genitive in John 1:3 [correction]
Harry W. Jones
hwjones2 at earthlink.net
Sun Dec 15 12:01:19 EST 2002
Yes Carl it would have been far simpler. But it didn't have the article and
that
bothered me. I believe the meaning comes out the same though.
Harry Jones
> [Original Message]
> From: Carl W. Conrad <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>
> To: Harry W. Jones <hwjones2 at earthlink.net>
> Cc: Biblical Greek <b-greek at franklin.oit.unc.edu>
> Date: 12/15/02 5:00:45 AM
> Subject: [b-greek] Re: genitive in John 1:3 [correction]
>
> At 1:34 AM -0800 12/15/02, Harry W. Jones wrote:
> > PANTA DI' AUTOU EGENETO KAI CWRIS AUTOU EGENETO OUDE hEN.
> >
> >Since the subject of EGENETO is *all things*---I believe that PANTA is
> >being used
> >attributively as a neuter plural to the implied subject of EGENETO---
and
> >since Christ(AUTOU) is the agency by which all things are brought into
> >existence(ie, the subject is being acted upon) then the verb EGENETO
would
> >not have a direct object.
>
> It would be far simpler to say that PANTA is a substantive functioning as
> the subject of EGENETO, rather than to call it an attributive adjective
> modifying an implicit subject, although I think what you mean, Harry, is
> not so unclear as it looks at first. As for EGENETO, this is one of those
> instances where GINOMAI actually functions as a passive, as a few older
MP1
> aorists continued to do even after the coming-into-vogue of the -QH_ MP2
> forms. And, as I think has already been stated earlier in this thread, DI'
> AUTOU indicates intermediate agency: "all things were brought into being
> through (the Word)."
> --
>
> Carl W. Conrad
> Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)
> 1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
> cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu OR cwconrad at ioa.com
> WWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list