tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12543231.post7951256161149812086..comments2023-06-15T09:41:19.355-05:00Comments on NT/History Blog: Beggars before the Spirit - 2Bill Heromanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05283809456471966882noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12543231.post-85191821657083610032012-01-10T12:34:24.231-06:002012-01-10T12:34:24.231-06:00Wow, most intelligent anonymous comment, ever.
I ...Wow, most intelligent anonymous comment, ever.<br /><br />I think my better point was about the vagueness, and maybe I shouldn't have italicized/emphasized the sing/pl thing. I agree 'are the poor' is a plural reference. But 'beggars' would be more clearly a plural.<br /><br />My far bigger gripe is the meaninglessness of the metaphorical 'in spirit'. This post would have been better if I'd left out the words singular and plural.Bill Heromanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05283809456471966882noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12543231.post-57093769257806918542012-01-10T11:03:10.707-06:002012-01-10T11:03:10.707-06:00I strongly agreed with Kirk's assertion about ...I strongly agreed with Kirk's assertion about "the + adjective" being plural in good English. I have myself blamed Bible translations that accept it in the singular.<br /><br />But I just read the KJV Ps. 10:9 "He doth catch the poor, when he draweth him into his net" (similar in Coverdale), and now I'm having anxious doubts about my old certainty. I can't find any clear discussion about whether this is solecism, obsolete English, or just good English...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12543231.post-89025261617608030762009-09-13T19:37:11.045-05:002009-09-13T19:37:11.045-05:00Peter, you know I love it when we quibble. :-)
I...Peter, you know I love it when we quibble. :-)<br /><br />I admit the singular/plural category blurs a bit sometimes. I did call it a 'collective singular'. But the greek is clearly plural and my point was that I think we lose something important when it disappears from the rendering. Plurals are very important in Paul's letters, too, but I digress.<br /><br />By the way, Liddell & Scott (p.1550) list 'ptoxos' primarily as a <b>noun</b>. On the 8th line, "2. metaph." (with a citation of Mt.5:3). On the 9th line, "II. as Adj., beggarly"<br /><br />I haven't really looked at the ESV yet, but thanks for the compliment, except I don't think I've "abused" any adjectives. ;-)<br /><br />[cue music]<br />Don't know much about the ESV<br />Don't know much bi-ol-o-gie<br />La-da-da-da-da-da-daaaa da...<br />[fade music]Bill Heromanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05283809456471966882noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12543231.post-83483343370392564582009-09-13T12:20:16.033-05:002009-09-13T12:20:16.033-05:00Sorry to quibble, but technically in English "...Sorry to quibble, but technically in English "the poor" is plural, not singular. Compare "*The poor is always with you" with "The poor are always with you". But you are in the fairly good company of the ESV translators who have abused "the" + adjective in English as a singular when it is plural.Peter Kirkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13395635409427347613noreply@blogger.com