Hebrews 9:6, 12:6 and the usage of DE
Mark Wilson
emory2oo2 at hotmail.com
Wed Jul 17 17:07:41 EDT 2002
Bill:
You wrote:
-----------------
>I guess I was looking for insight into how to evaluate when it does and
>when it doesn't. For example, the "in line" usage seems to me to infer
>an adversive, while the post-positive usage seems to imply a new
>thought.
-----------
Not sure of your terminology here. Not familiar with "in line." I do
not think there are grammatical clues to its function. Context alone
will decide. I think DE is always post-positive, right?
Next:
------
> >>I do think though that Heb 9:12 is adversative, but not 12:6.
>
><Bill>
>Can you explain why, grammatically, you would come to those conclusions?
>For the reasons indicated above, I tend to come to the opposite
>conclusions!
------------
Here there is a strong CONTRAST. The blood of animals (offered)
is not the basis of his entering the holy place, BUT RATHER it
is by his blood. I would consider this a clear use of the adversative
DE. In fact, an ALLA would be appropriate here in my opinion.
Mark Wilson
_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list