1 John Reading Group (Aug. - Oct.)

Greek Koine and Biblical and Medieval Greek
1

This first post may be edited a couple times in the next couple days.

Welcome–this is a 1 John reading group that anyone is invited to participate in. I am hoping beginning readers can make use of this thread (now or in the future). Please treat novice questions with patience, and feel free to indulge in more advanced discussion. There are workbooks available for students who are partially through a textbook, so very introductory questions may be posed.

Goal: Begin reading 1 John at a pace of ~7 verses a week. Pace may quicken, but not substantially, after the first month. Finish 1 John by late October.

For Novice and Beginning Readers - Please introduce yourself. Maybe post about your experience with Greek so far, a note if you’re using any secondary texts, etc. Feel free to pose any questions you may have while reading 1 John!
For Intermediate and Advanced Readers - Feel free introduce yourself, pose any questions you may have of your own while working through the text, etc.! Also, if you would like to direct beginning readers to certain words or phrases, this would be welcome. For example, if there is an interesting word, suggest a beginner to consult a lexicon (feel free to let beginners do the grunt work). If there is something you find admirable (or undesirable) in terms of style or structure, leave a post about it. If you can think of other ways to stimulate discussion or interest for beginners, don’t hesitate to contribute!

[u]Schedule for August[/u]*

  1. 8/1/14-8/7/14 - 1 John 1:1-7
  2. 8/8-8/14 - 1 John 1:8-2:6
  3. 8/15-8/21 - 1 John 2:7-2:14
  4. 8/22-8/28 - 1 John 2:15 - 2:21

*Sections are broken up according to Wilson&Vlachos divisions in their 1 John Workbook, which provides glosses so 1 John can be approached by students more than halfway through an introductory text.

Suggested Resources
1 John in Greek, a Greek lexicon (Perseus is fine), a Greek grammar (comprehensive or Koine/NT)
Wilson and Vlachos - A Workbook for 1 John [for novice and beginning students]
Culy - 1, 2, 3 John- A Handbook on the Greek Text [for beginning to advanced readers]

Greek Audio of 1 John, along with many other NT Greek resources, can be found on Ted Hildebrandt’s Mastering NT Greek webpage (scroll to very bottom for 1 John reading): Mastering New Testament Greek Audio Resources

2

Hey There! I’m Mason, and have been very thankful of textkit since June. Without this site, my progress in Greek may have halted. I’m reading 1 John because I want to read Greek, real Greek, the Greek my heroes read (eh, I’ll just name Friedrich Schleiermacher). I am halfway through Croy and Machen’s textbooks.

I’ll be using the 23rd edition of Nestle-Aland for the Greek text–and may ask one or two questions on textual variants, but probably will avoid the bottom of the page! I’ll also be using the two handbooks mentioned in the first post (Wilson&Vlachos and Culy). Thanks to the library, I have the 4th Rev. edition of the Bauer-Arndt Greek-English Lexicon of the NT and Other Early Christian Literature for at least 3 weeks, and maybe for the entire reading group.

Expect some novice questions from me! My personal thanks to C. S. Bartholomew for offering to answer questions when I was trying to recruit beginners to reading 1 John.

3

can anyone explain why there is a grave accent on the final word in the phrase “μετὰ τοῦ πατρὸς” in 1 John 1:3? i expect πατρὸς

4



  1. An acute on the ultima is changed to a grave when the word is followed immediately by another word without intervening punctuation mark.
    source:> http://www.ntgreek.net/lesson11.htm

Smyth and E.V.N. Goetchius qualify this rule “except when the word is followed by an enclitic.”

I am not an accent geek. There at least two schools of thought on NT greek accents. Since the oldest manuscripts we have do not have accents, breathing marks or punctuation all of this is added by editors at one time or another. Accents & breathing marks are useful for disambiguation of some forms. Otherwise they make no contribution to the semantic or syntactic analysis of the text.

I generally ignore them. But I don’t like reading texts without them which means I really don’t ignore them.

