From: CEP7@aol.com
Date: Mon Oct 04 1999 - 00:28:52 EDT
In a message dated 10/3/99 7:26:25 PM, dixonps@juno.com writes:
<< If the MH of Mt 19:9 should be rendered "except" because of the parallel
with Mt 5:32, then what does "except" mean? Does it mean the negation,
that is, if a man divorces his wife because of PORNEIA and remarries,
then he does not commit adultery?
Even if the construction in Mt 19:9 somehow denotes the negation of the
protasis, the negation of the apodosis screams for assertion. It simply
cannot be assumed, as apparently Zerwick does. >>
That is the implication when you have multiple protases that are in equal
parallel relationship. Each protasis is a necessary condition for the
realization of the apodosis. Therefore, if the condition of MH EPI PORNEIAi
is not met, then the apodosis does not follow. Thus, he does not commit
adultery. The negative inference applies if necessary conditions are involved.
Charles
--- B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-329W@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:41 EDT