Page 1 of 2

Rev 13:8 ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου

Posted: April 1st, 2015, 11:03 am
by grogers
In Rev. 13:8 does ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου modify ἐσφαγμένου or γέγραπται?

Re: Rev 13:8 ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου

Posted: April 1st, 2015, 12:17 pm
by Jonathan Robie
grogers wrote:In Rev. 13:8 does ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου modify ἐσφαγμένου or γέγραπται?
Here's the entire text:
Rev 13:8 wrote:καὶ προσκυνήσουσιν αὐτὸν πάντες οἱ κατοικοῦντες ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, οὗ οὐ γέγραπται τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τῆς ζωῆς τοῦ ἀρνίου τοῦ ἐσφαγμένου ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου.
If ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου modified ἐσφαγμένου, then ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τῆς ζωῆς τοῦ ἀρνίου τοῦ ἐσφαγμένου ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου would mean "in the book of life of the Lamb who was slaughtered before the world was made".

Grammatically, that may be possible, but I think it's much more likely that it modifies γέγραπται - πάντες οἱ κατοικοῦντες ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, οὗ οὐ γέγραπται τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τῆς ζωῆς ... ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου ("all who dwell on the earth whose name is not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world "), and the rest modifies the book: ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τῆς ζωῆς τοῦ ἀρνίου τοῦ ἐσφαγμένου ("in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain").

Re: Rev 13:8 ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου

Posted: April 1st, 2015, 12:32 pm
by Thomas Dolhanty
I think a simple reading of the sentence itself favours associating ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου with ἐσφαγμένου (with Beale & Osborne). It is hard to imagine why John would separate the prepositional phrase from the antecedent by 12 words. Those who choose γέγραπται as the antecedent tend to argue from theological considerations and/or the parallel with Rev 17:8 (so Aune).

Personally, I do not get Aune’s argument that it is “theologically impossible” for the prepositional phrase to modify ἐσφαγμένου. There are many instances in the NT where an event or a status is described in a way that doesn’t fit our concept of time as a simple linearity (e.g. Jn 1:18, Jn 17:11, Rom 8:30, etc.).
Jonathan Robie wrote:Grammatically, that may be possible
I would argue that 'grammatically' it is strongly favoured, and the natural reading!

Re: Rev 13:8 ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου

Posted: April 1st, 2015, 1:39 pm
by grogers
Jonathan Robie wrote:
grogers wrote:In Rev. 13:8 does ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου modify ἐσφαγμένου or γέγραπται?
Here's the entire text:
Rev 13:8 wrote:καὶ προσκυνήσουσιν αὐτὸν πάντες οἱ κατοικοῦντες ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, οὗ οὐ γέγραπται τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τῆς ζωῆς τοῦ ἀρνίου τοῦ ἐσφαγμένου ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου.
If ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου modified ἐσφαγμένου, then ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τῆς ζωῆς τοῦ ἀρνίου τοῦ ἐσφαγμένου ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου would mean "in the book of life of the Lamb who was slaughtered before the world was made".

Grammatically, that may be possible, but I think it's much more likely that it modifies γέγραπται - πάντες οἱ κατοικοῦντες ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, οὗ οὐ γέγραπται τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τῆς ζωῆς ... ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου ("all who dwell on the earth whose name is not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world "), and the rest modifies the book: ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τῆς ζωῆς τοῦ ἀρνίου τοῦ ἐσφαγμένου ("in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain").
I tend to agree. While I cannot point to a grammatical rule that would definitively show this to be true I also cannot show that it must modify ἐσφαγμένου. John makes this same point later on in 17:8 - ὧν οὐ γέγραπται τὸ ὄνομα ἐπὶ τὸ βιβλίον τῆς ζωῆς ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου. Clearly here ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου modifies γέγραπται.

Re: Rev 13:8 ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου

Posted: April 1st, 2015, 3:32 pm
by Jonathan Robie
Grammatically, I think either reading is possible. Just looked at some commentaries, and very smart people obviously disagree about which is the more natural reading.

We're basically asking if the last two prepositional phrases combine to make one long prepositional phrase:

Code: Select all

[cl οὗ οὐ *γέγραπται 
  [np τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ]
  [pp ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τῆς ζωῆς τοῦ ἀρνίου τοῦ ἐσφαγμένου ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου ]
]
or should be considered two separate prepositional phrases that each modify the verb of the clause:

Code: Select all

[cl οὗ οὐ *γέγραπται 
  [np τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ]
  [pp ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τῆς ζωῆς τοῦ ἀρνίου τοῦ ἐσφαγμένου ] 
  [pp ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου ]
]
Both interpretations are possible. I don't think the number of words in between γέγραπται and ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου is determinative here - nested structures are common in Greek, and nested phrases or clauses can be long.

I do think you have to look at context and meaning and what you think. Consider the English sentence: "I knew a man with a wooden leg named Sam". I think "named Sam" modifies "a man", not "a wooden leg". It's not the grammar that tells me that. If you think it's likely that a wooden leg is named Sam, you might come to a different conclusion. If you think the person who wrote The Revelation would be likely to say "the Lamb who was slaughtered before the world was made", you might interpret this verse differently than I do.