5

ok, thanks. i tend not to look too hard at accents in any language–i know from experience that they just become second-nature with enough reading and my brain identifies everything correctly. but i recently made a big mistake with an imperfect of ‘to be’, and decided to look a little harder at this stage to prevent similar mistakes.

new question…
Culy describes ὀφθαλμοῖς ἡμῶν as the dative of instrument and should be taken “as the literal instrument”, while αἱ χεῖρες ἡμῶν ἐπηλάφησαν is a metaphor (as Culy states, it is specifically synecdoche).

Culy says that the whole preposition (περὶ τοῦ λόγου τῆς ζωῆς) clarified what John/the author is going to be writing about. but doesn’t it also clarify the preceding relative clauses? if it does clarify the preceding clauses, aren’t ὃ ἑωράκαμεν τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς ἡμῶν and αἱ χεῖρες ἡμῶν ἐπηλάφησαν
both somewhat metaphorical? how can ὀφθαλμοῖς ἡμῶν literally see τοῦ λόγου τῆς ζωῆς ?

i guess ὃ ἑωράκαμεν could be τὴν ζωήν τὴν αἰώνιον(which suppose can literally be seen). but i don’t understand why it would be linked to this object, rather than to the prepositional phrase (περὶ…)

6

last question first:

how can ὀφθαλμοῖς ἡμῶν literally see τοῦ λόγου τῆς ζωῆς ?

John was an eyewitness[1]. I agree that to some extent every thing here is a metaphor. But it probably is good to not rule out multiple layers of meaning, one of which might be somewhat literal. The referent of τοῦ λόγου τῆς ζωῆς is intentionally ambiguous. For example, John was an eyewitness to transfiguration. This kind of ambiguity is a strength not a weakness.

That whole issue metaphor gets into questions of hermeneutics which require some reading. Suggest you see Invitation to Biblical Interpretation Andreas J. Köstenberger, Richard Duane Patterson.


[1] Richard Bauckham Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony (2006)

7

thank you very much CS. i certainly subscribe to the idea that ambiguity is a benefit in the hands of many authors! in skilled hands, the ambiguity of language creates marvels and may express wonderful complexities.

i was actually thinking of writing in the post that it very well could be a hermeneutical question, but–at this point in my greek–i thought i may be reading it incorrectly. i have a book on biblical hermeneutics in general, emphasizing the german philological tradition. i skimmed it for a better understanding of my beloved Peter Szondi and contemporary hermeneutics–long before i gave serious thought to Koine (or Greek). i remember it had an index of bible passages, and i should probably dig it out of whichever box it’s in…

–

  1. point of interest, (and question):
    -how conscious are authors using Koine (from LXX authors through Gospels to church fathers) of etymology. i just received my Intermediate LS (hence ILS), and was looking up words that I haven’t encountered in textbooks. i found the definition of ψηλαφάω interesting, and am wondering if John and his contemporaries would be aware of the classical definition.

ψηλαφάω is glossed in Wilson/Vlachos as “touched/felt”; this roughly corresponds to the second definition in the ILS (which indeed cites NT). but, the first definition included this nuance: “to feel or grope about like a blind man or in the dark”

given the emphasis on sight/light/darkness in the epistle, it seems very likely that ψηλαφάω would be used with full knowledge of this definition. however, is it best to assume that Koine authors would sometimes be unaware of a word’s earlier meaning(s)?

