TIP OF THE DAY 47b: Filling in gaps in early posts

link to next post TIP OF THE DAY 48: Ambiguity: Semantic roles, lexical ambiguity - Logos Forums

Since the forum change has been delayed, I've started adding these posts to the previous tip list. See L/V 10 Tip of the Day

QUESTION: How do I find the definition of a word?

SOFTWARE: Method 1: double click

1. When you encounter an unfamiliar word, double click on it to bring up the definition in your highest priority dictionary containing the word.
2. Note that in Program setting you can change the double click to perform other actions.
3. Note that in the Library panel you can prioritize your dictionaries to change what dictionary is used.

Method 2: Command box

1. The command box is accessed through the application icon at the top/left of application toolbar.
2. Type Look up followed by the word/phrase to be defined. The definition from your highest priority dictionary containing the word.
3. Note that in the Library panel you can prioritize your dictionaries to change what dictionary is used.

Method 3: Help Center

1. Open the Help Center from the question mark icon on the application toolbar or the Help Center card on the Dashboard.
2. Enter the term and the type of term, if known, e.g. semantic role experiencer into the search box.
3. Depending upon the results, you may find the documentation containing the definition before the actual definition. You may wish to open the documentation and scroll rather than scrolling through the results to go directly to the definition.

QUESTION: How do I open Andersen-Forbes documentation quickly without remembering the title?

Software: The documentation for the Andersen-Forbes semantic domains has not been linked to appear in the Lookup section. You are dependent upon the shortcut bar or favorites for quick access.

QUESTION: How do I identify a Proper name functioning as a Vocative?

Skill: Syntactic force datatype functioning as

SOFTWARE: Remember that this is strictly a New Testament feature.

1. Open your preferred Bible from the toolbar.
2. Use the Reference box to navigate to Matthew 1.
3. Select any personal name.
4. Right click to open the Context menu.
5. On the tab side (left line) look for a dark diamond with an element of proper name and a data source of Lexham SGNT Syntactic Force. It will probably need to be expanded into two elements before you can select it.
6. On the action side (right side) select the Bible under the Search option.
7. This will open a Search panel with the search argument of SGNTSyntacticForce:"proper name"
8.  After the search argument’s first term type INTERSECTS (with a preceding blank) which indicates that you want the next term to appear in the same location as the first term.
9. Copy the first term and paste it after INTERSECTS with a space between.
10. Replace the second “proper name” with “Vocative”.
11. Run the search.

QUESTION: What are kephalia and how do they apply to the Gospel of Mark?

ANSWER: from Perplexity

Kephalaia are an ancient system of chapter divisions used in New Testament manuscripts. Here are the key points about kephalaia:

1. The word kephalaia comes from the Greek κεφάλαια, meaning "headings" or "chapters".

2. They were an early system of dividing the text of the New Testament books, in place by at least the 5th century AD.

3. Kephalaia are not identical to modern chapter divisions. They varied greatly in length, both within and between books.

4. For example, the Sermon on the Mount (3 modern chapters) has only one kephalaion mark, while Matthew 8 (one modern chapter) has several kephalaia, one per miracle.

5. In manuscripts, the kephalaia with their numbers, standard titles (titloi), and page numbers would be listed at the beginning of each biblical book.

6. Within the text, the chapter number and name (kephalaion) would be written at the top of the page where a chapter began, usually in red ink.

7. Most kephalaia begin with the word περι (peri), meaning "about" or "concerning".

8. The kephalaia system was not a true chapter division, but more like bookmarks to help readers find well-known episodes quickly.

9. The number of kephalaia varied between books. For instance, there were far fewer in John than in Mark, despite John being longer.