Re: Rev 13:8 ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου

Posted: April 1st, 2015, 5:06 pm
by Thomas Dolhanty
Jonathan Robie wrote: Grammatically, I think either reading is possible. Just looked at some commentaries, and very smart people obviously disagree about which is the more natural reading.
We’re agreed that the grammar doesn’t settle it, but I would still contend that anyone well versed in Koine reading this sentence for the first time would normally associate ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου with the immediately-preceding ἐσφαγμένου. Even Aune, who agrees with your reading, concedes that:
David E. Aune wrote:At first glance it seems more natural, given the existing word order of the text, to connect the phrase ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου, “since the creation of the world” with ἐσφαγμένου, “slain” …

He goes on to say that, "It is also grammatically possible ..." to regard γέγραπται as the antecedent, which I think is the right language - not natural, but possible.

What would make one question the more natural reading? Other considerations – primarily theological, no doubt, as Aune also concedes. Fair enough.
Jonathan Robie wrote:I do think you have to look at context and meaning and what you think. Consider the English sentence: "I knew a man with a wooden leg named Sam". I think "named Sam" modifies "a man", not "a wooden leg". It's not the grammar that tells me that. If you think it's likely that a wooden leg is named Sam, you might come to a different conclusion. If you think the person who wrote The Revelation would be likely to say "the Lamb who was slaughtered before the world was made", you might interpret this verse differently than I do.
This is a pretty funny example. I’ll bet there are lots of folks who would agree with you about the misplaced modifier in this sentence, who would not agree with you about Revelation 13:8. ;->

Grammar doesn’t settle it, and other considerations go beyond our B-Greek boundaries. Could we go there I suspect that, ultimately, we would find ourselves pretty much in the same place. I see either reading saying, in the final analysis, the same thing.

Re: Rev 13:8 ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου

Posted: April 1st, 2015, 11:50 pm
by Stephen Hughes
Remember that the selection in BDAG is a small selection from a limited corpus, and that the selection was not made with this point in mind, and it is not directly relevant to the point under consideration here, let me add that the verses listed for this meaning employ intransitive / subject affected verbs / verb forms with the phrase. Consequently, both the verbs that we are considering in the passage οὗ οὐ γέγραπται τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τῆς ζωῆς τοῦ ἀρνίου τοῦ ἐσφαγμένου ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου. are part of what seems to be not only grammatical possible - as has been mentioned in this thread, but are also syntactically idiomatic for the use of ἀπό in this sense, subject to the caveat that further searching would need to be done for it to be conclusive.
Matthew 9:22 wrote:Καὶ ἐσώθη ἡ γυνὴ ἀπὸ τῆς ὥρας ἐκείνης.
Matthew 11:12 wrote:Ἀπὸ δὲ τῶν ἡμερῶν Ἰωάννου τοῦ βαπτιστοῦ ἕως ἄρτι ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν βιάζεται, καὶ βιασταὶ ἁρπάζουσιν αὐτήν.
Matthew 13:35 (extra to BDAG's list) wrote:ὅπως πληρωθῇ τὸ ῥηθὲν διὰ τοῦ προφήτου, λέγοντος, Ἀνοίξω ἐν παραβολαῖς τὸ στόμα μου, ἐρεύξομαι κεκρυμμένα ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου.
Matthew 22:46 wrote:Καὶ οὐδεὶς ἐδύνατο αὐτῷ ἀποκριθῆναι λόγον· οὐδὲ ἐτόλμησέν τις ἀπ’ ἐκείνης τῆς ἡμέρας ἐπερωτῆσαι αὐτὸν οὐκέτι.
John 11:53 wrote:Ἀπ’ ἐκείνης οὖν τῆς ἡμέρας συνεβουλεύσαντο ἵνα ἀποκτείνωσιν αὐτόν.
Luke 2:36 wrote:Καὶ ἦν Ἅννα προφῆτις, θυγάτηρ Φανουήλ, ἐκ φυλῆς Ἀσήρ — αὕτη προβεβηκυῖα ἐν ἡμέραις πολλαῖς, ζήσασα ἔτη μετὰ ἀνδρὸς ἑπτὰ ἀπὸ τῆς παρθενίας αὐτῆς,
Luke 8:43 wrote:Καὶ γυνὴ οὖσα ἐν ῥύσει αἵματος ἀπὸ ἐτῶν δώδεκα, ἥτις ἰατροῖς προσαναλώσασα ὅλον τὸν βίον οὐκ ἴσχυσεν ὑπ’ οὐδενὸς θεραπευθῆναι,
Acts 23:23 wrote:Καὶ προσκαλεσάμενος δύο τινὰς τῶν ἑκατοντάρχων εἶπεν, Ἑτοιμάσατε στρατιώτας διακοσίους ὅπως πορευθῶσιν ἕως Καισαρείας, καὶ ἱππεῖς ἑβδομήκοντα, καὶ δεξιολάβους διακοσίους, ἀπὸ τρίτης ὥρας τῆς νυκτός·
Romans 1:20 wrote:Τὰ γὰρ ἀόρατα αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ κτίσεως κόσμου τοῖς ποιήμασιν νοούμενα καθορᾶται, ἥ τε ἀΐδιος αὐτοῦ δύναμις καὶ θειότης, εἰς τὸ εἶναι αὐτοὺς ἀναπολογήτους·
2 Corinthians 8:10 wrote:Καὶ γνώμην ἐν τούτῳ δίδωμι· τοῦτο γὰρ ὑμῖν συμφέρει, οἵτινες οὐ μόνον τὸ ποιῆσαι ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ θέλειν προενήρξασθε ἀπὸ πέρυσι.
2 Corinthians 9:2 wrote:οἶδα γὰρ τὴν προθυμίαν ὑμῶν, ἣν ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν καυχῶμαι Μακεδόσιν, ὅτι Ἀχαΐα παρεσκεύασται ἀπὸ πέρυσι· καὶ ὁ ἐξ ὑμῶν ζῆλος ἠρέθισεν τοὺς πλείονας.
I realise that we don't talk using the following way of discoursing on B-Greek, but never-the-less let me say what I think for a moment, i.e. that for examples like the τολμᾶν + infinitive "to make oneself bold enough to ..." in the beautifully constructed phrase (οὐδὲ ἐτόλμησέν τις ἀπ’ ἐκείνης τῆς ἡμέρας ἐπερωτῆσαι αὐτὸν οὐκέτι) Matthew 22:46, and the συμβουλεύεσθαι + ἵνα + subj. "thought out a plan among themselves to ..." in John 11:53 if we were to say that the two verbs are a syntactic compound, with the transitivity expressed grammatically in only one part of itself, that would just as plainly be saying that the first part (the part not directly associated with the "object") is subject affected, and so also fits the pattern that the others seem to be following. (The other way of taking it, which I don't think is so valid to say, is that even though it is not directly associated with that part of the construction, the τολμᾶν / συμβουλεύεσθαι is restricted / defined by the object separately (albiet in a parallel fashion) from how the finite verbs following them in the construction are.)

