[B-Greek] ECOMEN or ECWMEN - Rom. 5.1

bitan buth ybitan at mscc.huji.ac.il
Sun Apr 9 10:12:47 EDT 2006


Larramore egrapsen: 
>>NT Wright takes ECWMEN as imperative. He puts the
circumflex over the W. Could he mean that it is in
form a Subjunctive, but in function an imperative? He
glosses it "let us have peace."
o de fay:
> I believe he is taking the subjunctive as hortatory. He mistates himself 
since there is no 1st plural imperative form per se. Admittedly, he states 
in his commentary that this is a possibility (which I believe is wrong), but

I think he is mistating himself. Also, Wright does believe it should be 
understood as indicative (Romans, 515).
He points to Moo (Romans, 295-6) as support for the imperatival reading, but

Moo takes it as a hortatory subjunctive as well.>
 
It helps to recognize that people do not always use the same metalanguage.
A hortatory subjunctive is someone else's cohortative, is someone else's
1st person imperatival usage. 
What concerns me is the w-mega properispwmenon (circumflex). That would be
a misprint for either E'XOMEN or E'XWMEN proparoksutonos. 
Please note, it would be possible for a scribe to write either one, even if 
a subjunctive was intended. They were homonyms in the first century.
ERRWSQE
Randall BUth

 

 

Randall Buth, PhD
Biblical Language Center

www.biblicalulpan.org

c/o margbuth at gmail.com

also, Director, Biblical Studies in Israel
under Rothberg International School,

Hebrew University

ybitan at mscc.huji.ac.il

 




More information about the B-Greek mailing list