From: James H. Vellenga (email@example.com)
Date: Fri Nov 22 1996 - 16:10:00 EST
> From: Randy Leedy <RLEEDY@wpo.bju.edu>
> AUTOS DIDOUS in Acts 17:25 looks like a sure enough nominative
> absolute; just like the genitive absolute except in the nominative
> case. The only difference I can see between this and an unquestioned
> absolute construction is that the subject of the absolute participle
> does not usually appear in the governing clause (see Blass &
> DeBrunner, #423); here AUTOS refers to and agrees with hO QEOS in v.
> 24, the subject of the governing clause. However, in Matt. 12:46,
> nobody questions that AUTOU LALOUNTOS is a genitive absolute, even
> though Jesus also appears in the genitive in the governing clause (hH
> MHTHR KAI hOI ADELFOI AUTOU). So I don't see any reason not to take
> AUTOS DIDOUS in Acts 17:25 as a true nominative absolute.
Why not simply a noun in apposition with KURIOS in the preceding
... this one, being master of heaven and earth, doesn't dwell
in handmade shrines, nor is he served by human hands [as if]
having need of anything -- himself [being one] who gives to
all [people] life and breath and all things.
James H. Vellenga | firstname.lastname@example.org
Viewlogic Systems, Inc. __|__ 508-303-5491
293 Boston Post Road West | FAX: 508-460-8213
Marlboro, MA 01752-4615 |
"We all work with partial information."
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:57 EDT