Revelation 2:13

An Exegetical Examination of Possessive Pronoun Variants in Select New Testament Passages

This exegesis addresses specific textual variants involving the presence or absence of possessive pronouns in Revelation 2:13, 2 Peter 1:17, and John 2:12. The core exegetical issue revolves around determining the most probable original reading, understanding the stylistic implications of pronoun repetition in Hellenistic Greek versus potential Semitic influences, and how these textual decisions impact translation. The discussion will draw upon insights from textual criticism, grammatical analysis, and the broader context of ancient Greek linguistic practices.

Revelation 2:13 (Nestle 1904)

οἶδα ποῦ κατοικεῖς, ὅπου ὁ θρόνος τοῦ σατανᾶ, καὶ κρατεῖς τὸ ὄνομά μου καὶ οὐκ ἠρνήσω τὴν πίστιν μου καὶ ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις Ἀντιπᾶς ὁ μάρτυς μου ὁ πιστός μου, ὃς ἀπεκτάνθη παρ᾿ ὑμῖν, ὅπου ὁ σατανᾶς κατοικεῖ.

2 Peter 1:17 (Nestle 1904)

λαβὼν γὰρ παρὰ θεοῦ πατρὸς τιμὴν καὶ δόξαν φωνῆς ἐνεχθείσης αὐτῷ τοιᾶσδε ὑπὸ τῆς μεγαλοπρεποῦς δόξης· Οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός μου, ἐν ᾧ εὐδόκησα·

John 2:12 (Nestle 1904)

Μετὰ τοῦτο κατέβη εἰς Καφαρναοὺμ αὐτὸς καὶ ἡ μήτηρ αὐτοῦ καὶ οἱ ἀδελφοὶ καὶ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐκεῖ ἔμειναν οὐ πολλὰς ἡμέρας.

Key differences with SBLGNT (2010) (and other noted variants):

• Revelation 2:13: The Nestle 1904 text (and SBLGNT 2010) reads “ὁ μάρτυς μου ὁ πιστός μου” (my witness, my faithful one), retaining the second possessive pronoun. However, some critical editions and manuscript traditions (noted as “RP” in the original discussion, often referring to the Textus Receptus, and The Greek New Testament (TGN)) omit the second μου, resulting in “ὁ μάρτυς μου ὁ πιστός“.
• 2 Peter 1:17: Nestle 1904 reads “Οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός μου” (This is my Son, my beloved), placing “Οὗτός ἐστιν” at the beginning of the divine pronouncement. SBLGNT 2010 presents “Ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός μου οὗτός ἐστιν“, relocating “οὗτός ἐστιν” to follow the possessive phrase. The TGN text cited in the discussion further omits the second μου and reads “οὗτος ἐστιν ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός“.
• John 2:12: Nestle 1904 (and SBLGNT 2010) omits the possessive pronoun αὐτοῦ after “οἱ ἀδελφοὶ” (the brothers). A significant textual variant, however, includes αὐτοῦ, resulting in “οἱ ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ” (his brothers), found in manuscripts such as P66c, א, Θ, f1, f13, 33, m, lat, sy. The omission is supported by P66*, P75, B, Ψ, 0162.
• Other noted differences from the original discussion:
  • Revelation 10:1: Inclusion/omission of definite articles before κεφαλὴν/ς.
  • Revelation 11:3: Variation in bolding between προφητεύσουσιν and περιβεβλημένοι in SBLGNT.
  • Revelation 12:8: A textual difference between φιλαδελφίαν and οὐρανῷ.

Textual Criticism (NA28) and Lexical Notes

The variants concerning possessive pronouns in these passages are indicative of common scribal tendencies and illustrate the interplay between Greek idiom and potential Semitic literary influence.