10. Kephalaia are found in important early manuscripts like Codex Alexandrinus (5th century) and influenced later Greek manuscript traditions.[1]

Here is the list of kephalaia (chapter divisions) for the Gospel of Mark in Codex Alexandrinus:

1. Mark 1.23 - peri\ tou= daimonizoménou (Concerning the demon-possessed man)
2. Mark 1.29 - peri\ th=s penqera=s Pétrou (Concerning Peter's mother-in-law)
3. Mark 1.40 - peri\ tou= leprou= (Concerning the leper)
4. Mark 2.1 - peri\ tou= paralutikou= (Concerning the paralytic)
5. Mark 2.13 - peri\ Leuì tou= telẃnou (Concerning Levi the tax collector)
6. Mark 2.18 - peri\ tw=n parabolw=n tou= Kuríou (Concerning the parables of the Lord)
7. Mark 3.1 - peri\ tou= chràn éxontos xei=ra (Concerning the man with the withered hand)
8. Mark 3.13 - peri\ th=s tw=n a)postólwn e)klogh=s (Concerning the selection of the apostles)
9. Mark 3.20 - peri\ th=s tou= Kuríou e)pitimh́sews pròs toùs légontas au)tòn e)n Beelzeboùl e)kbállein tà daimónia (Concerning the Lord's rebuke to those saying he cast out demons by Beelzebul)
10. Mark 4.1 - peri\ tw=n parabolw=n (Concerning the parables)
11. Mark 4.35 - peri\ th=s e)pitimh́sews tou= a)némou kaì th=s qalásshs (Concerning the rebuke of the wind and sea)
12. Mark 5.1 - peri\ tou= legiw=nos (Concerning Legion)
13. Mark 5.21 - peri\ th=s qugatròs tou= a)rxisunagẃgou (Concerning the daughter of the synagogue ruler)
14. Mark 5.25 - peri\ th=s ai(morroou=shs (Concerning the woman with a flow of blood)
15. Mark 6.1 - peri\ tw=n a)postólwn (Concerning the apostles)
16. Mark 6.14 - peri\  )Iwánnou kaì  (Hrẃdou (Concerning John and Herod)
17. Mark 6.30 - peri\ tw=n pénte ártw=n kaì tw=n dúo i)xqúwn (Concerning the five loaves and two fish)
18. Mark 6.45 - peri\ tou= e)n qalássh| peripátou (Concerning walking on the sea)
19. Mark 7.1 - peri\ th=s paradósews tw=n presbute/rwn (Concerning the tradition of the elders)
20. Mark 7.24 - peri\ th=s Foinikísshs (Concerning the Phoenician woman)
21. Mark 7.31 - peri\ tou= mwfou= (Concerning the deaf man)
22. Mark 8.1 - peri\ tw=n e(ptà ártw=n (Concerning the seven loaves)
23. Mark 8.11 - peri\ th=s zúmhs tw=n Farisaíwn (Concerning the leaven of the Pharisees)
24. Mark 8.22 - peri\ tou= tuflou= (Concerning the blind man)
25. Mark 8.27 - peri\ th=s e)n Kaisareía| e)perwth́sews (Concerning the questioning in Caesarea)
26. Mark 9.2 - peri\ th=s metamorfẃsews tou= Xristou= (Concerning the transfiguration of Christ)
27. Mark 9.14 - peri\ tou= selhniazome/nou (Concerning the epileptic)
28. Mark 9.33 - peri\ tw=n dialogizome/nwn tís meízwn (Concerning those arguing who is greatest)
29. Mark 10.1 - peri\ tw=n e)perwthsántwn Farisaíwn (Concerning the questioning Pharisees)
30. Mark 10.13 - peri\ tou= e)perwth́santos plousíou tòn  )Ihsou=n (Concerning the rich man who questioned Jesus)
31. Mark 10.32 - peri\ tw=n ui(w=n Zebedaíou (Concerning the sons of Zebedee)
32. Mark 10.46 - peri\ Bartimaíou (Concerning Bartimaeus)
33. Mark 11.1 - peri\ tou= pẃlou (Concerning the colt)
34. Mark 11.12 - peri\ th=s chranqeíshs sukh=s (Concerning the withered fig tree)
35. Mark 11.15 - peri\ th=s tou= Kuríou e)perwtḩsews (Concerning the questioning of the Lord)
36. Mark 12.1 - peri\ tou= a)mpelw=nos (Concerning the vineyard)
37. Mark 12.13 - peri\ tw=n e)gkaqétwn dià tòn kh=nson (Concerning those sent because of the tax)
38. Mark 12.18 - peri\ tw=n Saddoukaíwn (Concerning the Sadducees)
39. Mark 12.28 - peri\ tou= grammatéws (Concerning the scribe)
40. Mark 12.38 - peri\ th=s tw=n grammatéwn e)perwtḩsews (Concerning the questioning of the scribes)
41. Mark 13.1 - peri\ th=s sunteleías (Concerning the end)
42. Mark 13.32 - peri\ th=s h(méras kaì w(/ras (Concerning the day and hour)
43. Mark 14.1 - peri\ th=s a)leiyáshs tòn Kúrion múrw| (Concerning the woman who anointed the Lord with ointment)
44. Mark 14.12 - peri\ tou= pásxa (Concerning the Passover)
45. Mark 14.22 - peri\ tou= mustikou= deípnou (Concerning the sacramental supper)
46. Mark 14.43 - peri\ th=s paradósews tou=  )Ihsou= (Concerning the betrayal of Jesus)
47. Mark 14.66 - peri\ th=s a)rnh́sews tou= Pétrou (Concerning the denial of Peter)
48. Mark 15.42 - peri\ th=s ai)th́sews tou= sẃmatos tou= Kuríou (Concerning the request for the body of the Lord)[2]

