theos and ho theos'

GregStffrd at aol.com GregStffrd at aol.com
Thu Mar 1 22:09:52 EST 2001


In a message dated 03/01/2001 9:23:42 AM Pacific Standard Time, CEP7 writes:

<< This is interestingly because Dixon, Harner, Kuehne, Robertson, and 
Wallace all came to the conclusion that the majority (80%) of the anarthrous 
preverbal predicate nominatives were qualitative, and only rarely verbal. See 
the discussion in Wallace, 256-70,
 
 Philip B. Harner, Qualitative Anarthrous Predicate Nouns: Mark 15:39 and 
John 1:1, JBL 92 (1973): 75-87.
 
 C. Kuehne, A Postscript to Colwells Rule and John 1:1, Journal of Theology 
15 [1975] 22.
 
 Paul Stephen Dixon, The Significance of the Anarthrous Predicate Nominative 
in John (Th.M. thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1975).
 
 
 Charles E. Powell, Ph.D. >>


Dear Charles:

Thank you for the references. Of course, I discuss and express disagreements 
with each of the above sources, and others, in my published discussion of 
issues pertaining to John 1:1. If you are willing to discuss the grammatical 
bases informing the above opinions, I will gladly share my thoughts with you. 
I am sure you and I could keep things on the grammatical level required, 
here. 

As a prelude to the discussion, assuming you have not read my book, I do not 
believe the above sources provide any evidence that so-called qualitative 
nouns are not simply definite or indefinite nouns, the qualities of which 
receive emphasis by means of fronting. Fronting accomplishes this not only 
with PNs, but with terms of different grammatical cases, too. Of course, I 
would be happy to discuss the grammatical evidence from the above works that 
you find compelling. 

Best regards,

Greg Stafford



More information about the B-Greek mailing list