« AnteriorContinuar »
1336. For fyó; Mr von Velsen conjectures isov. I would read and punctuate as the Ravenna MS. does, according to my notes, éyó That have I.' So éryo is used to emphasize an assertion, not to be translated by an emphatic 'I, Acharnians 202, and in other passages where its meaning has not generally been understood.
1373. ovdels év * ayopā Venice MS. ovdeis ěv řáyopa Ambrosian. έν τ' αγορά ουδείς Ravenna. Mr von Velsen prints oúdeis év * * * and proposes to fill the vacant space with m e. I see no objection to read with Bekker and others ουδείς εν αγορά.
1401. kk Tôn Ba Lavetop TieTau Tò xojTptop. So Elmsley. The MSS. have all λούτρον or λουτρόν. Mr von Velsen adopts Routplov. I have not seen the word elsewhere, and would read
κάκ των βαλανείων πίεται το λουτρόν. ΔΗΜ. εύ,
In these brief notes I have only mentioned a few points in which I venture to differ from the conclusions of the editor. No doubt in his explanatory notes he will have a great deal to say in defence of them. I have left unnoticed the many points in which I agree with him,
The book is an excellent sample of faithful and conscientious work.
W. G. CLARK.
ON THE εν μέσω OF REV. V. 6, AND THE ανα μέσον OF
1 COR. VI. 5.
And I beheld, and lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain. Rev, v. 6, Authorized Version.
So there is not among you any wise man who shall be able to judge between his brother? 1 Cor. vi. 5, literally rendered.
The Greek of these passages in the best MSS. (the variations of which it would be ab re to discuss here) stands as follows:
Και είδον (+ και ιδού, ε) εν μέσω του θρόνου και των τεσσάρων ζώων και εν μέσω των πρεσβυτέρων αρνίον εστηκός (or έστηκώς Ν) ως εσφαγμένον.
And: Ούτως ουκ ένι (or έστιν, ς) εν υμίν ουδείς σοφός (or σοφός ουδε εις, ε) ος δυνήσεται διακρίναι ανά μέσον του αδελφού αυτού;
Every one who has read even the first few chapters of Genesis in the original, knows how the Hebrew idiom reduplicates the particle which is equivalent to our between (1925...12) when the between governs two objects specified and distinguished. Thus what is rendered in our Version, “I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed” (Gen. iii. 15), is literally “between thee and between the woman, and between thy seed and between her seed.” In ix. 16, “the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh,” is literally "covenant between Elohim and between every creature.” So in c. i. 4, “God divided the light from the darkness” is “between the light and between the darkness”; and in like manner in v. 14, “ between the day and between the night” (1975:209 799 big j'a).
Now the existence of Hebraisms in the New Testament has been fully and conclusively shown by Winer, Böckel, Webster and others. As an example, noticed by Webster though overlooked by Winer, and not recognized as a Hebraism by Bloomfield or Alford, I may quote the redundant use in several passages of the personal pronoun after the relative. Thus in Acts xv. 17, é d' oùs TKÉKintai tò óvouá nov ét' aŭtous,
this common and familiar Hebrew idiom may be found in the New Testament as in Mark vii. 25, Acts xv. 17, Eph. ii. 10, 1 Pet. ii. 24 (in X and other MSS.), Rev. vii. 2, 9.
But it is especially in the Greek of the Revelation that solecisms of various kinds abound, and it can therefore excite no surprise if the peculiar use of 129......y should be found there; and the object of this brief paper is to suggest that we have it in the passage quoted above from v. 6. I believe the true rendering of this verse to be as follows: And I saw BETWEEN the throne and the four living creatures (on the one hand) and the elders (on the other hand) a Lamb standing, as one that had been slain.
I assume that in this vision, as in that described in the first chapter of Ezekiel's prophecies, the four living creatures are intimately associated with the throne itself. This seems implied by the manner in which they are mentioned in iv. 6. (KÚKNW ToŮ Opovov), v. 11, and xiv. 3.
But in justification of this rendering of év ułow, it is important first to observe that it is evidently the same general sense that is conveyed by the ανά μέσον in vii. 17: το αρνίον το ανά Mégov toll Opovou polpavei aŭtoús, which all commentators and translators, so far as I am aware, take as nearly or quite equivalent to the èv uéow before us. What is the exact sense of this åvà uéoov in vii. 17 we will consider presently: the point to be noted now is its being (almost) synonymous with ev ułow. For a comparison of the two passages seems conclusive on this point.
But avà pécov is exactly the expression which the Seventy chose as the Greek rendering for the Hebrew 9a, and they habitually repeat it just as "2 is repeated. Thus in the LXX. version of Gen. i. 4, we find και διεχώρισεν ο Θεός ανά μέσον TOû bwtós kai ávà uéoOV TOÙ OKÓTOUS. In v. 14 of the same chapter: του διαχωρίζειν ανά μέσον της ημέρας και ανά u é 0v Tms PUKT0s. In Gen. iii. 15: cat expat do ảoà μέσον σου και ανά μέσον της γυναικός, και ανά μέσον του σπέρματός σου και ανά μέσον του σπέρματος αυτής. And such, so far as I have observed, is the usual rendering of 12.......1 throughout the Septuagint though occasionally the latter 12 is left untranslated, as in Gen. xiii. 8: un ČOTW uáxn và u áo ou euos kai Joũ (7) .... ), though the next clause is perfectly literal–και ανά μέσον των ποιμένων Mov kaì åvà uboov TÔ Toljévwv cov. Of the reduplicated åvà méoov other instances will be found in Ex. viii. 23, and xxvi. 33, Judg. iv. 5, 1 Sam. vii. 14, 1 Kin. xxii. 34, Jer. vii. 5, Ezek. xxxiv. 20, Zech. xi. 14. And just so in Latin inter is sometimes repeated, as in Hor. Sat. 1. 7. 11, where see Macleane's note; though this is not a recognized idiom of the Latin language. Bentley calls it “vitiosum sane loquendi genus et idiotikov."
But an obvious difficulty in the way of the interpretation here suggested is found in the dvà uéoov of vii. 17, which seems intelligible, or possibly intelligible, as commonly rendered“the Lamb which is in the midst of the throne shall be their shepherd,”—while “ between the throne" seems at the first glance destitute of meaning. Is it possible that the avà méoov may indicate the interval between two objects of which one only is specified, and the other is understood ? I think this is clearly the case in the verse from 1 Cor. vi. above quoted, “who shall be able to judge between his brother?” As to the reading neither Tregelles nor Alford gives any variant on