From: Carl W. Conrad (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu Jun 05 1997 - 13:03:48 EDT
At 11:38 AM -0400 6/5/97, Jim Beale wrote:
>On Jun 4, 9:59pm, Paul Dixon - Ladd Hill Bible Church wrote:
>> Just this. Check out 1 Jn 3:9, the classic refutation of
>> antinomianism verse. There we have something similiar going on. Yet, I'd
>> opt for the universal negation translation simply because of the immediate
>> context which certainly calls for it. More later.
> PAS hO GEGENNHMENOS EK TOU QEOU hAMARTIAN
> OU POIEI hOTI SPERMA AUTOU EN AUTWi MENEI
> KAI OU DUNATAI hAMARTANEIN hOTI EK TOU QEOU
>Is PAS+OU+verb the same as OU+verb+PAS?
>The idea seems to be: "All the ones having been born of God do not
>sin ..." which is equivalent to "None of those who have been born of
>God sin ..."
>The text itself seems clear and unambiguous to me. Is there some
>reason you see to move to the context to support the universal
I think you have a Semitism here: PAS ho ... = KOL ... In this
instance PAS is not "all" or "every" but rather "any(one)." Better
(Classical Attic) Greek would have the form hOSTIS AN EK TOU QEOU
GEGENNHTAI OU POIEI ... or EAN TIS EK TOU QEOU GEGENNHTAI, OU POIEI ...
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics/Washington University
One Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018
Summer: 1647 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(704) 675-4243
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:18 EDT