<$BlogRSDURL$>

Friday, September 22, 2006

BeDuhn/Bowman on John 8:58 


Note on linking conventions: Links on the far left are numbered according to the external discussion group with links directly to those sites. Links in the description and body will be directed to enhanced copies of these pages where cross-references and references cited but not quoted can be conveniently reviewed. [Quality Control provided by Rob Bowman here. (Not to be considered an endorsement :)]


(RB18396) [Wed Jul 27, 2005 7:29 am] (Rob #40: Jason's farewell and the end of the debate)

(JB18250) - [Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:05 am] (Jason #36: So long)


(JB17980) - [Sun Jun 5, 2005 11:08 pm] (Jason #35: Final clarifications)


(JB17738) Jason BeDuhn [Mon May 23, 2005 7:21 pm] (Jason #34: And finally . . . )

(JB17307)
Jason BeDuhn [Thu Mar 31, 2005 8:44 am] (Jason #33: Grammar must rule over whim)



From the introduction: "In your book, you acknowledge that a PPA reading of John 8:58 is possible. Your argument consists in seeking not to refute it, but to make it less probable than some other reading that could be construed as justifying the traditional translation. Neither in your book nor in our 400+ pages of debate have you settled on one particular reading, and neither of your readings justify the traditional translation. Therefore, I maintain, you have lost this debate."

Also, Jason points out that Rob has mishandled Mark 9:21. Rob admits this is a PPA but has incorrectly identified the parts of speech in this verse. With this mistake uncovered Mark 9:29 is yet another example of the category of "clausally-modified PPA" which Rob denies exists. Also discussed are Exodus 4:10 and 21:36.

(JB17298) Jason BeDuhn [Mon Mar 28, 2005 10:19 am] (Jason #32: Exegeting and translating John 8:58)

Opening Sentence: Rob, In your message #31, all of your discussion is in support of a reading that would make EIMI in John 8:58 a copula. As I have already pointed out, this position may be defensible, but it requires an abandonment of the defense of the traditional translation that you have undertaken to mount in our discussion.
(JB17280) Jason BeDuhn [Date: Fri Mar 25, 2005 10:36 am] (Jason #31:More and more problems)


Opening sentence: You continue to compound your initial grammatical errors with new ones, taking us deeper into a twilight zone where normal rules of grammar do not apply, where EIMI or `be' are transitive verbs, where there can be "absolute" copulas with nothing coupled to the subject, where present tense action can occur before past events. This might make interesting science fiction, but it simply is beyond the fringe of any generally recognized principles of either Greek or English grammar ...


(RB17260) - Robert Bowman [Fri Mar 11, 2005 8:52 pm] (Rob #35: Antecedent time, LXX parallels, and the meaning of EIMI in John 8:58)

(RB17259) Rob Bowman [Fri Mar 11, 2005 8:49 pm] (Rob #34: PPA and other broad-band presents)

(RB17258) - Rob #33: [Fri Mar 11, 2005 8:44 pm](Once again, word order)


(RB17257) - Robert Bowman [Fri Mar 11, 2005 8:42 pm] (Rob #32: Exodus 4:10 and 21:36 and the PPA)


(RB17255) Robert Bowman [Thu Mar 10, 2005 12:43 am] (Rob #31: Exegeting and translating John 8:58)

(RB17208)
Robert Bowman [Mon Feb 28, 2005 1:30 pm] (Rob #30: The Relation of the two clauses, and EIMI as absolute, in John 8:58)

(JB17165) - Jason #30: [Date: Wed Feb 23, 2005 11:18 am] (Pr 8:23-35; "knew" in Jer 1:5; Ps 90:2 - A state antecedent... continues)


(JB17163) Jason BeDuhn [Wed Feb 23, 2005 4:52 pm] (False either/or opposition of infinitive and indicative -- Jason #29)


(JB16652) Jason BeDuhn [Sat Jan 22, 2005 3:57 pm] (Jason #28: Question of Clarification)

(16651) Jason BeDuhn [Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:19 pm] (Bowman corrected on Gnomic: Jason #27)


(16629)
Jason BeDuhn [Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:27 pm] (Jason #26)

(16623) Jason BeDuhn [Tue Jan 18, 2005 4:09 pm] (Jason #25: Revisitation of the PPA)

(16616) Jason BeDuhn [Date: Mon Jan 17, 2005 4:32 pm] (Jason AGAIN asks Bowman for proof that the "wording" of John 8:58 is unusual for Greek grammar. - Jason #24)


(15992) Robert Bowman[Sun Nov 14, 2004 8:46 pm ](John 8:58 - Rob #22: Changing your position on what is "fractured syntax")

(15857) Jason BeDuhn[Fri Oct 29, 2004 11:55 pm](Examples of PPA with EIMI in the LXX -- Jason #22)


Tuesday, October 26, 2004
(15835) Jason BeDuhn[Wed Oct 27, 2004 12:30 am](John 8:58 -- Jason #21)


Monday October 25, 2004

(15832) Jason BeDuhn [Tue Oct 26, 2004 12:09 am](John 8:58 -- Jason #20)


Sunday October 24, 2004

(15830) Jason BeDuhn [Mon Oct 25, 2004 12:38 am](John 8:58 -- Jason #19)

Saturday, October 23, 2004

(15826) Jason BeDuhn[Sat Oct 23, 2004 10:07 pm](John 8:58 -- Jason #18) - The proper understanding of the broad band presents. [Links to excerpts from Daniel Wallace's Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics added to aid in following the discussion.]


