[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