From: Kevin L. Barney (klbarney@yahoo.com)
Date: Thu Dec 02 1999 - 17:32:01 EST
Why are we so certain that gender was irrelevant to Clement? Are we basing
this on later Christian theology (or current political correctness)? It
seems to me that there are two problems here. First, since the meaning of
GENNAW varies depending on whether the subject is a man or a woman, we have
to ask what gender, if any, Clement perceived God to be. Since in the NT
God is called "father", and even later is called the gennetor to Christ's
gennema, I don't see how we can just assume that Clement thought of God as
genderless (unless of course there is something in his writings to suggest
that). If Clement thought of God in male terms, then we come to the second
problem of choosing a good English word to represent GENNAW (fathered,
begat, begotten, sired, generated, procreated or whatever).
Am I missing something here?
Kevin L. Barney
Hoffman Estates, Illinois
klbarney@yahoo.com
--- 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 - 15:40:47 EDT