Re: J 1:1 (fwd)

From: Paul Dixon - Ladd Hill Bible Church (pauld@iclnet93.iclnet.org)
Date: Sat Aug 19 1995 - 00:57:16 EDT


        You are correct in concluding that it is inappropriate to apply
Colwell's rule to Jn 1:1c. The conditions are not the same. In Jn 1:1c
we have an anarthrous predicate noun. Colwell's Rule applies only to
definite predicate nouns. Forget Colwell here.
        Paul Dixon

On Fri, 18 Aug 1995, Stephen Carlson wrote:

> Paul Dixon - Ladd Hill Bible Church wrote:
> > Recently there has been considerable discussion regarding
> > Colwell's Rule, its meaning and abuse, and whether Colwell himself was
> > guilty of abusing his own rule.
> > In 1975 my Th.M. thesis, "The Signifance of the Anarthrous
> > Predicate Nominative in John," argued that it was an abuse of Colwell's
> > rule to argue that anarthrous predicate nouns preceding the copulative
> > verb tend to be definite. This is the converse of Colwell's rule which
> > asserts that definite predicate nouns preceding the copulative tend to be
> > anarthrous.
>
> Is this really Colwell's rule? If so, it is of no relevance to
> Jn1:1c. In Jn1:1c, if THEOS is to be a predicate nominative,
> instead of the subject, am I right in thinking that KAI hO QEOS
> HN hO LOGOS must mean "and God was the Word" -- completely ruling
> out the possibility of predicate nominative QEOS being arthrous?
>
> Stephen Carlson
> --
> Stephen Carlson : Poetry speaks of aspirations, : ICL, Inc.
> scc@reston.icl.com : and songs chant the words. : 11490 Commerce Park Dr.
> (703) 648-3330 : Shujing 2:35 : Reston, VA 22091 USA
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:25 EDT