Freethought & Rationalism Archive

spin · 02-10-2010, 01:27 PM

So that you can see what you were supposed to be talking about, I've gone back and supplied the context (note the added bold):

Quote:

Walrus: I have provided a plausible, logical reason,...
spin: Eisegesis is no meaningful response. What you are attempting to do needed to have come from the author of the text. Nothing you can say in the matter will change that or be relevant.
Walrus: Well, since nothing I can say is relevant, I guess you win, don't you?
spin: Don't take things out of context.
Walrus: I wasn't taking things out of context,...

When you said, "Well, since nothing I can say is relevant, I guess you win, don't you?" you obviously did take things out of context.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Walrus

...I was reading the text in the context of the larger work, i.e. the book of Mark, in which Jesus is clearly portrayed as a preacher that travelled around the area to preach. If you were reading a book about an American Major League baseball team from New York (say the Mets), and in the course of this book an interesting incident is noted to have happened during the season while this team was in Houston, followed by the following sentence: After this they returned to New York via (through, by way of, etc.) Los Angeles., you would not need to be told that they went to L.A. to play a series against the Dodgers, you would naturally assume that. That is known as exegesis, reading a text in the context of the work as a whole, not as an isolated statement.

You confuse exegesis with eisegesis. Modern scenarios as attempted analogies don't cut it, though I believe you are being sincere in this inerrantist fudge. It's the sort of thought that should help you understand how texts can be amplified without any need for lies or misbehavior.

spin

Walrus · 02-10-2010, 02:01 PM

I am not confusing anything. Exegesis includes looking at context which is what I am doing and you are not. If anyone is confused it is you. This is only an error if you lift this verse out and ignore the rest of the book. Give me a reason why modern analogies don't cut it, as your statement isn't sufficient proof of this "fact".

spin · 02-10-2010, 11:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Walrus

I am not confusing anything. Exegesis includes looking at context which is what I am doing and you are not.

Eisegesis is reading into the text what you want. In this case you are hanging onto the hook of Jesus going to the Sea of Galilee via Sidon an event set in Sidon. As I have pointed out earlier in this thread, the language doesn't allow you to consider Sidon as a stop. It is provided merely as a trajectory to the destination, ie to the Sea of Galilee.

Reading the text as is one finds merely a trajectory in δια Σιδωνος and you are trying to eke it out into something more.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Walrus

If anyone is confused it is you.

"It's not me: it's you!" Deep.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Walrus

This is only an error if you lift this verse out and ignore the rest of the book. Give me a reason why modern analogies don't cut it, as your statement isn't sufficient proof of this "fact".

Analogies in general are no means of argument. They are merely illuminating of something that already exists.

Modern analogies based on modern language require one to show evidence from the original language that reflects the idea you are trying to impute to the ancient work.

spin

JoeWallack · 02-11-2010, 07:42 AM

JW:
What we are going through here is how exactly is the offending word διὰ in Mark 7:31 used:

Offense (for error)
διὰ is being used in a directional geographical context.

Defense
διὰ is being used in completion context. (He went "through" all the towns).

Here's the first entry from BDAG:

Quote:

