From: Clwinbery@aol.com
Date: Thu Jul 19 2001 - 19:35:30 EDT
In a message dated 7/19/01 3:11:04 PM, cassian@holyroodguild.com writes:
>So while is may be true that the tradition has generally associated EN
>THi ERHMWi with PHWNH BOWNTOS, is there any real grammatical basis for doing
>so?
>
>If one looks at the context, there are two imperative verbs, more or less
>exhibiting parallelism. The second colon places EUQEIAS before the verb
>in the emphatic position; could not the EN THi ERHMWi in the first colon also
>be placed before the imperative in the emphatic position? Is this a
>reasonable interpretation of the *grammar* of the Greek?
>
>I was disturbed by the confidence of the commentator that I was reading
>when he said what I related above. The actual situation seems less certain to
>me.
>Any comments?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Mark Cassian DelCogliano
>
While the quotations in Mark and Matthew could be grammatically interpreted
ambiguously, Matthew 3:1 and 11:7 and Mark 1:4 clearly claim that John was
preaching in the wilderness. It would seem to me that such closeness in
context would be decisive and would be grounds for the confidence seen in the
majority of the interpretations in antiquity and in modern translations.
Carlton Winbery
Louisiana
---
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 - 15:37:01 EDT