[B-Greek] The relative pronouns in Ephesians 6:17 and Revelation 5:8
Wong Hung Huen
hwhhwong at gmail.com
Wed Oct 13 02:34:59 EDT 2010
as Leonard has pointed out the idea of gender assimilation according to the
following predicate substantive,
but how are going to understand the relative pronoun hO in Eph 6:17, can we
be very sure to say that it is because this relative pronoun is assimilated
in gender to the word hRHMA, the hO can refer to MACAIRAN(feminine) instead
of PNEUMATOS which is neuter in gender and the noun nearest to the relative
pronoun?
This is different from the case of Rev. 5:8, where becaue of the factor of
gender assimilation in operation, the relative pronoun there hAI can refer
to prayers though it is not in agreement with the words incenses in gender.
Wong Hung Huen(hh)
On 13 October 2010 11:25, Leonard Jayawardena <leonardj at live.com> wrote:
>
> 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
> ---
> B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
> B-Greek mailing list
> B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
>
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list