διά prep. w. gen. and acc. (Hom.+) (for lit. s. ἀνά, beg.); the fundamental idea that finds expression in this prep. is separation, esp. in the gen., with the gener. sense ‘through’; in the acc. the gener. sense also is ‘through’ (cp. the semantic range in Eng.), but primarily with a causal focus ‘owing to’.
A. w. gen.
① marker of extension through an area or object, via, through
ⓐ w. verbs of going διέρχεσθαι διὰ πάντων (sc. τόπων, EpArist 132) go through all the places Ac 9:32; cp. Mt 12:43; Lk 11:24. ἀπελεύσομαι δι᾽ ὑμῶν εἰς I will go through your city on the way to Ro 15:28; cp. 2 Cor. 1:16. διαβαίνειν Hb 11:29. διαπορεύεσθαι διὰ σπορίμων Lk 6:1. εἰσέρχεσθαι διὰ τῆς πύλης (Jos., Ant. 13, 229) Mt 7:13a; τ. θύρας J 10:1f; cp. vs. 9. παρέρχεσθαι διὰ τ. ὁδοῦ pass by along the road Mt 8:28; cp. 7:13b. παραπορεύεσθαι Mk 2:23; 9:30. περιπατεῖν διὰ τοῦ φωτός walk about through or in the light Rv 21:24. ὑποστρέφειν διὰ Μακεδονίας return through M. Ac 20:3.—Ἰης. ὁ ἐλθὼν δι᾽ ὕδατος καὶ αἵματος 1J 5:6 first of all refers quite literally to Jesus’ passing through water at the hand of John and through blood at his death (on the expression ‘come through blood’ in this sense cp. Eur., Phoen. 20 in Alex. Aphr., Fat. 31 II 2 p. 202, 10, of the oracle to Laius the father of Oedipus, concerning the bloody downfall of his house: πᾶς σὸς οἶκος βήσεται δι᾽ αἵματος). But mng. 3c may also apply: Jesus comes with the water of baptism and with the blood of redemption for his own.—AKlöpper, 1J 5:6–12: ZWT 43, 1900, 378–400.—The ῥῆμα ἐκπορευόμενον διὰ στόματος θεοῦ Mt 4:4 (Dt 8:3) is simply the word that proceeds out of the mouth of God (cp. Theognis 1, 18 Diehl3 τοῦτ᾽ ἔπος ἀθανάτων ἦλθε διὰ στομάτων; Pittacus in Diog. L. 1, 78 διὰ στόματος λαλεῖ; Chrysippus argues in Diog. L. 7, 187: εἴ τι λαλεῖς, τοῦτο διὰ τοῦ στόματός σου διέρχεται, i.e. if one e.g. says the word ἅμαξα, a wagon passes through the person’s lips; TestIss 7:4 ψεῦδος οὐκ ἀνῆλθε διὰ τ. χειλέων μου. Cp. also δέχεσθαι διὰ τῶν χειρῶν τινος Gen 33:10 beside δέχ. ἐκ τ. χειρ. τινος Ex 32:4).
ⓑ w. other verbs that include motion: οὗ ὁ ἔπαινος διὰ πασῶν τ. ἐκκλησιῶν (sc. ἀγγέλλεται) throughout all the congregations 2 Cor 8:18. διαφέρεσθαι δι᾽ (v.l. καθ᾽) ὅλης τῆς χώρας be spread through the whole region Ac 13:49. διὰ τ. κεράμων καθῆκαν αὐτόν they let him down through the tile roof Lk 5:19. διὰ τοῦ τείχους καθῆκαν through an opening in the wall (Jos., Ant. 5, 15) Ac 9:25; cp. 2 Cor 11:33. (σωθήσεται) ὡς διὰ πυρός as if he had come through fire 1 Cor 3:15. διασῴζεσθαι δι᾽ ὕδατος be brought safely through the water 1 Pt 3:20.—δι᾽ ὅλου J 19:23 s. ὅλος 2.

prep. prep. = preposition(al)
gen. gen. = genitive
acc. acc. = accusative
Hom Hom , VIII B.C.—List 5
lit. lit. = literal(ly); literature (refererences to [scholarly] literature)
beg. beg. = beginning
esp. esp. = especially
gener. gener. = generally
cp. cp. = compare, freq. in ref. to citation fr. ancient texts
sc. sc. = scilicet (one may understand, supply)
EpArist EpArist = Epistle of Aristeas, II B.C.—List 5
Jos. Jos. = Josephus. This abbr. used when follow by title; I A.D.—Lists 5
Eur Eur , V B.C.—List 5
mng. mng. = meaning(s)
ZWT ZWT = Zeitschrift für Wissenschaftliche Theologie—List 6
Theognis Theognis , VI B.C.—List 5
Diehl Diehl , ed., s. AnthLG—List 5
Diog. L. Diog. L. = Diogenes Laertius, III A.D.—List 5
i.e. = id est (that is)
I.-E. Indo-European
e.g. e.g. = exempli gratia (for example)
TestIss TestIss = Testament of Issachar, s. Test12Patr—List 2
v.l. v.l. = varia lectio (variant reading)

Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., & Bauer, W. 2000. A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature. "Based on Walter Bauer's Griechisch-deutsches Wr̲terbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der frhüchristlichen [sic] Literatur, sixth edition, ed. Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland, with Viktor Reichmann and on previous English editions by W.F. Arndt, F.W. Gingrich, and F.W. Danker." (3rd ed.) . University of Chicago Press: Chicago

JW:
Starting with the general definition:

Quote:

διά prep. w. gen. and acc. (Hom.+) (for lit. s. ἀνά, beg.); the fundamental idea that finds expression in this prep. is separation, esp. in the gen., with the gener. sense ‘through’; in the acc. the gener. sense also is ‘through’ (cp. the semantic range in Eng.), but primarily with a causal focus ‘owing to’.
...
① marker of extension through an area or object, via, through

Note that the fundamental idea is "separation" which favors the offense (geographical as opposed to completion). Also note the meaning of "via".

When used with the genitive the meaning is often "through". When used with the accusative there is a stronger causal meaning, "owing to". If I am reading this correctly the related verb has no case here:

Quote:

ἦλθεν ēlthen 2064 V-2AAI-3S he came

If someone wants to argue this issue seriously, you have to go to the Lexicons. That Authority does not give any example of the offending phrase being used in a completion sense suggests that there isn't one. I have not seen an example either. But by all means, look for one. The defense needs to look for a similar use of διά in between a departure and destination with no verb after the one attached to διά. For those who need points sharply explained, you need to find an example where the location that is being gone through is not in between the departure and destination in a directional geographical sense. The meaning is limited to sequential. If the defense is unable to find one such example than this case is closed and I will close the related inventory of error at ErrancyWiki.

It should be clear by now that there was no known reasonable alternative route to the Sea of Galilee going north or east from Sidon (as opposed to going back south towards Tyre).

Joseph

ErrancyWiki

JoeWallack · 02-13-2010, 09:18 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2t4D8...eature=related

JW:
These situations always remind me of High Plains Drifter where the three hired guns go and get themselves killed before the convicts they are supposed to protect the town from come riding through. Our hired gun here, Greek Professor Jeffrey Gibson, is never around when you really need him. Perhaps I can make some griekvous error here that will get his attention. Shouldn't take long.

To the lexicon. This first entry above for διὰ by BDAG seems to be the applicable one for 7:31. If Apologists don't like this use of διὰ they need to try and find another BDAG entry they think it fits.

Quote:

διά prep. w. gen. and acc. (Hom.+) (for lit. s. ἀνά, beg.); the fundamental idea that finds expression in this prep. is separation, esp. in the gen., with the gener. sense ‘through’; in the acc. the gener. sense also is ‘through’ (cp. the semantic range in Eng.), but primarily with a causal focus ‘owing to’.

JW:
The basic question here is how do we understand the διά of 7:31. Is it directional/geographical or completion/sequential?

The basic meaning is "separation" which favors directional/geographical (d/g). Especially with the genitive case. With the genitive there is a strong sense of "through". With the accusative case there is a strong casual relationship.

Quote:

