάρ and οὖν are used to help the audience integrate material which is offline with respect to the main narrative events, but which aids in comprehending the events in the narrative which are on-line. In terms of mental representations in discourse processing, γάρ and οὖν each signal the audience to modify the mental representations they construct of discourse: γάρ by introducing material which confirms and strengthens the preceding proposition (usually but not necessarily by giving either a reason or elaboration), and οὖν by signaling that the ongoing representation is dependent in some way on material which precedes. Winer's observation that etymologically γάρ is a compound of γε and ἄρα or ἄρ, and 'expresses generally an affirmation or assent (γε) which stands in relation to what precedes (ἄρα!)' appears -- whatever the value of etymology per se -- to capture the pragmatic function of γάρ quite well.
Technical-level stuff, for sure.
For me, the non-technical upshot is: go with the flow and be very careful about staging a doctrine or a sermon on a γάρ. E.g. once I heard a preacher (who had just completed his doctorate) holding forth on a γάρ that was "very critical" to the understanding of a passage. It was unconvincing at best.
Oh yes, buy the book!
0 -
I think it might be very helpful, if we could quote some verses of the Bible with Varity usage of it to come up with more clarification
Blessings in Christ.
0 -
Those books do discuss many examples. [:)]
0 -
Thanks to all who contributed positively to this thread! *smile* I found it very helpful indeed! *smile* A study of this helped me "put together" a few concepts that were slightly "out of kilter" in my mind!
Psalm 29:11
Philippians 4: 4 Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. 5 Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand..........
0 -
Mark 3:9-10 is an interesting contrast (and not having any theological content). It certainly demonstrates causal vs expansion, which NLT promptly ignores! But I'd still argue, whether greek or even in english, you'd need to know who the author was and his practices. 'Causal' carries another layer of meanings, while expansions are implied causality (else no need for the expansion).
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Denise said:
Mark 3:9-10 is an interesting contrast (and not having any theological content). It certainly demonstrates causal vs expansion, which NLT promptly ignores! But I'd still argue, whether greek or even in english, you'd need to know who the author was and his practices. 'Causal' carries another layer of meanings, while expansions are implied causality (else no need for the expansion).
I think "for" is here reason.And "so that" is result.
Blessings in Christ.
0 -
Tes ... did you notice in v9 vs v10, the Mark author distinguished the usage?
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Liam,
You are right, and "γάρ" can have more than just those three meanings. They correct meaning of such a word has to be derived from the context, and one's theology will color one's translation. It is unavoidable.
And it is often a matter of opinion which meaning the word has. Translation is just not an exact science, and sadly many people do not realize that. That is why a "word for word" translation is impossible.
Personally, I prefer translations that do not try to make such translation decisions for me, whenever possible. Just leave "γάρ" as "for" and let me wrestle with the context to determine which meaning is correct. Same for other similar words.
"In all cases, the Church is to be judged by the Scripture, not the Scripture by the Church," John Wesley0 -
Lee said:
Sentence Conjunctions in the Gospel of Matthew provide rich discussion on these oft-neglected words.
I have Runge's works. I am waiting for publication of works similar to Stephanie Black's on other NT texts. It could be quite erroneous to transfer Matthew's use of conjunctions upon other human authors and other Genre's of NT literature.
Making Disciples! Logos Ecosystem = LogosMax on Microsoft Surface Pro 7 (Win11), Android app on tablet, FSB on iPhone & iPad mini, Proclaim (Proclaim Remote on Fire Tablet).
0 -
Michael Childs said:
You are right, and "γάρ" can have more than just those three meanings. They correct meaning of such a word has to be derived from the context, and one's theology will color one's translation. It is unavoidable.
Just as an illustration: "Bear to the right." Do I mean to move slightly to the right? If I'm driving through Yellowstone National Park (assuming his highness, Barack Hussein Obama, ever permits that again), it might mean that there is an animal called a "bear" to the right.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
Thanks everyone for all the great feedback!
Denise thanks for the suggestions! (Yeah I'm finding that every translation is a bit iffy it seems)
Josh, yeah I really like the AMP and sometimes it does have indications of what the "for" is. It's a bit hit and miss as far as that particular word though. I didn't have a verse in mind per se, but Romans 1:16-23 would probably be a good test because of all the "for"s in it.
