43 articles Revelation Page 2 / 3

Revelation 22:11

Rev. 22 11 And 3rd Person Imperatives

Rev. 22:11 and 3rd person imperatives boyd at huxcomm.net boyd at huxcomm.net Thu Oct 18 18:57:21 EDT 2001   What Do We Make of CWRIS and ANDRES? Greek Courses Online I’ve had a lingering question about 3rd person imperatives, which was further kindled by Revelation 22:11. Here’s the text:hO ADIKWN ADIKHSATW ETI KAI hO hRUPAROS…

Revelation 1:10

Rev. 1 10

[] Rev.1:10 Lira rosangelalira at terra.com.br Mon Dec 1 07:57:15 EST 2003   [] N.T. Textual Criticism [] Rev. 1:8 ERCOMENOS What I’ve found about this was that although the prevailing interpretationequates the expression “Lord’s day” with Sunday, this equation is based noton internal evidences of the book of Revelation but on three second-centurypatristic testimonies,…

Revelation 20:4

Revelation 20:4

erasmus and rev. Kevin W. Woodruff cierpke at prodigy.net Sun Sep 5 20:56:28 EDT 1999   3 questions erasmus and rev. Jim and others:I was always under the impression that Erasmus had in his work _Annotationson the New Testament_ (Novum Testamentum Annotationes) confessed (forgive meif my Latin is faulty):…quanquam in calce hujus libri, nonulla verba…

Revelation 4:1

Grammatical Errors In Revelation

Grammatical errors in Revelation? Jason Rachels rachelsj at aol.com Sun May 16 15:18:58 EDT 1999   Dative Participle Luke 8:27 Limerick: Mark 3.1 Some have claimed that grammatical errors in Revelation distinguish it from books by John the apostle. Are any of you aware of “errors” in the Greek or have any input on the…

Revelation 4:2

Revelation 4:2

I was currently working on translating chapter 4 of Revelation for class, when I came across what seems to be this awkward construction. However My Greek class uses “Basics of Biblical Greek” written by William D. Mounce, as it’s text book, in which I recently had to check something similar. I don’t think that is should be counted as awkward, or weird, just not normal. It is however more normal than one might think. For me what seemed odd was not the needing of “someone” but the absence of the article as found in verse 4. the result would be one is sitting; the one who is setting; something of this nature, as the participle is functioning substantial. This usually has the presence of the article as in verse 4. typically without the article we would not translate the participle adjectival but adverbially(key words being while, after, had, depending on the tense.) on Page 272 Mounce makes it clear that in most cases we can determine if it is adverbial or adjectival by the presence of the article, however not always. context becomes the end factor, because not always will there be an article for the use of adjectival. It seems here the absence, only my speculation, is due to the prepositional phrase. With the same word being used in the next verse with the articular it is fairly clear that it should be translated adjectival; one is sitting, or the one who is sitting.

I hope this is helpful.

Steven Jensen
the_glove@live.com

Statistics: Posted by Steven Jensen — April 23rd, 2014, 6:53 pm


Revelation 8:6

New Testament • Re: rough breathing on αὐτοὺς Rev. 8:6 ?

I concur that Schmid is a good resource on the text of Revelation. I also found that Hoskier was a great resource when working with this text.

Hoskier, Herman Charles. Concerning the text of the Apocalypse: collations of all existing available Greek documents with the standard text of Stephen’s third edition, together with the testimony of versions, commentaries and fathers; a complete conspectus of all authorities Vol. 1. 2 vols., 1929.

Regarding the Byzantine text tradition, at least some of the variation here can be attributed to the fact that Revelation does not appear at all in the lectionary tradition of the Church. We find much greater consistency in the texts that are regularly used in the liturgical services.

Statistics: Posted by spuluka — February 28th, 2014, 10:51 pm


Revelation 2:10

New Testament • Re: Rev 2:10
Stephen Carlson wrote:
Per BDAG μηδείς 2bβ (p. 647), μηδέν = in no way

Ah I see. That makes perfect sense, though I don’t have BDAG. ;)

Stephen Hughes wrote:

Stephen Carlson wrote:Per BDAG μηδείς 2bβ (p. 647), μηδέν = in no way

It seems weaker than examples like:

Luke 4:35 wrote:
Καὶ ἐπετίμησεν αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς, λέγων, Φιμώθητι, καὶ ἔξελθε ἐξ αὐτοῦ. Καὶ ῥίψαν αὐτὸν τὸ δαιμόνιον εἰς μέσον ἐξῆλθεν ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ, μηδὲν βλάψαν αὐτόν.

Acts 16:28 wrote:
Ἐφώνησεν δὲ φωνῇ μεγάλῃ ὁ Παῦλος λέγων, Μηδὲν πράξῃς σεαυτῷ κακόν· ἅπαντες γάρ ἐσμεν ἐνθάδε.

Thanks for the examples!

Stephen Hughes wrote:
Compare this instance, though, where οὐ is used different to οὐδέν

Mark 14:60 wrote:Καὶ ἀναστὰς ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς εἰς μέσον ἐπηρώτησεν τὸν Ἰησοῦν, λέγων, Οὐκ ἀποκρίνῃ οὐδέν; Τί οὗτοί σου καταμαρτυροῦσιν;

Isn’t this just the double negative, where “ουκ αποκρινη ουδεν” just means “do you not answer anything?”

Statistics: Posted by David Lim — June 25th, 2014, 6:26 am


Revelation 13:18

Revelation 13 18

[] Revelation 13:18 Ron Snider ronpt at comcast.net Sun Jul 4 15:47:43 EDT 2004 [] Reverse transliteration – national keyboards [] Re: Greek “zugos” translation This question concerns the explanatory clause ARIQMOS GAR ANQRWPOU ESTIN, in which both nouns are anarthrous. John has used the term “number” three times in this verse and the two…

Revelation 2:1

Revelation 2:1

: The Biblical Greek Forum /////////////////////////////////////////// What does this text mean? Re: ANGELO of Rev 2:1 Posted: 10 Sep 2012 08:01 PM PDT http://feedproxy.google.com/~r//~3/k-_07GnWu1M/viewtopic.php?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email Hi Joe: the reason, in Rev 2:1, it is “Write to (someone)” is because of the presense of the indirect object of the imperative “Write”. Rev 2:1 starts off with τῷ…

Revelation 1:20

Revelation 1:20

This is my first post to this list. I am translating the NT directly from the Greek source to an indigenous language of Latin America (more at http://nebibliaj.org). My concern is to produce a literary translation that is as objectively accurate as possible from all viewpoints. My interest is philological; I am not working with…