corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Re: Gal 1:16 and Rom 1:19

From: Ronald Troxel <rltroxel AT facstaff.wisc.edu>
To: "Corpus-paul" <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
Subject: Re: Gal 1:16 and Rom 1:19
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 10:32:58 +0100

It occurred to me on the drive in to my office that I might have
misconstrued your intent, John. If you are suggesting that *en autois* is
datival, that's certainly a possibility (cf. Acts 7.13: *kai Paneron
egevneto tW{i} ParaW{i} to gevnos tou IWsHP*). Then, however, I would
press my other argument again: how is *en autois* in Rom 1.19 any more
"emphatic" there than *autois* at the end of the sentence?

Ron

Ronald L. Troxel, Ph.D.
Department of Hebrew and Semitic Studies
1340 Van Hise Hall
1220 Linden Dr.
Madison, WI 53706

Gal 1:16 and Rom 1:19, John Dickson, 04/06/1999
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: Gal 1:16 and Rom 1:19, Ronald Troxel, 04/06/1999
- Re: Gal 1:16 and Rom 1:19, Ronald Troxel, 04/06/1999
- Gal 1:16 and Rom 1:19, Lloyd Gaston, 04/09/1999
- Re: Gal 1:16 and Rom 1:19, Ronald Troxel, 04/09/1999