Re: AUQENTEIN, 1Tim2.12
Stephen C. Carlson (scarlson@mindspring.com)
Sun, 17 May 1998 23:33:00
At 08:13 5/16/98 EDT, Paul S. Dixon wrote:
>On Sat, 16 May 1998 16:49:00 "Stephen C. Carlson"
><scarlson@mindspring.com> writes:
>>As I understand him, speaking nothing in Jonathan's statement that
>>"rejects the application of logical principles." What I reject is
>>the apparent argument that an author never implies anything beyond
>>what logically follows from his explicit statements.
>>
>Hmm, Stephen, this is an interesting statement. Usually the word
>"implies" carries with it a logical connotation. I am not familiar with
>the idea that an author could "imply" something otherwise.
I'll keep this short, mindful that a discussion about what is implied
is not strictly directed to the Greek text (almost by definition!).
The word "imply" need not, and often does not, merely mean logical
implication. For example, the fourth definition of "imply" in my
Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary states: "to express
indirectly <his silence IMPLIED consent>."
Stephen Carlson
--
Stephen C. Carlson : Poetry speaks of aspirations,
scarlson@mindspring.com : and songs chant the words.
http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/ : -- Shujing 2.35