Wayne Leman of the Better Bibles Blog has a recent post titled Paragraphing Ephesians 5 where he discusses some of the peculiarities of paragraph breaks.

Yep. Paragraph breaks. And paragraph breaks (and sentence breaks, and punctuation) are all important and sometimes overlooked elements of the original language editions of the New Testament. For example, the NA27 Greek text and the UBS4 Greek text differ in their paragraphs in Ephesians 5. They both have paragraph breaks between vv. 20 and 21. But UBS4 has vv. 21-33 as a single paragraph while NA27 has vv. 21-24 as a paragraph and 25-33 as a pargraph (... with a sub-paragraph break before v. 29!). Different folks think different things are going on here.

Another helpful source to consult is the OpenText.org clausal analysis. OpenText.org have analyzed the Greek New Testament for its syntactic structure. (Small plug: Logos Bible Software have developed and will release a version of the OpenText.org analysis; see the Logos Bible Software blog for some more details). The text they analyzed, as I understand it, had no punctuation -- so their clause breaks (and secondary clauses, and embedded clauses) reflect their own judgment as to the underlying syntactic structure of the text. They plan to use their clausal analysis as a basis for a higher-level analysis of paragraph structure, so their clausal analysis could be helpful for us to consult in this case as well.

OpenText.org have Eph 5.18b-21 as a single primary clause with a series of embedded clauses. Like below, where each paragraph represents a clause. The first clause (v. 18a) has what OpenText.org calls a secondary clause, it is indented. The second clause (vv. 18b-21) has a series of five embedded clauses (these would traditionally be labeled "participial clauses", likely), they are indented as well. I've forced wrapping on some of the embedded clauses; there are only five.

καὶ μὴ μεθύσκεσθε οἴνῳ,
    ἐν ᾧ ἐστιν ἀσωτία,

ἀλλὰ πληροῦσθε ἐν πνεύματι,
    λαλοῦντες ἑαυτοῖς ἐν ψαλμοῖς καὶ ὕμνοις
        καὶ ᾠδαῖς πνευματικαῖς
    ᾄδοντες
    καὶ ψάλλοντες τῇ καρδίᾳ ὑμῶν τῷ κυρίῳ
    εὐχαριστοῦντες πάντοτε ὑπὲρ πάντων
        ἐν ὀνόματι τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ
        τῷ θεῷ καὶ πατρί
    ὑποτασσόμενοι ἀλλήλοις ἐν φόβῳ Χριστοῦ

You can see the OpenText.org representation online (click New Testament in the Texts sidebar menu, then click Ephesians, then check out the clause view of chapter 5).

This analysis is helpful for me because I can start to piece things together and think about what the text is really communicating. The second clause is talking about "being filled in the spirit". It then lists five ways that we can focus on to do this. The participle clauses "attach" to the primary verb (which, thanks to the OpenText.org analysis, we know is the predicator/verb πληροῦσθε). So we know that it is through speaking psalms, hymns and spiritual songs; through singing; through making music in our heart to the Lord; through always offering thanks for all things; and through submitting to one another out of reverence/fear of Christ.

OpenText.org list their next clause as vv. 22-23:

αἱ γυναῖκες τοῖς ἰδίοις ἀνδράσιν
    ὡς τῷ κυρίῳ
    ὅτι ἀνήρ ἐστιν κεφαλὴ τῆς γυναικὸς
        ὡς καὶ ὁ Χριστὸς κεφαλὴ τῆς ἐκκλησίας
        αὐτὸς σωτὴρ τοῦ σώματος

As Wayne notes in his blog post, v. 22 (in NA27 and UBS4) has an implied verb, likely ὑποτάσσω as some form of the word is in several MSS (Sinaiticus and several minuscules; Byz texts too). This would likely function as the predicator (primary verb). There are two immediately secondary clauses; an adverbial clause and a subordinate clause. The subordinate clause has some other stuff going on. The adverbial clause is a contrast, it helps explain the primary portion of the clause ("Wives, to your own husbands; as to the Lord ... ") with the subordinate clause providing more information ("... because the husband is head of the wife as Christ is head of the church; he [Christ] is Savior of the body").

