Re: John 21:15

From: Edward Hobbs (EHOBBS@WELLESLEY.EDU)
Date: Fri May 30 1997 - 17:02:10 EDT

• Next message: Jim Beale: "Re: John 21:15"
• Previous message: Jack Kilmon: "Re: John 21:15"
• Maybe in reply to: T & J Peterson: "John 21:15"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
• Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

Dear Carl,

You wrote:
                                by which I don't mean that the author
intended it to be ambiguous (though I wouldn't rule that out in Johannine
literature, where we have what many think is a deliberately ambiguous
ANWQEN in Jn 3:3),

Add:

        PNEUMA/PNEW

        HUDWR ZWN

        hUYSOW

        MENW/MONH/MONAI (one of most important)

.....etc., etc., etc.

In my introductory lecture on John, I always include PUNS as one of the
Fourth Evangelist's main literary devices (along with Cryptic Remarks,
Stupid Characters, and Dialectic). (Of course, in honesty, puns are a sub-
device under Cryptic Remarks.)

Edward

• Next message: Jim Beale: "Re: John 21:15"
• Previous message: Jack Kilmon: "Re: John 21:15"
• Maybe in reply to: T & J Peterson: "John 21:15"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
• Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:17 EDT