…will be pretty slow for me- commenting and posting.
Though I have most of my reading done for the semester, I need to read one more book for Church History, The Next Christendom: the Coming of Global Christianity by Philip Jenkins, and write a book report on it. I also have to do a small write up on Romans 5.1 on whether εχομεν or εχωμεν is the intended original text as well as a discourse analysis on Phil 2.1-13, both for my Greek syntax class.
This will be followed by finals the week following.
RSS/XML Feed:
Email:
Well, my brother, you have a handful of work before you. You’ll do well!
Good luck on echomen or echwmen. My NA27 apparatus shows a great divide.
But most translations ten to go with echomen in the text with a note for echwmen.
Hey TC,
I’ve been looking at the manuscript evidence for the verse, and the support for that definitely seems to favor echwmen- although 0220, the earliest we have of the verse, points us to the indicative echomen.
I think the nail in the coffin for me is that echomen favors the buildup we have in Chps 1-4, and the fact that Paul places our reconciliation with God in verse 10 in the past tense (linked to the cross, see my discussion in an earlier blog haha), it seems to assume that our peace is also tied to justification, not something we must add to it.
Well, Bryan, you have used the internal evidence greatly to your advantage. I’m almost a believer (hahaha).
I’ll look at your other post.