As to Wayne's original post about whether there is a paragraph break between v. 21 and v. 22; I'm not too sure. He is, of course, correct that there is cohesion between the two clauses especially shown with the use of the assumed verb in v. 22 (NA/UBS editions). Either way, there is a consistent vibe working through the last half of Ephesians 5.

All of this (Wayne's post particularly, and my few thoughts above) underscores the importance of thinking about higher-level discourse issues.

Too often (and I'm one very guilty of this) we get stuck in the words, doing searches and looking at concordances to see how particular words are used; we forget that the primary thing that affects word meaning is immediate context. Words dissociated from context are difficult to deal with. But in context, we can work to quantify meaning. One method of evaluating context is to step up from the word level to the clause level and the paragraph level. Trace the flow of the larger section (paragraph, pericope, whatever). Evaluate where different editions have sentence breaks and paragraph breaks. Look at syntax; see where the phrase or clause appears in the larger discourse. What is the primary verb, and where does the currently evaluated text lie in relation to that verb? What is the subject (who is doing the acting)? What is being acted upon (or, what is/are the objects)? What other sorts of things modify the verb?

Starting with words is fine; but we also need to be diligent to examine how words relate to each other to form larger units (OpenText.org would call these "word groups"); and then how those units form into clauses; and how those units form into paragraphs. Then we've worked the text from a variety of angles and we can know the big picture (for vv 18b-21, it could mean being filled with the spirit and evidencing that in particular ways) and the smaller picture (practically, what "making music to the Lord" could mean). But all sorts of stuff — not just word meaning — affects how a verse or section is interpreted and then applied in the life of a Christian.

Update (2006-03-18): Note that the break between Eph 5.21 and 22 has been a subject of discussion on the OpenText.org forum.

At Bible study earlier tonight (we're going through 2 Peter) we came across 2Pe 2.15-16:

Forsaking the right way, they have gone astray. They have followed the way of Balaam, the son of Beor, who loved gain from wrongdoing, but was rebuked for his own transgression; a speechless donkey spoke with human voice and restrained the prophet’s madness. (2Pe 2:15-16)

And here's the Greek. Note the words in bold between the two:

καταλείποντες εὐθεῖαν ὁδὸν ἐπλανήθησαν, ἐξακολουθήσαντες τῇ ὁδῷ τοῦ Βαλαὰμ τοῦ Βοσόρ, ὃς μισθὸν ἀδικίας ἠγάπησεν ἔλεγξιν δὲ ἔσχεν ἰδίας παρανομίας· ὑποζύγιον ἄφωνον ἐν ἀνθρώπου φωνῇ φθεγξάμενον ἐκώλυσεν τὴν τοῦ προφήτου παραφρονίαν. (2Pe 2:15-16)

This is in the context of a rather severe denunciation of false teachers. Rather than go the right way (the way modelled by angels in v. 11) these false teachers instead think lightly of judgement and embrace blasphemy. Like Balaam (a prophet for hire saying whatever he wanted [or whatever his benefactor desired] who was set straight by a dumb donkey), they have chosen the wrong way.

When I read this, I couldn't help but think of the Didache:

There are two ways, one of life and one of death, and there is a great difference between the two ways. (Did 1.1)

And here's the Greek:

Ὁδοί δύο εἰσί, μία τῆς ζωῆς καὶ μία τοῦ θανάθου, διαφορὰ δὲ πολλὴ μεταξὺ τῶν δύο ὁδῶν.  (Did 1.1)

This, of course, is similar to the Epistle of Barnabas:

But let us pass on to another lesson and teaching. There are two ways of teaching and of power, the one of light and the other of darkness; and there is a great difference between the two ways. For on the one are stationed the light giving angels of God, on the other the angels of Satan. And the one is the Lord from all eternity and unto all eternity, whereas the other is Lord of the season of iniquity that now is. (EpBarn 18.1-2)

And, again, the Greek:

