From: Clwinbery@aol.com
Date: Thu May 17 2001 - 19:45:50 EDT
In a message dated 5/17/01 3:15:21 PM, hjbluebird@aol.com writes:
>I really appreciate you help in this. But it wouldn't be grammatically
>correct to translate KAMYH as "will bow" would it? That's why I
>cann't understand why my NASB would do that. It's suppose to be a
>literal translation, isn't it?. I feel some what betrayed.
>
The aorist subjunctive is part of a hINA clause, hINA EN TWi ONOMATI IHSOU
PAN GONU KAMYHi. . .
by nature all subjunctives are potential and thus future. There are a number
of places in the GNT when the future indicative is used inter-changeably with
the subjunctives in hINA clauses. To translate the aorist subj. as future
here is, IMHO, is very close to what Paul was thinking. He considered that,
if this were God's purpose, it surely would come to pass.
Carlton Winbery
LA College
---
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 - 15:36:57 EDT