0
Keroro Posted 16 years ago
Grammar
More telling of
Hi, I don't understand the meaning of the sentence: "Perhaps more telling of one who begins the letter by referring himself as a slave is the denial of our only Master" in the following paragraph, which is an excerpt from a commentary on the Letter of Jude 4: "For certain intruders have stolen in among you, people who long ago were designated for this condemnation as ungodly, who pervert the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ."
The level of invective is high and tends to overwhelm other dynamics in the text. But behind the invective we find social and cultural values, values important to Jude but apparently not to his opponents, or perhaps more accurately, values of not sharing them is damning indeed. That the opponents are referred to as "intruders" who have "stolen in" is more than name-calling. It is evidence of a premium placed on honesty, openness, and a propriety of place. To be out of place is to be impure, polluted. The value of the ancient over the new and the importance of prophetic anticipation are clear, as are the place and value of grace, and the cultural rejection of "licentiousness." Perhaps more telling of one who begins the letter by referring himself as a "slave" is the denial of "our only Master," which in sociocultural terms is a repudiation of appropriate social roles within the community of believers.
Could anybody help? Thanks!
The level of invective is high and tends to overwhelm other dynamics in the text. But behind the invective we find social and cultural values, values important to Jude but apparently not to his opponents, or perhaps more accurately, values of not sharing them is damning indeed. That the opponents are referred to as "intruders" who have "stolen in" is more than name-calling. It is evidence of a premium placed on honesty, openness, and a propriety of place. To be out of place is to be impure, polluted. The value of the ancient over the new and the importance of prophetic anticipation are clear, as are the place and value of grace, and the cultural rejection of "licentiousness." Perhaps more telling of one who begins the letter by referring himself as a "slave" is the denial of "our only Master," which in sociocultural terms is a repudiation of appropriate social roles within the community of believers.
Could anybody help? Thanks!
Top answer
) The implication is that you cannot have a slave without a master. ) The sentence order may make it difficult to parse. Perhaps his denial of our only Master speaks more about this guy than does [the prior context], since he refers to himself as a slave.
- ) The implication is that you cannot have a slave without a master.
- ) The sentence order may make it difficult to parse.
- Perhaps his denial of our only Master speaks more about this guy than does [the prior context], since he refers to himself as a slave.
- Obviously, the person being criticized disagrees with the author of your example about the existence of ***.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
3 Answers
0
Keroro "Perhaps more telling of one who begins the letter by referring himself as a slave is the denial of our only Master"His stated position is that there is only one master (presumably, ***.)
He is poking criticism at a certain writer who calls himself a slave, yet in other writing denies the existence of the
00
0
Related Questions