  1. random note on my method/ideas for other beginners:
    i have begun copying out the verses into a cheap spiral notebook, skipping a line to do interlinear translation of individual words. i’m doing the interlinear words in pencil so they can be erased. i am making flashcards of those words. on the opposing page of the notebook, i am writing notes to myself–writing out declension of a form i haven’t met yet in a textbook, etc. also, in copying out the verses, i become much more conscious of the rules governing the accents. these verses have been the most continuous greek i have read (opposed to short translations in textbooks), and copying it by hand is the most greek i have written. it seems likely i will continue to benefit from this method through 1 John.
8

authors using Koine of etymology

Can’t be dogmatic about this. Luke seems to be literate. The authors of Hebrews and Paul, James, Jude/2nd Peter, 1Peter, a few others show evidence of literacy. We don’t know how these authors worked. I don’t know what John might have read in greek if anything. I don’t know what sort of help he had when writing the epistle. If he had someone working with him who was literate then actual word choice might have been left up to his editor/scribe. Different literary assistants could account for different styles in the the works traditionally attributed to John. 1John is a carefully written book with a memorable style and occasional poetic language. The syntax is decent. The Apocalypse is also a work of art but it has a syntax all of its own. Some of the current thinking on this is that the author had a decent command of the language but ignored certain aspects of syntax like concorde. Errors abound but meaning and style doesn’t suffer. Classical scholars will disagree. They have a different way of accounting for style. The Apocalypse is a work in Greek words by someone thinking in a different language.

note on lexicons:
I generally use a NT Lexicon first before looking at LSJ or LS intermediate. Online access to Grimm_Thayer or the STEP bible (Tyndale House, Cambridge) has a lexicon. Louw&Nida are included in almost any bible software. The third edition of BDAG is expensive. Anyone who plans to study the NT for years and years will want to own it. But there is no hurry. You can live without it. I picked up a large format hard copy of Grimm_Thayer decades ago and have tested the articles against the 2nd and 3rd editions of BAGD & BDAG. Once in a while there is a big difference. Not often.



2) random note on my method/ideas for other beginners:
i have begun copying out the verses into a cheap spiral notebook, skipping a line to do interlinear translation of individual words. i’m doing the interlinear words in pencil so they can be erased. i am making flashcards of those words. on the opposing page of the notebook, i am writing notes to myself–writing out declension of a form i haven’t met yet in a textbook, etc. also, in copying out the verses, i become much more conscious of the rules governing the accents. these verses have been the most continuous greek i have read (opposed to short translations in textbooks), and copying it by hand is the most greek i have written. it seems likely i will continue to benefit from this method through 1 John.

Writing personal notes to the greek text is what I did for nearly 20 years. It is a good memory exercise. Writing things down helps you recall them. I still do this to some extent with difficult material like Attic Tragedy.

9

thank you for note on literacy of authors about knowledge/usage of words with historically different (or nuanced) meanings. i think i’ve used the bauer lexicon for most words, then looked up a couple more through perseus and seen many lexicons.

i’ll pretty much always write vocab notes on a post-it and keep them on facing pages or the end of the book. this is first time i’ve written extensive grammar notes, rewritten the actual primary language, etc. when i first get to read a longer text in its original, i will go through several editions of post-its–memorizing more important vocabulary for that text it’ll be things like the weather and the lay of the land, feelings, tastes, emotions, states of being). as i reread, i like to get to point where post-its will only contain south american bird species or the word for rubber tree.

general questions on this week’s reading:

  1. how common will i find the “οὐ μονον … ἀλλὰ καὶ” construction in Koine, and can it generally be translated along the lines of “not only…but also” (or at least transmits that idea)? Culy’s handbook, and Croy’s textbook, makes this look like an extremely simple phrase, but I peeked at Smyth and there was a whole lot. i felt i would return to it when i see it in an attic textbook, but should i prepare myself for this phrase in more depth now?

  2. I cannot understand how the end of 2:6 works:
    καθὼς ἐκεῖνος περιπάτησεν καὶ αὐτὸς οὕτως περπατεῖν works. i looked at the KJV, and saw that it has grammar that would now be very awkward. it is some sort of comparative construction i do not understand, and don’t know how to look up in a grammar yet.

10

The best way to get grasp on it is to see lots use so here are some examples:

John 5:18 διὰ τοῦτο οὖν μᾶλλον ἐζήτουν αὐτὸν οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι ἀποκτεῖναι, ὅτι οὐ μόνον ἔλυεν τὸ σάββατον, ἀλλὰ καὶ πατέρα ἴδιον ἔλεγεν τὸν θεὸν ἴσον ἑαυτὸν ποιῶν τῷ θεῷ.