MJ and Lee, the Morphology I was referring to is just the popup (at the bottom left of panel) that has all the word info for interlinear Bibles. With the word "for" it tells you that it is a conjunction and then gives the intended meaning, either causal, explanitory etc. On moble devices this will popup if after highlighting a word and then hitting "look up".
Thanks to everyone who posted helpful resources and samples with this issue! It's beginning to look much more complicated!
Dave, thank you for checking the search results! I had no idea that it was possible to search like this! I would actually like to use your method of searching in the visual filters tool. Is there anyway to combine filter commands for a lemma, its translation, and something like @CZ morph (adverbial causal conjunction) (basically the same as your search but adding a morph search to it)? Also what is the opposite of NOTEQUALS? I tried EQUALS in the visual filters and I couldn't get it to work. Thanks also for recommending the NIV and NLT. It does seem that they translate these most often.
Tes, yeah I also like to look into the purpose/result conjunctions! Learning about Arcing is what got my attention to all these awesome details! I would love it if there was a resource that was a Bible fully arced, more for use as a commentary of sorts.
Micheal, you make a good point about the translator not forcing their view on the reader. Still it would be great if there was a translation that was immediately comprehensible when reading. With every "for" the reader has to go through all the different options in their mind, and decide which is the best. This process is a bit daunting for the average Bible reader. And for me too! ...it seems I have to go through and translate my ESV so I can understand it. Surely makes for some slow reading. Over all I agree with you though, ....maybe as a secondary Bible translation instead of the primary one.
Thanks for all the great suggestions everyone!
0 -
Liam Walsh said:
Is there anyway to combine filter commands for a lemma, its translation, and something like @CZ morph (adverbial causal conjunction) (basically the same as your search but adding a morph search to it)?
The syntax for a Morph search can be found at http://wiki.logos.com/Search_HELP#Morph_Search. Basically,
lemma:γάρ@CAZ = adverbial causal in Logos Greek morphology
Liam Walsh said:Also what is the opposite of NOTEQUALS? I tried EQUALS in the visual filters and I couldn't get it to work.
Use ANDEQUALS e.g. lemma:γάρ ANDEQUALS for
But lemma:γάρ@CAZ ANDEQUALS for doesn't work in Morph Search, so you have to switch to bible Search as shown in the wiki and use:-
<lemma = lbs/el/γάρ> ANDEQUALS <lbs-morph+el ~ CAZ> ANDEQUALS for
--> which shows how Morph Search uses a convenient shorthand!
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
David Thomas said:Lee said:
Sentence Conjunctions in the Gospel of Matthew provide rich discussion on these oft-neglected words.
I have Runge's works. I am waiting for publication of works similar to Stephanie Black's on other NT texts. It could be quite erroneous to transfer Matthew's use of conjunctions upon other human authors and other Genre's of NT literature.
You're right, 'cuz I didn't want to mention all that, 'cuz that would be conflating Matthean style with other authorial styles, 'cuz Matthew does have some particularities of style.
0 -
And good news, 'cuz Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics may be purchased on its own again, 'cuz Logos and Zondervan finally granted the request of many users.
0 -
Lee said:
And good news, 'cuz Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics may be purchased on its own again, 'cuz Logos and Zondervan finally granted the request of many users.
[Y]
Using adventure and community to challenge young people to continually say "yes" to God
0 -
Hey Dave,
Thanks for the tips on this! I would have never figured this out from just the one sentence in the wiki page, so thank you! The Greek works great!
I'm hoping I can bug you with one more question though, how does this work for the Hebrew? I don't think Hebrew conjunctions are tagged for "causal" or "explanitory" (correct me if I'm wrong please because this would be great!). So, because Logos doesn't have the hebrew conjunction morph tags, I would like to make a visual filter just for a Hebrew lemma and it's translation (כִּי.2 as for specifically), but I can't figure it out. Your post shows the greek, but I'm not sure what the "lbs/el" should be for the Hebrew; I checked the visual filter wikis and they don't seem to say anything about this.
Thank you!
0 -
Liam Walsh said:
I would like to make a visual filter just for a Hebrew lemma and it's translation (כִּי.2 as for specifically), but I can't figure it out. Your post shows the greek, but I'm not sure what the "lbs/el" should be for the Hebrew;
The principle is to specify your lemma in Morph Search for the morphology of interest e.g. lemma:כִּי.2 with Logos Hebrew Morphology**. When you click on Bible Search you will get ([field bible, content] <lemma = lbs/he/כִּי:2>) which can be abbreviated to <lemma = lbs/he/כִּי:2> and also used in Basic Search. This works for any bible language.
** this would be lemma:כִּי with BHS/WIVU Morphology --> <lemma = wivu/he/כִּי>
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Liam Walsh said:
I don't think Hebrew conjunctions are tagged for "causal" or "explanitory" (correct me if I'm wrong please because this would be great!).
When you type and select Conjunction you will see the choices available for the selected Hebrew bible (BHS/WHM Westminster Morphology classes Conjunction under Particle!). They don't tag for "causal" or "explanatory", being a different language.
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Michael Childs said:
Liam,
You are right, and "γάρ" can have more than just those three meanings. They correct meaning of such a word has to be derived from the context, and one's theology will color one's translation. It is unavoidable.
And it is often a matter of opinion which meaning the word has. Translation is just not an exact science, and sadly many people do not realize that. That is why a "word for word" translation is impossible.
Personally, I prefer translations that do not try to make such translation decisions for me, whenever possible. Just leave "γάρ" as "for" and let me wrestle with the context to determine which meaning is correct. Same for other similar words.
Michael is spot on. I've learned NEVER to base the interpretation of a passage on a preposition (much less base any part of my theology on one). Greek prepositions are so fluid that most of them have only a RANGE of possible meanings----many of the overlapping with each other, & only the context can help determine WHICH meaning applies. Or in the words of one seminary prof, "context rules."
Grace & Peace,
Bill
MSI GF63 8RD, I-7 8850H, 32GB RAM, 1TB SSD, 2TB HDD, NVIDIA GTX 1050Max
iPhone 12 Pro Max 512Gb
iPad 9th Gen iOS 15.6, 256GB0 -
Actually, the English translation "for", though not always adequate, mimics well the ambiguity that reside in a word that has multiple usages. The ambiguity cannot be avoided by consulting a version that tells which it is each time because what you would have is only an opinion. That opinion may be informed and researched and yet both debatable and actually debated. The fact is that any message committed to writing is liable to the question of what the author meant by what was written.
The only way to find out what it means in a particular passage is (1) to compare resources you trust that will give you their take (Bible translations, commentaries) or (2) if you know Greek and have the tools you need, tackle the question yourself.
If reliable resources are 50-50, it may be an indication that the question is particularly difficult to resolve in a given passage.
0 -
Greek doesn't have a "causal" or "explanatory" γάρ. Γάρ is just γάρ as "bear" is just "bear" in English whether it refers to the animal or to carrying something. Context, context, context.Dave Hooton said:Liam Walsh said:I don't think Hebrew conjunctions are tagged for "causal" or "explanitory" (correct me if I'm wrong please because this would be great!).
When you type and select Conjunction you will see the choices available for the selected Hebrew bible (BHS/WHM Westminster Morphology classes Conjunction under Particle!). They don't tag for "causal" or "explanatory", being a different language.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
Blessings in Christ.
0 -
George Somsel said:
Greek doesn't have a "causal" or "explanatory" γάρ. Γάρ is just γάρ as "bear" is just "bear" in English whether it refers to the animal or to carrying something. Context, context, context.Dave Hooton said:Liam Walsh said:I don't think Hebrew conjunctions are tagged for "causal" or "explanitory" (correct me if I'm wrong please because this would be great!).
When you type and select Conjunction you will see the choices available for the selected Hebrew bible (BHS/WHM Westminster Morphology classes Conjunction under Particle!). They don't tag for "causal" or "explanatory", being a different language.
Hey George, do you know if there is a resource that marks out a guess for Hebrew conjunctions like the morph tags do for the Greek in the New? Is there anything that does this in Logos? Why is it that only the Greek has this tool and not the Hebrew?
0 -
The answer to your last question is simple. How many in the forum know Greek? Of those who know Greek, how many know Hebrew? Hebrew tends to be the red-headed stepchild.Liam Walsh said:George Somsel said:
Greek doesn't have a "causal" or "explanatory" γάρ. Γάρ is just γάρ as "bear" is just "bear" in English whether it refers to the animal or to carrying something. Context, context, context.Dave Hooton said:Liam Walsh said:I don't think Hebrew conjunctions are tagged for "causal" or "explanitory" (correct me if I'm wrong please because this would be great!).
