emory2oo2 at hotmail.com
Mon Jan 8 14:39:00 EST 2001
OUC hOTI HDH ELABON
H HDH TETELEIWMAI
DIWKW DE EI KAI KATALABW
EF hW KAI KATELHMFQHN hUPO CRISTOU
I note that ELABON is a transitive verb, without its object(s) provided.
My question has to do with how one goes about determining (eliminating or
including) grammatical object(s).
In the previous section, I am assuming that one or more
of the following could be supplied as the object(s) of ELABON:
hEUREQW EN AUTWi
TOU GNWNAI AUTON
Is it a general rule of thumb that if you can NOT grammatically
eliminate a possible object, you should assume it would be included in
the object(s) of ELABON? Hence, verse 12 would read:
"Not that I have already attained (all the aforementioned)"
Secondly, I note that the NET Bible takes the subsequent, parallel
phrase (??) as the object of ELABON:
"Not that I have already attained this--that is, I have not already been
This seems like an odd use of the particle H to me. Is this kind of
usage attested elsewhere?
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
More information about the B-Greek