Stephen Carlson wrote:The inference is asymmetric. When there is constructio ad sensum, you may assume that the author conceives of the noun as somehow personal. When you have ordinary grammatical agreement, you can't assume anything about how the author conceives of the personality of the noun.
John milton wrote: Is John being inconsistent in the prologue ( neuter pronoun referring to τὸ φῶς [a personality?] in verse 5, personal pronoun referring to τὸ φῶς [a personality] in verse 10 ) , or did he not imagine τὸ φῶς to be personal at verse 5 ? While the normal construction at John 1:5 does not prove that τὸ φῶς in verse 5 isn't a personality, it seems to strongly argue against it being personal.
John milton wrote:Respectfully, I don't see how Barry's notion of "studied ambiguity" answers the question of why apostle John failed to jettison grammatical gender in verse 5 for natural gender . Was τὸ φῶς not personal at this time?
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest