rrankin at isd.net
Wed Jan 17 01:29:28 EST 2001
This makes it more clear -- as crystal. Thank you and all for your help.
From: Harold R. Holmyard III [mailto:hholmyard at ont.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 9:07 PM
To: Biblical Greek
Subject: [b-greek] RE: Rev.22:2
I did slightly misunderstand you.
>> I am looking at KAI
>in the beginning of v.1 and v.3 as Hebraisms introducing a new thought. I
>see the other KAI's in vv.1-2 as connecting ideas. Therefore, I was
>a comma or semi-colon at the end of v.1 and making v.2 a completion of the
>thought begun in v.1. Is this grammatically possible according the Greek
>What I see done sometimes in English translations is that a long Greek
>sentence is broken down into several sentences. I wonder if this is
>possibly the case in vv.1-2?? The Kurt Aland Text does this with vv.3-4;
>they place a period after KAI...ETI. Then KAI HO QRONOS begins a new
>thought with a comma at the end of v.3 implicating the KAI's in v.4 are
>connecting the ideas begun in v.3. Some English translations separate it
>Is it just too unnatural a reading of the Greek to see vv.1 and 2 a one
>thought related to the "river"? What would not allow this? Maybe the word
I think AUTHS is the problem, because it evidently refers back to the city.
It is the street of the city that is in view: "In the middle of its
street." Also POTAMOU in verse 2 presents a problem, because it is
conjoined with "street." That means the subject of verse 2 is not another
point about the POTAMON in verse 1 but is wider in scope. Verse 2 is not
simply talking about the river, but it is talking about a tree of life that
seems to be between the street of the city and the river. So it seems an
entirely new statement, even if it does mention the river again and also
something else that John saw.
More information about the B-Greek