From: Carl W. Conrad (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Sep 11 2000 - 06:57:21 EDT
At 12:08 PM -0400 9/10/00, Polycarp66@aol.com wrote:
>In a message dated 9/9/2000 12:25:43 PM Central Standard Time,
. . . even here, where suffering to carry the gospel is
>clearly in view, the evangelistic work is not called MARTURIA--that is, I
>can't see the "modern" sense of MARTURIA that you assert for Rev 1:2.
>Under MARTUREW 1, d. BAGD has (also see MARTURIA 3)
>d. in eccl. usage w. regard to martyrdom bear witness, testify, be a witness
>(unto death) , be martyred: of Paul MARTURHSAS EPI TWN hHGOUMENWN . . . EIS
>TON hAGION TOPON EPOREUQH 1 Cl 5:7; cf. vs. 4; MPol 1:1; 19:1; 21f; Epil Mosq
>3. Prob. 1 Ti 6:13 also belongs here: XRISTOU IHSOU TOU MARTURHSANTOS EPI
>PONTIOU PILATOU THN KALHN hOMOLOGIAN Christ Jesus, who made the good
>confession before Pontius Pilate (cf. GBaldensperger, RHPhr 2, '22, 1-25;
>95-117); otherwise the passage may be classed under 1a above.
>The usage of MARUTRIA in the sense of martyrdom appears to be for the most
>part a late usage. Thus it would seem that your understanding of the
>significance of the term would be dependent upon your dating of the writing.
>The Apocalypse has generally been considered to be one of the later (if not
>the latest) work in the NT. It is only when the Pastorals and some other
>works attributed to Paul were designated as being from another hand that the
>Apocalypse's postition as the ultimate work of the NT was questioned. For
>some reason the traditional dating of this book has survived the recognition
>by most that it was not written by the Apostle John. I consider it to have
>been written somewhat later than the traditional date therefore I consider
>that later usages of the term MARTUR* should be considered.
>Consider the usage in the Apocalypse only
>1.2 Jesus died.
>6.9 TAS YUXAS TWN ESFAGMENWN DIA TON LOGON TOU QEOU KAI DIA THN MARTURIAN hHN
>EIXON. Surely these are viewed as dead Christians who had given their life
>11.7 KAI hOTAN TELESWSIN THN MARTURIAN AUTWN, TO QHRION TO ANABAINON EK THS
>ABUSSU POIHSE MET' AUTWN POLEMON KAI NIKHSEI AUTOUS _KAI APOKTENEI AUTOUS_.
> Here MARTURIAN seems to refer to their testimony, but it ultimately
>results in the death of the witness.
>12.11 KAI AUTOI ENIKHSAN AUTON DIA TO hAIMA TOU ARNIOU
>KAI DIA TON LOGON THS MARTURIAS AUTWN
>KAI OUK HGAPHSAN THN YUXHN AUTWN AXRI QANATOU.
> 'Nuff said.
>12.17 KAI WRHISQH hO DRAKWN EPI THi YUNAIKI KAI APHLQEN POIHSAI POLEMON META
>. . . EXONTWN THN MARTURIAN IHSOU.
> Although those who are witnesses are pictured as alive, it might be
>questioned whether it is anticipated that they will suffer death as a result.
>15.5 hO NAOS THS SKHNHS TOU MARTURIOU EN TWi OURANWi
> An obvious allusion, indeed quotation, from the LXX regarding the
>17.6 KAI EIDON THN GUNAIKA MEQUOUSAN EK TOU hAIMATOS TWN hAGIWN KAI EK TOU
>hAIMATOS TWN MARTUWN IHSOU.
> Would any deny that these are to be called martyrs? The KJV, ASV, RSV,
>NRSV all translate this as martyrs. Only the NRSV translates it as witnesses.
Could it be that only the NRSV of these versions has it right? Of course
the argument from majority has only limited proof-value.
>19.10 TWN EXONTWN THN MARTURIAN IHSOU . . . hH GAR MARTURIA IHSOU ESTIN TO
>PNEUMA THS PROFHTEIAS.
> Although it would be difficult to maintain that this MUST refer to a
>witness which leads to death, neither can it be authoritatively excluded.
>20.4 KAI EIDON QRONOUS KAI EKAQISAN EP' AUTOUS KAI KRIMA EDOQH AUTOIS, KAI
>TAS YUXAS TWN PEPELEKISMENWN DIA THN MARTURIAN IHSOU KAI DIA TON LOGON TOU
>QEOU KAI hOI TINES OU PROSJUNHSAN TO QHRION OUDE THN EIKONA AUTOU KAI OUK
>ELABON TO XARGMA EPI TO METWPON KAI EPI THN XEIRA AUTWN.
> Care to wager regarding the life status of those pictured here or how
>they achieved that status?
>22.15 MARTURW EGW PANTI TWi AKOUONTI TOUS LOGOUS THS PROFHTEIAS TOU BIBLIOU
>TOUTOU; [English, not Greek punctuation]
> I confess that, if this is "John" speaking, there is no way that this
>passage pictures martydom or immanent martyrdom. The only question is "Does
>this represent the voice of 'John'?" If it represents Christ, that's another
>22.20 LEGEI hO MARTURWN TAUTA; NAI, ERXOMAI TAXU. [English punc.]
> This surely is Christ speaking. He is the one who is pictured as the
>With few exceptions those who "testify" are pictured as dying as a result of
>this testimony. THAT IS MARTYRDOM.
Interesting argument. I think actually that an argument COULD be made (but
I would not make it) that the statement of Jesus to disciples in the
Synoptic apocalypse (Mk 13:10-14 and parallels) points to the future usage
of the terminology, although the words MARTUROS and MARTUREW don't actually
appear there, clearly enough associate "witnessing" with "suffering." As
for dating Revelation, fashions may be changing; my impression is that
there are growing doubts as to whether there really was any great
persecution of Christians under the Emperor Domitian and some tendency to
think that Revelation ought to be pushed backwards to the time of Nero.
That's another controversy on which I don't choose to take sides.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics/Washington University
One Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018
Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [email@example.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@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 - 15:36:35 EDT