Comments on: Runge’s Critique of Porter http://www.sakeoftruth.com/2010/03/runges-critique-of-porter/ Biblical Studies, Exegesis, Theology, etc. by Josh Mann Thu, 08 Dec 2011 17:58:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Josh Mann http://www.sakeoftruth.com/2010/03/runges-critique-of-porter/comment-page-1/#comment-2221 Josh Mann Thu, 18 Mar 2010 20:05:28 +0000 http://www.sakeoftruth.com/?p=1194#comment-2221 Thanks for the link, Mike! Thanks for the link, Mike!

]]> By: Mike Aubrey http://www.sakeoftruth.com/2010/03/runges-critique-of-porter/comment-page-1/#comment-2210 Mike Aubrey Wed, 17 Mar 2010 16:42:41 +0000 http://www.sakeoftruth.com/?p=1194#comment-2210 Josh, you should check out Steve's paper on the historical present from SBL, which puts forth a very strong case for understanding tense as a valid category using the very same data Rod Decker used in his monograph/dissertation to argued that it wasn't. http://www.ntdiscourse.org/publications/ Josh, you should check out Steve’s paper on the historical present from SBL, which puts forth a very strong case for understanding tense as a valid category using the very same data Rod Decker used in his monograph/dissertation to argued that it wasn’t.

http://www.ntdiscourse.org/publications/

]]> By: Josh Mann http://www.sakeoftruth.com/2010/03/runges-critique-of-porter/comment-page-1/#comment-2196 Josh Mann Tue, 16 Mar 2010 02:29:32 +0000 http://www.sakeoftruth.com/?p=1194#comment-2196 Ahh, I've been imprecise... I actually meant to refer to a grammar seminar in my PhD program in the above post. Even so, I was also present at the SBL seminar which was enjoyable. In both experiences, the same question comes to the fore of my mind: Its answer determines in large part the outcome. Ahh, I’ve been imprecise… I actually meant to refer to a grammar seminar in my PhD program in the above post. Even so, I was also present at the SBL seminar which was enjoyable. In both experiences, the same question comes to the fore of my mind: Its answer determines in large part the outcome.

]]> By: Steve Runge http://www.sakeoftruth.com/2010/03/runges-critique-of-porter/comment-page-1/#comment-2195 Steve Runge Tue, 16 Mar 2010 02:20:22 +0000 http://www.sakeoftruth.com/?p=1194#comment-2195 FWIW, I spoke at some length with Campbell in New Orleans, and he wanted to make it clear that he does not disavow temporal semantics in the indicative. However, I think that the course of argumentation he has taken has made it hard to see much of a difference between his position and that of Porter or Decker. Sorry to have missed you as SBL, I presented a paper in the Linguistics and Biblical Hebrew section during the Verbal Aspect section. Would have been nice to be there and heard all of the papers. I have not seen Porter's or Campbell's. FWIW, I spoke at some length with Campbell in New Orleans, and he wanted to make it clear that he does not disavow temporal semantics in the indicative. However, I think that the course of argumentation he has taken has made it hard to see much of a difference between his position and that of Porter or Decker. Sorry to have missed you as SBL, I presented a paper in the Linguistics and Biblical Hebrew section during the Verbal Aspect section. Would have been nice to be there and heard all of the papers. I have not seen Porter’s or Campbell’s.

]]>