Ταῦτα μὲν οὕτως· μεταβῶμεν δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ ἑτέραν γνῶσιν καὶ διδαχήν. Ὁδοὶ δύο εἰσὶν διδαχῆς καὶ ἐξουσίας, ἥ τε τοῦ φωτὸς καὶ ἡ τοῦ σκότους· διαφορὰ δὲ πολλὴ τῶν δύο ὁδῶν. Ἐφ ̓ ἧς μὲν γάρ εἰσιν τεταγμένοι φωταγωγοὶ ἄγγελοι τοῦ θεοῦ, ἐφ ̓ ἧς δὲ ἄγγελοι τοῦ σατανᾶ. Καὶ ὁ μέν ἐστιν κύριος ἀπ ̓ αἰώνων καὶ εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας, ὁ δὲ ἄρχων καιροῦ τοῦ νῦν τῆς ἀνομίας. (EpBarn 18.1-2)

To be clear: I think Second Peter is earlier than both the Didache and the Epistle of Barnabas. And it seems plain enough that the idea of opposites (here in the form of two "ways") is used frequently in all sorts of literature. For example, we know the gospel and first epistle of John both use the opposition of light and dark in a similar way to contrast alternates. Even the quote from Epistle of Barnabas above uses the light/dark metaphor to reiterate the difference between the two ways.

Is this a not-so-direct mention of the "two ways" in 2 Peter? The one way is right/straight/proper (εὐθεῖαν) and the other way is associated with Balaam and is astray (ἐπλανήθησαν) from the right way.

Whether or not 2Pe 2.15-16 is a reference to "two ways" imagery similar to that of the Didache and the Epistle of Barnabas, the idea that there are two ways, and that one way is right and proper and the other way is not seems fairly clear, at least to me as I read this (admittedly late).

Many moons ago, I had a series of posts on the Epistle to Diognetus. At the end of that series, there was a poll on which text I should blog about next.

Not too many people responded, but those who did specified that the Didache would be a good one to look into. So I will.

But first, some thoughts.

Should examination of non-canonical text (text that isn't Scripture) be different from examination of Scripture? I think it should be as the non-canonical text does not have the same underlying authority that Scripture has. But I'm not sure what that means. [Note: I'm thinking more about application of the text in the life of a Christian here than general examination/exegetical practices. Apologies for the confusion.]

Most editions of non-canonical text I've seen are just that: editions. They have the text and translation. They identify parallels in canonical and non-canonical documents. They discuss language, grammar, syntax, authorship, etc. They have brief notes, usually relating to the definition of a word or two.

That is much different than most commentary on Biblical texts, which seem to center on application or perhaps more homiletical purposes. I have not yet examined the Hermeneia volume on the Didache; a friend has that volume and I hope to borrow it from him shortly. Perhaps that will help me out.

Until then, my basic question is: What should commentary on non-canonical text consist of? What should it look like? What methods should it use?

Currently, my thought is to go very slowly through the text and comment on the Greek as it relates to similar words or grammatical/syntactic structures as they are found in the New Testament. That is, major on the language and minor on the exegesis. But if one was to do exegesis, what would that end up looking like? And would it be valuable? And would it be useful?

Just runnin' at the fingers here. If you have any thoughts, please email, leave some comments, or write away with your own thoughts on your own blog and I'll link to you from here (assuming I find it or you tell me, of course).

Thanks!

Check it out: First the blog article, then the 2006 Road Trip page on the Logos web site.

How cool is that?

I probably won't make it out to any of the scheduled stops (I have other plans this summer!) but wow, does it sound like fun. If you are anywhere near any of the stops that are planned, please do stop by for the show. And if you can host a stop or suggest a host, then please do contact us. The contact info for the road trip is on both the blog post and the 2006 Road Trip page.

The Logos Bible Software 3.0 Road Trip begins May 1, and I have a few more things to do before then, so I'd better get back to work!

Awhile back, I posted a note referring to a book edited by Al. N. Oikonomides called Abbreviations in Greek: Inscriptions, Papyri, Manuscripts and Early Printed Books (amazon.com).

