From: David Miller (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu Nov 18 1999 - 01:14:56 EST
I am looking at the questions in Romans 10:18-19. The standard view is
that, because of the double negative, the expected answer is "Yes" when MH +
OUK occur together in a question.
Thus, 10:18 (MH OUK HKOUSAN] should be read as follows: "Did they not heae?
Yes, they did."
10:19 [MH ISRAHL OUK EGNW] should be translated: "Did Israel not know? Yes,
Leon Morris, however, suggests that while this is the case in 10:18, in
10:19 "MH introduces the question, but OUK is found with the verb: the
question negates the suggestion that Israel did not know.ä (Morris 393 #78)
After excluding questions with EI MH, I am left with Rom 10:18-19, 1 Cor 9:4
and 9:5, 1 Cor 11:22, and 1 Jn 3:10 and 4:8. The passages in 1 John both
negate participles so they can be excluded. 1 Cor 9:4-5 follow the pattern
of Rom 10:18 exactly. 1 Cor 11:22 clearly expects the answer "yes" [MH GAR
OIKIAS OUK EXETE EIS TO ESTHIEIN]. MH does not occur in the LXX, so I could
not check the pattern there.
So, my question is: Is there any evidence outside of Romans 10:19 to
confirm (or negate) Morris' suggestion?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:45 EDT