Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected
| PentecostalTheology.com
To my mind, the ο ων of Exodus 3 would fit better here than ο ζων, even more naturally, with the words “I am the First and the Last,” ο ων of course being the translation of the Tetragrammaton in the Greek Old Testament. And I can see how “alive” (ζων) could possibly become a corruption of ων in the immediate context: “I am the First and the Last, and the Living One [ο ζων]. And I was dead, but behold, I live (ζων ειμι) forever…” To me, “I am the First and the Last, and He who is [יהוה/ο ων]. And was dead, but behold, I live forever…” After all, ο ζων would amount to a divine title—”the Living One,” since you wouldn’t say, “I am he who is alive” if you were simply going to say, “I am alive” (not that “the First and the Last” is not already the name of God used here of the Son).
Metzger’s Textual Commentary on the New Testament does not discuss any significant textual variant here. According to Tischendorff’s apparatus, there is a redaction of the Codex Siniaticus that omits και from the phrase και ο ζων, but nothing else.
The oldest complete Patristic commentary on Revelation was written by Andrew of Caesarea (533-637), and has been translated by Dr. Eugenia Constantinou. Andrew here writes:
And when I saw him I fell down at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me saying, “Do not be afraid. I am the first and the last and the living one. And I became dead, and behold I am living unto the ages of ages. Amen.
Christ revived the Apostle [John] himself who had died through the weakness of human nature like Joshua son of Nun (Joshua 5:14) and Daniel (Daniel 8:17, 10:9-12) by saying to him, “Do not fear, for I have not come near to kill you, since I am beginningless and endless, having become dead for your sakes.”
Oecumenius of Isauria, who slightly predates Andrew, wrote:
The holy John would not have been strong enough to survive his astonishment had the saving right hand of the Son of God not touched him, which by the mere touch had accomplished so many wonderful things. And he said to me, “I am the first and the last,” which is as though he had said, “I am he who for the salvation of you all sojourned among you in the flesh at the end of times, even though I am the First and the firstborn of all creation. How is it possible that anything evil transpire from my appearance? For if I who am living and am the wellspring of life became dead for you, and trampled death underfoot and lived again, how is it possible that you who are living become dead on account of me and my appearance? And if ‘I have the keys of death and of hades,’ so that I make dead and make alive those whom I wish, and that I will bring down to hades and bring up again, as it is written concerning me, and that, as the prophet says, escape from death belongs to me (Psalm 68:20), I would not have sent my own worshipers and disciples to an untimely death.”
One other Church Father who comments on Revelation 1:18 is Cyprian of Carthage (210-258). In his Latin translation of the verse in Ad Quirinium, II.26, he also reads ο ζων here.
Eastern Orthodox writers are usually particularly sensitive to being faithful to patristic interpretations of Scripture and highlighting differences of opinion between the Fathers. Lawrence Farley‘s commentary here explains:
He tells John, “Do not be afraid,” and in this He tells all of John’s churches not to fear. They need not fear death, martyrdom, or anything in all the world. Why? Because Christ has overcome the world, trampling down death by death. He became dead, but now He is alive to ages of ages. As such, He is the first and the last, sovereign over all (compare God as the Alpha and Omega in 1:8) and the Living One, the source of all life. He had authority over death and Hadesby His Resurrection. Death cannot now separate us from Him, for He is Lord of both the living and the dead.1
Russian Orthdox Archbishop Averky Taushev (1906-1976) also wrote a Patristic commentary on Revelation. Here he comments:
From these words, St John had to understand that the One Who appeared was none other than the Lord Jesus Christ, and that his appearance could not be fatal for the Apostle, but on the contrary, would be life giving. To have the keys to something signified among the Jews to receive authority over something. Thus, “the keys of hell and of death” signify authority over the death of the body and the soul.2
Thus, I do not believe there is any credible Patristic source that ever read anything other than ο ζων in the text.
1. The Apocalypse of Saint John: A Revelation of Love and Power (Orthodox Bible Study Companion Series) (Conciliar Press)
2. The Epistles and Apocalypse (Commentary on the Holy Scriptures of the New Testament) (Holy Trinity Monastery)
First, I could find no evidence of any variation in the text of ancient sources at Rev 1:18. (I can understand the reason for the excellent, ingenious and penetrating question.)
However, I find much precedent for text as it is BUT implying that YHWH is implied. I note that:
- That Jesus takes the title, “First and Last” is a direct allusion to the exclusive title of YHWH in Isa 41:4, 44:6
- In John’s writings, Jesus is often depicted as the source of life, 1 John 5:11, 12 (Greek zoe). See also John 15:1-5.