I've had the book for a few weeks now. It contains four monographs (some short, some long, some with extensive catalogues and other such material) having to do with abbreviations in Greek. These monographs are:

"Abbreviations in Greek Inscriptions" by M. Avi-Yonah
"Abbreviations and Symbols in Greek Papyri" by F. G. Kenyon
"Abbreviations in Greek Manuscripts" by T. W. Allen
"Abbreviations in Early Greek Printed Books" by G. F. Ostermann and A. E. Giegengack.

I think it is safe to say that if you have questions about abbreviations or ligatures in Greek text, this book is a great place to start looking. Particularly helpful for my purposes are the tables of abbreviations found in Greek incunabula (Ostermann & Giegengack's article) and T.W. Allen's article as it deals with stuff one finds in Greek MSS.

If you're really into this stuff, you'll probably want to check out the Byzantine Greek Fonts mentioned by Suzanne McCarthy on her blog, Suzanne's Bookshelf.

Greetings, folks.

Some of you know I've been seeing a lot of a certain lovely woman named Amy Thompson.

This past Saturday evening, as Amy and I were on the beach and the sun was setting, I professed my love to her and asked her to be my wife.

Thankfully, she said "Yes!"

Praise be to God for this thing He has worked. I have no idea why God has seen fit to bless me so abundantly. In times of abundance and in times of trouble and despair, God is to be praised.

So please praise Him with us, and glorify in Him for His goodness.

We have no date set yet, but we're hoping the big day will be this summer. More information as it becomes available.

Many thanks to those who have been praying for Amy and me; we appreciate your continued prayers as we take this next step in our relationship.

Soli Deo gloria!

[More pictures of varying quality are available.]

Update (2006-03-06): Thanks to everyone who has commented, sent email, or otherwise offered congratulations! All y'all are awesome, and your congratulatory wishes are very much appreciated. And thanks especially to JP van de Giessen of Aantekeningen bij de Bijbel for his thanks and oliebollen recipe!

Welcome to Biblical Studies Carnival III. It's been a month since Tyler Williams' most excellent Biblical Studies Carnival redivivus post that brought us up to date and walked us through the biblioblogosphere happenings for the month of January.

I've slipped my feet into his gigantic shoes and walked around a bit. It may not be as pretty as Tyler's prosaic post-smithing and it may not be as smooth, but it is Biblical Studies Carnival III! Take off your coat and your shoes; make yourself at home. February is a short month but there is still much to review.

The posts highlighted in this Carnival are but a small sampling of the sheer chunky goodness that comprises February's Biblical Studies bloggin' fare. Please feel free to click the sidebar links to explore other Biblical Studies Blogs. Or head to the motherlode, biblioblogs.com for a more comprehensive listing.

Enough with the preliminaries, on with the show!

[Update I: If you've already read BSC:III, please note the addendum section on the bottom. This will be updated as necessary. Thanks!]

Podcasts!

Let's start with the completely new. February brought podcasts upon us. Ben Myers of Faith and Theology got the ball rolling with a podcast titled What is the Gospel? and followed it up with The Bible and theology. The biblioblogosphere's own worship chorus lyricist of power, Chris Tilling of Chrisendom, followed up Ben's original podcast with Gospel in Paul. On the last day of the month, Steven Harris of Theology and Biblical Studies adds a podcast (with transcript!) with Jesus and Guantanamo Bay.

Faith and Scholarship

It seems just about everyone is interacting with Michael Fox's SBL Forum Essay, Bible Scholarship and Faith-Based Study. I've stayed out of the way because I'm on the fringes of the academic realm due to my interests and occupation. I'm not a direct player. But this has been bouncing about the blogosphere so it is well worth mentioning here. At this point, though, rather than retrace the history of the interaction is it probably best to simply point to Danny Zacharias (deinde) who has tracked the discussion and indicated he'll be updating his blogger-cooler discussion on the topic as the discussion continues.

Archaeology

A common area of posting in the Biblical Studies realm has to do with archaeology of the ancient near east. February was no exception. Joe Cathey (Dr. Cathey's Blog) started us out with his Top Five Archaeological Finds for Hebrew Bible. He followed it shortly with his Research Bibliography - Tel Dan Stele. Then Jim Davila of PaleoJudaica.com got in the act providing us with a glimpse at how he would modify Joe's list.

