Matt 19:9
Steve Puluka
spuluka at hotmail.com
Mon Oct 4 06:20:47 EDT 1999
>From: dixonps at juno.com
>To: spuluka at hotmail.com
>CC: b-greek at franklin.oit.unc.edu
>Subject: Re: Matt 19:9
>Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 16:51:41 -0700
>
>
>The question is, did the early church fathers understand the
>MH EPI PORNEIA of Mt 19:9 as denoting preterition (as excluding
>from consideration the case of PORNEIA) or as denoting the
>negation, that is, if a man divorced his wife because of PORNEIA,
>and remarried, then he did not commit adultery in so doing?
>
>I don't see anything in the translations cited below that suggests
>anything other than the preterition view.
>
>Paul Dixon
I'm not clear on this distinction, but perhaps we are on the same page. I
read the Patristic evidence as permiting the divorce only for fornication,
but not any further marriages for either party.
Beyond that I really can't speak to the grammer distinction on negation or
exclusion. Could you elaborate on this please?
Steve Puluka
Adult Education Instructor
Byzantine Catholic Archeparcy of Pittsburgh
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list