Acts 21:13 τότε ἀπεκρίθη ὁ Παῦλος· τί ποιεῖτε κλαίοντες καὶ συνθρύπτοντές μου τὴν καρδίαν; ἐγὼ γὰρ οὐ μόνον δεθῆναι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἀποθανεῖν εἰς Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἑτοίμως ἔχω ὑπὲρ τοῦ ὀνόματος τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ.

Acts 26:29 ὁ δὲ Παῦλος· εὐξαίμην ἂν τῷ θεῷ καὶ ἐν ὀλίγῳ καὶ ἐν μεγάλῳ οὐ μόνον σὲ ἀλλὰ καὶ πάντας τοὺς ἀκούοντάς μου σήμερον γενέσθαι τοιούτους ὁποῖος καὶ ἐγώ εἰμι παρεκτὸς τῶν δεσμῶν τούτων.

Acts 27:10 λέγων αὐτοῖς· ἄνδρες, θεωρῶ ὅτι μετὰ ὕβρεως καὶ πολλῆς ζημίας οὐ μόνον τοῦ φορτίου καὶ τοῦ πλοίου ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν ψυχῶν ἡμῶν μέλλειν ἔσεσθαι τὸν πλοῦν.

Rom. 1:32 οἵτινες τὸ δικαίωμα τοῦ θεοῦ ἐπιγνόντες ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες ἄξιοι θανάτου εἰσίν, οὐ μόνον αὐτὰ ποιοῦσιν ἀλλὰ καὶ συνευδοκοῦσιν τοῖς πράσσουσιν.

Rom. 5:3 οὐ μόνον δέ, ἀλλὰ καὶ καυχώμεθα ἐν ταῖς θλίψεσιν, εἰδότες ὅτι ἡ θλῖψις ὑπομονὴν κατεργάζεται,

Rom. 5:11 οὐ μόνον δέ, ἀλλὰ καὶ καυχώμενοι ἐν τῷ θεῷ διὰ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δι᾿ οὗ νῦν τὴν καταλλαγὴν ἐλάβομεν.

Rom. 8:23 οὐ μόνον δέ, ἀλλὰ καὶ αὐτοὶ τὴν ἀπαρχὴν τοῦ πνεύματος ἔχοντες, ἡμεῖς καὶ αὐτοὶ ἐν ἑαυτοῖς στενάζομεν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπεκδεχόμενοι, τὴν ἀπολύτρωσιν τοῦ σώματος ἡμῶν.

Rom. 9:10 Οὐ μόνον δέ, ἀλλὰ καὶ Ῥεβέκκα ἐξ ἑνὸς κοίτην ἔχουσα, Ἰσαὰκ τοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν·

Rom. 9:24 Οὓς καὶ ἐκάλεσεν ἡμᾶς οὐ μόνον ἐξ Ἰουδαίων ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐξ ἐθνῶν,

Rom. 13:5 διὸ ἀνάγκη ὑποτάσσεσθαι, οὐ μόνον διὰ τὴν ὀργὴν ἀλλὰ καὶ διὰ τὴν συνείδησιν.

2Cor. 7:7 οὐ μόνον δὲ ἐν τῇ παρουσίᾳ αὐτοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν τῇ παρακλήσει ᾗ παρεκλήθη ἐφ᾿ ὑμῖν, ἀναγγέλλων ἡμῖν τὴν ὑμῶν ἐπιπόθησιν, τὸν ὑμῶν ὀδυρμόν, τὸν ὑμῶν ζῆλον ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ ὥστε με μᾶλλον χαρῆναι.

