[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Rom 1 and phusis
I would pose two questions for Mr. Jordan's "transaltion:. First, why is
that in 1 COr 6, where we encounter a rare word, only the context can dictate
what the word means, and other contexts andwords with possibly overlapping
semantic domains are irrelevant, but in Roms 1, the context seems all but
ignored while a wide net is cast to come up with possible meanings? Tangled
up in this is the issue that the proposed translation continues to assert the
very case that needs proving, i.e., that Paul discerned a difference
between heterosexuals doing homosexual things and true homosexuals. I think
the most natural way to read the passage is to understand Paul as saying there
was no such thing as a homosexual in any sense until God delivered them over
to an uncontrolled, God-alienated state (there's probably one long German
word for that, but I don't know what it is). Until that can be shown
antecedently, I can't find justification for reading the passage in an
"unnatural" way which assumes it.
Ken Litwak
Richmond, CA
Follow-Ups: