[B-Greek] TINAS in 2 Pet. 3:9

Oun Kwon kwonbbl at gmail.com
Sat Jan 29 16:07:33 EST 2011


On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 3:53 PM, Rod Rogers <rngrogers at embarqmail.com> wrote:
>
> I'll reply to this post hoping that all will see me replying to both Carl's
> and Alastair's posts. Alistair, thanks for the link to the Google book, I'll
> look into it. I can't deny that my palms get sweaty went Carl and I go head
> to head. I'm sure all of us on the list have no problem giving Carl his due.
> That said, I have a couple of comments. First, I don't know who agrees with
> whom. Carl said, "but the question whether that is to be understood in this
> text is one that I don't think can be answered." which is what I tried to
> convey at the beginning of my first post, "Although it may not be proven
> grammatically I think there is a logical antecedent to TINES". I was trying
> to convey the idea that this verse is one historically problematic to
> theologians. I'm not demanding anything in this verse. Sorry if it came
> across that way.
>
<clipped>

It seems to me that all these have to do with  'grammatical
antecedent' vs 'logical antecedent'. In the case of 'logical', it may
be better to say 'logical referent' to avoid confusion.

Oun Kwon.



More information about the B-Greek mailing list