It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Regarding of using the present form for things pertaining to the Divinity, I disagree. The confession in the Liturgy of St Basil says, `mpe tefme;nou] vwrj `ntefmetrwmi (His divinity never parted from his humanity). This is clearly the past tense. Just thought I clear that up.
This may not be the topic of this thread but I wanted to assure that Bikhristos afdonf is accurate and not some mistranslation.
re you saying that Remnkemi is incorrect in the information he provided about verb forms? Are you saying that I am incorrect in suggesting that Coptic was not the language that the Alexandrian Orthodox community chose to generally communicate theology in?
imikhail, your translation of the Coptic seems different to Remnkemi, and to the scholarly translator of the Coptic New Testament.
And if it is reflexive then could it not just be an emphasiser that it is Christ Himself who has risen or is risen.
In regard to this phrase, what are you trying to suggest is conveyed by your translation Christ arose himself? How is this more subtle than any number of English phrases and how can you know the subtle meaning of any Coptic phrase beyond the usual translation of a grammatical form?
Indeed how can any modern reader of Coptic be aware of the subtle nuances of Coptic, or any other nearly dormant languag
If I recall correctly, it is possible to say aftwn without the last f, that would simply mean that Christ rose. I think that the last f, the reflexive part, adds 'himself' to Christ rose himself.
The first is an example of rising. In fact, the man rose by himself, without any help. Then I'm wondering why the added f is missing. Why is there no emphasizing?