(Robin)
Tried finding the CLNT word “limited” in their Keyword, but it’s hidden away under the alternate word “enshroud” (page 90).
It’s a Greek “sunestalmenos,” a combination word … “together” + “positioned” …
Perfect Passive Participle, which is Nominative Singular Masculine, which I read as the hyphenated … “having had been together-positioned… {#4958 V-RPP-NSM
The CLNT rendering of this as …”the era is limited”… is an oddly wrong conjugation, and perhaps a bit of doctrinally directed in the wrong direction, inadvertently I hope, and this might help explain how Clyde goes off track … The Dabhar (The Writ) provides a more accurate reading (here and often elsewhere) … “the term, it is one having been stationed together” …
My own reading is a bit harder on the itching English ears, but it just might be the most accurate English reading of this verse that you will find nowadays … it’s a consistently concordant calque (hyper-literalistic word-for-word translation):
7:29* Yet, to~this I aver, brethrened,
the season having had been together-positioned, so-that the remaining [matter] be:
Even the [ones] to~wives holding, as no[t] holding, they should be;” (~Robin)
Note: The asterisk is there to indicate that there’s a source text difference between the Byzantine and Alexandrian readings … this concerns other words in this verse, not the verb under discussion, but I just thought I’d mention this, in case anyone was wondering.
***
7:29* Yet, to~this I aver, brethrened, the season having had been together-positioned, so-that the remaining [matter] be: Even the [ones] to~wives holding, as no[t] holding, they should be;
touto de phEmi adelphoi ho kairos sunestalmenos to loipon estin hina kai hoi echontes gunaikas hOs mE echontes Osin
to~this [thing] {3778 D-ASN} yet {1161 CONJ} I aver {5346 V-PAI-1S} brethrened! {0080 N-VPM} the [one] {3588 T-NSM} a~season {2540 N-NSM} having had been together-positioned {4958 V-RPP-NSM} to~the [thing] {3588 T-ASN} to~a~remaining [thing] {3063 A-ASN} there be {1510 V-PAI-3S} so-that {2443 CONJ} even {2532 CONJ} the [ones] {3588 T-NPM} holding {2192 V-PAP-NPM} to~wives {1135 N-APF} as {5613 ADV} no[t] {3361 PRT-N} holding {2192 V-PAP-NPM} they should be {1510 V-PAS-3P}
Dear Martin on your Rev. Series #676 I find it very peculiar that many who try to say that the earlier Epistles of Paul aren’t really for us today often misquote Act 28:28 to support their position and the key word they misquote is ( they say ( is dispatched when it actually say ( was dispatched ) these words are small but with great value (Is) would mean at this time or now is dispatched but the word ( was dispatched ) would mean has been or had been dispatched. Now maybe I’m being too simplistic but I have always looked for the simple solution to problem
God Bless You and keep on keeping on.
Visit Martinzender.com for books, audios, videos, and articles that share the message of the grace of God. Sign up on the homepage to receive emails of this show plus weekly newsletters.
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
(Robin)
Tried finding the CLNT word “limited” in their Keyword, but it’s hidden away under the alternate word “enshroud” (page 90).
It’s a Greek “sunestalmenos,” a combination word … “together” + “positioned” …
Perfect Passive Participle, which is Nominative Singular Masculine, which I read as the hyphenated … “having had been together-positioned… {#4958 V-RPP-NSM
The CLNT rendering of this as …”the era is limited”… is an oddly wrong conjugation, and perhaps a bit of doctrinally directed in the wrong direction, inadvertently I hope, and this might help explain how Clyde goes off track … The Dabhar (The Writ) provides a more accurate reading (here and often elsewhere) … “the term, it is one having been stationed together” …
My own reading is a bit harder on the itching English ears, but it just might be the most accurate English reading of this verse that you will find nowadays … it’s a consistently concordant calque (hyper-literalistic word-for-word translation):
7:29* Yet, to~this I aver, brethrened,
the season having had been together-positioned, so-that the remaining [matter] be:
Even the [ones] to~wives holding, as no[t] holding, they should be;” (~Robin)
Note: The asterisk is there to indicate that there’s a source text difference between the Byzantine and Alexandrian readings … this concerns other words in this verse, not the verb under discussion, but I just thought I’d mention this, in case anyone was wondering.
***
7:29* Yet, to~this I aver, brethrened, the season having had been together-positioned, so-that the remaining [matter] be: Even the [ones] to~wives holding, as no[t] holding, they should be;
Τοῦτο δέ φημι, ἀδελφοί, ὁ καιρὸς συνεσταλμένος· τὸ λοιπόν ἐστιν ἵνα καὶ οἱ ἔχοντες γυναῖκας
ὡς μὴ ἔχοντες ὦσιν·
touto de phEmi adelphoi ho kairos sunestalmenos to loipon estin hina kai hoi echontes gunaikas hOs mE echontes Osin
to~this [thing] {3778 D-ASN} yet {1161 CONJ} I aver {5346 V-PAI-1S} brethrened! {0080 N-VPM} the [one] {3588 T-NSM} a~season {2540 N-NSM} having had been together-positioned {4958 V-RPP-NSM} to~the [thing] {3588 T-ASN} to~a~remaining [thing] {3063 A-ASN} there be {1510 V-PAI-3S} so-that {2443 CONJ} even {2532 CONJ} the [ones] {3588 T-NPM} holding {2192 V-PAP-NPM} to~wives {1135 N-APF} as {5613 ADV} no[t] {3361 PRT-N} holding {2192 V-PAP-NPM} they should be {1510 V-PAS-3P}
Dear Martin on your Rev. Series #676 I find it very peculiar that many who try to say that the earlier Epistles of Paul aren’t really for us today often misquote Act 28:28 to support their position and the key word they misquote is ( they say ( is dispatched when it actually say ( was dispatched ) these words are small but with great value (Is) would mean at this time or now is dispatched but the word ( was dispatched ) would mean has been or had been dispatched. Now maybe I’m being too simplistic but I have always looked for the simple solution to problem
God Bless You and keep on keeping on.
You must log in to post a comment.