[B-Greek] Genitive of Subordination and Revelation 1:5
Edgar Foster
edgarfoster2003 at yahoo.com
Mon Mar 30 10:08:36 EDT 2009
Thanks for your help, Carl. I thought that Revelation 1:5 could be understood another way, even if it does meet the criteria for a genitive of subordination. I now better understand what Wallace is doing in categorizing the genitive this way.
Just a couple of points. The NET Bible translates Revelation 1:5: "and from Jesus Christ – the faithful witness, the firstborn from among the dead, the ruler over the kings of the earth."
I assume that this Bible is treating hO ARXWN TWN BASILEWN THS GHS as a genitive of subordination. However, it does not explain the rationale for rendering the verse thus. I looked up Colossians 1:15 in the NET. It reads: "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation." Hence, the Greek construction PRWTOTOKOS PASHS KTISEWS is also treated as a genitive of subordination. The NET does contain a footnote for this part of Colossians 1:15. Interestingly, it is a reference to Daniel Wallace's GGBB.
I like the quote from Milton. It reminds me of what we find in Plato's Republic where Socrates quotes poetic verse, then he suggests that the verses should not be allowed in the ideal republic:
"I would rather be a serf on the land of a poor and portionless man than rule over all the dead who have come to naught."
Best regards,
Edgar Foster
--- On Fri, 3/27/09, Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com> wrote:
> From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Genitive of Subordination and Revelation 1:5
> To: edgarfoster2003 at yahoo.com
> Cc: "b-greek list" <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Date: Friday, March 27, 2009, 9:15 PM
> On Mar 27, 2009, at 8:18 PM, Edgar Foster wrote:
>
> >
> > Greetings B-Greekers,
> >
> > Text for Revelation 1:5: καὶ ἀπὸ Ἰησοῦ
> Χριστοῦ ὁ μάρτυς ὁ πιστός ὁ
> πρωτότοκος τῶν νεκρῶν καὶ ὁ
> ἄρχων τῶν βασιλέων τῆς γῆς τῷ
> ἀγαπῶντι ἡμᾶς καὶ λύσαντι
> ἡμᾶς ἐκ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν ἐν
> τῷ αἵματι αὐτοῦ [KAI APO IHSOU XRISTOU hO
> MARTUS hO PISTOS hO PRWTOTOKOS TWN NEKRWN KAI hO ARXWN TWN
> BASILEWN THS GHS TWi AGAPWNTI hHMAS KAI LUSANTI hHMAS EK TWN
> hAMARTIWN hHMWN EN TWi hAIMATI AUTOU].
> >
> > My question regards how the genitive hO PRWTOTOKOS TWN
> NEKRWN in this verse might be understood. Is it partitive of
> a genitive of subordination? Whether this grammatical
> construction is the former or the latter, another question
> that has occupied my thinking here lately is whether the
> so-called "genitive of subordination" is an
> example of a category that exemplifies the famed
> unnecessarily multiplied entities which Occam's Law
> militates against. I ask because of what Daniel B. Wallace
> (Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, pp. 103-104) writes about
> the genitive of subordination in his work.
> >
> > Wallace writes that the genitive of subordination
> "is a subset of the objective genitive, but not
> always." Hence, "For this reason, most likely,
> such a category is not to be found in standard
> grammars."
> >
> > I have looked in other grammars to see what they might
> say about the genitive of subordination. I did not find a
> mention of this category in Robertson, nor in William D.
> Chamberlain's An Exegetical Grammar of the Greek New
> Testament. I also do not think that the category appears in
> Brooks and Winbery's Syntax of New Testament Greek, or
> in Biblical Greek by M. Zerwick or BDF. Cf. Richard A.
> Young, Intermediate New Testament Greek: A Linguistic and
> Exegetical Approach.
> >
> > I guess an additional question is when did grammarians
> begin to call certain genitive constructs "genitives of
> subordination"?
>
> For my part, I think I would understand the genitive TWN
> NEKRWN in this context as partitive: of those who have died,
> the first to come to birth again is Jesus Christ.
>
> As for the "genitive of subordination," it
> appears to be the brainchild of Professor Wallace, perhaps
> "the firstborn of many aporetic case-usages." On a
> more serious note: From the pages you cite it would appear
> that he is concerned with the usage of the genitive to
> indicate those governed by or commanded by one in a position
> of authority, an ARCWN. My guess is that this is really an
> instance of a genitive of comparison -- which is really a
> genitive of separation (ablatival) used especially with
> comparative adjectives such as KREITTWN; although ARCWN is a
> substantive participle, the verb ARCW really means
> "have priority over" or "be in front."
> It is certainly the case that verbs of command take a
> genitive object, and I suspect that the category of
> "genitive of subordination" was created, like some
> of those Aristotelian terms for virtues and vices of which
> he says, "We know what the behavior is and can describe
> it even though we have no word for it." I think that
> Professor Wallace has created a name for a genitive usage
> with an expression of governance or command that has always
> been there but has hitherto been nameless.
>
> BUT: I really do NOT think the phrase PRWTOTOKOS TWN NEKRWN
> has a sense of governance or command over the dead. That
> sounds more like Milton's Satan: "Better to reign
> in Hell than serve in Heaven."
>
> Carl W. Conrad
> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list