2Cor. 8:10 καὶ γνώμην ἐν τούτῳ δίδωμι· τοῦτο γὰρ ὑμῖν συμφέρει, οἵτινες οὐ μόνον τὸ ποιῆσαι ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ θέλειν προενήρξασθε ἀπὸ πέρυσι·

2Cor. 8:19 οὐ μόνον δέ, ἀλλὰ καὶ χειροτονηθεὶς ὑπὸ τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν συνέκδημος ἡμῶν σὺν τῇ χάριτι ταύτῃ τῇ διακονουμένῃ ὑφ᾿ ἡμῶν πρὸς τὴν [αὐτοῦ] τοῦ κυρίου δόξαν καὶ προθυμίαν ἡμῶν,

2Cor. 8:21 προνοοῦμεν γὰρ καλὰ οὐ μόνον ἐνώπιον κυρίου ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐνώπιον ἀνθρώπων.

2Cor. 9:12 ὅτι ἡ διακονία τῆς λειτουργίας ταύτης οὐ μόνον ἐστὶν προσαναπληροῦσα τὰ ὑστερήματα τῶν ἁγίων, ἀλλὰ καὶ περισσεύουσα διὰ πολλῶν εὐχαριστιῶν τῷ θεῷ.

Eph. 1:21 ὑπεράνω πάσης ἀρχῆς καὶ ἐξουσίας καὶ δυνάμεως καὶ κυριότητος καὶ παντὸς ὀνόματος ὀνομαζομένου, οὐ μόνον ἐν τῷ αἰῶνι τούτῳ ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι·

Phil. 1:29 ὅτι ὑμῖν ἐχαρίσθη τὸ ὑπὲρ Χριστοῦ, οὐ μόνον τὸ εἰς αὐτὸν πιστεύειν ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ πάσχειν,

1Th. 2:8 οὕτως ὁμειρόμενοι ὑμῶν εὐδοκοῦμεν μεταδοῦναι ὑμῖν οὐ μόνον τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰς ἑαυτῶν ψυχάς, διότι ἀγαπητοὶ ἡμῖν ἐγενήθητε.

1Tim. 5:13 ἅμα δὲ καὶ ἀργαὶ μανθάνουσιν περιερχόμεναι τὰς οἰκίας, οὐ μόνον δὲ ἀργαὶ ἀλλὰ καὶ φλύαροι καὶ περίεργοι, λαλοῦσαι τὰ μὴ δέοντα.

2Tim. 4:8 λοιπὸν ἀπόκειταί μοι ὁ τῆς δικαιοσύνης στέφανος, ὃν ἀποδώσει μοι ὁ κύριος ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ, ὁ δίκαιος κριτής, οὐ μόνον δὲ ἐμοὶ ἀλλὰ καὶ πᾶσι τοῖς ἠγαπηκόσι τὴν ἐπιφάνειαν αὐτοῦ.

Heb. 12:26 οὗ ἡ φωνὴ τὴν γῆν ἐσάλευσεν τότε, νῦν δὲ ἐπήγγελται λέγων· ἔτι ἅπαξ ἐγὼ σείσω οὐ μόνον τὴν γῆν ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸν οὐρανόν.

1Pet. 2:18 Οἱ οἰκέται ὑποτασσόμενοι ἐν παντὶ φόβῳ τοῖς δεσπόταις, οὐ μόνον τοῖς ἀγαθοῖς καὶ ἐπιεικέσιν ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῖς σκολιοῖς.

11

[quote=“akhnaten”
2) I cannot understand how the end of 2:6 works:
καθὼς ἐκεῖνος περιπάτησεν καὶ αὐτὸς οὕτως περπατεῖν works. i looked at the KJV, and saw that it has grammar that would now be very awkward. it is some sort of comparative construction i do not understand, and don’t know how to look up in a grammar yet.[/quote]

1John 2:6 ὁ λέγων ἐν αὐτῷ μένειν ὀφείλει καθὼς ἐκεῖνος περιεπάτησεν καὶ αὐτὸς [οὕτως] περιπατεῖν.

Not sure I can improve on Culy. Probably not. This is intermediate greek not beginner.

