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