[B-Greek] The relative pronouns in Ephesians 6:17 and Revelation 5:8
Barry H.
nebarry at verizon.net
Wed Oct 13 00:19:48 EDT 2010
----- Original Message -----
From: "Leonard Jayawardena" <leonardj at live.com>
To: <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 11:25 PM
Subject: [B-Greek] The relative pronouns in Ephesians 6:17 and Revelation
5:8
>
> 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.
As someone once said, don't teach Greek grammar from Revelation... :)
> 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.
>
Not sure what you are getting at here, "Read PLEONEKTHS for EIDWLOLATRHS."
The text has what you wrote above, PLEONEKTHS, hO ESTIN EIDWOLOLATRHS. Yes,
this is the Greek equivalent of the Latin id est. However, a number of the
manuscripts correct to hOS. I love Metzger's note on this: "[It] appears to
be a correction introduced by overly punctilious scribes," scribes whose
Greek was very correct. The first year that I taught Greek at WTS, I had
written something on the board in English that was corrected by one of the
international students in the class. My response then, as now, was
"American is my native language, and I'll butcher it any way I wanna!"
Tongue slightly in cheek,
N.E. Barry Hofstetter, semper melius Latine sonat...
Classics and Bible Instructor, TAA
http://www.theamericanacademy.net
(2010 Salvatori Excellence in Education Winner)
V-P of Academic Affairs, TNARS
bhofstetter at tnars.net
http://www.tnars.net
http://my.opera.com/barryhofstetter/blog
http://mysite.verizon.net/nebarry
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list