[B-Greek] Singular Rel-pro in Rev 13:8; the plural Rel-pro in Rev 17:8

virgil newkirk virgilsalvage1 at msn.com
Mon Nov 7 13:36:22 EST 2005


Carl,

I wasn't thinking or suggesting that the phrasing in 17:8 was actually 
"derived from" 13:8; what was in my mind was, here is the author essentially 
writing again about all the people living on the earth and their attention 
to the beast ( I guess I am assuming it's the same subject..should I not?) 
and yet he writes EPI TO BIBLION where before he wrote in a similar 
description of things EPI TWi BIBLIWi; should I think that his Greek went 
from good to bad in this short span ? (Please, I am not being sarcastic..I 
just don't understand) Or am I distorting what you've suggested about the 
flux of Greek ? If it is a case of solecism or bad Greek it puzzles me why 
it occurred so close together in two different manifestations ?

Since he used hWN in 17:8 could there be another reason he used hOU in 13:8, 
other than what you've suggested ? You did say:

"
What "might" be noted in the clause "hOU OU GEGRAPTAI TO ONOMA
AUTOU" is the Semitizing construction wherein hOU is repeated in
AUTOU as is common with ASHER clauses in Hebrew."

This for me is another one of those cases where the words.."might be," 
"could be," "possibly," lead to not being able to be sure about the accuracy 
and clarity contained in the grammar.

I probably won’t use the word "mystical" in the future, although it is a 
word for me that simply refers to what is "real." BTW..I did not use the 
phrase "mystical reality." In view of that allow me to ask simply:

"
Couldn't we take APO KATABOLHS KOSMOU as modifying both the book's existence 
found in 17:8, and the one who has become as slain in 13:8 ?"


Virgil Newkirk
Salt Lake City, Utah








----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Carl W. Conrad" <cwconrad at ioa.com>
To: "virgil newkirk" <virgilsalvage1 at msn.com>
Cc: "B-Greek B-Greek" <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2005 3:52 AM
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Singular Rel-pro in Rev 13:8; the plural Rel-pro in 
Rev 17:8



On Nov 7, 2005, at 1:28 AM, virgil newkirk wrote:

> Carl,
>
> I've read how the singular relative pronoun may sometimes have a
> plural antecedent; it seems though, that it's quite a stretch for
> "all" the people living on the earth to be reduced to or
> represented by a singular "hOU OU GEGRAPTAI TO ONOMA AUTOU"; I
> don't understand. Why the change to the plural hWN in Rev 17:8

I would not assume that the phrasing of Rev 17:8 is derived from that
of 13:8. What might be noted in the clause "hOU OU GEGRAPTAI TO ONOMA
AUTOU" is the Semitizing construction wherein hOU is repeated in
AUTOU as is common with ASHER clauses in Hebrew. Although BDAG lists
a number of anomalous varieties of pronominal non-agreement with
antecedent, this doesn't really seem to fall into it. I'd be more
inclined to think this is one of those not-at-all-uncommon
"solecisms" of Revelation.

> Another thing that puzzles:
>
> In Rev 13:8 John writes the dative prepositional phrase EN TWi
> BIBLIWi to describe (I presume) the place in which TO ONOMA AUTOU
> did not become written; then in Rev 17:8 John writes the accusative
> prepositional phrase EPI TO BIBLION; again, I don't understand.

While others might understand it differently, I'd say simply that EPI
TO BIBLION is a solecism (from the perspective of school grammar) --
it's just bad Greek. On the other hand, as I keep noting, Koine Greek
is a language in flux: one of the currents in its movement away from
classical toward modern usage is increasing usage of the accusative
forms of nouns as objects of all prepositions. And -- as I said
above, I wouldn't necessarily assume that the phraseology of 17:8
depends directly upon the phrasing of 13:8.

> Also, couldn’t TO BIBLION THS ZWHS and TOU ESQAGMENOU in a mystical
> (read reality) kind of way have existed APO KATABOLHS KOSMOU. That
> is to say, couldn't we take APO KATABOLHS KOSMOU as modifying both
> the book's existence found in 17:8, and the one who has become as
> slain in 13:8 ?

This gets into speculation that goes beyond what the Greek text as a
Greek text says; I'd prefer not to talk about "mystical reality."
/ 



More information about the B-Greek mailing list