[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