Revelation 2:13 – ὁ μάρτυς μου ὁ πιστός μου:

• Textual Criticism (NA28): The NA28 apparatus indicates strong support for the inclusion of the second μου, aligning with Nestle 1904 and SBLGNT. Manuscripts such as P47, א, A, C, P, 046, and the majority text tradition support the repetition. The omission is found in other, often later, traditions like the Textus Receptus and some medieval manuscripts.
• Internal Evidence: The repetition of the possessive pronoun (μου) with two closely related descriptors (μάρτυς, πιστός) is less characteristic of classical or idiomatic Hellenistic Greek, which would often omit the second pronoun if the possessive relationship was clearly implied. This structure, however, is a common feature of Semitic syntax, often serving an emphatic purpose. As noted by Raija Sollamo in her work on the Septuagint, translational Greek (especially from Hebrew) frequently retains such repetitions, whereas Greek scribes, seeking to “smooth” the text, might omit a repeated pronoun to conform to more idiomatic Greek style. Therefore, the inclusion could be considered the lectio difficilior or a reflection of the author’s Semitic background, while omission might be a scribal Hellenization.
• Lexical Notes (BDAG):
  • μάρτυς (martys): ‘witness,’ ‘one who testifies.’ In a legal context, one who confirms truth; in a religious context, one who bears testimony, often to the point of death (martyr).
  • πιστός (pistos): ‘faithful,’ ‘trustworthy,’ ‘believing.’ Here, it describes Antipas’s steadfastness.
  • μου (mou): ‘my,’ the genitive singular of the first-person personal pronoun. Its function here is to assert a personal relationship of possession or belonging (“my witness,” “my faithful one”). The repetition emphasizes the individual and intimate connection.

2 Peter 1:17 – Οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός μου:

• Textual Criticism (NA28): NA28 and SBLGNT both retain the repetition of μου. However, they differ on the placement of “οὗτός ἐστιν“. NA28 (like Nestle 1904) places it first (“Οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός μου“), supported by manuscripts like P72, א, A, B, C, P, Ψ, while SBLGNT places it after the possessive phrase (“Ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός μου οὗτός ἐστιν“), supported by readings like K, L. Some traditions, like TGN mentioned in the discussion, omit the second μου entirely.
• Internal Evidence: The repetition of μου (“my Son, my beloved”) similarly reflects a potentially Semitic emphatic style, common in divine pronouncements (cf. the Synoptic parallels). The omission of the second μου would again represent a move towards more concise Greek. The placement of “οὗτός ἐστιν” affects rhetorical emphasis; fronting it gives prominence to “This is,” while placing it later emphasizes the preceding descriptive phrase.
• Lexical Notes (BDAG):
  • υἱός (huios): ‘son.’ Here, signifying divine sonship.
  • ἀγαπητός (agapētos): ‘beloved,’ ‘dear one.’ A common epithet for the Son in divine pronouncements, expressing unique affection and status.
  • μου (mou): As above, indicating the intimate possession by God the Father. Its repetition underscores the profound and unique relationship.

John 2:12 – Omission or Inclusion of αὐτοῦ after οἱ ἀδελφοὶ:

• Textual Criticism (NA28): NA28, SBLGNT, and Nestle 1904 omit the αὐτοῦ. This omission is strongly supported by early and significant manuscripts such as P66*, P75, B, Ψ, 0162. However, its inclusion (“οἱ ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ“) is also well-attested in important witnesses like P66c, א, Θ, f1, f13, 33, m, lat, sy. The presence of the variant in P66 itself (original hand omitting, corrector adding) highlights an early textual fluidity.
• Internal Evidence: The omission of αὐτοῦ makes the phrase “οἱ ἀδελφοὶ καὶ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ” more idiomatic in Greek, where the possessive relationship (that they are Jesus’s brothers) can be inferred from context, especially when “his disciples” (οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ) immediately follows. The inclusion of αὐτοῦ (“his brothers and his disciples”) creates a more explicit, possibly Semitic-influenced, enumeration. Sollamo’s research would suggest that scribes are more likely to *omit* a repetitive pronoun to conform to idiomatic Greek than to *insert* one, which would favor the shorter reading as original, with the longer reading being a clarification or a harmonizing reading.
• Lexical Notes (BDAG):
  • ἀδελφοὶ (adelphoi): ‘brothers.’ Here, referring to the biological brothers of Jesus.
  • αὐτοῦ (autou): ‘his,’ genitive singular of the third-person personal pronoun. Indicates possession by Jesus. The debate is whether this possession is explicitly stated or contextually implied.

Translation Variants with Grammatical & Rhetorical Analysis

The presence or absence of possessive pronouns significantly impacts the grammatical and rhetorical texture of the text. From a grammatical perspective, the repetition of a possessive pronoun with coordinate nouns or adjectives (e.g., “my witness, my faithful one”) is often seen as a Semitic stylistic feature (a Hebraism) within the Greek New Testament. In idiomatic Hellenistic Greek, such repetition is frequently avoided, with the possessive pronoun being stated once or inferred from context.

Rhetorically, the repetition can serve to emphasize the individual relationship or aspect of possession, creating a more formal or emphatic tone. For instance, in “my witness, my faithful one,” each attribute is personally claimed by the speaker. The omission, by contrast, creates a more concise and flowing expression, where the possessive relationship is understood as applying to the entire coordinated phrase. In the case of John 2:12, the explicit “his brothers and his disciples” versus “the brothers and his disciples” slightly alters the perceived grammatical relationship of the first noun phrase, though the semantic meaning remains largely the same due to context.

The variants in 2 Peter 1:17 also demonstrate how word order (Οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός μου vs. Ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός μου οὗτός ἐστιν) can shift the rhetorical emphasis, even when the same words are used. Placing “Οὗτός ἐστιν” at the beginning makes the declaration itself (“This is…”) the primary emphasis, whereas placing it at the end highlights the description (“My beloved Son, this one…”).

Conclusions and Translation Suggestions

The analysis of these possessive pronoun variants highlights the dynamic nature of textual transmission and the influence of both source language (Semitic) and target language (Hellenistic Greek) stylistic preferences. While critical editions like NA28 and SBLGNT generally lean towards readings supported by early and diverse manuscripts, the internal criteria of scribal habit (Hellenization vs. preservation of Semitic style) play a crucial role. For translators, these choices present opportunities to convey nuance regarding emphasis, formality, and cultural background.

Translation Suggestions for Revelation 2:13 (“ὁ μάρτυς μου ὁ πιστός μου”):

1. “Antipas, my witness, my faithful one,”
   This translation maintains the explicit repetition of the possessive pronoun, reflecting a potential Semitic emphasis and the more formal, inclusive reading found in many critical texts.
2. “Antipas, my faithful witness,”
   This option prioritizes idiomatic English, combining the two descriptors and implicitly applying the possessive to both, reflecting the stylistic tendency of Hellenistic Greek to avoid redundant pronouns.
3. “Antipas, my witness and faithful servant,”
   This rendering aims for a slightly more interpretive, dynamic equivalence, while still capturing the two aspects of Antipas’s character and maintaining the possessive relationship in a natural English idiom.

Translation Suggestions for 2 Peter 1:17 (“Οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός μου” or “Ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός μου οὗτός ἐστιν”):

1. “This is my Son, my Beloved, in whom I am well pleased.”
   This closely follows the word order of Nestle 1904/NA28, emphasizing the divine declaration itself (“This is…”) and retaining the emphatic repetition of “my.”
2. “My Son, my Beloved, this is the one in whom I am well pleased.”
   This reflects the SBLGNT word order, shifting emphasis slightly to the description of the Son first, then the declaration. It maintains the repetition for emphasis.
3. “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.”
   This provides a more idiomatic English rendering, often found in modern translations. It compresses the possessive pronouns and softens the repetition, while still conveying the core theological message.

Translation Suggestions for John 2:12 (variant for “οἱ ἀδελφοὶ [αὐτοῦ]”):

1. “After this he went down to Capernaum with his mother, his brothers, and his disciples, and they stayed there not many days.”
   This translation includes “his” for “brothers,” reflecting the variant reading that explicitly states the possessive pronoun, which might be preferred for formal equivalence or if a scribe sought to clarify.
2. “After this he went down to Capernaum with his mother, the brothers, and his disciples, and they stayed there not many days.”
   This follows the critical text (Nestle 1904, SBLGNT, NA28) which omits “his” before “brothers.” The possessive relationship is implicitly understood through context and the following “his disciples.”
3. “After this he went down to Capernaum with his mother, his siblings, and his followers, and they remained there for a few days.”
   This rendering uses more dynamic English for “brothers” (“siblings”) and “disciples” (“followers”) and opts for the explicit possessive, illustrating a translator’s choice to maximize clarity and modern idiom.