> So back to John 1:1c. All agree that QEOS is a substantive, is indefinite
> and functions as a PN standing before the verb. But is it generic or
> specific? It MUST be either of them, and that is the real crux! As shown
> above we cannot avoid this crux by saying it is qualitative, because it is
> still a substantive, yes a count noun (in contrast to a mass noun), and as
> such it must either be generic or specific.
Is QEOS a count noun necessarily? I get the impression it could also be
a mass noun, or an abstract noun - from pagan Greek usage to the ancient
Greek-speaking Christian theologians who considered that QEOS was an
essence that could be shared by several "persons" or stretched across
innumerable personified emanations. Surely these non-Biblical writers also
had theological axes to grind, but since they were native speakers of this
language (altho one must account for linguistic change based on passage
of time & theological trends), their testimony ought to be considered at
least.
Greg Jordan
gjordan@southeast.net