Re: Rev 13:8 ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου

Posted: April 2nd, 2015, 3:41 am
by Eeli Kaikkonen
As a metacomment I want to say – even if it's a bit offtopic – that we can't detach language and real world background. It's very true that finding the original meaning of Bible or any other ancient text using our own theological or cultural background is always misleading and should be avoided. However, the original speakers/writers and listeners had their own background and that should be used. Grammar can't settle this down but cultural/historical/religious background could. If the book written ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου was familiar idea, then it must be it. If not, and a lamb slain ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου was familiar or more probable, then it must be it. We have to use the normal means of exegesis and certain kind of biblical theology to interpret the text after grammatical interpretation (meaning normal fluent understanding of the language used). But we discuss here only about language with random forays to historical/cultural background. Systematic theology (in this case whether in our system the lamb should be slain or the book should written from the beginning of the world) is out of bounds.

Re: Rev 13:8 ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου

Posted: April 2nd, 2015, 5:53 am
by Jonathan Robie
Eeli Kaikkonen wrote:As a metacomment I want to say – even if it's a bit offtopic – that we can't detach language and real world background. It's very true that finding the original meaning of Bible or any other ancient text using our own theological or cultural background is always misleading and should be avoided. However, the original speakers/writers and listeners had their own background and that should be used. Grammar can't settle this down but cultural/historical/religious background could..
Agreed.
Eeli Kaikkonen wrote:If the book written ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου was familiar idea, then it must be it. If not, and a lamb slain ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου was familiar or more probable, then it must be it. We have to use the normal means of exegesis and certain kind of biblical theology to interpret the text after grammatical interpretation (meaning normal fluent understanding of the language used). But we discuss here only about language with random forays to historical/cultural background.
Of course, we can certainly look for those phrases to see how they are used in the language in the rest of the Bible and see if they occur in close proximity, I think that would be in bounds. But it's no substitute for exegesis. We prepare the ground for exegesis here, but the exegesis happens elsewhere.
Eeli Kaikkonen wrote:Systematic theology (in this case whether in our system the lamb should be slain or the book should written from the beginning of the world) is out of bounds.
It's certainly fine to point out what each interpretation would mean. It's certainly not OK to go into an extended debate on whether or not there was a belief in a lamb slain ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου in the early church. There's fuzzy ground in between, I would find it very relevant to see an early text that speaks of a lamb slain ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου, if it existed.

Re: Rev 13:8 ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου

Posted: April 2nd, 2015, 7:37 am
by Barry Hofstetter
Just a few additional comments on a fine discussion:

1) If there weren't theological considerations of some importance to people I don't think that any one would take ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου with γέγραπται. It's just too far separated.

2) Having said that, the Greek of Revelation is not exactly normal Greek, and we should always be a little extra careful in drawing conclusions based on our broader understanding of the language. The author patently did not have an ammanuensis to correct his style when writing. What's the Greek for "misplaced modifier?" :o

3) Yes, there is a parallel passage, but that doesn't mean that the author intends to say the same thing in that passage.