[B-Greek] hO ESTIN? (1 Jn 2:8)
Mitch Larramore
mitchlarramore at yahoo.com
Sat Feb 10 09:12:47 EST 2007
Iver wrote:
> > The translation by Culy makes no sense to me,
> because it focuses on
> > the grammar, where the sense
> > needs to be derived from pragmatics and context.
> The hO - which -
> > of hO ESTIN sets the reader up to
> > think "What does this concept mean? or "How does
> it apply?"
Dr. Conrad wrote:
> I wasn't really so much approving and promoting
> Culy's interpretation
> as trying to state what it is. On the other hand, if
> we really do
> suppose that the neuter relative pronoun hO has hH
> ENTOLH as its real
> antecedent, then it's an additional item pointing
> toward a
> questionable level of competence in Greek on the
> part of the author
> of 1 John. I have thought for some times that there
> are parts of 1
> John that really don't fit together very well
> syntactically -- at
> least in terms of "standard" syntactic patterns, and
> this is one of
> them.
Why is hO not the 'conceptual antecedent' I have read
about in other contexts? Isn't this 'standard' enough
Greek (as in Eph 2.8 KAI TOUTO OUK EX hUMWN)?
Mitch Larramore
Sugar Land, Texas
____________________________________________________________________________________
Get your own web address.
Have a HUGE year through Yahoo! Small Business.
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/domains/?p=BESTDEAL
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list