Search found 3 matches
- September 7th, 2014, 10:36 pm
- Forum: New Testament
- Topic: Hebrews 10:37 Future Indicative vs. Subjunctive
- Replies: 2
- Views: 944
Hebrews 10:37 Future Indicative vs. Subjunctive
In the citation of Habakkuk 2:3–4 in Hebrews 10:37–38, Hebrews has a negated future indicative as opposed to the LXX's emphatic-negative subjunctive. Heb 10:37 - ὁ ἐρχόμενος ἥξει καὶ οὐ χρονίσει· Hab 2:3b LXX - ἐρχόμενος ἥξει καὶ οὐ μὴ χρονίσῃ. The author of Hebrews has edited Hab 2:3–4 and made oth...
- October 15th, 2013, 11:48 am
- Forum: Pragmatics and Discourse
- Topic: Question on Present Tense in Romans 7.14-25
- Replies: 5
- Views: 4716
Re: Question on Present Tense in Romans 7.14-25
Thanks! Yes, I would rather focus on the way the present tense is functioning in the text instead of the theological debate! I apologize for framing the discussion along those lines. The Runge article is available online: http://www.ntdiscourse.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Runge-ReconsideringHP.pd...
- October 15th, 2013, 10:11 am
- Forum: Pragmatics and Discourse
- Topic: Question on Present Tense in Romans 7.14-25
- Replies: 5
- Views: 4716
Question on Present Tense in Romans 7.14-25
Moderator's note: please ignore the theological debate outlined in this message and focus on the text itself, and what it means. One of the arguments used by proponents of a "Christian view" of Romans 7:14-25 is Paul's shift to the present tense in these verses (cf. Dunn, Cranfield). On t...