Greek: Ὁ νικῶν οὕτως περιβαλεῖται ἐν ἱματίοις λευκοῖς καὶ
οὐ μὴ ἐξαλείψω τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ἐκ τῆς βίβλου τῆς ζωῆς καὶ ὁμολογήσω τὸ
ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ἐνώπιον τοῦ πατρός μου καὶ ἐνώπιον τῶν ἀγγέλων αὐτοῦ.
The Risen Lord, Jesus Christ, assures the "angel" of the Sardis congregation that those who conquer will walk in white robes (garments) like the Christians mentioned in Rev. 3:4. Additionally, the conquerors will not have their name blotted out from the book of life, but Christ will profess the conquering one's name before his Father and before the Father's angels. What a privilege those who conquer this world will have: they walk eternally in imitation of their Master (John 16:33; 1 John 5:4).
Some interesting comparisons are made in The New Interpreter's Bible (Volume XII, page 583). The commentary references Revelation 2:1; 3:18; 4:4; 6:9-10; 7:14; 14:4; 16:15; 19:14. Cf. Revelation 15:1-8; 19:11-21. We also read that Christ is a "heavenly scribe" who possesses the ability to blot out names from the book of life. Compare Revelation 13:8; 17:8; 20:12; 21:27.
The congregation at Sardis receives correction because it has the name of being spiritually alive, but it's largely dead in the eyes of Jehovah and Christ (Revelation 3:1). However, there are still some in Sardis, who have kept their spiritual robes clean. If they continue in their Christian course and conquer, they can look forward to eternal blessings as God and Christ put their names indelibly in the book of life.
G.K. Beale (The Book of Revelation) perceives allusions to Daniel 11:35; 12:10. Cf. Daniel 12:1-2.
περιβαλεῖται is the future middle indicative third person singular of περιβάλλω. Buist Fanning III calls the verb, "middle intransitive" (Revelation, page 166). Compare Song of Solomon 1:7 (LXX); Revelation 19:8.
StepBible Apparatus Criticus: περιπατήσουσιν] ς WH περιπατήσουσι] Byz
Wednesday, March 15, 2023
Revelation 3:5 ("you will be clothed like them in white robes"-NRSV)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
31 comments:
I've recently come across a bit of scurrilous pleading from our Trinitarian and Modalists friends about Christ's role as scribe of the scroll/ book of life, as you likely guessed the claim is that only God himself can determine which names are erased or remain in the scroll of life therefore Jesus is JEHOVAH.
John CH.5:30NIV"By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who sent me."
I'm not surprised because I've seen so many attempts to prove that Jesus is God. But that scripture is a good one: Jesus is judge insofar as God has appointed him as such.
Trinitarians are desperate
Bowman/ White/ Shamoun are all trying so badly to prove it
Iv seen an argument for Rev 4:8 and the LXX's "Ho on" combinded with other manuscripts that are not of the bible (saint spyridon or something)...
Most claims can be shot down (Edgar is just far better at it than I am)
Edgar,
Great post.
Linguistic question:
What is the significance of the "middle intransitive" used for περιβαλεῖται as opposed to it being transitive or even another verbal construct?
I got this from wikipedia:
"In grammar, an intransitive verb is a verb whose context does not entail a direct object."
and also:
"In general, intransitive verbs often involve weather terms, involuntary processes, states, bodily functions, motion, action processes, cognition, sensation, and emotion."
Perhaps you can help me tie this altogether? Does this affect how an anointed Christian "clothes himself" in the "righteous acts" that are thus symbolised by his white garments (Rev 19:8)?
Also, thanks for introducing me to the Step Bible. Wow!
TK
Thanks Terence, and you're welcome for the step Bible link. I've found it to be a great resource.
What you've posted from Wikipedia looks good to me. A transitive verb entails or takes a direct object (e.g., "The dog bit the man" or "John sculpted the statue") but intransitive verbs do not entail or take a direct object: "Isaac walked slowly but purposefully" or "John silently pondered").
