RE: [John_Lit] John 3:34 TO PNEUMA
I would think that the easier argument would be for TO PNEUMA to be the object. If PNEUMA were the subject, then this would be an intransitive verb, no? That is relatively rare for the active form of DIDWMI. A quick look through Liddell Scott, and my concordance, found few instances of the intransitive use. And John seems to like the transitive use. Though John 14:27 might be an example of an intransitive use, in which the issue is manner of giving (similar to your "EX METROU" in 3:34).
I wonder also, is the PNEUMA sufficiently personalized in John to carry a verb like "to give"? The PNEUMA in John seems to be more of a quality (moves like the wind, linked with truth, etc), or a future paraclete.
Just some thoughts.
Mark A. Matson
Academic Dean, Milligan College
> -----Original Message--------
> From: Wieland Willker [mailto:willker@...-bremen.de]
> Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 4:01 PM
> To: John-Lit
> Subject: [John_Lit] John 3:34 TO PNEUMA
> John 3:34
> ON GAR APESTEILEN O QEOS TA RHMATA TOU QEOU LALEI, OU GAR EK
> METROU DIDWSIN TO PNEUMA.
> What arguments are there for taking TO PNEUMA as the subject
> (i.e. nominative instead of
> Zahn notes that the confusion in this phrase (either addition
> of O QEOS, omission of TO
> PNEUMA, or rewriting by Sy-C: O PATHR TW UIW AUTOU?) is due
> to the fact that the scribes
> did not recognize that TO PNEUMA is the subject.
> Best wishes
> Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
> SUBSCRIBE: e-mail firstname.lastname@example.org
> UNSUBSCRIBE: e-mail email@example.com
> PROBLEMS?: e-mail firstname.lastname@example.org
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.384 / Virus Database: 216 - Release Date: 8/21/2002
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.384 / Virus Database: 216 - Release Date: 8/21/2002