From: Edgar Foster (questioning1@yahoo.com)
Date: Sat Apr 18 1998 - 17:19:48 EDT
Dear Mike,
I will abstain from entering into another discussion right now
involving Christ's Deity. I personally believe that the LOGOS is "God
of a sort," but I still try to look at texts involving Christ's Deity
objectively.
For your consideration, there is a good discussion about Rom. 9:5 in
Earle's Word Meanings in the NT. While I do not agree with Earle's
conclusion on Rom. 9:5, I feel that he fairly cites both sides. The
argument is primarily one of punctuation, not grammar. Earle also adds
that this argument is not a liberal-conservative argument--even some
conservatives favor THEOS applying to the Father in Rom. 9:5.
E. Foster
---MikeBzley wrote:
>
> Dear B-Greekers,
>
> There has been a great deal of correspondence recently about whether
Peter
> called Jesus QEOS in 2 Peter 1:1. Without wishing to reopen the
discussion, I
> have to say that it seems to me, as a novice, that the GS rule does
apply in
> that case.
>
> Some of us have also exchanged views about punctuation and its
effect on both
> reading and interpretation.
>
> May I ask for help in translating another verse which has been used
by many as
> evidence for Christ's membership of the Trinity; Romans 9:5: WN hOI
PATERES,
> KAI EX WN hO CRISTOS TO KATA SARKA; hO WN EPI PANTWN QEOS EULOGHTOS
EIS TOUS
> AIWNAS, AMHN.
>
> Here, it seems to me, the interpretation is dependent more on
assumptions
> about punctuation than about grammar. The key to the translation
being
> whether in fact there is a stop of any sort after PANTWN.
>
> All the translations and commentaries I have read are definite that
CRISTOS
> and QEOS are one and the same, but it seems to me that the passage
could be
> read just as easily as:
>
> ... of whom is Christ, concerning the flesh, who is over all - God
be blessed
> forever, Amen.
>
> rather than the usual:
>
> ... of whom is Christ as concerning the flesh, who is over all, God,
blessed
> forever. Amen.
>
> Am I right that the difference in interpretation lies purely in
assumptions
> about the punctuation, or are there grammatical or linguistic
nuances that tie
> CRISTOS and QEOS firmly together?
>
> Lest I be misunderstood; I personally believe in Christ's place in the
> Trinity, but I am not convinced that this verse is arguing that
particular
> point.
>
> CARIS hUMIN KAI EIRHNH
>
> Mike Beazley,
> Bushey, Hertfordshire, UK
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:24 EDT