Johannine Comma and Georgios Babiniotis - Revision history

Nick at 03:02, 4 July 2021

2021-07-04T03:02:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:02, 4 July 2021
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''Voulgaris Vindicated by Leading Greek Expert'''		'''Voulgaris Vindicated by Leading Greek Expert'''

	Most critical text proponents don't even engage in the grammatical issues surrounding the Johannine Comma, and those who do, such as Barry ~~Hoffstetter~~, or James White, only reveal that they are not adequately informed about this issue.		Most critical text proponents don't even engage in the grammatical issues surrounding the Johannine Comma, and those who do, such as Barry Hofstetter, or James White, only reveal that they are not adequately informed about this issue.

	In an email discussion with Professor Georgios Babiniotis a few months ago, I asked him about the validity of the claims of legendary Greek professor Eugenius Voulgaris concerning the Johannine Comma. Those familiar with the grammatical arguments made by Voulgaris will be pleased to know that Babiniotis, who is probably one of the most important Greek linguists alive today, said that not only was Voulgaris correct to say we need to keep the Comma for grammatical reasons, and he also took it a step further by pointing out that verse 7 justifies verse 8 because of the “syntactic parallelism” of these two verses.		In an email discussion with Professor Georgios Babiniotis a few months ago, I asked him about the validity of the claims of legendary Greek professor Eugenius Voulgaris concerning the Johannine Comma. Those familiar with the grammatical arguments made by Voulgaris will be pleased to know that Babiniotis, who is probably one of the most important Greek linguists alive today, said that not only was Voulgaris correct to say we need to keep the Comma for grammatical reasons, and he also took it a step further by pointing out that verse 7 justifies verse 8 because of the “syntactic parallelism” of these two verses.

	Babiniotis is a Greek linguist and philologist who has written several books about Greek grammar, etymology, and other Greek language-related topics. He is the former Minister of Education and Religious Affairs of Greece and previously served as rector of Athens University.		Babiniotis is a Greek linguist and philologist who has written several books about Greek grammar, etymology, and other Greek language-related topics. He is the former Minister of Education and Religious Affairs of Greece and previously served as rector of Athens University.

	As David Crystal is to English-speaking people, so Georgios Babiniotis is to the Greek speaker. Here are some of the books he has written here: https://babiniotis.gr/ergografia/vivlia.		As David Crystal is to English-speaking people, so Georgios Babiniotis is to the Greek speaker. Here are some of the books he has written here: https://babiniotis.gr/ergografia/vivlia.

Line 13:		Line 14:

	:“...Dear Mr Sayers,		:“...Dear Mr Sayers,

	:I apologize that only now I can answer your kind letter about the N.T. passage discussed by Ευγένιος Βούλγαρης.		:I apologize that only now I can answer your kind letter about the N.T. passage discussed by Ευγένιος Βούλγαρης.

	:Here is my opinion as a linguist, not as an expert in theology.		:Here is my opinion as a linguist, not as an expert in theology.

	:Γ. Μπαμπινιώτης...”		:Γ. Μπαμπινιώτης...”

	(Word Doc):		(Word Doc):

	:I will not discuss the opinion of the really great theologist and scholar (yet not a linguist) bishop Ευγένιος Βούλγαρης as I do not know on what conditions it was formulated. However, linguistically —though with another explanation— Ευγένιος Βούλγαρης is right to consider verse 5.7 obligatory for the existence of verse 5.8.		:I will not discuss the opinion of the really great theologist and scholar (yet not a linguist) bishop Ευγένιος Βούλγαρης as I do not know on what conditions it was formulated. However, linguistically —though with another explanation— Ευγένιος Βούλγαρης is right to consider verse 5.7 obligatory for the existence of verse 5.8.
	:What you are asking has two aspects: a theological and a linguistic one. I can only say my own opinion on the linguistic aspect of the specific text within the frame of what is quite often used in regard to the Greek language and passages of New Testament Greek.
			:What you are asking has two aspects: a theological and a linguistic one. I can only say my own opinion <u>on the linguistic aspect</u> of the specific text within the frame of what is quite often used in regard to the Greek language and passages of New Testament Greek.

