From: Paul S. Dixon (dixonps@juno.com)
Date: Wed Dec 17 1997 - 14:15:37 EST
On Wed, 17 Dec 1997 10:10:47 -0800 "Dale M. Wheeler"
<dalemw@teleport.com> writes:
>Edward Hobbs wrote:
>
><snip>
>>Thanks to Paul for discovering this omission. (I wouldn't have, since,
>>like Carl, I find this long opening super-sentence too stupefying to
>>seem worth the gymnastics to decode its Greek [did I say Greek?].)
>
>Before I say anything, let me say that the following is NOT intended
>as a criticism of Edward (or Carl for that matter), so *PLEASE* don't
>read it that way !!!!! Edward is *absolutely* correct that Eph 1:3-14
is
>a unique sentence in Greek, at times almost defying analysis by any
>normal standards of Greek syntax and rhetoric...though surprisingly
>very readable...but so is Revelation, and its Greek goes off the
>charts at times (BTW, I think the cause of both problems is similar).
Thanks, Dale. If I can read between the lines, I would agree that the
Greek employed by both Paul and John was affected by their ecstatic
outbreaks of worship and praise. Besides that, however, one's view of
the sacredness of Scripture is not dependent upon the quality of Greek
so employed, as though we should expect the highest level of Greek
throughout Scripture. Is it not a testimony of God's grace and power
that He usually took the things that "were not," such as the vernacular
Koine Greek and the nobodies of this world, and used them for His glory,
that no flesh should boast?
Please excuse my sermonizing. I must have gotten carried away.
Paul Dixon
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:38 EDT