Subject ὁ λέγων (ἐν αὐτῷ μένειν indirect discourse content of speech verb λέγων)
verb ὀφείλει
“object” περιπατεῖν

everything else is a qualifier of some sort, adverbials mostly

καθὼς adverb

καθὼς ἐκεῖνος περιεπάτησεν defines how the person claiming to abide … ought to "walk.

καθὼς ἐκεῖνος περιεπάτησεν the referent of ἐκεῖνος is Jesus.

καὶ is adverbial

the spurious [οὕτως] answers καθὼς and actually doesn’t improve the syntax as Culy points out.

12

1John 2:6 ὁ λέγων ἐν αὐτῷ μένειν ὀφείλει καθὼς ἐκεῖνος περιεπάτησεν καὶ αὐτὸς [οὕτως] περιπατεῖν.

What may be confusing is the function of αὐτὸς. We have two constituents that both point to subject of the verb ὀφείλει. The primary subject is the participle clause ὁ λέγων ἐν αὐτῷ μένειν. Since there is an intervening adverbial modifier καθὼς ἐκεῖνος περιεπάτησεν the nominative pronoun αὐτὸς serves to remind us of the subject of the main verb ὀφείλει.

Culy’s remark on the nominative case αὐτὸς is misleading. When the pronoun is coreferential with the nominative subject of the main verb it will be in nominative. We don’t think of it as a subject for the infinitive because it points to the same referent as the subject of the main verb.



The adverbial modifier καθὼς ἐκεῖνος περιεπάτησεν qualifies the infinitive περιπατεῖν.

13

It is an extremely simple phrase. οὐ μόνον A ἀλλὰ καὶ B = “not only A but also B,” “not just A but B too.” E.g. οὐ μόνον ἐμὲ φιλεῖ ἀλλὰ καὶ σέ “He loves not only me but also you”, “It’s not just me he likes, it’s you too.”
That’s all there is to it. Attic or koine, makes no difference. Smyth often gives more than you want.

It’s simple enough really, or would be if English were as logical as Greek. Lit. “(He who claims to abide in him ought), just as he walked, himself too to walk.” Grammatically this is faultless, but of course it sounds very awkward and archaic, and we’d be more likely to say “… ought himself too (καὶ αὐτός) walk in the same way that he walked.” The thing that makes it tricky in English is not just αὐτός but καὶ αὐτός, “(he) himself too,” which logically belongs after the καθὼς ἐκεῖνος περιεπάτησεν clause, since καί needs something preceding it (in this case ἐκεῖνος, Jesus). One can understand why the RSV’s “… ought to walk in the same way in which he walked” ignores the καὶ αὐτός altogether.

[The οὕτως present in some manuscripts makes perfectly good sense, “correlative” with καθὼς (“just as …, so …”), but is not actually needed, and good editors put it in square brackets, showing that they deem it an interpolation: it would more easily have crept into the text than fallen out. This exemplifies the text-critical principle of lectio brevior potior, “the shorter reading is the better”—not always applicable, obviously, and there are other things to factor in.]

PS I’m Michael, a research professor of Classics, goofing off here for a moment.

14

thank you for the responses. i’ve been backpacking, and i don’t see my last message from ~24th on the forum. i may also be gone for 8-10 days 2nd week of sept.

οὐ μονον … ἀλλὰ καὶ did seem extraordinarily simple, and i’m glad to see that it functions as such. one of these days, i’ll read through the smyth and figure out what more it could possible offer.

the explanation of καθὼς ἐκεῖνος περιπάτησεν καὶ αὐτὸς οὕτως περπατεῖν was very thorough, and i’m sure it will be helpful in other situations. thank you both CS and mwh.

CSB - to get list of uses, did you use Perseus, or a program like “E-Sword”…i am curious. or a physical concordance?

from a beginner’s perspective, i initially found the phrase difficult because:

  1. not being able to scan it and encounter subj/obj/verb/modifiers and put it together ‘in my head’, my initial scan read καὶ as a conjunction. it made for the sort of doubt that challenges further work on a phrase.
  2. once I took καὶ for an adverb–which was pretty quickly–my understanding “in my head” was not keeping the verb in the infinitive. i had come to the conclusion, exactly as CSB states, that “The adverbial modifier καθὼς ἐκεῖνος περιεπάτησεν qualifies the infinitive περιπατεῖν”, and because of that I was trying to think of how infinitives operate in English. that the KJV had an infinitive used in a somewhat archaic way confirmed some of my confusion, but didn’t really help me in understanding, or ‘was i thinking of the use of this infinitive in the correct manner’. i was gladdened to see my understanding of this phrase, in spoken english, would generally no longer be expressed with an infinitive.

–
1 John has been fairly good reading–the workbook makes it fairly well-glossed, and making flashcards for vocab using the workbook, the week before starting the verses, has been a routine i will not waiver from. meanwhile, the introductory Koine and Attic textbooks have gotten more difficult, but not excessively. not having books, the last week i pretty much just worked on learning all principal parts for the verbs i have seen used most thus far. i do like that John uses participles fairly early, and as substantives, since this is so common in a lot of literature, i do not know why it is not introduced earlier in language books. i’ve added the participle endings to my flashcards.

Since I have another tentative trip in Sept, I’m going to continue at the same pace. Here’s the reading schedule I will be using:
Reading Schedule: Weeks 5-8
5) 8/29-9/4/14 1 John 2:22-29
6) 9/5-9/11/14 - 1 John 3:1-8
7) 9/12-9/18/14 - 1 John 3:9-15
:sunglasses: 9/19-9/25/14 - 1 John 3:16-24

Again, reading list based upon Wilson and Vlachos workbook. So far, the reading of John 1 has been a sort of dessert wafer after working on the second half of Croy’s textbook (which, at least around chapter 15-18, seems to have picked up a lot of pace compared to the previous chapters).

15

i was gladdened to see my understanding of this phrase, in spoken english, would generally no longer be expressed with an infinitive.

1John 2:6 ὁ λέγων ἐν αὐτῷ μένειν ὀφείλει καθὼς ἐκεῖνος περιεπάτησεν καὶ αὐτὸς [οὕτως] περιπατεῖν.

ὀφείλει.. περιπατεῖν seems much the same to me as:
ought.. to walk,

so I am wondering why you have moved away from the English infinitive.

Andrew

16

CSB - to get list of uses, did you use Perseus, or a program like “E-Sword”…i am curious. or a physical concordance?

I used Accordance.

17

Why περιεπάτησεν and not περιεπάτει?

18

1John 2:6 ὁ λέγων ἐν αὐτῷ μένειν ὀφείλει καθὼς ἐκεῖνος περιεπάτησεν καὶ αὐτὸς [οὕτως] περιπατεῖν.


This is, as far as it goes, a very good question. Like the perfect, the imperfect was available to the Greeks even when, especially when, they did not need it. We know that there are dozens of nuances to both the perfect and the imperfect, many of which overlap. We might be tempted to say that here was an opportunity to paint a picture of the effectiveness of Jesus’ ministry as extended over a period of time, an opportunity that the author did not take. To truly understand what the Greek tenses do and do not do, we have to realize that the flip side of not knowing why a given a tense was used is not knowing why it was not.

I will say this: that you have an aorist (and not a progressive) thrown in here amidst the progressives λέγων, μένειν and περιπατεῖν. reminds me exactly of how Homer often does the inverse, using a perfect or a imperfect dashed in amongst some aorists not for semantic effect, but for what I have called spice.

If you think I have gone out of my way not to answer the question, you are right. And that is the point.

19

Yes, a good question: the imperfect is what we might have expected. The aorist conveys more the sense that he “took a walk” on this earth, before going back home. It was a one-time event.

(Markos, I cannot go along with your habitual refusal to recognize semantic distinctions. Different tenses, just like different cases, or different words, always mean different things. — Resistance is futile.:smiley:)

20

Your goal should be to be able to read the entire epistle in about 10 minutes.