- In other places Jesus is described explicitly as the source of life such as John 6:35-51 (bread of life); John 11:25 (resurrection and life); John 14:6 (way truth and life). Again, in each case, the Greek word is zoe.
There are numerous other places where NT writers use OT titles of YHWH as titles of Jesus. God (Deut 4:35, 6:4, 32:39 vs Matt 1:22, 23; John 1:1, 18 20:28), Creator (Isa 44:24, 45:18 vs John 1:3, Col 1:16, 17), Saviour (Isa 43:3, 11, 45:17, 21 vs Matt 1:21; Acts 4:12; 2 Tim 1:10, Tit 1:4, 2:13, 3:6; 2 Pet 1:1, 11), First and Last (as quoted above), etc.
[] Revelation 1:18 Stephen Baldwin stbaldwi at hotmail.com
Tue Jul 12 15:07:53 EDT 2005
[] sabbatical year of Greek study [] Revelation 1:18 Ladies and Gentlemen:This is my first posting to this forum. I’m grateful for its existence and look forward to learning.Just to introduce myself, I am not a professional theologian. Just a software engineer who would die to be able to study this stuff more. I’ve just completed a basic NTG course.In chatting to some JWs recently, we discussed Rev 1:18 where the First and the Last states that “I was dead” (NIV). In the New World “translation”, “became dead”. Looking in my GNT it is writtenEGENOMHN NEKROSThe usage of GINOMAI struck me as curious and the notion of “becoming dead”. Would a use of EIMI NEKROS have worked too? Should we understand “becoming dead” as being in the state of deadness? I’d be interested to read any thoughts regarding this, regarding the use of GINOMAI as an auxiliary verb etc. Also, if you have any references that discuss these types of questions, I’d be pleased to hear from you.ThanksStephen Baldwinstbaldwi at hotmail.com
[] sabbatical year of Greek study[] Revelation 1:18
[] Revelation 1:18 George F Somsel gfsomsel at juno.com
Tue Jul 12 15:56:02 EDT 2005
[] Revelation 1:18 [] Revelation 1:18 On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 19:07:53 +0000 “Stephen Baldwin”<stbaldwi at hotmail.com> writes:> Ladies and Gentlemen:> This is my first posting to this forum. I’m grateful for its > existence and > look forward to learning.> Just to introduce myself, I am not a professional theologian. Just a > > software engineer who would die to be able to study this stuff more. > I’ve > just completed a basic NTG course.> > In chatting to some JWs recently, we discussed Rev 1:18 where the > First and > the Last states that “I was dead” (NIV). In the New World > “translation”, > “became dead”. Looking in my GNT it is written> > EGENOMHN NEKROS> > The usage of GINOMAI struck me as curious and the notion of > “becoming dead”. > Would a use of EIMI NEKROS have worked too? Should we understand > “becoming > dead” as being in the state of deadness? I’d be interested to read > any > thoughts regarding this, regarding the use of GINOMAI as an > auxiliary verb > etc. Also, if you have any references that discuss these types of > questions, > I’d be pleased to hear from you.> > Thanks> > Stephen Baldwin> stbaldwi at hotmail.com__________________KAI hO ZWN, KAI E-GENOMHN NEKROS KAI IDOU ZWN EIMI EIW TOUS AIWNAS TWNAIWNWN KAI EXW TAS KLEIS TOU QANATOU KAI TOU AiDOU.If you check a good lexicon such as BDAG (and if you don’t have this, getit), you will find that the concept which connects the usages (“come intobeing”, “to change location”, etc.) is that of a change of state orplace. He IS the living one, but he BECAME dead, and now he is alive. The significance is the (temporary) change of state.georgegfsomsel___________
[] Revelation 1:18[] Revelation 1:18
[] Revelation 1:18 Harold R. Holmyard III hholmyard at ont.com
Tue Jul 12 15:52:52 EDT 2005
[] Revelation 1:18 [] Revelation 1:18 Dear Stephen,>In chatting to some JWs recently, we discussed Rev 1:18 where the First and>the Last states that “I was dead” (NIV). In the New World “translation”,>“became dead”. Looking in my GNT it is written> >EGENOMHN NEKROS> >The usage of GINOMAI struck me as curious and the notion of “becoming dead”.>Would a use of EIMI NEKROS have worked too? Should we understand “becoming>dead” as being in the state of deadness? I’d be interested to read any>thoughts regarding this, regarding the use of GINOMAI as an auxiliary verb>etc. Also, if you have any references that discuss these types of questions,>I’d be pleased to hear from youHH: GINOMAI can be translated as “was.” The second main meaning for GINOMAI according to BAGD lexicon is “as a substitute for the forms of EIMI.” EIMI is the standard Greek verb for representing the “to be” idea. In English do we really talk like the New World translation? At least it sounds odd in my ears: “I became dead.” It seems more natural to say, “I died” or “I was dead.” (Of course, how often does anyone talk that way at all?) The verse (Rev. 1:18) seems to describe a stative condition. Jesus was in one state, that of deadness, and he is now is in another, aliveness. In a technical sense the New World translation is perfectly possible. The question is what part of GINOMAI’s scope of meaning the writer of Revelation had in mind. Since he uses EIMI in the same verse with “alive,” the New World Translation may have been tryng to preserve the difference. Yet the difference may have been so subtle in Greek that their attempt in English is too much.Yours,Harold Holmyard