This was only the beginning. Little did we know that Chris Heard of Higgaion was making lists, checking them twice, and listing all sorts of info about cool archaeological stuff. When the dust settled there were five Heardian lists of archaeological power: Of the making of lists there is no end, Part 1; Part 2; Part 3; Part 4; Part 5.

While we're talking about lists, it seems proper to mention (even though it isn't properly under this topic) Ben Myers' (Faith and Theology) final list for theologians: A list of his lists for Essential Theologians.

Back to Archaeology: There's Daily Hebrew with a post regarding the Gezer calendar, complete with photographs, transcription and translation.

Hebrew Bible

While we're in the area, a few posts in the realm of Hebrew Bible are worth mentioning. Tim Bulkeley of SansBlogue posted asking all sorts of questions regarding an article on Abraham for a "coffee table book on the Bible". There's so much to say, how to shove it all in to 3500 words? This was shortly after Claude Mariottini posted on The City of Abraham. Claude posted a follow-up to Tim's post that addressed some things Tim was pondering regarding historicity and how to approach this problem for the presentation in a coffee-table book. Interesting stuff. Tim provided a response concluding, essentially, that writing from a strict approach (e.g. maximalist or minimalist) would be relatively easy; but writing something that walks the fence for popular presentation is more difficult.

Next, Daily Hebrew blogs about Gomorrah. Now, this NT Greek student (i.e. Rico) doesn't follow much of this, but he follows enough to know whenever cognate languages are responsibly invoked, one should listen carefully. 

Elsewhere in Hebrew Bible, Tyler Williams of Codex Blogspot did his Valentine's Day duty with The Most Excellent of Songs (The Challenge of Translating Metaphors). Makes me wax poetic ... and no, I'm not saying that with a fake Scottish or Irish accent!

New Testament

Speaking of Valentine's Day, on the New Testament side Brandon Wason of Novum Testamentum filled the void and blogged some mighty fine bloggin' 'bout Love in the New Testament.

Even though love is the greatest (cf. 1Co 13.13), and even though (as John, Paul, George and Ringo would have us think) "All you need is love", there's more than that going on in the NT, and we need to be reminded of it. Mark Goodacre of NT Gateway Weblog brings us back with two posts on Historical Jesus studies: Forgotten Criteria, Post I, Post II.

Then we have Darrell Pursiful in the new-to-me blog Disert Paths blogging on The Nazoreans. He's got a six-post series on the topic (I, II, III, IV, V, VI) that you may want to check out.

Next is Richard H. Anderson of dokeo kago grapho soi kratistos theophilos, writing about The Fruits Theology of Matthew, considering use of the word "fruits" (6x in Mt) and its implications.

Propitiation is an important concept, so it is valuable to discuss. Suzanne McCarthy does just that in her post for the Better Bibles Blog on Propitiation. Loren Rosson (The Busybody) follows up and interacts with The Mercy Seat of Rom 3.25.

And let's not forget about AKMA and his Random Thoughts. His post Derogating the Divine discusses the issue of blasphemy. It's worth reading.

Pastoral Epistles

There was a decent amount of action in the area of the Pastoral Epistles, so much so that it warrants splitting it out from the section on the New Testament.

First, Ben Witherington treats us to an excerpt from his upcoming commentary on the Pastorals on 2Ti 3.16: On the Inspiration and Authority of Scripture.

But the big action was on that always controversial portion of First Timothy, 1Ti 2.15. It started with a post by Aaron O'Kelly of Aaron's Corner called Once More: Saved Through Childbearing. This was followed by David Ritsema on 1Ti 2.15. Rick Brannan of PastoralEpistles.com followed this up with some musings of his own, Saved by Childbirth in 1Ti 2.15 and a Follow-up. Somewhere between those two posts, Wayne Leman of Better Bibles Blog posted on the topic, and David Ritsema offered some more thoughts (here and here).

