Apoc 1:1 pronominal reference

c stirling bartholomew cc.constantine at worldnet.att.net
Sun Jan 6 02:12:15 EST 2002


Rev. 1:1 APOKALUYIS IHSOU CRISTOU
hHN EDWKEN AUTWi hO QEOS
DEIXAI TOIS DOULOIS AUTOU hA DEI GENESQAI EN TACEI
KAI ESHMANEN APOSTEILAS
DIA TOU AGGELOU AUTOU TWi DOULWi AUTOU IWANNHi

There are a number of problems in this passage with identifying the referent
of the pronouns.  Lets just look at one of them:

DIA TOU AGGELOU AUTOU

Who is the referent of AUTOU? Well at first glance there seem to be only two
alternatives,  IHSOU CRISTOU  or hO QEOS. However, Peter R. Carrell* thinks
there is a third alternative. He suggests, arguing in some detail, that both
IHSOU CRISTOU and hO QEOS are the referent of AUTOU.

Carrell's argument is long, complex and theological, thus off topic for this
forum. My question is simply grammatical. How can AUTOU have two
antecedents? 

Actually I don't think Carrell would consider this a substantive objection
to his thesis since he is claiming that  IHSOU CRISTOU and hO QEOS function
here as a single referent, "a unity," but again that is for a different
discussion group.

My problem is that even if I am willing to accept Carrell's conclusion on
the Christology question I don't see how it can hang together in terms of
syntax. Even if the Apocalypse is rather famous for breaking rules and there
are other instances of AUTOU in this verse which involve referential
ambiguities, postulating multiple referents for this particular AUTOU seems
to get us entangled with grammatical imponderables.

Has Carrell gone off the deep end here?

greetings,

Clay   

--  
Clayton Stirling Bartholomew
Three Tree Point
P.O. Box 255 Seahurst WA 98062

*See page 120, angelology and the christology of the Apocalypse of John /
Peter R. Carrell. Cambridge ; New York : Cambridge University Press, 1997.




More information about the B-Greek mailing list