Is the first word of Hebrews 2:11 "hO", the masculine definite article
(nom. sing.) - or "hO" (with accent), the neuter relative pronoun
(nom./acc. sing.)? NA-20, 25, 26, and 27, and UBS3 (corrected) and UBS4
(both first and second printing) show the relative pronoun, as does the
Scrivener Textus Receptus. Perschbacher's REFRESH YOUR GREEK (using UBS3
(corrected)) has changed it to the definite article (no accent) and so
does Friberg's ANALYTICAL GREEK NEW TESTAMENT (using UBS 3). My
inclination would side with the definite article - a neuter relative
pronoun used in conjunction with a masculine participle seems unusual,
and the second participle has the (plural) definite article (hO ...
hAGIAZWN KAI hOI hAGIAZOMENOI ...), not a relative pronoun, in all these
Greek texts.
However, the Greek text editors seem to favor the neuter RELATIVE
PRONOUN. So what am I missing or misunderstanding about how the neuter
relative pronoun functions here - if indeed it is the relative pronoun?
-- "Eric S. Weiss" http://home1.gte.net/eweiss/index.htm eweiss@gte.net