From: George Blaisdell (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon May 03 1999 - 13:58:16 EDT
>From: "Mark House"
>we're reading 1 John 1, and the question arose concerning the use of the
>subjunctive in v. 9, where the writer promises that (pardoning any
>transliteration flubs) EAN hOMOLOGWMEN TAS hAMARTIAS hHMWN, PISTOS ESTIN
>DIKAIOS, hINA AFHi HMIN TAS AMARTIAS....
>The question concerned the hINA
>clause, which I explained as a result rather than a purpose clause.
>Wouldn't the use of a future indicative (without hINA) have made the
>more reliable? Something like: If we confess..., he is faithful...and he
I would venture to observe that were it future indicative it would involve a
quid pro quo that the author wishes to avoid, placing the confesser in
charge of his own forgiveness of sins.
>Put another way, doesn't the subjunctive here lend to the
>uncertainty of a promise that the writer seems to want to drive home to his
>readers with certainty?
Certainty not! :-)
I would see it as a subjunctive of probable result, which avoids the vanity
of the sinner controlling his own forgiveness through confession, yet opens
the way for its promise...
>I ventured the guess that the INA clause is a standard way of expressing
>results (or, more frequently, purpose), and doesn't necessary carry with it
>any implicit uncertainty. But that answer did seem to run contrary to my
>prior definition of the subjunctive as communicating contingency.
>Any comments will be greatly appreciated.
Well, I appreciate your question ~ It reflect some good sand in yer craw!
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
--- B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [email@example.com] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-329W@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:25 EDT