John 20:31 was Re: [B-Greek] Phil 2:11

Jon Boyd boyd at huxcomm.net
Wed Oct 15 23:23:50 EDT 2003


Iver wrote:

>It seems to me that this argument is not convincing. There are a number 
>of similar identificational statements in John, e.g.
>
>1:20 EGW OUK EIMI hO CRISTOS
>1:25 EI SU OUK EI hO CRISTOS
>3:28 OUK EIMI EGW hO CRISTOS
>4:29 hOUTOS ESTIN hO CRISTOS (also 7:26,41)
>10:24 EI SU EI hO CRISTOS
>11:27 hOTI SU EI hO CRISTOS
>20:31 hOTI IHSOUS ESTIN hO CRISTOS

Stephen wrote:
<The argument for identifying the subject as the articular hO CRISTOS rather
than the anathrous IHSOUS is grammatical.  However, all of the listed
examples other than John 20:31 involve definite pronouns (personal or
demonstrative), so these examples, though interesting, have little to no
bearing on the grammatical argument actually being made for John 20:31.>

I don't presume to speak for Iver here, but I would say that he is offering
*contextual* support (rather than strictly grammatical support) for his
reading of the text.  I would agree with him that these verses provide valid
contextual support for understanding 20:31 in the traditional sense.  

Jon Boyd
Huxley, IA   







More information about the B-Greek mailing list