From: Watt1997 (Watt1997@aol.com)
Date: Mon Apr 13 1998 - 11:12:51 EDT
I would be interested in the views of those in the group on the traditional
point at which verses 17 and 18 of Matthew chapter 5 are split.
Is there any *grammatical* or *linguistic* reason why the split should not
take place after hO OURANOS KAI hH GH which is traditionally included in verse
18 i.e. the first part of traditional verse 18 is rather a conclusive point
regarding the content of verse 17?
I would be particularly interested in comments on the following points:
1. the unusual double use of hEWS AN in traditional verse 18
2. the use of AMHN GAR as introducing a concluding statement, bearing in mind
the conclusive use of GAR.
I appreciate that the division suggested has significant theological
implications. Here I would be interested primarily in linguistic comments on
the proposed altered division of the verses.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:22 EDT