Ben Witherington adds his own thoughts on the topic in his post Literal Renderings of Texts of Contention.

Read them all, and especially the comments (especially on Ben Witherington's posts).  

Textual Criticism

The folks at the group blog Evangelical Textual Criticism have a few goodies for us this month as well. Peter M. Head posts about 0220 at Romans 5.1, complete with a cropped photo of the variant in question. It is a good reminder that getting a gander at the MS is always a good thing to try to do. One of the comments on that post led to another interesting post, with Peter M. Head posting for Ulrich Schmid, on Two Early Editions of the Pauline Corpus.

Just beating the end-of-February deadline, P. J. Williams of Evanagelical Textual Criticism posts on Inerrancy and Textual Criticism. Some interesting thoughts to consider. 

While the MSS that the gents at Evangelical Textual Criticism discuss are hundreds of years old, examiniation of MSS of a different origin has begun. Rick Brannan of ricoblog has posted samples of handwritten manuscripts that folks have submitted to him. His project is to acquire 8-10 copies of Second Timothy from volunteer scribes, collate the variants, and see what happens. 

Stephen C. Carlson of Hypotyposeis is also dealing with manuscripts again; this time with an SBL paper proposal about Archaic Mark. Carlson has suspicions about the manuscript. And you can check the manuscript yourself; P. J. Williams of Evangelical Textual Criticism posted a link to an article announcing the availability of digital images of Archaic Mark. You can see the images of Archaic Mark for yourself. (How cool is that?!)

Books and Book Reviews

It isn't a biblioblog review if we don't talk about books, right?

What better place to start than with Biblioblogdom's own Tim Bulkeley (SansBlogue) and the publication of his Hypertext Commentary on Amos? Congratulations, Tim!

Ben Witherington offers us a peek at what he's got in the hopper with A Preview of What's Next. I'm anxious for his work on the Pastorals (any chance of an advance copy to review? Please?) though the rest sounds pretty fab-o-riffic.

But we haven't talked about real books yet. You know, that are already published in print and available today. But Loren Rosson (The Busybody) has. He blogged about April DeConick's Recovering the Original Gospel of Thomas in his post The Rolling Gospel of Thomas. Stephen C. Carlson (Hypotyposeis) provides his own thoughts and interacts with Loren's review.

Loren is a busy reader. He's also posted a review of Social Science Commentary on the Letters of Paul. Make sure to check it out.

Humor and Other Things

There are just too many posts to categorize, so I decided to use a catch-all heading. We'll start out with one of the funnier posts of the month, from Stephen C. Carlson (Hypotyposeis) with his February 21 list of On This Day in Biblical Studies.

Moving from the humorous to the serious, Jim West (Petros Baptist Church) blogs about Why Biblical Scholars and Theologians Must Self-Publish.

From the serious to the mythic, Kevin P. Edgecomb (biblicalia) offers thoughts on Myth, Legend, Folklore.

From the mythic to the new, please take note of the new blog from David Croteau, Slave of the Word. David is a recent Ph.D. in New Testament from Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary and, from the looks of his blog has done some serious research in the realm of tithing. Be sure to give David's blog a look-see.

Addendum (2006-03-01)

With apologies to Jim Davila of PaleoJudaica.com, I've inadvertently left out a post of his that really should've been included: His notice of Professor Emeritus Robert Wilson's 90th birthday. Professor Wilson's work is all over — I happen to be reading through the New Testament Apocrypha volumes he edited and translated from Schneemelcher. Happiest birthday wishes and many happy returns, Professor Wilson!

Upcoming Biblical Studies Carnivals

Bibilical Studies Carnival IV (BSC:IV) will be hosted by Loren Rosson III at The Busybody in the first week of April, 2006. Look for a call for submissions on his blog soon.

Submissions (which should be blog entries posted in March 2006) for the next Biblical Studies Carnival may be emailed to biblical_studies_carnival [AT] hotmail.com or entered via the submission form provided by Blog Carnival here.

For information about the Biblical Studies Carnival please consult the Biblical Studies Carnival Homepage.

Cheers, all, and happy browsing!