A. w. gen.
① marker of extension through an area or object, via, through
ⓐ w. verbs of going διέρχεσθαι διὰ πάντων (sc. τόπων, EpArist 132) go through all the places Ac 9:32; cp. Mt 12:43; Lk 11:24. ἀπελεύσομαι δι᾽ ὑμῶν εἰς I will go through your city on the way to Ro 15:28; cp. 2 Cor. 1:16. διαβαίνειν Hb 11:29. διαπορεύεσθαι διὰ σπορίμων Lk 6:1. εἰσέρχεσθαι διὰ τῆς πύλης (Jos., Ant. 13, 229) Mt 7:13a; τ. θύρας J 10:1f; cp. vs. 9. παρέρχεσθαι διὰ τ. ὁδοῦ pass by along the road Mt 8:28; cp. 7:13b. παραπορεύεσθαι Mk 2:23; 9:30. περιπατεῖν διὰ τοῦ φωτός walk about through or in the light Rv 21:24. ὑποστρέφειν διὰ Μακεδονίας return through M. Ac 20:3.—Ἰης. ὁ ἐλθὼν δι᾽ ὕδατος καὶ αἵματος 1J 5:6 first of all refers quite literally to Jesus’ passing through water at the hand of John and through blood at his death (on the expression ‘come through blood’ in this sense cp. Eur., Phoen. 20 in Alex. Aphr., Fat. 31 II 2 p. 202, 10, of the oracle to Laius the father of Oedipus, concerning the bloody downfall of his house: πᾶς σὸς οἶκος βήσεται δι᾽ αἵματος). But mng. 3c may also apply: Jesus comes with the water of baptism and with the blood of redemption for his own.—AKlöpper, 1J 5:6–12: ZWT 43, 1900, 378–400.—The ῥῆμα ἐκπορευόμενον διὰ στόματος θεοῦ Mt 4:4 (Dt 8:3) is simply the word that proceeds out of the mouth of God (cp. Theognis 1, 18 Diehl3 τοῦτ᾽ ἔπος ἀθανάτων ἦλθε διὰ στομάτων; Pittacus in Diog. L. 1, 78 διὰ στόματος λαλεῖ; Chrysippus argues in Diog. L. 7, 187: εἴ τι λαλεῖς, τοῦτο διὰ τοῦ στόματός σου διέρχεται, i.e. if one e.g. says the word ἅμαξα, a wagon passes through the person’s lips; TestIss 7:4 ψεῦδος οὐκ ἀνῆλθε διὰ τ. χειλέων μου. Cp. also δέχεσθαι διὰ τῶν χειρῶν τινος Gen 33:10 beside δέχ. ἐκ τ. χειρ. τινος Ex 32:4).

JW:
Going through the examples, the first category is with the genitive, and has a definition of "① marker of extension through an area or object, via, through".

"ⓐ w. verbs of going". The verb here is not "going", it's "coming", so on to the next sub-category:

Quote:

ⓑ w. other verbs that include motion: οὗ ὁ ἔπαινος διὰ πασῶν τ. ἐκκλησιῶν (sc. ἀγγέλλεται) throughout all the congregations 2 Cor 8:18. διαφέρεσθαι δι᾽ (v.l. καθ᾽) ὅλης τῆς χώρας be spread through the whole region Ac 13:49. διὰ τ. κεράμων καθῆκαν αὐτόν they let him down through the tile roof Lk 5:19. διὰ τοῦ τείχους καθῆκαν through an opening in the wall (Jos., Ant. 5, 15) Ac 9:25; cp. 2 Cor 11:33. (σωθήσεται) ὡς διὰ πυρός as if he had come through fire 1 Cor 3:15. διασῴζεσθαι δι᾽ ὕδατος be brought safely through the water 1 Pt 3:20.—δι᾽ ὅλου J 19:23 s. ὅλος 2.

No good examples here of the geographical setting of 7:31 so back to the definitions with "going":

The first decent example I see with comparative context is Acts 20:3:

http://biblos.com/acts/20-3.htm

Quote:

Acts 20:3 Greek Study Bible (Apostolic / Interlinear)

ποιήσας τε μῆνας τρεῖς· γενομένης ἐπιβουλῆς αὐτῷ ὑπὸ τῶν Ἰουδαίων μέλλοντι ἀνάγεσθαι εἰς τὴν Συρίαν, ἐγένετο γνώμης τοῦ ὑποστρέφειν διὰ Μακεδονίας.

