Steven Avery
Administrator
WIP
March 2020 - more faux analogy verses from James Snapp
=================================
Barry Hofstetter actually shows they are not applicable.
https://www.thetextofthegospels.com/2018/08/the-comma-johanneum-and-greek-grammar.html
They are simply constructio ad sensum.
And this was affirmed by Ilias Theodosis, who gave some value-added explanation
https://www.purebibleforum.com/inde...nalogy-verses-and-contstructio-ad-sensum.1714
nations
multitude
Gentiles
Groups of people can be subject to construction ad sensum because they are seen as the many masculine singular individuals .
There is no there there.
(Can you fault Eugenius Voulgaris for not pointing out this special case? Nahhh, he would expect his readers to know all about that. )
Unless you think that the spirit water and blood are similarly groups of people, this has no relevance.
=================================
This is a well known constructio ad sensum.
No discordance.
Ilias Theodosis
Matthew 25:32 ...και συναχθησεται εμπροσθεν αυτου παντα τα εθνη και αφοριει αυτους απ αλληλων…
("το εθνος" changes to "οι ανθρωποι") this men of nations --> "m"
Grammatically correct.!!
● Acts 5:16 συνηρχετο δε και το πληθος των περιξ πολεων εις ιερουσαλημ φεροντες ασθενεις... – “There came also a multitude out of the cities round about unto Jerusalem, bringing sick folks.”
Here crowd is modified by the masculine plural participle φέροντες, bringing. The qualifying genitive phrase “out of the cities round about Jerusalem,” is actually feminine, since “cities,” πόλεων, is a grammatically feminine word.
Here’s a slightly different type of example to show that it’s not peculiar to having a crowd and a genitive plural:
● Rom 2:14 οταν γαρ εθνη τα μη νομον εχοντα φυσει τα του νομου ποιη ουτοι νομον μη εχοντες εαυτοις εισιν νομος – “For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves.”
In this case “Gentiles” is neuter plural, and the pronoun referring back to them, “these” is masculine plural. There is no qualifying genitive to offer any confusion.
Now let’s consider what Eugenius said: “On the other hand no one has ever claimed that neuter noun substantives are indicated by masculine or feminine adjectives or pronouns.” His claim does not appear to be borne out by the facts of the language. More examples may be culled from the New Testament text, but these will suffice.
... they ought to suffice to show that the grammar-based objection is a phantom,
============
Response in process
1 John 5:7 (AV)
For there are three that bear record in heaven,
the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost:
and these three are one.
SOLECISM IN THE EARTHLY WITNESSES CRITICAL TEXT
James Snapp will not see this, unless he lifts the block or comes in without his regular name. Feel free to give him the url here:
And online.
March 2020 - more faux analogy verses from James Snapp
=================================
Barry Hofstetter actually shows they are not applicable.
https://www.thetextofthegospels.com/2018/08/the-comma-johanneum-and-greek-grammar.html
They are simply constructio ad sensum.
And this was affirmed by Ilias Theodosis, who gave some value-added explanation
https://www.purebibleforum.com/inde...nalogy-verses-and-contstructio-ad-sensum.1714
nations
multitude
Gentiles
Groups of people can be subject to construction ad sensum because they are seen as the many masculine singular individuals .
There is no there there.
(Can you fault Eugenius Voulgaris for not pointing out this special case? Nahhh, he would expect his readers to know all about that. )
Unless you think that the spirit water and blood are similarly groups of people, this has no relevance.
=================================
This is a well known constructio ad sensum.
No discordance.
Ilias Theodosis
Matthew 25:32 ...και συναχθησεται εμπροσθεν αυτου παντα τα εθνη και αφοριει αυτους απ αλληλων…
("το εθνος" changes to "οι ανθρωποι") this men of nations --> "m"
Grammatically correct.!!
● Acts 5:16 συνηρχετο δε και το πληθος των περιξ πολεων εις ιερουσαλημ φεροντες ασθενεις... – “There came also a multitude out of the cities round about unto Jerusalem, bringing sick folks.”
Here crowd is modified by the masculine plural participle φέροντες, bringing. The qualifying genitive phrase “out of the cities round about Jerusalem,” is actually feminine, since “cities,” πόλεων, is a grammatically feminine word.
Here’s a slightly different type of example to show that it’s not peculiar to having a crowd and a genitive plural:
● Rom 2:14 οταν γαρ εθνη τα μη νομον εχοντα φυσει τα του νομου ποιη ουτοι νομον μη εχοντες εαυτοις εισιν νομος – “For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves.”
In this case “Gentiles” is neuter plural, and the pronoun referring back to them, “these” is masculine plural. There is no qualifying genitive to offer any confusion.
Now let’s consider what Eugenius said: “On the other hand no one has ever claimed that neuter noun substantives are indicated by masculine or feminine adjectives or pronouns.” His claim does not appear to be borne out by the facts of the language. More examples may be culled from the New Testament text, but these will suffice.
... they ought to suffice to show that the grammar-based objection is a phantom,
============
Response in process
1 John 5:7 (AV)
For there are three that bear record in heaven,
the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost:
and these three are one.
SOLECISM IN THE EARTHLY WITNESSES CRITICAL TEXT
James Snapp will not see this, unless he lifts the block or comes in without his regular name. Feel free to give him the url here:
And online.
Last edited: