From: Jim West (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Apr 07 1998 - 11:45:11 EDT
At 08:37 AM 4/7/98 -0700, you wrote:
>In the excellent work _Exegetical Fallacies_ DA Carson discusses GB
>Caird's view of John 1:1c. Caird says that John 1:1c cannot be
>considered as a statement of identity. Conversely, Carson takes issue
>with this affirmation and says:
>"Caird simply affirms that the second clause of John 1:1 disallows the
>view that the third clause is an identity statement; but that
>affirmation is demanded by neither lexical semantics nor syntax"
>Is this view correct? I thought that John 1:1c unequivocally could not
>be viewed as an identity statement. Is Carson mistaken here?
This is no answer- but note, you have cited two of the best NT scholars of
recent days and they disagree! Thus, here as in many places, the
interpretive lens determines what we wee much more than the grammar or syntax!
Jim West, ThD
Quartz Hill School of Theology
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:21 EDT