Another Reason Not to Use the Catholic Encyclopedia
A few days ago a new member of the Areopagus Forum of the NTRMin Discussion Board asked for help in answering a claim his Roman Catholic friend was making regarding the interpretation of the Last Supper passages in Matt 26:28 and parallels (see link).
The key point here was that the Catholic Encyclopedia article on the “Sacrifice of the Mass” insisted there is a "grammatical rule" at play which demands we see in the present-tense form of the word ekchynnomenon a “present pouring out” of Jesus blood right there at the table, allegedly “proving” the Roman Catholic dogma of transubstantiation. The grammatical rule in question was purported to have come from Blass’s Grammar of New Testament Greek.
I responded with skepticism here, and promised to look it up as I found time.
Well, look it up I did, and the results are quite amusing. Here is my latest response to this. The moral is, don’t ever trust a Roman Catholic polemist when he tells you “but the Greek says x.”
The key point here was that the Catholic Encyclopedia article on the “Sacrifice of the Mass” insisted there is a "grammatical rule" at play which demands we see in the present-tense form of the word ekchynnomenon a “present pouring out” of Jesus blood right there at the table, allegedly “proving” the Roman Catholic dogma of transubstantiation. The grammatical rule in question was purported to have come from Blass’s Grammar of New Testament Greek.
I responded with skepticism here, and promised to look it up as I found time.
Well, look it up I did, and the results are quite amusing. Here is my latest response to this. The moral is, don’t ever trust a Roman Catholic polemist when he tells you “but the Greek says x.”
posted by NA at 1:14 PM
<< Home