From: B.J. Williamson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu Jul 13 2000 - 16:34:34 EDT
>I would not emphasize that the "calling" has to have happened
>before either of the imperatives but agree with Carl that the "calling"
>pervades the other two actions, before, during, and after.
>Dr. Carlton L. Winbery
I think Luke could have employed better temporal indicators than he chose
here, if that were his intention, but he has already done that earlier in
This appears to be one of many clear examples in which other factors must be
summoned to resolve any temporal conclusion.
Whatever temporal implications we have here, however, I think the antecedent
action of "calling" must be retained in light of the events portrayed
earlier by Luke himself. To have a "baptism" (no matter how you conceive
that) and a "washing" (no matter how you conceive that) occurring PRIOR TO
this "calling" would be a reversal of the events' temporal sequence
elsewhere described, by more than Luke himself.
Luke gives us some flexibility here, but I think we should not completely
disassociate this passage from the rest of the letter.
One can still hold to their respective theological tendencies regardless of
the temporal order here.
B. J. Williamson
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [email@example.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@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 - 15:36:31 EDT