From: Arto Hoikkala (hoikkala@myy.helia.fi)
Date: Sat Dec 26 1998 - 06:24:52 EST
Carl,
Your view seems to be grammatically the most probable one. As well it is
probable that I will continue to post once in a while similar "unnatural"
interpretations to B-GREEK list ;-) Thank you for your reply.
Arto Hoikkala
On Fri, 25 Dec 1998, Carl W. Conrad wrote:
> Without being dogmatic about it, I have to say that it seems strange to me
> to think in terms of PROSWPON TOU KURIOU AND hH DOXA THS ISCUOS AUTOU as
> agents of OLEQROS--the more so in that hUPO is more normal for a personal
> agent, or an instrumental dative for an impersonal means. More natural, in
> my view is to understand APO with these genitives in an ablatival function:
> "who will pay everlasting ruin away from the presence of the Lord and away
> from his glorious might" or the like. Moreover, the relative pronoun
> hOITINES must refer back to TOIS MH EIDOSIN QEON KAI TOIS MH hUPAKOUOUSIN
> TWi EUAGGELIWi TOU KURIOU hHMWN IHSOU--i.e., we have an active
> construction, so for that reason also APO with these genitives hardly seems
> likely as introducing an agent construction or even a source. Perhaps that
> argument can be made, but it seems unnatural to me.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:11 EDT