[B-Greek] Direct Discourse: Nominative/Object?
Jason Hare
jaihare at gmail.com
Wed Aug 23 00:59:41 EDT 2006
Jason,
Wow.... I thought this was settled already. LOL
OK, let's repeat the text again for the sake of clarity:
John 1:18 -- USB4
θεον ουδεις εωρακεν πωποτε· μονογενης θεος ο ων εις τον κοπλον του
πατρος εκεινος εξηγησατο.
QEON OUDEIS hEWRAKEN PWPOTE; MONOGENHS QEOS hO WN EIS TON KOPLON TOU
PATROS EKEINOS EXHGHSATO.
My understanding of your position is that you suppose this to be part
of a longer quotation of John the Baptist, starting in v. 15b. I can't
really object to this. I think it's a very likely option.
The problem is your attempt at reconstructing the meaning of the
verse. If QEOS is not to be taken as the noun head of the noun phrase
"MONOGENHS QEOS," then what do you make of hO WN...? It is imperative
that hO WN EIS KOPLON TOU PATROS modify MONOGENHS (if you want us to
believe that it is functioning as a substantive here). QEOS interrupts
the connection of MONOGENHS with hO WN.... It is simply an unnatural
reading of the text, and this is evidenced even more strongly by the
substitution of hUIOS for QEOS.
I do not think anyone's going to agree with you on this. If MONOGENHS
were a substantive here, I would expect it to appear with a definite
article, and it would not be separated from its modifying phrase.
Here is a reconstruction of what your invented text might look like:
* ο μονογενης ο ων εις κοπλον του πατρος εκεινος θεον εξηγησατο
* hO MONOGENHS hO WN EIS KOPLON TOU PATROS EKEINOS QEON EXHGHSATO
* The one-and-only, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has
declared/explained God.
This is not the structure of the verse, though, and I think your
reinterpretation goes beyond mere stretching into the land of the
far-fetched.
Regards,
Jason A. Hare
jaihare at gmail.com
Joplin, Missouri
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list