Date: Thu Mar 01 2001 - 12:24:34 EST
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 12:23:42 EST
Subject: Re: [b-greek] Re: theos and ho theos'
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Mac sub 43
In a message dated 3/1/01 10:05:59 AM, GregStffrd@aol.com writes:
<< With respect to the original question, and keeping entirely clear of
theological lines, the fact remains that, grammatically, the LOGOS is "with"
hO THEOS. Therefore, regardless of whether one decides to view the fronting
of the PN as an indicator of pure qualitativeness (which I do not believe is
_ever_ the case with a PN) or an emphasized definite or indefinite noun
(which I believe is _always_ the intent behind fronting [that is, emphasis]),
the fact remains that the LOGOS cannot _grammatically_ be shown to be the God
he is "with." >>
This is interestingly because Dixon, Harner, Kuehne, Robertson, and Wallace
all came to the conclusion that the majority (80%) of the anarthrous
preverbal predicate nominatives were qualitative, and only rarely verbal. See
the discussion in Wallace, 256-70,
Philip B. Harner, “Qualitative Anarthrous Predicate Nouns: Mark 15:39 and
John 1:1,” JBL 92 (1973): 75-87.
C. Kuehne, “A Postscript to Colwell’s Rule and John 1:1,” Journal of Theology
15  22.
Paul Stephen Dixon, “The Significance of the Anarthrous Predicate Nominative
in John” (Th.M. thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1975).
Charles E. Powell, Ph.D.
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 - 15:36:52 EDT