[B-Greek] Rev 1 1 => Main Clause
Harold R. Holmyard III
hholmyard at ont.com
Sun Oct 31 08:51:43 EST 2004
Dear Peter,
>I'd consider:
>
>1) as main clause:
> KAI ESHMANEN TW DOULW AUTOU IOANNH hOSA EIDEN
> (Jesus indicated his servant John the things he saw. 'He'
>is refering to John and not to Jesus, who is the seer in the
>revelation:1,11ff. His name is introduced in between: V.1.hOSA EIDEN
>refers to the receiving of the revelation by seeing)
>
>
>2) as Adverbial Clause (specifiying the way the revelation came to John):
> APOSTEILAS DIA AGGELOU AUTOU
>
>3) as appositiv clause to identify John more specific (refering to
>two past - Aorist- events leading to his exile - exactly as in Rev 1
>9):
>hOS EMARTURHSEN TON LOGON TOU QEOU KAI MARTURIAN IHSOU XRISTOU
>
>I can't see any refering point in the appositive clause (hOS
>EMARTURHSEN TON LOGON TOU QEOU KAI THN MARTURIAN IHSOU XRISTOU) to
>hOSA EIDEN, so I consider the appositiv clause to be ended with
>XRISTOU. The hOSA EIDEN belongs then as an object to the main
>clause. John did not yet EMARTURHSEN (Aorist) hOSA EIDEN in the
>past, because the complete revelation still is a future thing for
>John in the introduction Verses.
HH: This does not seem the most natural reading to me. The words TW
DOULW AUTOU IOANNH seem to function as the indirect object of
APOSTEILAS, and hOSA EIDEN seems to be in apposition to TON LOGON TOU
QEOU KAI MARTURIAN IHSOU XRISTOU. I think you're perhaps focusing on
the idea that the revelation was still a future thing for John in the
introductory verses. First, I don't see why it has to be. He wrote
the letter after he witnessed all these things. Second, it is
possible that he used the epistolary aorist. By the time the readers
get the letter, John will certainly have been finished witnessing to
what he saw.
Yours,
Harold Holmyard
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list