QUESTION: Does the Latin Vulgate have a tradition similar to the Greek kephalia?

ANSWER: from Perplexity

While the Vulgate does not have an exact equivalent to the Greek kephalaia system, it does have some similar traditions for dividing and organizing biblical text:

1. Capitula: The Vulgate manuscripts often included capitula, which were short summaries or titles for sections of text, similar in function to kephalaia. These capitula were typically listed at the beginning of each book.

2. Breves: Some Vulgate manuscripts contained breves, which were brief summaries of chapter contents, also similar to kephalaia in purpose.

3. Early chapter divisions: Various systems of chapter divisions existed in Latin manuscripts before the modern chapter system. Hugh Houghton identified 16 different chapter systems just for the Gospel of John in Old Latin manuscripts, with chapters ranging from 13 to 68.

4. Alcuin's Bible: The Latin Bible produced by Alcuin of York (AD 796-804) had its own system of chapter divisions that influenced later developments.

5. Theodulf's Bible: The Latin Bible of Theodulf, bishop of Orléans (c. AD 800), also had a chapter division system that contributed to later traditions.

6. Paris Bible: The standardization of chapter divisions in the 13th century, often attributed to Stephen Langton, was heavily influenced by these earlier Latin traditions and was popularized through the Paris Bibles.

While these systems served similar purposes to the Greek kephalaia in organizing and referencing the text, they developed independently within the Latin manuscript tradition. The modern chapter system we use today evolved from these various Latin traditions, particularly through the work of Stephen Langton and the Paris Bibles, rather than directly from the Greek kephalaia system.[3]

QUESTION: Does the Syriac Peshitta have a tradition similar to the Greek kephalia?

ANSWER: from Perplexity

While the Peshitta doesn't have an exact equivalent to the Greek kephalaia system, it does have its own tradition of textual divisions:

1. The Peshitta, being the standard Bible version for Syriac churches, has its own system of organizing and dividing the biblical text.

2. In Syriac manuscripts, including the Peshitta, there are divisions called "pericopes" or "lections" which are used for liturgical readings.

3. These pericopes are often marked in the margins of Syriac manuscripts and serve a similar function to the Greek kephalaia in terms of organizing the text for reading and reference.

4. The Peshitta also includes section divisions that are sometimes indicated by larger letters or spaces in the text.

5. Some Syriac manuscripts include titles or summaries at the beginning of sections, which function similarly to the titles in the Greek kephalaia system.

6. The New Testament of the Peshitta, while primarily based on Greek sources, shows some unique characteristics in its textual divisions and readings.

