Rom 7 again, and an apology
Tue, 29 Oct 1996 20:56:17 -0500

I have read Carl Conrad's reading of Carlton Winbery's statement and must
admit my own embarrassment for not having read it correctly! I suppose I
should go back and brush up on English grammar once again! Indeed, my
initial reading of Dr. Winbery's post was similar to Dr. Conrad's, though the
subsequent discussion seemed to take it differently. So, I fell prey to a
hermeneutic of consensus. Shame on me! My sincerest apologies to Dr.
Winbery are here offered. My misunderstanding has not put him in the best

You all have offered a stimulating discussion of an emotionally-charged
passage in the NT. Since I am not a member of this list, I get it
second-hand. Now, that might sound strange. After all, I do get the exact
words of each electronic missive! However, after a long weekend far away
from home in which I lectured for nine hours, I came back to see a flurry of
discussion on Rom 7 and partial interactions with my point in Exegetical
Syntax. Unfortunately, I was not clear-headed in my response, being
exhausted from the trip. So I reacted without due consideration for the
arguments being put forth, at least in their original form.

I think I shall now crawl back into my cave and pop out my head only so
slowly, every now and again. At the same time, I suppose some good did come
out of the exchange in which two ships were passing in the night: you all
understand my Greek syntactical method a bit better (not to mention my lack
of understanding of ENGLISH syntax!). Thanks for making my Monday (and now,

Dan Wallace

a.k.a. ""