From: Paul F. Evans (evans@wilmington.net)
Date: Tue Dec 08 1998 - 22:04:47 EST
Carl,
Thanks for the reminder. I don't get to stay in the Greek text much and my
experience investigating grammar is limited by the amount of time lost to
other pastoral duties that rob me of something love to do.
>but you shouldn't ever see hO AGAQOS hO ANHR.
Still I am not quite satisfied with your statement. Your observation about
Machen are correct,of course,and you quote him and his examples perfectly.
However, isn't the construction hO LOGOS hO AGAQOS exactly equivalent to hO
AGAQOS hO ANHR, which Machen uses as an example of the attributive, but
which you say one should never see? (cf. # 70 and #72) He even elaborates
on this construction. I may be missing something simple, but I am confused!
(which doesn't take much). I think my confusion is not really with the
attributive or predicative but with the perceived ambiguity.
Are you saying that in the real world of ancient Greek one is not going to
come across this, and therefore it is not an authentic possibility even
though theoretically it is possible? Have I muddied the water enough?
Good! Then I shall step back and let it settle out!
Paul & Loala Evans
Wilmington First Pentecostal Holiness Church
E-mail: evans@wilmington.net
Web-page: http://wilmingtonfirst.churches.wilmington.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:10 EDT