Apoc 3,14

GregStffrd at aol.com GregStffrd at aol.com
Wed May 16 01:29:10 EDT 2001


In a message dated 05/15/2001 10:00:23 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
jlupia2 at excite.com writes:

<< GS: Revelation 3:14 does not say this at all, but that the Amen is hH ARCH
 THS KTISEWS TOU QEOU. If, then, as you say, the Amen is the "first principle
 and cause of all things," how is it that the apostle says that he is the
 ARCH THS 
 KTISEWS ****TOU QEOU****? 
  
 I do not say the Amen is the "first principle and cause of all things,"  you
 have misread what I wrote.  What I read Apoc 3,14b as saying is the Amen is
 God's eternal "Yes" that faithfully witnesses to God as the eternal creator. 
>>>


Dear John:

I must admit it never occurred to me that you (or anyone else for that 
matter) would offer such a view, and I did misunderstand your translation. 
You wrote:

In a message dated 05/15/2001 7:34:39 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
jlupia2 at excite.com writes:

<< IMHO: The Amen, the faithful and true witness, says these things of God, 
the
 first principle and cause of all things. >>


I can now see that you believe that Amen says "these things of God." But I do 
not understand how you get to this conclusion. You explained:

 
<<  I see the final clause TOU QEOU as the object of the first TADE LEGEI.  I
 see hH ARCE THS KTISEWS to read "the first principle and cause of all things
 (creation)." as the action of God to which the Amen bears a faithful and
 true witness to. >>


Thank you for clarifying your view, which, again, is:

 
<< The Amen, the faithful and true witness, says these things of God, the 
first
 principle and cause of all things. >>


Now, before I get to the grammatical problems I find with the above, just 
what "things" does the AMHN say about God? It seems very clear that what the 
AMHN says begins in verse 15, and since that is the case your translation is 
essentially impossible. 

But I assume you have some explanation for this otherwise you would not have 
offered it, so I will wait to hear how you explain this and then we can 
discuss it and some other grammatical concerns I have with your view. 

Also, if you plan on continuing the discussion please do not forget my other 
remarks about the core issues in your post, as they relate to your use of 
Aristotle. 

Best regards,

Greg Stafford



More information about the B-Greek mailing list