News of Koine and Biblical and Medieval Greek

Does ἐπίκλητος modify ἁγία? If so, why is ἐπίκλητος masculine if ἁγία is feminine?

For instance in Numbers 29:1.
Καὶ τω μηνὶ τω ἑβδόμω μια τοῦ μηνὸς ἐπίκλητος ἁγία ἔσται ὑμῖν πᾶν ἔργον λατρευτὸν οὐ ποιήσετε ἡμέρα σημασίας ἔσται ὑμῖν

πλὴν καὶ ὑμεῖς οἱ καθʼ ἕνα ἕκαστος τὴν ἑαυτοῦ γυναῖκα οὕτως ἀγαπάτω ὡς ἑαυτόν, ἡ δὲ γυνὴ ἵνα φοβῆται τὸν ἄνδρα.

I'm involved in a discussion with a fellow believer who proposes to take ἡ δὲ γυνὴ ἵνα φοβῆται τὸν ἄνδρα as a subordinate clause to the main verb ἀγαπάτω. The resulting effect is something like:

Let each man love his own wife as himself, so that the wife may revere her husband.

While the ...

ἡ ἐλευθερία μενέτω καὶ ἡ ἰσότης καὶ ἡ ἀδελφότης.

ἡ χάρις τοῦ Κυρίου μετὰ τῆς Νίκαιας.

Je suis Charlie.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/16/europe/fr ... index.html

αὐτὸς δὲ Ἰησοῦς οὐκ ἐπίστευεν αὑτὸν αὐτοῖς διὰ τὸ αὐτὸν γινώσκειν πάντας καὶ ὅτι οὐ χρείαν εἶχεν ἵνα τις μαρτυρήσῃ περὶ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, αὐτὸς γὰρ ἐγίνωσκεν τί ἦν ἐν τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ.

Jesus himself did not entrust himself to them because of the person all of them he perceived and that he had no need in order someone should witness concerning the people - he himself perceived what was inside the people.
The bit I have ...

There are (at least) two textual readings of this verse. Leaving aside such issues as which text-type is original and theological ramifications, is there a difference in meaning between the two readings:

Reading A, adjectival participle: καὶ ἦν χεὶρ κυρίου μετʼ αὐτῶν, πολύς τε ἀριθμὸς ὁ πιστεύσας ἐπέστρεψεν ἐπὶ τὸν κύριον.

Reading B, adverbial participle:καὶ ἦν χεὶρ κυρίου μετʼ αὐτῶν, πολύς τε ἀριθμὸς πιστεύσας ἐπέστρεψεν ἐπὶ τὸν κύριον.

In reading B, it's clear that all ...

Is there good reason why πυροῦσθαι (burned) in 1Cor7:9 and ἐξεκαύθησαν (inflamed) in Rom1:27 cannot be read as expressing the same idea?

I mean is there other evidence to suggest that ἐξεκαύθησαν (inflamed) is only used with a negative or deviant behavior, while πυροῦσθαι (burned) expresses a purer type of sexual desire? Or are both words simply used to expression a high level sexual desire (i.e. one that is burning or enflamed)?

I do not know whether this phrases is just a trivial or not a difference at all

from John 4:14 ὃς δι’ ἂν πίῃ ἐκ τοῦ ὕδατος οὗ ἐγὼ δώσω αὐτῷ, (PT)
ὃς δʼ ἂν πίῃ ἐκ τοῦ ὕδατος οὗ ἐγὼ δώσω αὐτῷ, (UBS)

I can read the second line for it is perfectly make sense,
but whoever drink from the water that I will give him

but how about the first line? could it ...

I just picked up Robertson's Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research for a couple bucks at a thrift store. I'm a beginning/intermediate reader of NT Greek. Maybe someone here could offer a take on a couple questions.

1) Is any part of the book under academic scrutiny? (I bought most volumes of Kittel's TDNT at the same store, and finding criticism of that scholarship is very easy)
2) As ...

τοῦτον τῇ ὡρισμένῃ βουλῇ καὶ προγνώσει τοῦ θεοῦ ἔκδοτον διὰ χειρὸς ἀνόμων προσπήξαντες ἀνείλατε, ὃν ὁ θεὸς ἀνέστησεν λύσας τὰς ὠδῖνας τοῦ θανάτου, καθότι οὐκ ἦν δυνατὸν κρατεῖσθαι αὐτὸν ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ:.

My translation
This one (ie Jesus) by the deliberate will and foreknowledge of God was given up to you and you using impious men attaching him (ie crucifying) killed him whom God raised up releasing from the agony of death inasmuch as it was ...

Does anyone know if there is a standard edition with the NT Apocrypha in general use? I would be thinking about something close to this and this, except containing the original texts instead of translations. I did a few searches, and nothing conclusive seemed to appear. Yet it seems to me like the kind of thing that probably exists, so I'm asking here.

Thanks!