Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Yes, I understandBrennin said:Anyone who claims a¹rsenokoiðthv (arsenokoites) does not refer to homoeroticism is either ignorant/deluded or prevaricating; there is no other alternative.
So you are claiming that compound words in ancient greek are always reliably determined by their root parts?Brennin said:1) "The Shadow Minister" is not a compound word, nor is it Ancient Greek
Examples where words do follow their roots do nothing to prove the reliability of the rule - that's a very basic logical fallacy.2) Mailman, policeman, fireman, fisherman, newspaper, doghouse, etc.
ebia said:So you are claiming that compound words in ancient greek are always reliably determined by their root parts?
Examples where words do follow their roots do nothing to prove the reliability of the rule - that's a very basic logical fallacy.
ottaia said:Yes, I understand
Under - to be beneath something
Stand - to be upon ones feet
understand - to be on one's feet beneath something.
Oh, thank you! I am honored by your kind and loving words. Rather presumptuous of you to assume that I do not know Koine Greek.Brennin said:This discussion requires knowledge of Ancient Greek, not English. If you do not know Ancient Greek then do not let the thread's doorknob hit you on the way out.
ottaia said:If I had my books at home I woud have been sure to spell it right. Now that you know what I meant, you may follow the retraction.
Which is what I had typed.Brennin said:
Thanks for the retraction but for your edification it is sku/balon (skubalon).
[Or sku/bala (skubala)--Ancient Greek is an inflected language]
crazyfingers said:Why does this discussion matter at all?
ottaia said:Which is what I had typed.
An illustration is an illustration.Brennin said:I am claiming that you need to make recourse to Ancient Greek (as I have done) if you want to argue about an Ancient Greek word.
"More often than not" hardly consitutes definitive proof.The point is more often than not, the meaning of a compound word is based on its constituents - that's very basic, period.
Brennin said:(good writers use uncommon words and have even been known to invent words).
Brennin said:Novel or not, the definition of the word is plain
Polycarp1 said:The traditional meaning given to it by the Church and in translations is, certainly, clear. But the question is, is it what Paul meant? And various members have cited learned commentaries that suggest it had more to do with the male prostititution industry in Corinth than with what two homosexual people do.
ebia said:An illustration is an illustration.
"More often than not" hardly consitutes definitive proof.
Brennin said:Learned commentaries? I do not think so. Commentaries with an agenda is more like it.
Brennin said:I do not expect it would matter to an atheist. My atheist ex-gf had a similar reaction to a historical Jesus thread.
Then I guess this these also constituted a vacuous illustration:Brennin said:It is a vacuous illustration. Not only is the illustration from a different language, it is from an analytic language (as opposed to an inflected or synthetic language such as Ancient Greek).
Brennin said:2) Mailman, policeman, fireman, fisherman, newspaper, doghouse, etc.
Not as something to be relied upon, no.Since it is more often than not the case that the definition of a compound word is derived from its constituents, that should be the null hypothesis.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?