[] Revelation 1:18[] Revelation 1:18
[] Revelation 1:18 Awohili at aol.com Awohili at aol.com
Tue Jul 12 17:00:58 EDT 2005
[] Revelation 1:18 [] Revelation 1:18 The New World “translation,” as you put it, is a literal translation from the Greek. The way it renders Revelation 1:18 is not different from other “translations,” to use your expression. For example, Revelation 1:18 in the Analytical-Literal Translation by Gary F. Zeolla (2001) reads: “And I became dead. And Look! I am living into the ages of the ages.” The New Testament Transline by Michael Magill (2002) renders it: “And I became dead and behold — I am living forever and ever.” Literal “translations,” as you put it, do just that — they translate literally. Solomon In a message dated 07/12/2005 12:08:24 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, stbaldwi at hotmail.com writes:In chatting to some JWs recently, we discussed Rev 1:18 where the First and the Last states that “I was dead” (NIV). In the New World “translation”, “became dead”. Looking in my GNT it is writtenEGENOMHN NEKROSThe usage of GINOMAI struck me as curious and the notion of “becoming dead”. Would a use of EIMI NEKROS have worked too? Should we understand “becoming dead” as being in the state of deadness? I’d be interested to read any thoughts regarding this, regarding the use of GINOMAI as an auxiliary verb etc. Also, if you have any references that discuss these types of questions, I’d be pleased to hear from you.
[] Revelation 1:18[] Revelation 1:18
[] Revelation 1:18 Awohili at aol.com Awohili at aol.com
Tue Jul 12 17:10:02 EDT 2005
[] Revelation 1:18 [] Rev. 1:18 My apologies for not signing my full name. The problem is that I usually post where I am well-known and don’t have to. Solomon Landers In a message dated 07/12/2005 2:05:08 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Awohili at aol.com writes:Literal “translations,” as you put it, do just that — they translate literally.Solomon
[] Revelation 1:18[] Rev. 1:18
[] Rev. 1:18 Carlton Winbery winberycl at earthlink.net
Tue Jul 12 17:58:59 EDT 2005
[] Revelation 1:18 [] Revelation 1:18 Let us talk about the text of Rev. 1:18 (GINOMAI/EIMI, ETC) without discussing any particular groups claims or the methods of translation of any group. This will lead us astray. If you have not yet done so, please read the FAQ for as to what is permitted and what is not. home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/ThanksCarlton Winberyco-moderator– Carlton L. WinberyRetired Professor of ReligionLouisiana College318-448-6103winberycl at earthlink.netwinbery at lacollege.edu
[] Revelation 1:18[] Revelation 1:18
[] Revelation 1:18 malcolm robertson mjriii2003 at yahoo.com
Wed Jul 13 10:06:47 EDT 2005
[] Rev. 1:18 [] Traditional Greek grammar (was: Ephesians 5:5 “TOUXRISTOU KAI QEOU”) Dear Stephen, Welcome to and I can tell you many blessings lie in store for you in the Greek text. Happy mining. Now to your query. Please don’t let your mind be clouded by compartmentalizing Greek grammar and divorcing it from common sense. NEKROS is NEKROS. EGENOMHN may be translated by *became* but it also may be translated simply by *was*. If a person *becomes dead* they are actually dead. EIMI NEKROS would not work simply because the statement *I am dead* would betray a lie. HN NEKROS *I was dead* would however serve equally well and state the same thing. But there is a theological nuance here implied by the use of EGENOMHN that may explain better this semantic choice of John (cf.1:4f). List rules will not permit me to elaborate further. However, the context makes it plain that EGENOMHN NEKROS is in contrast with both KAI hO ZWN and IDOU ZWN EIMI. Hope this helps and again welcome aboard. Cordially in Christ, Malcolm Robertson__________________________________________________Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
[] Rev. 1:18[] Traditional Greek grammar (was: Ephesians 5:5 “TOUXRISTOU KAI QEOU”)
