Yes I missed something.

• To: David John Marotta <H620@dmt03>, New Testament Greek Mailing List <NT-Greek@Virginia.EDU>
• Subject: Yes I missed something.
• From: David John Marotta <djm5g%Virginia.EDU@dmt03.mcc.Virginia.EDU>
• Date: 07 Oct 92 14:01:14 EST

Sterling writes:

>Have I missed something here?  sperma, spermatos, to - neuter, not
>feminine.
>
>Also, attraction happens only with regard to case, not with regard to
>gender, as far as I have ever seen.

No you haven't missed anything, I have mis-stated my case.  you are exactly
right, the attraction claimed is concerning the case, not the gender of
the relative pronoun, and since I don't have my Greek text with me I am
hesitant to try and correct myself before I look again.  But in an attempt
at settling the issue and clearing it up before everyone writes to remind
me that sperma is neuter I will try and guess:

   The relative pronoun could be Nominative or Accusative but not Dative (?)
(I think?) thus it could agree with "Christ" or "One" but not "Seed", either
Christ, by attraction, or One (my suggestion) but not seed.

Does this sound right?  I will check as soon as I get back to my books.
Hope this puts the discussion back on track from where I derailed it.

• Prev: Paul, a 90's kind of guy
• Next: Re: Was Paul counting on his readers ignorance?
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread