[B-Greek] Ephesians 2:1

David Schultz philosopher at creighton.edu
Fri Apr 15 13:29:21 EDT 2005


On Apr 15, 2005, at 6:39 AM, Carl W. Conrad wrote:

> I would have to say nevertheless (i.e. reiterate) that the above
> distinction seems to me based on nothing more than etymological
> speculation,

Does Stott provide any support? Does he refer to a source for this or 
just make  bald claim? That would settle a lot. The original post just 
said "Stott says..." or something like that. Was it checked against 
other commentaries?  Generally, to me, it is interesting that at times 
some so called meaning or idea is adopted by one, due to imagination 
more than research, quoted by another, and then another, and so on, 
from commentaries into theology books, until it becomes obvious to 
everyone without support; to challenge it would be nuts! I have seen 
this as I did detailed  studies on words and saw the accepted wisdom 
many times was bunk. One sees this in commentaries all the time. 
Scholarship is hard work. It may not be a 'fallacy' or anything that 
sophicated, just bad scholarship (if I may be so bold).


David Schultz
------
"The new degree Bachelor of Science does not guarantee that the holder 
knows any science. It does guarantee that he does not know any Latin."
     (Dean Briggs, Harvard College, c.1900).
-----
Philosopher and University Educator...
...and a lot of things I don't get paid for.




More information about the B-Greek mailing list