Friday, October 22, 2004
(15823) Jason BeDuhn[Sat Oct 23, 2004 12:32 am](John 8:58 -Retracing the Threads- Jason #17)

Wednesday, October 20, 2004
(15799) Robert Bowman[Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:34 am]( John 8:58: Rob #21: Where we go from here

Tuesday, October 19, 2004
15797: Jason BeDuhn [Tue Oct 19, 2004 4:15 pm ]( Re: John 8:58: Rob #20: Where we go from here (again)) [Jason #16]


Monday, October 18, 2004
(15784) Jason BeDuhn[Mon Oct 18, 2004 9:18 pm](Re: John 8:58: Jason #15)


(15780) Robert Bowman[Mon Oct 18, 2004 7:13 am](John 8:58: Rob #18: Exegeting and translating John 8:58)


(15779) Robert Bowman[Mon Oct 18, 2004 3:59 am](John 8:58: Rob #17: The relation of the two clauses in John 8:58)


Sunday, October 17, 2004
(15775) Robert Bowman[Sun Oct 17, 2004 11:04 pm](John 8:58: Rob #16 (read before #15): John 8:58 and the broad-band presents)


(15773) Robert Bowman[Sun Oct 17, 2004 8:12 am] (John 8:58: Rob #15: The PRIN ("before") + aorist infinitive clause)

Saturday, October 16, 2004
(15768) Jason BeDuhn[Sat Oct 16, 2004 9:29 pm](Subject: John 8:58 -- Jason #14)


Thursday, October 14, 2004
(15763) Jason BeDuhn [Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:48 pm] (Re: John 8:58: Rob #13: Where we go from here) [Jason #13]


Wednesday, October 13, 2004
(15758) Jason BeDuhn [Date: Wed Oct 13, 2004 11:27 am] (Subject: Re: John 8:58: Jason #12) [Jason challenges Rob Bowman to a debate on John 1:1 in this post.]


Friday, October 08, 2004
Reply at (15736) Jason BeDuhn [Fri Oct 8, 2004 1:40 pm](Re: John 8:58 - Rob #11: Narrow and Broad Definitions of the PPA) [Jason #11]

Thursday, September 02, 2004
(15562) Jason BeDuhn [Thu Sep 2, 2004 4:48 pm] (Re: John 8:58 - Rob #6: The PPA and Adverbial Phrases) [Jason #7]


Sunday, September 05, 2004
(15568) Robert Bowman [Sun Sep 5, 2004 12:02 am] (John 8:58 - Rob #8: The PPA and Adverbial Phrases (cont.))


Wednesday, September 08, 2004
(15584) Jason BeDuhn [Wed Sep 8, 2004 11:55 am] (Re: John 8:58 - Rob #7: The PPA and Temporal Clauses with PRIN or PRO) [Jason #8]

(15585) Jason BeDuhn [Wed Sep 8, 2004 5:44 pm] (Re: John 8:58 - Rob #8: The PPA and Adverbial Phrases (cont.)) [Jason #9]


(15586) Robert Bowman [Wed Sep 8, 2004 11:35 pm] (John 8:58 - Rob #9: Shall we continue?)


Tuesday, September 14, 2004
(15636) Jason BeDuhn [Tue Sep 14, 2004 9:52 am] (Subject: Re: John 8:58 - Jason #10: Shall we continue?) :

Monday, August 30, 2004
(15555) Robert Bowman [Mon Aug 30, 2004 1:06 pm] (John 8:58 - Rob #7: The PPA and Temporal Clauses with PRIN or PRO)

(15554) Robert Bowman [Mon Aug 30, 2004 12:57 pm] (John 8:58 - Rob #6: The PPA and Adverbial Phrases)

Tuesday, August 24, 2004
(15540) Jason BeDuhn [Tue Aug 24, 2004 3:17 pm] (Re: Update on John 8:58 discussion) [Not sequenced]


Monday, August 23, 2004
(15534) Robert Bowman [Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:08 pm] (Update on John 8:58 discussion) [Not sequenced]



Friday, August 20, 2004
(15524) Jason BeDuhn [Fri Aug 20, 2004 12:38 pm] (Re: John 8:58 - Jason#6 (Psalm 89/90:2))[Jason #6B]


Thursday, August 19, 2004
(15522) Jason BeDuhn [Thu Aug 19, 2004 3:11 pm] (Re: John 8:58 - Rob #5: Word order (cont.)) [Jason #6A]


Monday, August 16, 2004
(15497) Robert Bowman [Mon Aug 16, 2004 12:01 pm] (RE: BeDuhn & Bowman (no, it's not over))[Not sequenced] (In Response to 15496)Tuesday, August 10, 2004


(15378) Jason BeDuhn [Tue Aug 10, 2004 9:47 am] (Re: John 8:58 - Jason #5:burdens of proof)



(15367) Jason BeDuhn [Tue Aug 10, 2004 1:17 am ] (Re: John 8:58 - Jason #4)


Friday, August 06, 2004
(15333) Robert Bowman [Fri Aug 6, 2004 6:01 pm] (John 8:58 - Rob #4: general considerations (cont.))



(15331) Jason BeDuhn [ Fri Aug 6, 2004 12:40 pm] (Re: John 8:58 - Jason#3: general considerations (cont.))

Wednesday, August 04, 2004
(15326) Robert Bowman [Wed Aug 4, 2004 10:21pm] (John 8:58 - general considerations) [Rob #1]


(15318) Jason BeDuhn [Wed Aug 4, 2004 1:07 pm] (John 8:58) [Jason #1]


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?