From: Jason Hare (email@example.com)
Date: Tue Feb 22 2000 - 16:10:09 EST
By saying << it does not refer to a "word" (in its narrow sense) >> you
admit that "word" has a wider sense in which to be understood. Therefore
it is not such a "limited" means of expression and is acceptable as is.
Cf. my reply to Polycarp.
On 02/22/00, "Steven Craig Miller <firstname.lastname@example.org>" wrote:
> To: Jason Hare,
> << We are all taught in the most basic Greek that LOGOS means "word,
> statement, purpose, etc." That is no shock. I think what you have said
> makes sense, but why are you against the translation "word?" What do you
> have against it? >>
> The only thing I have "against it" (to use your phrase) is simply that it
> is possible that the English term "utterance" might do a better job of
> expressing the author's intent at John 1:1 than the English term "word."
> Also, I suspect that, even in other passages where we find the English term
> "word," it does not refer to a "word" (in its narrow sense) but is most
> commonly used metaphorically. For example, at Mark 2:2, we find: << ... and
> he was speaking the word to them >> (Mark 2:2d NRSV). I think it fairly
> obvious that here TON LOGON refers to a spoken message. Mark 2:2d might be
> better translated as: "... and he was speaking the message to them."
> -Steven Craig Miller
> Alton, Illinois (USA)
> FWIW: I'm neither a clergy-person, nor an academic (and I have no post-grad
--- 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 - 15:40:58 EDT