[B-Greek] The relative pronouns in Ephesians 6:17 and Revelation 5:8
Leonard Jayawardena
leonardj at live.com
Tue Oct 12 23:25:53 EDT 2010
Further to my post of yesterday on the above subject, some more comments on Rev. 5:8 and a clarification on Ephes. 5:8.
The question was asked which was the antecedent of the relative pronoun in hAI\ in FIALAS CRUSAS GEMOUSAS QUMIAMATWN, hAI/ EISIN hAI PROSEUCAI TWN hAGIWN (Rev. 5:8)--FIALAS or QUMIAMATWN.
Incense is the scriptural symbol for prayer (cf. Psalm 141:2; Luke 1:10). Accordingly, in Revelation, a highly symbolical book, it is QUMIAMATA, not FIALAS, which represents the prayers of the saints--The FIALAI only CONTAIN the QUMIAMATA. Therefore the technically correct relative pronoun in this passage is hA/ (neuter plural) to agree with the antecedent QUMIAMATA. But John opts for the feminine relative--hAI/ EISIN hAI PROSEUCAI TWN hAGIWN--and this can be explained in terms of the relative assimilating in gender to the predicate substantive (PROSEUCAI), which expresses the main idea or reality.
There is a similar case in Revelation 4:5: hEPTA LAMPADES PUROS KAIOMENAI ENWPION TOU QRONOU, hA/ EISIN TA hEPTA PNEUMATA TOU QEOU. Here the antecedent is LAMPADES, so the technically correct relative is hAI/. But John uses the neuter, which again can be explained as above.
I wrote in my last post "Ephesians 5:5--In the same book we have PLEONEKTHS, hO ESTIN EIDWLOLATRHS, where the ordinary relative would be hOS to agree with the masculine EIDOLOLATRHS."
Read PLEONEKTHS for EIDWLOLATRHS--a slight slip on my part. In this case, hO ESTIN must be explanatory beause there is no possibility of the relative being assimilated in gender to EIDWLOLATRHS, the genders being different.
Leonard Jayawardena
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list