Saturday, July 14, 2007
Thursday, July 12, 2007
Composition or Not?
While I attempt to figure out how to do unicoding (if this is a true word), let me talk about our most recent NT Greek course which just ended less than two weeks ago. It was my second time around teaching the course at The Master’s College for the degree completion program.
I was quite satisfied with the progress of this class. At the end of their 16th week, they were working at a level far beyond the point I was at the end of my 16th week of beginning Greek. This I attribute to the fact that going through Machen’s grammar, I challenged them to do the English to Greek composition exercises for homework each week, with special attention given to accenting. I mostly required them to translate English to Greek exercises since I felt the Greek composition exercises would trump anything they could learn by merely translating Greek into English on a weekly basis.
I am a firm believer that learning accents must be an integral part of beginning Greek and that composition cannot exist without it. Unfortunately I didn’t learn accents until the second year of seminary when I finally hit a brick wall and my learning could go no further without conquering “the beast.” I was able to get by for several years without them, but it was detrimental to my grasp of the language.
Excluding composition from beginning Greek is common place around the theological circles I’ve been in these last several years. When I was a beginning student, it wasn’t required, much less learning the accents. Mounce’s popular grammar excludes it entirely. Wherefore, future generations of theological students will not have a command of the language anywhere near as strong as their secular counterparts in classics programs, which, to my knowledge, all require composition studies.
“What’s the big deal about composition if all I want to do is translate the New Testament?” People ask this question quite often. In reply, I have a quote from Charles E. Bennett writing in The Teaching of Latin in the Secondary School. Though he addresses the importance of Latin composition, the principles apply to Greek as well:
Before making any comments upon this exercise, let us get well before us, if we can, the purpose of Latin composition. Why is it to be studied in the schools? What does it accomplish? The field may be partially cleared by stating, first, what it does not accomplish, at least in the school, namely, an ability to write continuous Latin with fluency and ease. Whatever be the purpose of the study, it cannot be that. For I am convinced no one ever does learn to write Latin of this kind in the school by any method of study yet devised, despite the occasional prescription of an ability to write simple Latin prose in the entrance requirements of our colleges. In fact, even in the college itself the ability to compose continuous Latin prose is a capacity acquired by but few, --chiefly those who specialize somewhat carefully in that classical field.
What, then, is the purpose and function of Latin composition in the secondary school? So far as reason and experience enable me to judge, the study of Latin composition is primarily intended to increase the accuracy, breadth, and certainty of the pupil’s grammatical knowledge, --more particularly his knowledge of syntax. He first learns the Subjunctive of Purpose, let us say, or the Gerundive construction, by learning to recognize these idioms when he meets them in his reading. But this is only partial knowledge. A completer knowledge of the Subjunctive of Purpose or the Gerundive construction is acquired when the pupil learns to employ these in actual phrases of his own making. He then sees these constructions from a new side, and a practical side. The act of constructing sentences which contain these, fixes his mind more intently upon the construction than ever before. His knowledge of it is fuller and surer. Hence it is primarily as contributory to a better knowledge of the grammar, that the study of Latin composition is of value.
I was quite satisfied with the progress of this class. At the end of their 16th week, they were working at a level far beyond the point I was at the end of my 16th week of beginning Greek. This I attribute to the fact that going through Machen’s grammar, I challenged them to do the English to Greek composition exercises for homework each week, with special attention given to accenting. I mostly required them to translate English to Greek exercises since I felt the Greek composition exercises would trump anything they could learn by merely translating Greek into English on a weekly basis.
I am a firm believer that learning accents must be an integral part of beginning Greek and that composition cannot exist without it. Unfortunately I didn’t learn accents until the second year of seminary when I finally hit a brick wall and my learning could go no further without conquering “the beast.” I was able to get by for several years without them, but it was detrimental to my grasp of the language.
Excluding composition from beginning Greek is common place around the theological circles I’ve been in these last several years. When I was a beginning student, it wasn’t required, much less learning the accents. Mounce’s popular grammar excludes it entirely. Wherefore, future generations of theological students will not have a command of the language anywhere near as strong as their secular counterparts in classics programs, which, to my knowledge, all require composition studies.
