Date: Fri Aug 25 2000 - 11:48:51 EDT
ANEBHN DE KATA APOKALUFIN KAI ANEQEMHN AUTOIS TO EUAGGELION hO KHRUSSW EN
TOIS EQNESIN KAT' IDIAN DE TOIS DOKOUSIN MH PWS EIS KENON TREXW H EDRAMON.
As a matter of exegesis, it would appear that Paul is not saying that he has
doubts about the validity of the gospel he is preaching but that the
acceptance of circumcision by the church as a condition of salvation (an
error in Paul's mind) would compromise the gospel that he has preached,
effectively nullifying it, with the result that all he had accomplished would
then have been in vain.
My questions. I know what I want the Greek text to say, but does the Greek
text actually support me in the above conclusion? If yes, how would I argue
that it does? If no, what conclusion does the text support?
On - MH PWS EIS KENON TREXW H EDRAMON - AT Robertson describes it as
"Negative purpose with the present subjunctive (TREXW) and then by a sudden
change the aorist indicative (EDRAMON), as a sort of afterthought or
retrospect. Could someone translate that into 8th grade English so I might
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 - 15:36:34 EDT