[B-Greek] Eph 4:22-24
malcolm robertson
mjriii2003 at yahoo.com
Mon Jun 27 12:47:14 EDT 2005
Dear David,
Although some weighty textual evidence supports the imperative form(s) for vs 22-24, the syntax is better explained with the infinitives in light of the undisputed existence of hUMAS (vs 22).
...KAQWS ESTIN ALHQEIA EN TWi IHSOU [that/so that/in order that] APOQESQAI hUMAS...ANANEOUSQAI [hUMAS]...ENDUSASQAI [hUMAS] ...
Cordially in Christ,
Malcolm Robertson
__________________________
David Bielby <dbielby at bloomingtonvineyard.org> wrote:
Vs 22 APOQESQAI UMAS KATA THN PROTERAN....
Vs 23 ANANEOUSQAI DE TWi PNEUMATI TOU NOOS hUMWN
Vs 24 KAI ENDUSASQAI TON KAINON ANQRWPON TON...
My question is on the verbs here. Should the two Aorist's be handled as
past tense or as
imperatives. Why?
Having put off.or as imperatives.Put off.? What impact does the ANANEOUSQAI
have on these Aorists?
David Bielby
Pastor
dbielby at bloomingtonvineyard.org
---
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
B-Greek mailing list
B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list