[B-Greek] PNEUMA hAGION as a proper name
Blue Meeksbay
bluemeeksbay at yahoo.com
Thu May 13 19:31:03 EDT 2010
Dear Rolf -
I am so sorry I misunderstood your original question. I cannot think and have not been able to find any examples at the moment. But it seems this could be a very subjective analysis, if an example is found, since you already admit PNEUMA hAGION could be a proper name, or that it could be anarthrous for impersonal emphasis. Nevertheless, I agree examples would provide greater objectivity in coming to a conclusion. Perhaps, others on the list might know of some concrete examples.
Sincerely,
Blue Harris
________________________________
From: Rolf Furuli <furuli at online.no>
To: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
Sent: Thu, May 13, 2010 2:03:30 PM
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] PNEUMA hAGION as a proper name
Dear Blue,
See my comments below:
>Dear Rolf:
>
>
>
>Thanks so much for your thoughts. This seems like an excellent book.
>I have begun reading it, having found it at
><http://books.google.com/books?id=zCctAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=doctrine+of+the+greek+article+inauthor:middleton&lr=&as_drrb_is=q&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=&as_brr=0&cd=1#v=onepage&q&f=false>snip
>
>
>
>Getting back to the question at hand, you wrote: <But the
>lack of article may also indicate that the entity
>in question is an "it" and not a "he" or "she,"
>as Middleton implied. If we follow this line of
>reasoning-and I speak on the basis of linguistics
>and not on the basis of theology- I ask: If
>Middleton is correct and the lack of article
>indicates that PNEUMA hAGION in these instances
>is an "it" (influence or function), could not the
>same be true in the other instances where the
>article is found, to the point where PNEUMA
>hAGION always is an "it" and not a "he"?>
>
>
>
I am not sure if I agree. It seems that one of the problems with the
GNT is that sometimes it is difficult to ascertain just what was in
the mind of the writer. He is not here for us to ask, *Just what did
you mean by that phrase?* so we are sometimes thrown upon the wider
body of writing - to others who supposedly held similar opinions.
Sometimes this seems to be the only way to obtain a reasonable
conclusion. Obviously, the ones closer to the time of the writer are
a better source for comparison.
>
>
>
>When we do this I think it is reasonable to see what the writer of
>the Gospel of John believed regarding the Holy Spirit. I think one
>will see he believed the Spirit was more than just an influence or
>function, but understood him as a Person.
RF:
I agree that we cannot ask the one who wrote the text, and therefore
we should not attempt to do that. This means that we cannot ask what
John believed regarding PNEUMA hAGION. That would also probably
violate the rules of b-greek, as Carl said: "The matter of "the
personhood of the Holy Spirit" falls into the category of "general or
specific hermeneutical or theological issues."
So let us return to the linguistic issue: The original question was
whether PNEUMA hAGION is a proper name because it lacks the article.
My answer was that this is possible. Then I turned the issue upside
down by pointing out that the lack of article linguistically speaking
could also indicate something impersonal. Then I asked if the use of
the article could be pragmatic. In other words: Could all the
examples of the article with PNEUMA hAGION be anaphoric, which means
that PNEUMA hAGION semantically speaking is anarthrous, and the
article is added because of contextual requirements?
Your task, therefore, is to point to one or more examples where the
article cannot be pragmatic. This is the linguistic issue!
>snip
>
>
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Blue Harris
>
>
Best regards,
Rolf Furuli
---
B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
B-Greek mailing list
B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list