	:The use of masculine gender and not neuter on 5.8.		:The use of masculine gender and not neuter on 5.8.
	:«καὶ τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες ἐν τῇ γῇ,
	:τὸ Πνεῦμα καὶ τὸ ὕδωρ καὶ τὸ αἷμα		:''«καὶ '''τρεῖς''' εἰσιν οἱ '''μαρτυροῦντες''' ἐν τῇ γῇ,''
	:καὶ οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἕν εἰσιν»
	:is linguistically justified on the pattern of “syntactic parallelism”, i.e. on the ground that it makes a pattern completely the same (“parallel”) in structure with that of 5.7.		:''τὸ Πνεῦμα καὶ τὸ ὕδωρ καὶ τὸ αἷμα''
	:ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ,
	:ὁ Πατήρ, ὁ Λόγος καὶ τὸ Ἅγιον Πνεῦμα		:''καὶ '''οἱ τρεῖς''' εἰς τὸ ἕν εἰσιν»''
	:καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν είσι
	:So for Modern Linguistic analysis what is important is not the mere grammatical “gender agreement rule” (which would lead to the usage of neuter gender : «καὶ τρία εἰσὶ τὰ μαρτυροῦντα ἐν τῇ γῇ…»), but the overruling schema of “syntactic parallelism” which is much more stronger than a simple gender agreement rule.		:is linguistically justified on the pattern of '''<u>“syntactic parallelism”</u>''', i.e. on the ground that it makes a pattern '''completely the same (“parallel”) in structure''' with that of 5.7.
	:Conclusion. The issue we refer to has more to do with the linguistic style of the passage; it is the result of a stylistic selection which is far beyond the usage of a grammatical/syntactic rule that would lead to neuter gender and which furthermore would eliminate verse 5.7.
			:''ὅτι '''τρεῖς''' εἰσιν '''οἱ μαρτυροῦντες''' ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ,''

			:''ὁ Πατήρ, ὁ Λόγος καὶ τὸ Ἅγιον Πνεῦμα''

			:''καὶ οὗτοι '''οἱ τρεῖς''' ἕν είσι''

			:So for Modern Linguistic analysis what is important is not the mere grammatical “gender agreement rule” (which would lead to the usage of <u>neuter</u> gender : ''«καὶ '''τρία''' εἰσὶ '''τὰ μαρτυροῦντα''' ἐν τῇ γῇ…»''), but the overruling schema of “syntactic parallelism” which is much more stronger than a simple gender agreement rule.

			:'''Conclusion'''. The issue we refer to has more to do with '''the linguistic style''' of the passage; it is the result of a '''stylistic selection''' which is far beyond the usage of a grammatical/syntactic rule that would lead to neuter gender and which furthermore would eliminate verse 5.7.

	(End of word doc)		(End of word doc)

	George later said in an email:		George later said in an email:

	:“...I have given you my own linguistic explanation which is to keep verse 5.7. which justifies verse 5.8. It is grammatical and mainly “syntactic parallelism” of these two verses...”		:“...I have given you my own linguistic explanation which is to keep verse 5.7. which justifies verse 5.8. It is grammatical and mainly “syntactic parallelism” of these two verses...”

	:So I hereby challenge those of the Anglo Sanhedrin who desire to delete the Comma, such as James White, Dan Wallace, Barry Hofstetter, James Snapp Jr, Stephen Boyce, Bill Brown, Bart Ehrman, Elijah Hixson, etc, to refute the claims of this top Greek linguist, who has basically just confirmed that the Greek grammatical argumentation that myself (Nick Sayers), Steven Avery, Will Kinney, Edward Hill, Jack Moorman, and many other TR/KJV people hold to, is not only correct but that the Comma is also linguistically justified on the pattern of “syntactic parallelism”.		:So I hereby challenge those of the Anglo Sanhedrin who desire to delete the Comma, such as James White, Dan Wallace, Barry Hofstetter, James Snapp Jr, Stephen Boyce, Bill Brown, Bart Ehrman, Elijah Hixson, etc, to refute the claims of this top Greek linguist, who has basically just confirmed that the Greek grammatical argumentation that myself (Nick Sayers), Steven Avery, Will Kinney, Edward Hill, Jack Moorman, and many other TR/KJV people hold to, is not only correct but that the Comma is also linguistically justified on the pattern of “syntactic parallelism”.

			{{Article Index Johannine Comma}}
			{{Donate}}

Nick: New page: '''Voulgaris Vindicated by Leading Greek Expert''' Most critical text proponents don't even engage in the grammatical issues surrounding the Johannine Comma, and those who do, such as Bar...

