Search results

  1. R

    Anaphora at Titus 2:13

    Anaphora is an axiom of Ancient Greek that governs both NP structures as well as discourse composition. The articular θεός at Titus 2:13 indicates a repeated previous mention of θεός. Is there a grammatical reason that prevents this grammatical axiom from thus identifying God here as having...
  2. R

    BDF on πιστευιν ότι = πιστευιν εις at John 20:31 and it's application to 20:28

    At John 20:31 we find πιστεύητε ὅτι Ἰησοῦς ἐστὶν ὁ χριστὸς ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ. BDF 187.6 says: πιστεύειν εις = π. ότι (e.g. 1 Th 4:14, Jn 20:31) Οτι recitativum which "serves the function of our quotation marks” (BDF 470.1) and is “most common … in John.” Our English versions include quotation...
  3. R

    The Adverbial και at Titus 2:13.

    Sharp specified that for his rule the και in a Sharp’s TSKS was to be a copulative και. Wallace silently dropped this requirement. But there is also an adjunctive και and adverbial και. To assume copulative without proving it is circular reasoning. Smyth 2881. Adverbial καί also, even...
  4. R

    John 20:28

    @John Milton I have incorporated your concerns on the exegesis of John 20:28 here. I have given you special mention. ;) @Gryllus Maior, I am interested in your view of Margaret Davies. Her comments have been pulled from a footnote and given its own section.
  5. R

    Sharp's rule

    Who believes in Sharp's rule? I just brought up some Greek grammar in the Languages forum. Thread 'BDF on 2 Peter 1:1 - It's shocking' https://forums.carm.org/threads/bdf-on-2-peter-1-1-its-shocking.1649/
  6. R

    BDF on 2 Peter 1:1 - It's shocking

    Blass-Debrunner-Funk Greek Grammar (BDF §276.3) says that σωτῆρος is definite at 2 Peter 1:1, and so “σωτῆρος ἡμ. ᾽Ι. Χρ. may be taken by itself and separated from the preceding.” BDF §276 (3) Cf. 2 P 1:1 (but here S has κυρίου for θεοῦ, probably correctly; cf. 11, 2: 20, 3: 2, 18)...
  7. R

    The beginning at Proverbs 8 = εν αρχή at J 1:1

    I see some amazing parallels between "the beginning" at J 1:1 and Pr 8. Temporal parallel Εν αρχή is found at Proverbs 8:23 and John 1:1. Spatial parallel Also the speaker is ειμι παρά θεός at Proverbs 8:30 and ειμι προς θεός at J 1:1 Same place, same time, with God. Interestingly Jesus...
  8. R

    Predicate Nominatives in the prologue where subject and complement are articular

    In John 1:4 we find η ζωή ην το φως, the life was the light. This appears to falsify the claim/rule that one can not determine the subject if both terms are articular. Notice the parallel to John 1:1c. In the previous clause a participant has been activated as ζωή. Then και binds the 2...
  9. R

    The linguistic subject of John 20:28

    Levinsohn’s “Discourse Features, page 136” presents 5 rules for determining the the default marked encoding for subjects. If the subject is the same as the previous clause no overt reference is made to the subject. (Luke 15:13b) If the subject was the addressee of an immediately preceding...
  10. R

    Definite PVAPN

    Question for but not limited to @Gryllus Maior because he sees θεος at J 1:1c as definite. Levinsohn in his “Discourse Features” calls attention to the section in Wallace’s grammar on page 243 and the category of anarthrous nouns with a definite force. Wallace GGBB 263 gives Mt 27:42 and John...
  11. R

    The use of the Greek article

    The Greek article is basic to Greek, but it's not that basic functionally. In my Greek reading I have found that looking for the antecedent of articular nouns instead of considering it to merely make something definite is more illuminating. Comments...
  12. R

    Examples where BDAG is anti-trinitarian

    Some here have accused the Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich Greek Lexicon of having a Trinitarian bias. This thread will have examples where this is not true.
  13. R

    Impersonal λόγος at John 1:1 - How?

    The discussion on how to define ο λόγος at John 1:1 has been occurring in another thread. I would like to ask those who view it as impersonal to help me understand this concept better. Examples in Greek would be helpful. It appears that at least one of the JMs places importance on...
  14. R

    Biblical Hermeneutics

    The most objective tool for Biblical Hermeneutics is grammar. Within this large category exists some very basic axioms that are agreed upon by most everyone. These should form the foundation of the biblical exegesis of any text. Arguments based on these axioms must be challenged by other...
Top