Hey @Dan, note that moving the thread to chat only picked up your and Pat's comments, not @swasheck 's. One of you will need to add those manually if they're still relevant. (You can just get the URL of each comment and add it as a stand-alone message to get the usual oneboxing; no need to cut/paste text.)
@Dan yeah, it's a limitation of the "move to chat" feature (been burned by that in the past). Other than manually creating a room and pasting everything in one at a time, there's no good solution. If there's anything that you think should be in there you could set it off somehow -- precede with an intro or the like.
@swasheck a heuristic methodology that uses NLP and supervised machine learning to identify criminal behavior in text messages
pretty much what I always write about :P
I just test different approaches/methods
next I will be using hidden markov models
to analyze context of conversation threads
then eventually another heuristic approach to tie it all together
@swasheck thanks!
I'm still torn on a few things, seriously considering translating 'patient endurance' as just 'patience'
and a few other things
But re:publications I think I'm gonna go the Ph.D. route next year, so decided I need to submit more stuff to journals to beef up publications section of my CV ;)
@Dan no. patient endurance is good. it brings out the sense of the word. i translated it as "militant endurance." it's not a "whatever happens, happens" but an acknowledgement that you absolutely must engage "self" to ensure the endurance
@Dan and that's all kinda born from your employment?
:10997080 some people have more faith in their favorite theologian than their God.
when the theologian is challenged, the challenged party falls back on the infallibility of God (but really the logic implies the infallibility of the theologian)
@swasheck I'm surprised how strongly Wallace pushes for the gnomic and continual sense of the present participle in 3:16 ("everyone who continually believes")
I don't feel the grammar lets us make that assertion that confidently
I think you could argue it with context and other passages
But not from grammatical and syntactical features alone
I would argue this is one area where he lets theological bias interfere
@swasheck it is probably somewhat of a moot point
Otherwise you run into issues in Romans 3:24 with δικαιούμενοι in my opinion
I could use the same argument to state we are continually being justified, it is not a one-time deal
(an argument I am willing to make, but for Wallace this is an inconsistency)
The post-positive conjunction γὰρ in John 3:16 clues us in that there is some preceding context which this passage logically follows. Thus we must also look at vv. 14-15 before returning to v. 16.
Context
Καὶ καθὼς Μωϋσῆς ὕψωσεν τὸν ὄφιν ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ, οὕτως ὑψωθῆναι δεῖ τὸν
υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπ...
@MonicaCellio @swasheck it may actually be a let-down, most of the interesting rabbit holes are not written in the answer (why write about it if I'm not willing to pursue it and clarify it?). I only mention one such rabbit trail since I think it is very important to the question but don't have time to answer it at this time
@Dan wow, you wrote a lot already; I can understand why you wanted to just stop. :-) Thanks for the link, which I hope to digest this evening.
. Hey all. I just posted the following on meta and would like to draw some attention to it. It's time to rename the site as previously discussed. Please help.
We should just change it now. The current name is neither attracting knowledgable people nor educating new users. Biblical Studies has overwhelming support (by the standards of this site). Yes, there are some unresolved issues, but we shouldn't block on them any more. This change can only help.
@Dan y'know, on reflection I should have just edited more justification into yours. I started to edit my existing answer, then decided it was enough of a change that I shouldn't carry the votes, so created a new one... not quite noticing yours in the process. Sorry! I'm fine with merging.
@swasheck now only imagine if I went into a discussion of aktionsart vs. lexical aspect (a la Wallace vs. Porter). If I also did a proper lit review and found who is on which side for lots of scholars, plus teased out and broke down every similar construction and supporting use, not to mention instances where πᾶς is (or isn't) used as a substantive - this would quickly become a 50+ page paper
I had to leave a lot out
including a discussion of the meaning of the present tense itself
The post-positive conjunction γὰρ in John 3:16 clues us in that there is some preceding context which this passage logically follows. Thus we must also look at vv. 14-15 before returning to v. 16.
Context
Καὶ καθὼς Μωϋσῆς ὕψωσεν τὸν ὄφιν ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ, οὕτως ὑψωθῆναι δεῖ τὸν
υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπ...
We should just change it now. The current name is neither attracting knowledgable people nor educating new users. Biblical Studies has overwhelming support (by the standards of this site). Yes, there are some unresolved issues, but we shouldn't block on them any more. This change can only help.
The Library
The Library