From: clayton stirling bartholomew (c.s.bartholomew@worldnet.att.net)
Date: Mon Sep 18 2000 - 02:30:47 EDT
on 09/17/00 2:33 PM, Dan Parker wrote:
>
> On page 252 Daniel Wallace in his Exegetical Syntax says he considers
> AGGELOS QEOU to be definite along with all usages of ANNGELOS KURIOU
> in both the OT and the NT.
Dan,
You sure Wallace said that? Have you overlooked a nuance?
>
> The second hWS in the verse is generally taken as adverbial. If the
> AGGELOS QEOU is definite . . .
I don't think it is definite in this context. Also take a look at Acts 10:3
AGGELOV TOU QEOU and Dan 3:25 (LXX) AGGELOU QEOU. Keep in mind who is
speaking in Dan 3:25.
Clay
--
Clayton Stirling Bartholomew
Three Tree Point
P.O. Box 255 Seahurst WA 98062
---
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@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 - 15:36:36 EDT