KJV with Strong's

And there abode three months And when the Jews __ laid wait for him as he was about to sail into Syria he purposed __ to return through Macedonia

Greek	Transliteration	Strong's	Morphology	English
ποιήσας	poiēsas	4160	V-AAP-NSM	having done
τε	te	5037	PRT	And
μῆνας	mēnas	3376	N-APM	months
τρεῖς	treis	5140	A-APM	three
γενομένης	genomenēs	1096	V-2ADP-GSF	having developed
ἐπιβουλῆς	epiboulēs	1917	N-GSF	plot
αὐτῷ	autō	846	P-DSM	against him
ὑπὸ	upo	5259	PREP	Jews
τῶν	tōn	3588	T-GPM
Ἰουδαίων	ioudaiōn	2453	A-GPM	Jews
μέλλοντι	mellonti	3195	V-PAP-DSM	about
ἀνάγεσθαι	anagesthai	321	V-PPN	to go up
εἰς	eis	1519	PREP	into
τὴν	tēn	3588	T-ASF	the
Συρίαν	surian	4947	N-ASF	Syria
ἐγένετο	egeneto	1096	V-2ADI-3S	formed
γνώμης	gnōmēs	1106	N-GSF	decision
τοῦ	tou	3588	T-GSM	of the
ὑποστρέφειν	upostrephein	5290	V-PAN	to return
διὰ	dia	1223	PREP	through
Μακεδονίας	makedonias	3109	N-GSF	Macedonia

JW:
The context is Paul departing Greece and going through Macedonia to return to Jerusalem. Note the verb here is "ὑποστρέφειν upostrephein 5290 V-PAN to return". The noun here, "Μακεδονίας makedonias 3109 N-GSF Macedonia" is genitive which fits the BDAG description. In the Acts 20:3 example we have a likely directional/geographical use.

Compare to the structure of the offending verse:

Greek	Transliteration	Strong's	Morphology	English
Καὶ	kai	2532	CONJ	and
πάλιν	palin	3825	ADV	again
ἐξελθὼν	exelthōn	1831	V-2AAP-NSM	having departed
ἐκ	ek	1537	PREP	from
τῶν	tōn	3588	T-GPN	the
ὁρίων	oriōn	3725	N-GPN	region
Τύρου	turou	5184	N-GSF	of tyre
ἦλθεν	ēlthen	2064	V-2AAI-3S	he came
διὰ	dia	1223	PREP	through
Σιδῶνος	sidōnos	4605	N-GSF	Sidon
εἰς	eis	1519	PREP	against
τὴν	tēn	3588	T-ASF	the
θάλασσαν	thalassan	2281	N-ASF	sea
τῆς	tēs	3588	T-GSF	of
Γαλιλαίας	galilaias	1056	N-GSF	Galilee
ἀνὰ	ana	303	PREP	within
μέσον	meson	3319	A-ASN	midst
τῶν	tōn	3588	T-GPN	of the
ὁρίων	oriōn	3725	N-GPN	region
Δεκαπόλεως	dekapoleōs	1179	N-GSF	of decapolis

JW:
We note with interest that our related noun:

"Σιδῶνος sidōnos 4605 N-GSF Sidon" is genitive

We note with even more interest the accusative case of the Sea:

"θάλασσαν thalassan 2281 N-ASF sea"

indicating that the Sea is the direct object of the verb "came". Harken back to the BDAG definition:

Quote:

in the acc. the gener. sense also is ‘through’ (cp. the semantic range in Eng.), but primarily with a causal focus ‘owing to’.

thus we have the textual Marker that "through" Sidon communicates a causal relationship ("means of", "by way of", "via") and our meaning of directional/geographical is indicated.

The objective student should also note that simply the use here of the verb "came" as opposed to "went" indicates what is on either side, "through Sidon" and "the Sea", is a causal relationship. Going through Sidon is what enabled coming to the Sea. A verb of going would attach to the departure rather than the destination.

Thus the specific construction of 7:31 fits BDAG's definition of a directional/geographical use and at this point no one has shown any example of the construction of 7:31 in a completion/sequential use.

Joseph

ErrancyWiki

P.S. to "Mark's" Jesus You're going the wrong way

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-10-2010, 02:01 PM	#152
Walrus Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: North America Posts: 46	I am not confusing anything. Exegesis includes looking at context which is what I am doing and you are not. If anyone is confused it is you. This is only an error if you lift this verse out and ignore the rest of the book. Give me a reason why modern analogies don't cut it, as your statement isn't sufficient proof of this "fact".

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.