As you likely know, the middle voice has various functions in Greek, but it's often use to express action which an agent does to himself/herself (Sue washed her hands). However, I guess Fanning is saying that περιβαλεῖται in Rev. 3:5 is middle but it's intransitive, so it does not express or entail a direct object: i.e., the conqueror will be clothed with clean/white garments. Notice that we are not directly told who will cloth the victorious Christian but the implication is obviously that Jesus will because of what the context tells us. However, the verb in and of itself does not express the agent, nor does it give an object for the verb.
In Rev. 19:8, I believe there is a different form of περιβάλλω: περιβάληται is aorist middle subjunctive third person singular. It's interesting that the garments of 19:8 are the righteous acts of the holy ones, so it appears that anointed Christians (Christ's bride) cloth themselves in this case. Revelation 19:7 appears to support this understanding. The middle voice can be tricky; there are times when it's transitive, but may be intransitive at times.
Just the clarification I needed. Thank you.
An interesting question - Is there any evidence that the ancients believed the Christ (or messiah) to be God himself?
(Going about this in a different way)
Terence, glad it helped. Thanks for letting me know. I will check the blog in the morning for the other comments. It's been a long day, you all ☺
Anonymous, when you say "the ancients," it would depend on the time period, milieu, and group of people you had in mind. I don't think the Jews ever believed it although some scholars have tried to argue for an incipient form of Trinitarianism in the Hebrew Bible or they claim that Jews around Jesus' time thought the Messiah would be divine. But hardly anyone goes along with that suggestion.
By that I mean the Bible writers and the Jews - is there any actual written evidence.
God said he would send someone (I am pretty sure) however if they already knew God was the messiah, why did God not make that explicitly clear..
similar issue with the plural pronouns arguments
The simple answer is that there is no evidence for the Messiah being God himself. Even the early Cappadocian Fathers in the eastern church said the Trinity was not fully manifested until after the holy scriptures were written. Most NT scholarship I've read states that the Bible provided the outlines of the Messiah and what he would be like, but much remained obscure. See Daniel 7:13-14; 9:24-27, for example.
See the discussion by B.B. Warfield here: https://www.monergism.com/divine-messiah-old-testament
He brings up Isaiah 9:6, but that verse does not clearly teach the Messiah would be divine (i.e., God). Jews certainly did not read it that way. Some applied the verse to Jehovah God but that did not mean they saw the Messiah as equivalent to God.
earliest I can find is a guy called spyridon, polycarp following closely after - though I question the first guys authenticity
Does Spyridon come after Polycarp? Secondly, I'm not sure what he has to do with Bible manuscripts or the Trinity doctrine. The dates I found for Spyridon are circa 270-348 CE, but Polycarp's dates are 69-155 CE. So Polycarp lived before him, and I'm more familiar with Polycarp than Spyridon. Why use Spyridon to establish something about NT manuscripts? Hmmm
I now see that Spyridon reportedly participated in the Nicene Council of 325 CE and he used a metaphor to convince someone of the Trinity. However, due to his relatively late date, what connection does he have with NT manuscripts?
I read somewhere his writings were done in the first century... but now looking at it it may be faulty information
Polycarp was apparently an apostle of John.. yet believed the trinity I find that sus in all. something doesn't add up
ill find the source when I get home
Thanks. I've seen people try to make Polycarp a Trinitarian but I'm not convinced.
I cant find the source again but will keep looking - I think it is faulty information though, If he wasnt alive during the first century when the manuscripts were written he establishes nothing like alot of these early "Fathers"
Polycarp is a weird "cattle of fish" trinitarians use him as a trump card (like Coldwell's rule) however like you I remain unconvinced - it doesnt add up, John was a very technical writer and the style of how the trinity is described is written by Paul and alot of other writers - i.e when unity is involved all involved in unity are in the context explicitly. Compare deut 6:4 to john 10:30 (Deut has 1 subject John has 2) and the word one is always neuter
Whereas the quotes of deut in the NT the word is masculine indicating one (person) [this is by no means a hard rule, but from what I observe would be accurate]
Why use Spyridon to establish something about NT manuscripts? - I have no idea, theres alot of people who try to use early Christian fathers as a trump card... yet strangely they were all very near the end of the first century or thereafter (may be slightly inaccurate)
According to Early Christianity in Contexts: An Exploration across Cultures and Continents, edited by William Tabbernee, Spyridon of Trimithus was present at the Council of Nicaea of 325 CE. Other sources report the same year.
