[B-Greek] Rev 1 1 => Main Clause
Arie Dirkzwager
dirkzwager at pandora.be
Sun Oct 31 09:10:39 EST 2004
I agree with Harold.
One could add, that the style of the Revelation is very loose (and therefore
charming). It contains mostly a *chain* of thoughts. John does not like to
split parts of clauses.
Splitting hOSA EIDEN from the clause that ends with IWANNHi seems to me very
unnatural - not only for John.
Arie
Dr. A. Dirkzwager
Hoeselt, Belgium
e-mail dirkzwager at pandora.be
----- Oorspronkelijk bericht -----
Van: "Harold R. Holmyard III" <hholmyard at ont.com>
Aan: <B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Verzonden: zondag 31 oktober 2004 14:51
Onderwerp: Re: [B-Greek] Rev 1 1 => Main Clause
> 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
> ---
> B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
> B-Greek mailing list
> B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
>
>
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list