An Exegetical Examination of Revelation 4:3: The Grammatical Function of Dative Nouns in Describing Divine Appearance
The present exegetical study addresses a grammatical and semantic question arising from Revelation 4:3, specifically concerning the precise function of the dative nouns ἰάσπιδι (iaspidi) and σαρδίῳ (sardiō) in relation to λίθῳ (lithō) and ὁράσει (horasei). The primary issue is whether these dative nouns are best understood as epexegetical, appositional, or possessive, thereby influencing the visual description of the One seated on the throne. This analysis will employ textual criticism, lexical notes, and grammatical principles to propose suitable translations.
καὶ ὁ καθήμενος ὅμοιος ὁράσει λίθῳ ἰάσπιδι καὶ σαρδίῳ
Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):
- The specific phrase under examination, καὶ ὁ καθήμενος ὅμοιος ὁράσει λίθῳ ἰάσπιδι καὶ σαρδίῳ, is identical in both the Nestle 1904 edition and the SBLGNT (2010) text. No textual variants affect this portion of the verse.
Textual and Lexical Notes
The textual tradition for Revelation 4:3, particularly the phrase describing the appearance of the enthroned figure, is remarkably stable. The NA28 critical edition presents καὶ ὁ καθήμενος ὅμοιος ὁράσει λίθῳ ἰάσπιδι καὶ σαρδίῳ without significant variants that would alter the grammatical or semantic interpretation of the dative constructions. This stability underscores the reliability of the Greek text for this particular exegetical challenge.
Lexically, several terms are crucial for understanding the verse:
- ὅμοιος (homoios): According to BDAG, this adjective means “similar, like, resembling.” It typically governs a dative case to indicate the point of comparison, as seen here with λίθῳ.
- ὁράσει (horasei): This dative noun derives from ὅρασις (horasis), meaning “act of seeing, vision, appearance.” In this context, it functions as a dative of respect or reference, indicating “as to appearance” or “in respect to his appearance.”
- λίθῳ (lithō): The dative form of λίθος (lithos), meaning “stone” or, more specifically in ornamental contexts, “gemstone.” It serves as the direct object of comparison for ὅμοιος.
- ἰάσπιδι (iaspidi): The dative form of ἴασπις (iaspis), meaning “jasper.” BDAG describes it as a hard, opaque, usually green stone, but ancient usage could include various colors.
- σαρδίῳ (sardiō): The dative form of σάρδιον (sardion), meaning “sardius” or “cornelian.” BDAG identifies it as a reddish gemstone.
While KITTEL (Theological Dictionary of the New Testament) might offer deeper theological or historical insights into the symbolism of these gemstones (e.g., their connection to the high priestly breastplate or the foundations of the New Jerusalem), for the present grammatical question, BDAG sufficiently clarifies their meaning as specific types of precious stones without listing them as adjectives modifying λίθῳ. This confirms that ἰάσπιδι and σαρδίῳ are substantives.
Grammatical and Rhetorical Analysis of Translation Variants
The syntax of Revelation 4:3 presents a clear dative construction that requires careful analysis for accurate translation. The phrase begins with καὶ ὁ καθήμενος ὅμοιος, “and the one seated was similar.” The dative noun ὁράσει functions as a dative of respect or reference, specifying the aspect in which the similarity holds: “as to his appearance” or “in respect to his appearance.” This clarifies that the comparison is about the visual manifestation, not the being’s inherent nature.
Following ὅμοιος, the direct object of comparison is the dative noun λίθῳ, “to a stone/gemstone.” The crucial exegetical decision concerns the dative nouns ἰάσπιδι καὶ σαρδίῳ. As noted in the initial query, these are in the dative case. If they were intended as epexegetical genitives specifying the kind of stone (e.g., “a stone of jasper and sardius”), they would appear as λίθου ἰάσπιδος καὶ σαρδίου. Their dative form explicitly rules out such a genitival epexegesis.
Instead, the dative forms of ἰάσπιδι and σαρδίῳ are best understood as being in apposition to λίθῳ. Apposition occurs when two nouns in the same case refer to the same person or thing, with the second noun further identifying or explaining the first. Thus, λίθῳ ἰάσπιδι καὶ σαρδίῳ can be parsed as “to a stone, namely, to jasper and to sardius” or “to a stone, that is, a jasper and a sardius.” This interpretation is grammatically sound, aligning with the dative case, and semantically provides the necessary specification of the gemstones. BDAG’s definition of these terms as substantives, not adjectives, further supports their appositional role.
Rhetorically, this description vividly portrays the divine presence. The combination of jasper (often associated with clarity, brilliance, and perhaps a green hue) and sardius (a fiery red) creates a striking image of dazzling glory, purity, and perhaps even divine judgment or passion. This imagery contributes to the overall celestial grandeur and majesty of the throne room vision in Revelation.
