[B-Greek] Romans 5

Carl Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Thu Jun 16 15:34:01 EDT 2005


On Jun 16, 2005, at 10:16 AM, George F Somsel wrote:

> On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 06:36:47 -0700 (PDT) Eric Weiss
> <papaweiss1 at yahoo.com> writes:
>
>>> 6.   ONTWN hHMWN ASQENWN . . . APEQANEN.
>>> 8.   hAMARTWLWN ONTWN hHMWN . . . APEQANEN
>>>
>>> What we have in vv. 6, 8 is a genitive absolute which functions
>>> adverbially in relation to the main verb APEQANEN -- "while we
>>>
>> were weak
>>
>>> / sinners . . . he died."  The adverbial usage here is generally
>>>
>> temporal
>>
>>> (see Wallace, pp. 654, 55).
>>>
>>
>> And, being temporal, it would likely coincide timewise with APEQANEN
>> ("died" ... "we were").
>>
>> But must it coincide timewise with APEQANEN - i.e., does the aorist
>> APEQANEN rule out
>> translating the genitive absolutes as presents (i.e., "we are"
>> versus "we were")? After all, Paul
>> continues his argument with ECQROI ONTWN in 5:10, which is not a
>> genitive absolute
>> (ECQROI is nominative).
>>
> _____________
>
> Yes, being temporal it does coincide with APEQANEN.  Your example  of
> 5.10 is a different construction -- the nominative absolute

except that ECQROI in 5.10 is NOT Nominative ABSOLUTE: my text has   
EI GAR ECQROI ONTES KATHLLAGHMEN TWi QEWi ... ECQROI ONTES is simply  
circumstantial participle to KATHLLAGHMEN TWi QEWi

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)
1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad at ioa.com or cwconrad2 at mac.com
WWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/




More information about the B-Greek mailing list