Looking for examples of "arche' as "origin"

Polycarp66 at aol.com Polycarp66 at aol.com
Sun Jan 27 21:07:48 EST 2002


In a message dated 1/27/2002 9:18:54 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
edotte at optonline.net writes:


> I am involved in a study of Revelation 3:14 in connection to 'arche' and
> its deeper meaning beyond "beginning." Very few examples can be found in
> the Bible in which a clear example with the meaning of "origin" or
> "source" can be found. I started reading the the Apostolic Fathers for
> examples and have found one such example. I do know that many lexicons do
> list "origin" as a third meaning so examples are not just popping off the
> pages. I would appreciate it if anyone could point me to a few.
> 
> 

It seems almost as though there is a decided effort to avoid the obvious.  We 
have eminent scholars [such as Charles] denying that the apostle John (or the 
author of the gospel and epistles) was the same as the author of the 
Apocalypse who yet maintain that the Apocalypse is NOT pseudonimous.  To do 
so they must avoid any references in the Apocalypse which would appear to 
equate the author of the one with the author of the other.  This means that 
references such as

KAI ESHMANEN APOSTEILAS DIA TOU AGGELOU AUTOU TWi DOULWi IWANNHi, 2 hOS 
EMARTURHSEN TON LOGON TOU QEOU KAI THN MARTURIAN IHSOU XRISTOU hOSA EIDEN.

I would contend that here is a clear reference to this being the Apostle John 
who is a witness to the suffering (MARTURIAN) of Jesus Christ who is the 
LOGON (LOGOS) TOU QEOU.  This would refer to the gospel as a whole and 
specifically to Jn 1.1.

The case is similar with your passage.  

hH ARXH THS KTISEWS TOU QEOU

This appears to be a reference to Jn 1.1-3.

EN ARCH HN hO LOGOS, KAI hO LOGOS HN PROS TON QEON, KAI QEOS HN hO LOGOS. 2 
hOUTOS HN EN ARCH PROS TON QEON. 3. PANTA DI' AUTOU EGENETO, KAI XWRIS AUTOU 
EGENETO OUDE hEN.  hO GEGONEN

This is not to say that I believe that the Apostle John was the author of the 
Apocalypse.  I think Charles has proven rather conclusively that the two are 
not the same.  It is simply to say that the author presents himself as being 
the Apostle.  This is simply one way in which he does so.

gfsomsel



More information about the B-Greek mailing list