Conclusions and Translation Suggestions
Based on the textual and grammatical analysis, the dative nouns ἰάσπιδι and σαρδίῳ in Revelation 4:3 function appositionally to λίθῳ. This construction specifies the type of gemstone to which the enthroned figure’s appearance is compared, emphasizing their brilliance and symbolic significance. The phrase ὁράσει acts as a dative of respect, narrowing the comparison to the visual aspect.
Considering these conclusions, the following translation suggestions are offered:
- “And the One seated was similar in appearance to a stone, namely, to jasper and sardius.” This translation explicitly uses “namely” to highlight the appositional relationship.
- “And the One seated was similar, as to his appearance, to a jasper stone and a sardius stone.” This option rephrases for natural English flow, interpreting “stone” as being specified by the following gem names.
- “And the One seated, in appearance, was like jasper and carnelian.” This more concise rendering still conveys the appositional sense by allowing “like” to encompass the gemstone types directly following it, implying “like [a stone of] jasper and carnelian.”
Have you considered Rev 4 in your studies Link Hudson ?
Troy Day Just to clarify, you do not think this comment is relevant to our discussion of the timing of the rapture do you?
My question is about IASPIDI KAI SARDIWi being datives, they shouldn’t be considered as epexegetical (which would imply genitives, i.e., LIQWi IASPIDOS KAI SARDIOU). BDAG does not list them has adjectives (“jasper stones”). Should they be taken, then, as appositional? In that case, the sentence could be Englished in the following way:”And he who was seated was similar, as to his appearence, to a stone, [i.e.] to Jasper and cornelian” Your thoughts?
Link Hudson did you post a response here? I cannot see it yet Is Rev 4 not worth our eschatological attention today?
I did not see the connection between the particular grammatical issue the thread opened up with and our eschatalogical discussion.
Sorry, I cant really post during church times
Troy Day No pressure to post anything at any particular time.
It’s hard to text from the pulpit Dont try it
Link Hudson as I asked in the initial question of OP the Greek seem to clarify how the 24 elders are related to the Gates of the Heavenly City, which is also called by Ricky Grimsley The Bride of Christ
There is no doubt of course that the NT Church is the Bride of Christ and is in heaven at that time But what are those elders doing there in heaven Revelation ch 4? What possible purpose could they serve there after the rapture?
Troy Day there is no rapture of the church mentioned before the rapture of thechurch. Another example of a pretribber assuming a passage teaches pretrib.
I guess this is 4-5th time me asking and you not answering the same question so once again Who are these elders and what are they doing already in heaven by Revelation ch 4? What possible purpose could they serve there after the rapture?
Troy Day Why don’t you tell me what color were Jesus eye’s, and what He ate for breakfast three days after His 40 day fast ended, first?
There are some things that are not in the Bible. It seems to me that you have some speculative theory about who the 24 elders are, and you want to base some sort of doctrine on that, instead of looking at the plain teachings that are actually in scripture, like the fact that the man of sin is destroyed by the brightness of the Lord’s parousia, and the rapture occurs at the parousia, and Matthew 24 shows the coming of the Lord occuring after the tribulation of those days.
My answer is of course I do not know who the elders are. And I would venture to guess you do not either. Has the Lord taken you up into heaven and let you ask the 24 elders their names?
The last question makes no sense. The church hasn’t been raptured yet in Revelation 4. The first resurrection occurs at the end of the book, and the dead in Christ rise first according to Paul.
How is this relavent to the OP, btw?
My question was about IASPIDI KAI SARDIWi being datives, they shouldn’t be considered as epexegetical (which would imply genitives, i.e., LIQWi IASPIDOS KAI SARDIOU). BDAG does not list them has adjectives (“jasper stones”). Should they be taken, then, as appositional? In that case, the sentence could be Englished in the following way:”And he who was seated was similar, as to his appearence, to a stone, [i.e.] to Jasper and cornelian” Your thoughts?
Troy Day My thoughts are ‘How is this relavent to the questions you ask about the rapture and the elders in this thread?” other than the fact that John saw this in the same visionary/supernatural experience.
I am asking a very simple question about the elders that you seem to have a hard time fitting into your out-of-the-box eschatology. My question was about IASPIDI KAI SARDIWi being datives, they shouldn’t be considered as epexegetical (which would imply genitives, i.e., LIQWi IASPIDOS KAI SARDIOU). BDAG does not list them has adjectives (“jasper stones”). Should they be taken, then, as appositional? In that case, the sentence could be Englished in the following way:”And he who was seated was similar, as to his appearence, to a stone, [i.e.] to Jasper and cornelian” Your thoughts?
Troy Day I only responded to the tread because you tagged me. I am not very interested in the question because I do not see how it contributes to the overall meaning of the passage. It does not seem to be a theological question, but more of a question for Greek grammarians. Maybe you could discuss with your former Greek professors.
Gary Micheal Epping the initial question and followup discussion here Partial answer in the discussion of their body description
BIBLE STUDY Rev 3 RichardAnna Boyce Isara Mo