From: George Athas (gathas@mail.usyd.edu.au)
Date: Wed Mar 18 1998 - 16:25:34 EST
Williams, Wes wrote:
> > George Blaisdell wrote:
> > >And yet, in virtually all mss, there is no THi ~ And my suggestive
> > >question to anyone reading John is... Why?
> >
> >
> > May be because this word being absolute in itself does not require the
> > definite article?
> >
> A fine idea but usage does not always support it. The particular
> beginning that is referenced must come from context. Two examples of
> anarthrous EN ARCH:
>
> Acts 11:15 As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them just as on
> us EN ARCH. The reference is to Pentecost.
>
> Brenton LXX: 1 Samuel 17:9 For, behold, he is now hidden in one of the
> hills or in some other place: and it shall come to pass when he falls
> upon them EN ARCH,
>
> Verses 2 and 3 of John 1 suggest the reference for the beginning of
> verse 1 to be probably Genesis 1:1, which describes the creation of
> physical things.
If the writer of John was Semitic (and he almost definitely was), then the
omission of the article seems to be a deliberate action to make reference
back to Genesis 1:1. In Genesis 1, both the Hebrew and the Greek LXX omit
the article. This means that John was writing a 'new' Genesis. Notice how
John structures the next few chapters within a framework of 'days'
(1:29,35,43; 2:1,12,19), much like the beginning (ARCH - <<boom boom>>) of
Genesis.
Best regards!
George Athas
PhD (Cand.), University of Sydney
Tutor of Hebrew, Moore Theological College
Phone: 0414 839 964 ICQ#: 5866591
Email: gathas@mail.usyd.edu.au
(Visit the Tel Dan Inscription Website at)
(http://www-personal.usyd.edu.au/~gathas/teldan.htm)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:14 EDT