[B-Greek] Acts 23,9

Eddie Mishoe edmishoe at yahoo.com
Sun Apr 11 21:23:57 EDT 2004


OUDEN KAKON hEURISKOMEN EN TWi ANQRWPWi TOUTWi.
EI DE PNEUMA ELALHSEN AUTWi H AGGELOS

Should we understand a conditional statement
differently when the apodosis is omitted (from when
one is given)? 

Previous to this EI statement, the conclusion was (as
far as the scribes were concerned) that nothing
"wrong" (KAKON, wrong "theologically"??) had been said
by Paul (presumedly this assessment goes back as far
as Paul's defense that began in 22,1). That is, Paul
had claimed a heavenly personage appeared to him. This
conditional/EI statement seems to be better understood
as merely an acknowledgment that Paul's claim is not
in and of itself "wrong." Could it mean:

"Perhaps a spirit or angel did speak to him." (with
the idea that 'theologically, this is well-attested in
the OT'). This seems almost a "jab" by the
Pharisees/scribes at the Sadducees.

Disclaimer: I am not actually trying to open a
discussion on the above assumed theological
presumptions of the scribes. I mention them only to
develop what I think the grammar might be capturing.


=====
Eddie Mishoe
Pastor

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online by April 15th
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html



More information about the B-Greek mailing list