>Dear Rolf,
>
>Greetings. I've had a too-long absence from b-greek and just returned,
>and so I missed the history of this thread.
>
> You wrote:
>>(1) I view HN in John 1:1 as only indicating the existence (a
>>state) of the Word in "the beginning" and there are no lexical,
>>grammatical or syntacical reasons justifying the conclusion that
>>the Word is eternal. Do you agree?
>
>You raise a question that I too have pondered after reading the NIV
>Bible Commentary on John 1:1, which emphasizes that HN means eternal
>past here....<snip>
Hi Wes !
I think that you'll find that the more careful commentators choose
HN to refer to pre-temporal existence *not* because EIMI automatically
means that (which, of course, it doesn't, as you pointed out with the
John 2:1 example), but because: (1) John tends to use ARXH to refer
to pre-temporal existence (cmp., the Johnannine references in the
section of BAGD with John 1:1 to the other uses; eg., John 8:44),
(2) the contrast between EIMI and GINOMAI in vv 1-14, and (3)
the picture painted of Jesus and the Father PROS one another evidently
pre-time and outside of our Time/Space/History.
XAIREIN...
***********************************************************************
Dale M. Wheeler, Th.D.
Research Professor in Biblical Languages Multnomah Bible College
8435 NE Glisan Street Portland, OR 97220
Voice: 503-251-6416 FAX:503-254-1268 E-Mail: dalemw@teleport.com
***********************************************************************