“`html An Exegetical Study of Matthew 16:19: The Periphrastic Future Perfect body { font-family: ‘Palatino Linotype’, Palatino, Georgia, serif; line-height: 1.6; margin: 2em; max-width: 900px; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; } h1, h2, h3 { font-family: ‘Trajan Pro’, serif; color: #333; margin-top: 1.5em; margin-bottom: 0.8em; } h2 { font-size: 1.8em; border-bottom: 1px solid #ccc; padding-bottom: 0.3em;…
My rule of thumb is that if a verb is missing and it’s not in immediate parallelism with a preceding clause, try using a form of the verb εἶναι “to be.” That’s how some translations take it anyway.
Statistics: Posted by Stephen Carlson — March 12th, 2014, 1:36 am
Hi, I found an answer to my question, while scanning the thick grammar book by A. T. Robertson, p. 1184.
Sometimes a word is repeated with DE for special emphasis, as DIKAISUNH in Ro 3:22( cf. 9:30).
9:30:
EQNH TA MH DIWKONTA DIKAIOSUNHN KATELABEN DIKAISUNHN, DIKAISUNHN DE THN EK PISTEWS.
So, if DE can introduce a phrase as Rom 9:30, the answer to my question is obvious.
Moon Jung
Statistics: Posted by moon — June 10th, 2014, 7:52 am
