From: Ken Smith (kens@180solutions.com)
Date: Tue Jun 19 2001 - 01:12:38 EDT
<x-html>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4
: Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:36:59 EDT
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.0.4417.0">
<TITLE>RE: [b-greek] Revelation...</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>> My question for you right now is: What significance is</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> there in the fact that John wrote in verse four: "APO</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> hO WN KAI hO HN KAI hO ERCAMENOS"? Why did he not use</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> the genitive: APO TOU ONTOS... KTL?</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>A number of commentators have suggested that hO WN, from the LXX of Ex. 3:14, had taken on the nature of a fixed formula, enough so that John, whose Greek was marginal (albeit better than most of ours), didn't notice or didn't care about the agreement.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>In addition, Barclay, in a suggestion perhaps not original with him, has pointed out that there isn't an aorist participle form of EIMI, and that something like GENOMENOS would introduce an element of changeableness or becoming. So the writer chose the distinctly ungrammatical HN to "mark" the unchangeableness of God.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Clay, Carl, et al., what *would* the correct, grammatical options for this sentence be?</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>> Beyond that, it seems that John was bad with</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> agreement, also. He says in verse five: "KAI APO</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> IHSOU CRISTOU, hO MARTUS, hO PISTOS, hO PRWTOTOKOS TWN</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> NEKRWN KAI O ARCWN TWN BASILEWN THS GHS." It is</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> interesting (if not an error) that he uses the</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> genitive for "Jesus Christ" and the nominative for</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> "the witness, the faithful one, the first-born of the</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> dead... KTL." Is this non-agreement bad grammar,</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> period? Or is there a reason for it?</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>The Greek of Revelation is notoriously ungrammatical -- this is, I think, probably just one example. My own Greek is far more marginal than John's, but I've been able to pick out any number of examples from my own reading. You'll find more as you go through.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Ken Smith</FONT>
</P>
---<BR>
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]<BR>
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu<BR>
To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu<BR>
<BR>
</BODY>
</HTML>
</x-html>