2021-07-04T02:52:01Z

New page: '''Voulgaris Vindicated by Leading Greek Expert''' Most critical text proponents don't even engage in the grammatical issues surrounding the Johannine Comma, and those who do, such as Bar...

New page

'''Voulgaris Vindicated by Leading Greek Expert'''

Most critical text proponents don't even engage in the grammatical issues surrounding the Johannine Comma, and those who do, such as Barry Hoffstetter, or James White, only reveal that they are not adequately informed about this issue.

In an email discussion with Professor Georgios Babiniotis a few months ago, I asked him about the validity of the claims of legendary Greek professor Eugenius Voulgaris concerning the Johannine Comma. Those familiar with the grammatical arguments made by Voulgaris will be pleased to know that Babiniotis, who is probably one of the most important Greek linguists alive today, said that not only was Voulgaris correct to say we need to keep the Comma for grammatical reasons, and he also took it a step further by pointing out that verse 7 justifies verse 8 because of the “syntactic parallelism” of these two verses.

Babiniotis is a Greek linguist and philologist who has written several books about Greek grammar, etymology, and other Greek language-related topics. He is the former Minister of Education and Religious Affairs of Greece and previously served as rector of Athens University.
As David Crystal is to English-speaking people, so Georgios Babiniotis is to the Greek speaker. Here are some of the books he has written here: https://babiniotis.gr/ergografia/vivlia.

You may know of Babiniotis from his Greek dictionary which is often simply called the "Babiniotis" dictionary.

In May he wrote the following and attached a word doc:

:“...Dear Mr Sayers,
:I apologize that only now I can answer your kind letter about the N.T. passage discussed by Ευγένιος Βούλγαρης.
:Here is my opinion as a linguist, not as an expert in theology.
:Γ. Μπαμπινιώτης...”
(Word Doc):
:I will not discuss the opinion of the really great theologist and scholar (yet not a linguist) bishop Ευγένιος Βούλγαρης as I do not know on what conditions it was formulated. However, linguistically —though with another explanation— Ευγένιος Βούλγαρης is right to consider verse 5.7 obligatory for the existence of verse 5.8.
:What you are asking has two aspects: a theological and a linguistic one. I can only say my own opinion on the linguistic aspect of the specific text within the frame of what is quite often used in regard to the Greek language and passages of New Testament Greek.
:The use of masculine gender and not neuter on 5.8.
:«καὶ τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες ἐν τῇ γῇ,
:τὸ Πνεῦμα καὶ τὸ ὕδωρ καὶ τὸ αἷμα
:καὶ οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἕν εἰσιν»
:is linguistically justified on the pattern of “syntactic parallelism”, i.e. on the ground that it makes a pattern completely the same (“parallel”) in structure with that of 5.7.
:ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ,
:ὁ Πατήρ, ὁ Λόγος καὶ τὸ Ἅγιον Πνεῦμα
:καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν είσι
:So for Modern Linguistic analysis what is important is not the mere grammatical “gender agreement rule” (which would lead to the usage of neuter gender : «καὶ τρία εἰσὶ τὰ μαρτυροῦντα ἐν τῇ γῇ…»), but the overruling schema of “syntactic parallelism” which is much more stronger than a simple gender agreement rule.
:Conclusion. The issue we refer to has more to do with the linguistic style of the passage; it is the result of a stylistic selection which is far beyond the usage of a grammatical/syntactic rule that would lead to neuter gender and which furthermore would eliminate verse 5.7.
(End of word doc)

George later said in an email:
:“...I have given you my own linguistic explanation which is to keep verse 5.7. which justifies verse 5.8. It is grammatical and mainly “syntactic parallelism” of these two verses...”
:So I hereby challenge those of the Anglo Sanhedrin who desire to delete the Comma, such as James White, Dan Wallace, Barry Hofstetter, James Snapp Jr, Stephen Boyce, Bill Brown, Bart Ehrman, Elijah Hixson, etc, to refute the claims of this top Greek linguist, who has basically just confirmed that the Greek grammatical argumentation that myself (Nick Sayers), Steven Avery, Will Kinney, Edward Hill, Jack Moorman, and many other TR/KJV people hold to, is not only correct but that the Comma is also linguistically justified on the pattern of “syntactic parallelism”.