Re: Romans 1:29 peplhrwmenous pash adikia ponhria pleonexia kakia

From: Jonathan Robie (
Date: Thu Mar 06 1997 - 19:20:22 EST

Edgar, Lee, Ronald,

Thanks for your wonderful answers, which not only explained what the text
says, but really helped me see why I was reading it wrong.

Now there's one detail that I want to follow up on...

Edgar Krentz wrote:
>Jonathan Robie wrote:
>>Roma 1:30 (GNT) katalalous qeostugeis ubristas uperhfanous alazonas,
>>efeuretas kakwn, goneusin apeiqeis,
>>Why are these all accusative?
>If I were your classroom teacher, Jonathan, I would respond to you by
>asking whether you could find any other accusative plural masculine nouns
>or pronouns with which the terms you ask about could be in concord? Look
>further than the immdediate context in the entire sentence.

It would be *wonderful* if you *were* my classroom teacher, Edgar!
Since I don't have a classroom teacher, let me pretend you are and
try answering this...does it hang off of AUTOUS just like the
other clauses?


Jonathan Robie
POET Software, 3207 Gibson Road, Durham, N.C., 27703
Ph: 919.598.5728 Fax: 919.598.6728
email:, <--- shockwave enabled!

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:08 EDT