Re: reason for b-greek

From: Ben Crick (ben.crick@argonet.co.uk)
Date: Thu Dec 10 1998 - 21:02:06 EST


On Thu 10 Dec 98 (08:01:02), cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu wrote:
> I hope not to start an argument on this matter, and if we can steer clear
> of expressing theological and religious judgments regarding a question
> I think ought rather to be discussed in pragmatic and pedagogical
> terms, then we may be able to avoid argument. Personally, however, I
> don't like Ben's formulation above, either as a syllogism or even as a
> pair of propositions. I wouldn't want to urge any view on THE language
> that God speaks (or has spoken or will speak); if we want to consider
> the language spoken by the Jesus of history, that's debatable.

 Dear Carl,

 I'm so very sorry if I inadvertently offended against the canons of
 b-greek and of good taste in making that silly remark. It was not intended
 as a theological statement; only as a lame attempt at an aphorism.

 If it has any justification at all, then it is in Hebrews 1:1-2a

 POLUMERWS KAI POLUTROPWS PALAI hO QEOS LALHSAS TOIS PATRASIN EN TOIS
 PROFHTAIS EP' ESCATOU TWN hHMERWN TOUTWN ELALHSEN hHMIN EN hIWi...

 But I don't want to continue any argument on this matter, either: so this
 is private to you, not to the List.

 Yours ever,
 Ben

-- 
 Revd Ben Crick, BA CF
 <ben.crick@argonet.co.uk>
 232 Canterbury Road, Birchington, Kent, CT7 9TD (UK)
 http://www.cnetwork.co.uk/crick.htm


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:10 EDT