<<That you would argue for a denotative meaning for MONOGENES as "beloved" on
these grounds is truly remarkable. There is nothing to suggest that Paul is
simply describing Isaac in his own terms. If I were referring to someone
else's child, who was dearly loved and only-begotten, how is it that I cannot
refer to that child as "dearly loved," and my wife refer to him as
"only-begotten," without establishing a semantic equivalence between the
these descriptions?>>
The second sentence should have read, "There is nothing to suggest that Paul
is [not]simply describing Isaac in his own terms," or simply, "Paul is likely
describing Isaac in his own terms." Sorry for the confusion. I know I said I
read my post over carefully, but that was primarily to check its "tone." I
got in so late that I didn't even have time to spell check it. I'll take the
extra time to do so in the future.
Apok