Regarding Polycarp, we don't even have that much material about him or from him. I usually see Trinitarians bringing out one quote that supposedly establishes the Trinitarianism of Polycarp. That is not enough and even the quote they use doesn't seem to prove their claims.
Is the Polycarp reference related to Revelation (Alpha and Omega)? or am I thinking of some other reference..
(My memory is really bad at the moment)
I was thinking of this quote from The Martyrdom of Polycarp:
O Lord God Almighty, the Father of thy beloved and blessed Son Jesus Christ, by whom we have received the knowledge of Thee, the God of angels and powers, and of every creature, and of the whole race of the righteous who live before thee, I give Thee thanks that Thou hast counted me, worthy of this day and this hour, that I should have a part in the number of Thy martyrs, in the cup of thy Christ, to the resurrection of eternal life, both of soul and body, through the incorruption [imparted] by the Holy Ghost. I bless Thee, I glorify Thee, along with the everlasting and heavenly Jesus Christ, Thy beloved Son, with whom, to Thee, and the Holy Spirit, be glory both now and to all coming ages. Amen
That's it! for some reason in my head that's related/ associated with Revelation... I suppose you could use that to support the trinity if you omit "The Father" in the first clause
slightly offtopic this is a funny claim "ho on is the main word in the new testament used for deity" (YouTube comments apparently)
I realize I have bought this to your attention before - but if this is true then why do the writers bother with "Theos"
Good question. Also ask the person making this claim, how many times does ὁ ὢν occur in the NT and apply to God?
Revelation ch.1:4NIV"To the seven churches in the province of Asia:
Grace and peace to you from him who is, and who was, and who is to come, and from the seven spirits a before his throne, ,"
Revelation ch.1:8NIV"“I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty.”"
Revelation ch.4:23N8V"Each of the four living creatures had six wings and was covered with eyes all around, even under its wings. Day and night they never stop saying:
“ ‘Holy, holy, holy
is the Lord God Almighty,’ b
who was, and is, and is to come.”
Revelation ch.16:5NIV"Then I heard the angel in charge of the waters say:
“You are just in these judgments, O Holy One,
you who are and who were;"
Hebrews ch.5:7NIV"During the days of Jesus’ life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with fervent cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission. "
These are the occurrences ,that I am aware of, of ho on being used re:JEHOVAH in the N.T. As to whether it is being used as a title in these verses as per exodus 3:14 of the septuagint,maybe maybe not.
I think I have listed two examples of where it applies to humans - I dont really know how many times its applied to "God" unfortunately they also use Jesus as the "God" evidence
ὁ ὢν is not used often of God in the NT at all; contrast that with how many times ho theos appears and to whom it's applied. I think the relevant "Jesus deity" passages number 8 or 9. But the Father is called ho theos more than 100 times. As you say, Unknown, the NT uses ὁ ὢν for humans, not just God. In any event, the Youtube info is false.
again noticeably its never used of the holy spirit - because its a masculine noun to a neuter word per Wallace's study - if this was a title for God, I would expect it to be applied to it aswell
Good point about ho theos not being applied to the holy spirit (pneuma) because it's a masculine noun. I've written some about the holy spirit here: https://fosterheologicalreflections.blogspot.com/2017/11/some-thoughts-on-holy-spirit.html
Trinitarians try to argue that the spirit is called "God" in Acts 5:3-4 or they try to show that the spirit only does things that God could do. For instance, see 1 Corinthians 2:10ff.
I meant ho on (if it was a truely title) but yeah ho thoes works as well
The acts argument is flawed as in in John we have a paralel about Abraham and God both being a Father and apparently they only have one Father God - so is Abraham God now aswell - the trinity is becoming very full, by their own logic-
We have:
Father
Son
Holy spirit
&
Jesus' disiples
Moses
Solomon (thought to be)
Abraham
and a few others
also 2 Corin 3:17 is another used recently - however that falls flat with the second clause
Post a Comment