From: Suedaleg@aol.com
Date: Sat Sep 22 2001 - 11:51:18 EDT
Ken asked about this verse: TIS ESTIN (O PSEUSTHS EI MH (O ARNOUMENOS (OTI
IHSOUS
> OUK ESTIN (O XRISTOS.
Steve's response: ARNEOMAI ("to deny"), as a verb of speaking, has the hOTI
clause is its
direct object expressing an indirect statement. Thus the hOTI clause
indirectly expresses the denial itself. The OUK is retained from the direct
statement reflected in the indirect statement. The OUK must be retained or
the indirect statement would reflect the opposite of what was intended by
the direct statement, since the direct statement is IHSOUS OUK ESTIN hO
CRISTOS. Without the OUK the direct statement would have been IHSOUS ESTIN
hO CRISTOS, which was not what the writer's opponents were saying. In
English, since ARNEOMAI already expresses a negation, we cannot translate
both it and the negative particle OUK. This is why NASB renders as it does
(cf. also KJV, ASV, NAB, NIV, NAS95, RSV, NRSV). Other translations reflect
the OUK, but translate ARNEOMAI with a more generic word for speaking, such
as "claims" (NJB) or "says" (NLT).
So my understanding here might translate it: ". . . he who denies, [saying]
'Jesus is not the Christ.' " Is my understanding clear on this type of
construction?
Dale Greenlee
---
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 - 15:37:07 EDT