When you type and select Conjunction you will see the choices available for the selected Hebrew bible (BHS/WHM Westminster Morphology classes Conjunction under Particle!). They don't tag for "causal" or "explanatory", being a different language.
Hey George, do you know if there is a resource that marks out a guess for Hebrew conjunctions like the morph tags do for the Greek in the New? Is there anything that does this in Logos? Why is it that only the Greek has this tool and not the Hebrew?
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
George Somsel said:
Hebrew tends to be the red-headed stepchild.
Awww, George, you punctured my balloon. I thought it was that Hebrew readers were more sophisticated linguistically. Like <language of choice>, you've got to be to make sense of it.[;)]
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
Not disagreeing with MJ, but greek is what the Holy Spirit spoke. So, it's only natural. Hebrew, latin, coptic, etc are basically derivatives. Unless of course one was there at creation. Then the Hebrew syntax would likely be important.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
George Somsel said:
Context, context, context.
So true.
But theological bias, or theological tradition, or theological correctness (as in political correctness) often unknowingly controls one's understanding of the context.
The question ultimately is, how does one know what he/she thinks is true, really is true?
Instead of Artificial Intelligence, I prefer to continue to rely on Divine Intelligence instructing my Natural Dullness (Ps 32:8, John 16:13a)
0 -
Literally, no. If indeed you believe the oral word and thense written word was inspired, it came in a specific language (greek), and thus was susceptable to human interpretation. So also the LXX. And if you read 2nd Temple writings, there's was considerable discussion on God's literal speaking of creation in hebrew.
But actually I was referring to Logos being married to greek, even though early Christianity and the writings that survived are across the board.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Francis said:
I don't get it. Is it a joke?Denise said:greek is what the Holy Spirit spoke
Yes. Denise is referring to the scholarship level over a hundred years ago, when people seemed to think that NT-Greek (koine) was a special language invented by the Holy Spirit to communicate God's truth. Back then, apart from the bible only Classical Greek manuscripts where known. The situation changed when leftovers of NT-time shopping lists, apprenticeship contracts, invoices etc. everyday stuff was detected in Egypt.
Have joy in the Lord!
0 -
Denise,
re: You: no, I yes: You know that, according to literature theorists, the text (and in extension to this: the interaction of the recipient (=me) with the text), not its author determines the meaning? [6]
j.k.
Have joy in the Lord!
0 -
That's simple, if I say it's true, it's true. :-)JRS said:The question ultimately is, how does one know what he/she thinks is true, really is true?
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
George Somsel said:
That's simple, if I say it's true, it's true. :-)
Did you know that someone has actually discovered an "I" in TEAM?
[:D]Instead of Artificial Intelligence, I prefer to continue to rely on Divine Intelligence instructing my Natural Dullness (Ps 32:8, John 16:13a)
0 -
George Somsel said:
That's simple, if I say it's true, it's true. :-)JRS said:The question ultimately is, how does one know what he/she thinks is true, really is true?
OT: George, did you have to hand-write html-code to change the size and color, or can we congratulate that the enhanced editor started working for you?
Have joy in the Lord!
0 -
I used HTML tags. Thanks for inquiring.NB.Mick said:George Somsel said:
That's simple, if I say it's true, it's true. :-)JRS said:The question ultimately is, how does one know what he/she thinks is true, really is true?
OT: George, did you have to hand-write html-code to change the size and color, or can we congratulate that the enhanced editor started working for you?
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
NB, not to disagree with I or you. But the thin link between Iraneus' apologetic defence of the inspired text and the 1st century was a guy that placed 4th-level repeated VERBAL discussion ABOVE the WRITTEN 'memours' of Jesus' disciples. That would be Papias.
But more seriously, few ever imagine themselves in the position of the Holy Spirt, faced with humans, their languages, and their immense ability to ignore the Tower of Babal's main lession >> purposeful confusion.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Does anyone know if the new Westminster Hebrew Morphology would mark out causal and explative "for"s in Hebrew like the Logos Morph does for the Greek?
0