“What’s the big deal about composition if all I want to do is translate the New Testament?” People ask this question quite often. In reply, I have a quote from Charles E. Bennett writing in The Teaching of Latin in the Secondary School. Though he addresses the importance of Latin composition, the principles apply to Greek as well:
Before making any comments upon this exercise, let us get well before us, if we can, the purpose of Latin composition. Why is it to be studied in the schools? What does it accomplish? The field may be partially cleared by stating, first, what it does not accomplish, at least in the school, namely, an ability to write continuous Latin with fluency and ease. Whatever be the purpose of the study, it cannot be that. For I am convinced no one ever does learn to write Latin of this kind in the school by any method of study yet devised, despite the occasional prescription of an ability to write simple Latin prose in the entrance requirements of our colleges. In fact, even in the college itself the ability to compose continuous Latin prose is a capacity acquired by but few, --chiefly those who specialize somewhat carefully in that classical field.
What, then, is the purpose and function of Latin composition in the secondary school? So far as reason and experience enable me to judge, the study of Latin composition is primarily intended to increase the accuracy, breadth, and certainty of the pupil’s grammatical knowledge, --more particularly his knowledge of syntax. He first learns the Subjunctive of Purpose, let us say, or the Gerundive construction, by learning to recognize these idioms when he meets them in his reading. But this is only partial knowledge. A completer knowledge of the Subjunctive of Purpose or the Gerundive construction is acquired when the pupil learns to employ these in actual phrases of his own making. He then sees these constructions from a new side, and a practical side. The act of constructing sentences which contain these, fixes his mind more intently upon the construction than ever before. His knowledge of it is fuller and surer. Hence it is primarily as contributory to a better knowledge of the grammar, that the study of Latin composition is of value.
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
Wednesday, July 04, 2007
Under Construction
Hi everyone.
I've just realized that the Greek text is coming out in gibberish. I'm gonna have to find a new font to use. I may have some ideas, but if anyone has a suggestion, please let me know. I previously used BibleWorks Greek, but it would only appear right on a computer with this font already installed.
I've just realized that the Greek text is coming out in gibberish. I'm gonna have to find a new font to use. I may have some ideas, but if anyone has a suggestion, please let me know. I previously used BibleWorks Greek, but it would only appear right on a computer with this font already installed.
Friday, June 22, 2007
"Rapture" not in the Bible?
Often times, whether in internet chat rooms long ago or personal conversations, I’ve heard the claim that the word “rapture” is not in the Bible. And I confess if reading the English Bible alone, one will likely not find the word “rapture.” It actually isn’t an English word in origin. It comes from the Latin rapio, and this word is in the Bible—although in the Vulgate edition. As the text in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 states:
deinde nos qui vivimus qui relinquimur simul rapiemur cum illis in nubibus obviam Domino in aera et sic semper cum Domino erimusThe Latin rapiemur is simply a conjugated form of rapio and corresponds to ἁρπαγησόμεθα as appearing in the Greek New Testament of this same verse:
ἔπειτα ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες οἱ περιλειπόμενοι ἅμα σὺν αὐτοῖς ἁρπαγησόμεθα ἐν νεφέλαις εἰς ἀπάντησιν τοῦ κυρίου εἰς αέρα· καὶ οὕτως πάντοτε σὺν κυρίῳ ἐσόμεθα.
The King James Bible rendered it as such: "Then we which are alive and remail shall be caught up together with them in the coulds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord."
The King James Bible rendered it as such: "Then we which are alive and remail shall be caught up together with them in the coulds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord."
Therefore, the rapture is simply the “catching away” into the clouds that 1 Thessalonians 4:17 describes—this is where the concept appears in Scripture. And it is specifically called “rapture” according to the Latin version.
Monday, June 18, 2007
Friday, June 15, 2007
Why "Philology without Mercy"?
In case you're wondering about the strange name for this blog, let me explain. When I was at Army bootcamp, the Drill Sergeant would ask the company, "Delta Company, what makes the green grass grow?" Our reply was: "Blood, blood, blood makes the green grass grow!"