7. It's worth noting that the Peshitta's New Testament originally excluded certain disputed books (2 Peter, 2 John, 3 John, Jude, Revelation), which were later added in the Harklean Version.

While these divisions in the Peshitta serve similar purposes to the Greek kephalaia, they developed independently within the Syriac manuscript tradition. The exact nature and extent of these divisions can vary between different Syriac manuscripts and traditions.[4]

QUESTION: What is the distinction between parashot and sedarim?

ANSWER: from Perplexity after I could not coax a reasonable answer out of ChatGPT.

I'll provide a revised table showing the parashah and aliyot divisions for Genesis based on the annual (1-year) cycle. The sedarim will remain as they are, representing the triennial cycle.

This table now correctly represents the parashah and aliyot divisions for Genesis based on the annual (1-year) cycle, while the sedarim column shows the divisions for the triennial cycle. The aliyot are now divided into seven sections per parashah, as is customary for Shabbat readings in the annual cycle.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kephalaia and https://rsc.byu.edu/king-james-bible-restoration/chapters-verses-punctuation-spelling-italics and http://www.jgrchj.net/volume6/JGRChJ6-7_Goswell.pdf and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kephale_(New_Testament) and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chapters_and_verses_of_the_Bible and https://www.thetextofthegospels.com/2016/04/kephalaia-ancient-chapters-of-gospels.html and https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/new-testament-studies/article/titles-in-the-new-testament-papyri/4ADE3BD7541916BEA44E4E2067AE66A7 and https://biblestudy.tips/pericope-headings/

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mark and http://www.jgrchj.net/volume6/JGRChJ6-7_Goswell.pdf

[3] https://www.roger-pearse.com/weblog/2013/06/21/stephen-langton-and-the-modern-chapter-divisions-of-the-bible/comment-page-1/ and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chapters_and_verses_of_the_Bible and https://bridgeminlaredo.org/concerning-chapter-and-verse-divisions-in-the-bible/ and https://academic.tyndalehouse.com/explore/articles/where-did-the-bible-s-chapters-come-from/

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chapters_and_verses_of_the_Bible and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peshito

QUESTION: How does Gregory the Theologian classify the names of God?

Software : The Logos/Verbum all search on “church fathers on names in biblical interpretation” raised this question.

Answer: from Alfeyev, Hilarion. Doctrine and Teaching of the Orthodox Church. Translated by Andrew Smith. Vol. II. Orthodox Christianity. Yonkers, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2012.

One of the key Eastern Christian patristic teachings on God was the theme of the names of God. This theme was developed throughout the Arian controversies of the fourth century and found its classic expression in the Areopagite’s treatise On the Divine Names.

In the works of the fourth century church fathers, God is not only incomprehensible, but un-nameable. God’s anonymity bears witness, in the opinion of Gregory the Theologian, to that reverence with which ancient Israel surrounded the name of “the Existing One”: in writing it is expressed by the holy tetragrammaton, but in the period after the Babylonian captivity it ceased to be pronounced at all. Gregory saw in this a direct indication that the nature of God surpasses every name:

Our starting-point must be the fact that God cannot be named. Not only will deductive arguments prove it, but the wisest Hebrews of antiquity, so far as can be gathered, will too. The ancient Hebrews used special symbols to venerate the divine and did not allow anything inferior to God to be written with the same letters as the word “God,” on the ground that the divine should not be put on even this much of a level with things human. Would they ever have accepted the idea that the uniquely indissoluble nature could be expressed by evanescent speech? No man has yet breathed all the air; no mind has yet contained or language embraced God’s substance in its fullness.⁴⁹

Gregory divides the names of God into three categories: those that show his essence, those that show his power on earth, and finally, those that show his “economy,” or any kind of action for the good of man. Applied to the first category are the names Existing One, God, and Lord.⁵⁰ In the second category are the names All-Powerful, King of glory, King of the ages, King of might, King of kings, Lord of Sabaoth (Lord of hosts), Lord of might, and Lord of lords. In the third category are the names God of salvation, God of vengeance, God of peace, God of righteousness, God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and other names linked to God’s actions in the history of the people of Israel. To this category may be added the names of God after the incarnation, i.e. the personal name of Jesus. God is primarily called, before other names, Peace and Love.⁵¹

Every name of God characterizes one or another trait of his. However, these names are so relative and incomplete that not one of them can, on its own or even in totality, offer the possibility to imagine what God is in his nature. If one were to gather all of God’s names and the forms with which God is connected in the Scriptures, and stick them together to make one whole, one would achieve a kind of artificial, speculative construction—more idol than God.^[1]

QUESTION: How does Matthias Joseph Scheeben classify the names of God?

