b-greek-digest V1 #103

b-greek-digest            Monday, 5 February 1996      Volume 01 : Number 103

In this issue:

        Message for all! 
        Re: Re-posting on Romans 1:17


From: P61A2@aol.com
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 1996 21:51:03 -0500
Subject: Message for all! 

When an embryo is aborted 8 to 9 weeks into a pregnancy, the child has not
yet developed a functioning nervous system or brain so the child has no
'experiences' or 'memory'. The essence of life exists in the unique genetic

Some cells in an embryo have 'decided' to become certain organs and others
have not 'decided'. This is illustrated best by the fact that babies develop
from a single 'undecided' cell. It is scientifically plausible that if the
cells that have 'decided' to become certain organs are removed, the remaining
'undecided' cells can be nurtured and start the embryo growing again
(embryogenesis) replacing the cells that were removed.

Cryogenic Solutions, Inc. is a Houston based company that offers the service
of cryopreserving (freezing) embryo from terminated pregnancies. They are
sure the unique genetic identity of the embryo's life is preserved.

Cryogenic Solutions, Inc. believes that they and their consultant researchers
can perfect techniques to nurture the 'undecided' cells and start the embryo
growing again. They also believe they can use some of the widely accepted
techniques for In Vitro Fertilization to implant the developing embryo into
the original, surrogate, or adoptive mother.

The press has started calling Cryogenic Solutions' process 'pregnancy
suspension'. The company's total fee for cryopreservation, 10 years of
storage, record keeping, and research is $356.00 per embryo!

You should know. Cryogenic Solutions offers the service only to women who
have ABSOLUTELY decided to abort their pregnancy! The company's mission is a
last ditch effort to save the life that would otherwise be lost forever. I
think its about time somebody tried.

Cryogenic Solutions is a public company traded on the NASDAQ bulletin board
and their symbol is CYGS. The company expects to earn $2.00 per share this
year and I think the stock should be worth alot more than its current price
of $7.50 per share, I've been told $30.00 per share is not unreasonable.

If you have any questions you can e-mail me at the address on the header or
Cryogenic Solutions, Inc. at CYGS@AOL.COM. You can also call the company at

Finally, I am not involved with the company in any official capacity. I just
thought that everyone should know about their efforts to save babies and an
excellent moral investment.

Thank you for your time.



From: Carlton Winbery <winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net>
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 1996 21:47:36 +0400
Subject: Re: Re-posting on Romans 1:17

Professor Hobbs wrote;
>     Both Carl and Carlton have suggested ways Paul SHOULD have rewritten
>this text if he thought it meant "The righteous through faith shall live."
>     But I would argue that he did not feel free to rewrite the text. Paul
>does not rewrite his citations from the LXX to conform to his grammar.
>E.g., he uses the future ZHSW, not the classical ZHSOMAI, except when
>citing LXX, where he retains the future middle form (classical).  See
>Zerwick, Section 226.  He almost certainly could read Hebrew, and I would
>be incredulous if I were told that he didn't even bother to look in his
>Bible(s) for one of the two most central texts in his thinking.  Hence he
>saw both "HIS" and "MY" as modifiers of "FAITH(FULNESS)", thus a legitimate
>variable he could omit to universalize the text.
>        (And Carl, I would incline to think of this is the MOTTO for
>Romans, not a "proof text.")
>     Now, how did Paul understand this text?  (I won't refer you to my
>piece on this published just forty years ago, since I can't find it here
>myself.)  Carlton put it correctly when he said that some commentators base
>their interpretation (The one who is righteous through faith shall live) on
>the structure of Romans.  The modern commentator who fought hardest for
>this was Anders Nygren; his _Romerbrevet_ argued the case at great length
>and with substantial evidence.  What question is Paul offering to answer in
>Romans?  Is it, "How shall the righteous live? --  Answer: They shall live
>by faith."  Or is it, "How can anyone find life, the goal of all human
>striving?  I.e., Who shall live?  Answer: The righteous through faith shall
>     Ch. 1-4 -- The righteous through faith
>     Ch. 5-8 (or 5-15) -- Shall live
>And in each case, he argues first negatively (what righteous through faith
>is not: it is not UNrighteousness, nor is it righteousness through
>law/works) (what life is not: not being under the power of wrath, sin, law,
>or death) then what it IS.
>     No point in repeating Nygren (my copies of the original Swedish and
>the ET are in my office, not here in my cold basement, so I couldn't
>anyway, could I?); you can all read him.
>     But he convinced me, long ago; and he convinced the RSV translators in
>1946.  Alas, the NRSV went back to Luther's interpretation, and consigned
>Lutheran Bishop Nygren to the margin.  But then they usually got Paul
>wrong, I suspect.
>     A final point on word order:  Carl said,
>'By terms of "normal" Greek grammar, EK PISTEWS in Rom. 1:17 SHOULD be
>construed with ZHSETAI . . . .'
>     But as Carl well knows, lots of things in Hellenistic writers,
>including Paul, do not follow classical canons; and this example is
>probably one of them.  Whether Paul would have moved EK PISTEWS before
>DIKAIOS if he felt free to re-write his Biblical text, I don't know; but
>I'm somewhat doubtful.  The issue isn't whether this text COULD mean "The
>righteous shall live by faith," but whether it HAS to mean that.  In my
>opinion, it doesn't--it can quite plausibly be read "The righteous through
>faith shall live," probably with the same ambiguity as that English
I worked my way through Nygren back in the sixties.  I could not recall
whom I was referring to but I knew that the outline of Romans had
influenced some commentators.  I also appreciate very much the work of
Dieter Betz on Galatians.  It sits right next to my old copy of the ICC on
Galatians by E.D. Burton.  You may be right about Paul not rewriting the
text, but he did seem free to choose the LXX or use some other when it
favored the point he wanted to make such as his point about SPERMA and
SPERMATA in Galatians.

Carlton L. Winbery
Prof. Religion
LA College, Pineville, La


End of b-greek-digest V1 #103


To unsubscribe from this list write


with "unsubscribe b-greek-digest" as your message content.  For other
automated services write to the above address with the message content

For further information, you can write the owner of the list at


You can send mail to the entire list via the address: