In the last paragraph or two of Gem 2186 I made some comments related to the comparison between the Greek of John’s Gospel and Revelation. I had clipped some comments from others which drew some reaction from some of you Gem readers, especially with regard to the grammatical terminology used in the sentences. Fair comment. I will now explain the statements in ordinary language and then offer some suggestions as to why the Greek of Revelation is so different.
I introduced you to the two prime issues which the experts use to challenge the book of Revelation. I have dealt with the claim that there are multiple Johns and we don’t necessarily know which one wrote Revelation. While that is the claim it is not necessarily true and is certainly without verifiable proof. I used the assertion by Dionysius that Revelation was filled with mistakes or ‘idiotisms’ which has forced scholars to develop special grammars to deal with the idiosyncrasies of Revelation. I clipped some examples which didn’t help those you unfamiliar with the grammatical terms as some of you told me.
Now I will explain more clearly but of necessity I will have to use some grammatical terms. Greek is a language which uses a case system for the nouns. There are markers on the nouns to indicate how the word is being used in the sentence. Whether it is the subject or object and to give indication as to its relationship with other words in the sentence. The role the word is playing in the sentence is clearly marked. The verbs must be in agreement with the subject of the verb as far as the number of people involved (subjects or agents/actors) and marked for gender in terms of masculine, feminine or neuter. The tense (past, present, future and more), mood (indicative, imperative, subjunctive ) and aspect (duration of the action, repetition of the action, continuing effect of the action) are all marked and made plain. All of these markers and the agreement between the words in the sentence mean that the writer is then free to adjust the order of words in the sentence to place words they want to highlight in the first or last position in sentence for emphasis. In order to make this system work, the rules of Greek grammar have to be obeyed. This is one of the reasons which what makes Revelation a difficult book to interpret if the writer doesn’t follow the rules.
There are many examples in the book of Revelation where the case system has not been followed. There are other notable anomalies as well. The main verb is sometimes followed by a participle (or subordinate verb) introducing a new thought which doesn’t follow what went before it. Sometimes the flow of thought is broken by a bracketed idea but the sentence doesn’t return to its original point. The grammar of the sentence is on occasions disturbed or troubled by a pronoun or adverb or relative clause which clouds the meaning. The expected agreement between gender, number and case are not correct. It is these anomalies which lead critics to make the claims they do. Resulting in the allegations made by the experts that Revelation has been written in clumsy Greek which is full of mistakes in grammar and syntax.
These errors or idiotisms as Dionysius called them has led many scholars to conclude the author of John’s Gospel and Revelation cannot be one and the same person. Hence all of the ensuing debate over the years. In defence of John other scholars have come up with the suggestion that an amanuensis (or scribe) must have been used. As I indicated in Gem 2187, there’s a difference of opinion as to whether such a scribe was used for John or for Revelation. There are many Bible scholars who cannot believe that Jesus’ disciple, John, being a humble fisherman could have written such a Gospel with the flawless Greek which is evident in that document. Thus there are those who believe that John must have had a scribe helping him, given the standard of Greek seen in that Gospel. (This is also a feature of Peter’s letters – also a humble a fisherman.) Others are convinced that John must have been written Revelation without an amanuensis, i.e. scribal help. That would therefore explain why each work could be attributed to John, yet the end result could be so different from each other.
Gordon Fee is of the opinion that John wrote the Gospel himself without scribal help because it is hard to conceive a scribe being there and working alongside him while he was in exile on Patmos. Not only that but take note of what is recorded in the text of Revelation itself.
Suddenly, I heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet blast. It said, “Write in a book everything you see and send it to the seven churches in the cities of Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea.
Revelation 1:10-11
It is clear from the text of Revelation that John was instructed to write everything he had seen and heard in a book, the said book is of course the text of Revelation. I will address some more issues related to this in future Gems. There are numbers of scholars, critics and self-appointed experts who have suggested that John is likely to have made a series of short notes at the time of seeing the visions. One commentator, Henry Barclay Swete has said, “Due to the circumstances under which the book was written, it is most likely that John recorded the visions in shorthand notes, which he jotted down at the time to work on later and tidy them up.” That makes good sense. After all, if we see a vision or have a dream, it is not until after the experience that we have the opportunity to make a summary of what it was we saw or heard in the vision or the dream.
There is one word of clarification that I particularly like, a comment found in Swete’s text of The Apocalypse of St John which is a quote from Archbishop Benson’s work Apocalypse, which contained a chapter titled A Grammar of Ungrammar [see cxxiv-cxxv]. The sense being an example of what I have recorded above of those who criticized John’s work on the basis of the so-called error ridden Greek. What I find interesting is that in Benson’s opinion, “John had not erred through ignorance. Rather it is highly possible that he has not erred at all. His eccentricities were possibly due to thinking in a Semitic language.” The suggestion being that what John had produced was Hebraic Greek. It is not written with strict Greek flow of thought. i.e. It was not ordered and sequential. Rather it moves in circular ways and in so doing better reflects Hebrew thought. A strict tense progression is not adhered to; rather it is almost written in a form of Greek from a Hebrew perspective. Benson believed it was a result of John’s desire to give movement and vivid reality to the visions he had recorded. According to Benson, the style was clear and had literary power while abandoning the grammatical rules and syntax of Greek. The result is a powerful literary form which was clear and moved the content along well. Swete’s accompanying comment was that John’s work was obviously the work of one who was more familiar with the construction of the Semitic sentence rather than the Greek sentence. All of which perfectly matches who John was.
This accords with what Dr Eli Lizorkin-Eyzenberg and Prof Pinchas Shir from the Israel Bible Centre think related to John’s work in Revelation. We have to be open to the fact that the content John recorded was indeed inspired by God and communicated to him by angels. Furthermore, that John was using the apocalyptic literature of Hebrew TANAKH (the Law, Prophets and Writings) as the basis of what he shared content-wise. John drew his raw material from both what he saw and heard from Jesus and the quotes and allusions drawn from Old Testament apocalyptic literature. Rather than criticizing, we need to be prepared for interpreting this book on a much deeper level than we ever imagined.
This is a revelation from Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants the events that must soon take place. He sent an angel to present this revelation to his servant John, who faithfully reported everything he saw. This is his report of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ. God blesses the one who reads the words of this prophecy to the church, and he blesses all who listen to its message and obey what it says, for the time is near. This letter is from John to the seven churches in the province of Asia. Grace and peace to you from the one who is, who always was, and who is still to come; from the sevenfold Spirit before his throne; . . .
Revelation 1:1-4
Do you see the complication hidden in these three words I have highlighted?
Have a think about these three words before the next Gem in the context of what I have written in this Gem.
These three highlighted words hold the key as to why Revelation is so complex.
Don’t be too quick to criticize something we may not fully understand under the guise of our supposed enlightenment.
Ian
No matter how smart we are, our understanding will never catch up with our experience.
Rick Warren
Your level of Influence reflects your level of understanding. You can never influence what you do not fully understand.
Jose Carol
Always leave room for the possibility that you don’t understand something fully enough before you classify someone else’s view or comment as ignorance.
Ian
I am enjoying this analysis.