From: Steven Craig Miller (email@example.com)
Date: Mon Oct 11 1999 - 09:35:46 EDT
To: Joe A. Friberg,
SCM: << Also, one might note that the variant reading at John 6:29 is
PISTEUSHTE (aor. subj.) as opposed to PISTEUHTE (pres. subj.). If the aor.
subj. is translated as "that you believe ..." (as it is in the NKJV),
shouldn't the present subjunctive be translated differently? Or would one
want to say that there is no real difference between the two variant
JAF: << 1. Can you be sure that the NKJV was based on the aor. subj.? (I
do not recall the NKJV textual principles.) >>
They are supposed to follow the Textus Receptus (or Greek text) used by the
JAF: << 2. There is a difference of nuance in the Gk: I might suggest the
aor. subj. be translated: "that you should believe..." >>
As opposed to what? As opposed to "that you believe"? Somehow I have a hard
time understanding how adding the word "should" would illustrate the
difference between the aorist subjunctive and the present subjunctive.
Would you like to elaborate?
JAF: << The NKJV may have simply ignored the nuance in preference of the
standard interpretation. >>
-Steven Craig Miller (firstname.lastname@example.org)
--- 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 - 15:40:41 EDT