Re: 1 Pet. 2:5

From: Tim McLay (
Date: Sat Feb 03 1996 - 00:17:23 EST

Carl, Carlton, David,

Thanks for the input. I only had time for the quick message this morning,
though I should have taken more time. Obviously, it makes a difference that
the construction in 1 Pet. 2:5 is passive (or middle) and not active.
 Acts 1:23 doesn't seem quite the same to me, though the predicate
nominative is a logical explanation. 2:5 still seems at least worthy of
mention by someone, because OIKOS PNEU. could be understood in apposition.

Tim McLay
Halifax, Nova Scotia

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:37 EDT