From: Hultberg, Alan (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat Jan 15 2000 - 19:53:14 EST
Leaving the textual issue aside, and taking the NA/UBS text as it stands, how
do you understand Rev 21:3e?
The text reads (starting in the prior clause):
And they themselves shall be his people, KAI AUTOS O QEOS MET' AUTWN ESTAI
There are two options for the syntax (so also Charles, *Revelation*,
1) the prepositional phrase is the compliment of ESTAI, making AUTWN QEOS a
pendent nomintative ("God himself shall be with them--their God" [or "as their
2) the prepostional phrase modifies O QEOS, and the compliment of ESTAI is
AUTWN QEOS ("[the] God [who is] with them shall be their God" or "*God with
them* shall be their God").
Option 2 is the most straightforward, it seems to me, both syntactically and
in light of the parallelism with the previous clause, but is option 1 even
syntactially viable? I'm well aware that John is not averse to solecisms, and
thus that odd grammar is not the best criterion for judging what he may or may
not have intended syntactically, nevertheless, is option 1 so wierd as to be
virtually non-sensical? What do you b-greekers think?
(I am also aware of the possiblity of OT allusions and their impact on a final
solution. Please don't address those per se. I just want to know about the
two syntactical possibilities.)
--- B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [email@example.com] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-329W@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:54 EDT