Quote:
If a man were to be poisoned at 12:00, and then shot at 12:01, and he died at a hospital at 1:00, and no one performed an autopsy, people could fairly say "He was poisoned" and "He was shot."
There you go with your wild imagination again.
That has little to do with "hanged himself."Quote:
Matthew doesn't say "He hanged himself and this, and only this, immediately caused him to die."
"Hanged himself" implies method of death. You're just grasping at straws to reconcile these passages.
Quote:
One who had limited sources about the event he was mentioning.
"Limited sources"? I thought these were supposed to be the "Word of God." Didn't the big dude upstairs know what happened? Or are these writing really not god-breathed?
Quote:
But I don't grant that Judas is a "key character" for Luke.
One of Jesus' 12 disciples who betrayed him is not a key character? Jeez, Waterrock, you really do like to stretch things, don't you?
Quote:
"As Farmer Frank was decomposing in the field, vultures swarmed all over, and people have called that the Vultures' Field ever since."
We're not talking about Farmer Frank or vultures. We're talking about one of the key characters in the Gospel stories.
Quote:
Not if "prenes" means "swelling-up!" Do we see Luke use such a phrase elsewhere to describe someone falling? I don't think so.
Do we see Luke (or any other Bible writer, for that matter) use such a phrase elsewhere to describe something swelling up? I don't think so!
Quote:
It looks to me like Vine's is rather uncommitted, though hesitant to explicitly reject a traditional rendering of the word. At least the "swelling up" definition is mentioned.
"Swelling up" is mentioned, but qualified with "some ascribe" rather than just offering it as an alternative. That's not exactly strong support for it, now is it?
Quote:
Not only is this a simply point of etymology word-origin, but I'm willing to question whether there's really anything to the connection that Strong makes.
Anyone can be wrong, but, based on the various bits of info out there, I'm more willing to question whether there's really anything to the connection that YOU make.
Quote:
When I compare the treatment of "prenes" to the treatment of other words, it sure looks like the alternative definition is in the main paragraph to me.
You're right. I copied from another writing without opening up Vine's book, and I *thought* that I remembered it being one of those things sub-noted, but I was wrong. I grant that. However, you cannot honestly deny that Vine's includes it in a way that strongly implies that it is not a very likely alternative (qualifying it with "some ascribe," rather than stating it as a real alternative).
Quote:
As I mentioned, however mystifying Papias' comment may be in other respects, it's "at least a little bit relevant" because it refers to Judas as being swelled-up, which seems to be a trace of the early understanding of "prenes."
Papias was obviously a quack! And, as Franciscan Monkey pointed out, "Papias' comments could have been the impetus for the mistranslation of prenes as 'swelled up.'"
Have a good day. Gotta get to work......
"As for the truth, it seems like we just pick a theory." -- Emily Saliers of Indigo Girls