When we entered into the bayonet phase of our basic combat training, the Drill Sergeant would then ask the question: "Delta Company, what's the spirit of the bayonet?" Our reply in one accord was, "Kill, kill, kill without mercy! Hooah!!" It was almost like being at a football rally in high school in which everyone cheered in unison, "We've got spirit, yes we do; we've got spirit, how about you?" Yes, soldier's yell stuff like cheerleaders to keep themselves motivated through all the grunt work of combat training.
After bootcamp, I headed off to the Armed Forces School of Music to study trumpet performance in preparation for my MOS as a bandsman. There one of the saxophone instructors had a sign on his office door with a unique twist: "Jazz without mercy!"
I have since adopted this concept into my syllabus for a Greek course I teach at Master's College to define my philosophy of education: "Greek without mercy!" Furthermore, it is now the name of my blog.
When we entered into the bayonet phase of our basic combat training, the Drill Sergeant would then ask the question: "Delta Company, what's the spirit of the bayonet?" Our reply in one accord was, "Kill, kill, kill without mercy! Hooah!!" It was almost like being at a football rally in high school in which everyone cheered in unison, "We've got spirit, yes we do; we've got spirit, how about you?" Yes, soldier's yell stuff like cheerleaders to keep themselves motivated through all the grunt work of combat training.
After bootcamp, I headed off to the Armed Forces School of Music to study trumpet performance in preparation for my MOS as a bandsman. There one of the saxophone instructors had a sign on his office door with a unique twist: "Jazz without mercy!"
I have since adopted this concept into my syllabus for a Greek course I teach at Master's College to define my philosophy of education: "Greek without mercy!" Furthermore, it is now the name of my blog.
Friday, June 16, 2006
Homer and the New Testament
Having studied through A.T. Robertson's A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research page-by-page, I sensed a value in studying Greek outside of the NT in order to understand the Greek in the NT. Clyde Pharr provided valuable insight to this importance:
It is generally recognized that for the best results in the study of the New Testament, students should read a considerable amount of other Greek first. In the whole circle of Greek literature the two authors most important for the student of the New Testament are Homer and Plato. Herodotus informs us that Homer and Hesiod were the chief sources of the Greek popular religion; and certainly one cannot obtain a clear grasp of the forces opposed to Christianity without a good knowledge of Homer and of the hold that Homer had upon the popular mind. If one is to read intelligently the works of the early church fathers, he must be well acquainted at first hand with Homer. It is Homer, Homer's religion, and Homer's gods which recur constantly in their works and which are attacked over and over again as being the bulwarks of the heathen faith which they are striving to supplant. Homer and the ideas he represents are infinitely more important for the student of the New Testament and of the early church than is Xenophon; and if one can study not more than a year or so of Greek before taking up the New Testament, he should by all means have some Homer followed by Plato. Experience has shown that after a year of Homer, students can and do pass with little difficulty into the New Testament. The passage from Homer to Attic, or to Hellenistic, Greek is of course a great deal easier than vice versa, and occupies very little time and effort (Homeric Greek: A Book for Beginners, xxx).
It is generally recognized that for the best results in the study of the New Testament, students should read a considerable amount of other Greek first. In the whole circle of Greek literature the two authors most important for the student of the New Testament are Homer and Plato. Herodotus informs us that Homer and Hesiod were the chief sources of the Greek popular religion; and certainly one cannot obtain a clear grasp of the forces opposed to Christianity without a good knowledge of Homer and of the hold that Homer had upon the popular mind. If one is to read intelligently the works of the early church fathers, he must be well acquainted at first hand with Homer. It is Homer, Homer's religion, and Homer's gods which recur constantly in their works and which are attacked over and over again as being the bulwarks of the heathen faith which they are striving to supplant. Homer and the ideas he represents are infinitely more important for the student of the New Testament and of the early church than is Xenophon; and if one can study not more than a year or so of Greek before taking up the New Testament, he should by all means have some Homer followed by Plato. Experience has shown that after a year of Homer, students can and do pass with little difficulty into the New Testament. The passage from Homer to Attic, or to Hellenistic, Greek is of course a great deal easier than vice versa, and occupies very little time and effort (Homeric Greek: A Book for Beginners, xxx).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)