PANTES in Romans 3:23
Steven Craig Miller
scmiller at www.plantnet.com
Wed Jan 19 16:13:37 EST 2000
To: Joe A. Friberg,
<< In conclusion: there is no grammatical reason to take PANTES in Rom 3.23
as referencing 'groups' or 'kinds' of people. Nor is there any grammatical
reason in the other passages with an absolute/substantive use of PANTES.
Only theological motivations :-( >>
But almost everything can be blamed on "theological motivations," even your
reply! Perhaps there is no grammatical reason to take PANTES in Rom 3:23 as
referencing 'groups' or 'kinds' of people (in fact, I said as much in my
previous message), but then there is no grammatical reason not to take
PANTES in Rom 3:23 as referencing 'groups' or 'kinds' of people.
<< Then I read the passage and scratched my head, wondering if there was
someone out there who was wanting to exclude themselves from the 'sinner'
category! >>
Such a remark seems to me to be a "conservative's fallacy," it seems to
assume that everyone appropriates one's theology from scripture, which is
simply not true. Some people are interested in an honest interpretation of
scripture, without any regard as to how such an interpretation might
compare with their own theological beliefs. I'm Lutheran, and my Lutheran
theology teaches me that everyone is a sinner. But St. Paul, to the best of
my knowledge was not a Lutheran. So, it is not clear to me that St. Paul
necessarily shared all my religious beliefs. In fact, I'm pretty sure that
he didn't. And I am also pretty sure that I don't share all of St. Paul's
religious beliefs (in fact some of the seem down right immoral). But as a
Christian, and as one interested in Christian history, I'm interested in
trying to understand Paul's religious beliefs as best as I can.
-Steven Craig Miller
Alton, Illinois (USA)
scmiller at www.plantnet.com
Disclaimer: "I'm just a simple house-husband (with no post-grad degree),
what do I know?"
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list