[B-Greek] Rev 13:18

Daniel Gleason info at revelationjesuschrist.com
Mon Jul 5 22:48:20 EDT 2004


Ron Snider wrote: This question concerns the explanatory clause ARIQMOS GAR
ANQRWPOU ESTIN, in which both nouns are anarthrous.  John has used the term
"number" three times in this verse and the two others have the definite
article.  How would this best be understood grammatically, and I have read
the comments of Wallace in GGBTB.

This is my translation, if anyone sees any errors, let me know:

REV 13:18
Here, The Wisdom is ... The-One having a-mind, let-him-calculate the number
of-the beast, for it-is A-Number of-a-man ... and The Number of-it ... 666.

I broke the verse into 4 parts or clauses to reflect the words that are in
the nominative case: Wisdom, The-(One), a-Number (pred nom?), and 666.

I think the term "the wisdom" can be seen as a predicate nominative of
"here." This is a reflection of a disguised predicate nominative at the end
of the verse. That pred. nom. is the number 666 because the unsaid "estin"
is implied. So, the first clause can be translated as ... "The Wisdom is
here" or "Here is the Wisdom" because either has the same meaning.

Re the explanatory clause ARIQMOS GAR ANQRWPOU ESTIN ... the word "of-a-man"
is a genitive singular. So what is the connection between "of-a-man" and the
two following nominatives "the number" and "666"?

Over the centuries most translators and scholars have seen this verse as a
Greek Isopsephia riddle that refers to the number of the name "of-a-man" who
is un-named. I grammatically understand this verse as follows: The number
666 is a-number (a-component) of the unsaid man's name. In other words, the
isopsephia number of the man's name is not 666, it is a number greater than
666. In other words, using a predicate-nominative-grammar interpretation on
the clause Ron mentioned, the
term "of-a-man" can be seen as code for "of-a-number."

The Greek grammar of this verse is extremely tricky because it is so
ambiguous. Let's perform a truth test on the verse to see why the author may
have wrote it the way he did.

1] Let us assume the man's number is 666. If that is true, the author could
simply write the word "estin" before "666" and he would not be lying. But,
he didn't say "estin 666" because then the verse would not be true.

2] Now let us assume the man's number is greater than 666. If true, the
author could then say that "the number" ... "666" was "A-NUMBER of-a-man."
This is exactly what he said and the verse as it stands is now true.

Well that's my take on the verse. Anything else, such as "the revelation"
(the solution of the man's name and number), is definitely off topic.

Daniel Gleason





More information about the B-Greek mailing list