Software : The Logos/Verbum all search on “classification of Biblical names” raised this question.

Answer: from Nichols, Aidan. Romance and System: The Theological Synthesis of Matthias Joseph Scheeben. Steubenville, OH: Emmaus Academic, 2021.

Scheeben groups the revealed divine Names of the Old Testament into three categories which the New Testament confirms but—prescinding again from the Trinity of persons—does little or nothing to expand.

The first category consists of names which identify more God’s “position” ad extra than his inward essence. It consists of a trio: El (formed, according to Scheeben from the Hebrew root for “mighty”) as variously qualified (the “most high God,” the “God of the heavens,” and so forth); Elohim, (the plural of El but, claims Scheeben, with a further nuance of “worship-worthiness”), a name formed as a “plural of majesty” yet capable of extension in a weakened sense to non-divine realities touched by his majesty, as with angels, kings, judges, when it functions as a true plural; Adonai, which Scheeben takes to denote God as Lord and Judge, considering that it adds an ethical dimension to the holy fear summoned up in the names based on El.

The second category contains only one member: the Tetragrammaton YHWH, whose biblical explanation in the Exodus text (3:14) Scheeben translates as “I am who I am,” rather than the Vulgate-inspired version universal, one supposes, in the Scholastic tradition, “I am who am.” Not that this concern for the hebraica veritas makes much difference to Scheeben’s theological exegesis thereof. This name

characterizes God as the simply or absolutely existent, as the one who in his being is dependent on nothing outside him and accordingly can be neither diminished nor changed by anything, and in this way is distinguished from all other beings, actual or thinkable, and especially from all beings that are “divine” in the sense of more than earthly, powerful, sublime, masterly—the very beings which by misapprehen sion could be subsumed under the first category of [divine] names.⁴⁴

Precisely this for Scheeben makes the Tetragrammaton, unlike the names of the previous category, the “proper name” of God. Scheeben adds the important further point that this name is also a “covenant name” (Bundesname) not just in the sense that it was disclosed as a mark of special favor to Israel but in the more pregnant sense that “because of its outstanding propriety it was inter-locked with the covenant between God and Israel [where it functioned] as pillar, medium, and proof of the true knowledge of the true God.”⁴⁵ Scheeben postpones, in favor of his account of the attributes of divine being (chapter 9 below), any discussion of the sense in which this name is “ineffable.”

That leaves the third category which consists in another trio of names, consisting this time of adjectives—“powerful,” “exalted,” “holy”—which can also function as substantives.

Consonant with his systematic “itch,” Scheeben proposes to unify the seven Names set out in the preceding (3 + 1 + 3) as follows: the last set, from the third category, draws attention to a trio of aspects of the inner divine perfection springing from the divine essence denominated in the Tetragrammaton, the sole member of the second category, and as such underlies the three names grouped together in the first category.^[2]

⁴⁹ Ibid. 30.17 p. 107.

⁵⁰ Ibid. 6.12

⁵¹ Cf.: Ibid. 6.12.

^[1] Hilarion Alfeyev, Doctrine and Teaching of the Orthodox Church, trans. Andrew Smith, vol. II, Orthodox Christianity (Yonkers, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2012), 129–130.

⁴⁴ Ibid., 36.

⁴⁵ Ibid.

^[2] Aidan Nichols, Romance and System: The Theological Synthesis of Matthias Joseph Scheeben (Steubenville, OH: Emmaus Academic, 2021), 178–179.