From: Ward Powers (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu Sep 18 1997 - 08:17:24 EDT
At 14:00 97/09/17 EDT, Paul Dixon wrote:
>Apparently we may glean the purpose(s) of 1 John from three hINA clauses
>found in 1:3, 4 and 5:13. They are respectively:
>1) APAGGELLOMEN KAI hUMIN, hINA KAI hUMEIS KOINWNIA ECHTE MEQ hMWN, 1:3.
>2) TAUTA GRAFOMEN hMEIS, hINA hH CARA hMWN Hi PEPLHRWMENH, 1:4.
>3) TAUTA EGRAYA HUMIN hINA EIDHTE hOTI ZWHN ECETE AIWNION, 5:13.
>Are these purposes mutually exclusive, or are they necessarily related?
>And, if they are related, how so?
>I would like to argue that the ultimate purpose is stated in 5:13 and
>that the first two purpose statements necessarily relate to that purpose.
I would agree with Paul that these three hINA clauses are significant in
assessing 1 John. However, let me draw attention also to another hINA clause:
TEKNIA MOU, TAUTA GRAFW hUMIN hINA MH hAMARTHTE. (1 John 2:1.)
Little children of mine, I am writing these things to you in order that you
do not sin.
Recent discussion on b-greek about sin and the Christian in the light of 1
John should ensure that we are all tuned in to the significance of what
John says here in the first verse of Chapter 2.
I reckon that this clear statement of John's purpose in his writing this
epistle should have a place centre stage in any discussion about that purpose.
Rev Dr B. Ward Powers Phone (International): 61-2-9799-7501
10 Grosvenor Crescent Phone (Australia): (02) 9799-7501
SUMMER HILL NSW 2130 email: email@example.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:29 EDT