Announcement

Collapse

Biblical Languages 301 Guidelines

This is where we come to delve into the biblical text. Theology is not our foremost thought, but we realize it is something that will be dealt with in nearly every conversation. Feel free to use the original languages to make your point (meaning Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic). This is an exegetical discussion area, so please limit topics to purely biblical ones.

This is not the section for debates between theists and atheists. While a theistic viewpoint is not required for discussion in this area, discussion does presuppose a respect for the integrity of the Biblical text (or the willingness to accept such a presupposition for discussion purposes) and a respect for the integrity of the faith of others and a lack of an agenda to undermine the faith of others.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

The Apocalypse of John, by Charles C. Torrey

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Apocalypse of John

    Continuation of excerpts from the CRITICAL NOTES section of The Apocalypse of John (Yale University Press, 1958) by Charles Cutler Torrey:
    15:3 f. continued. The clause at the end of 19:8: has perplexed some commentators; but the figure, which is indeed peculiar, is taken from the mᵉᶜīl ṣᵉḏɔqͻ̅, "robe of righteousness," of Isa. 61:10 (Targum renders by zɔḵū). Observe the context: Messianic wedding ceremony, in both passages; for the speaker of 61:10, as in the first verse of the chapter, is the Messiah. See this writer's The Second Isaiah, pp. 138, 149, and 432 ff.

    We are given here, in these three lyric songs of praise, a most interesting glimpse of the writer's art in the Christian Aramaic literature of the first century. Whether we have in each case the precise words or not, we certainly have the precise form. The three, moreover, are marked as a single group not only by their literary structure but also by the prominence given to them. Each of the three is introduced with special emphasis: two are given titles, and the third has, in 19:5 f., the most impressive introduction in the book. We may perhaps recognize, in this symmetrical stanza of four long lines with a coda, the Apocalyptist's ideal pattern of a doxology.

    To be continued...

    Comment


    • The Apocalypse of John

      Continuation of excerpts from the CRITICAL NOTES section of The Apocalypse of John (Yale University Press, 1958) by Charles Cutler Torrey:
      15:3 f. continued. In thus touching incidentally upon the metrics of Revelation―a fascinating subject which must be left to future investigators―there is one other fact which may perhaps be given brief mention. It is not only in the songs, doxologies, etc., plainly indicated as verse by the context, that metric form is to be recognized. Wherever the language is highly rhetorical, verse division and accented lines are pretty sure to be found, as in the O.T. books (whence the prevailing usage in Hebrew prophecy). An example may be given here before leaving the subject. In 6:16 f., where the terrified peoples call upon the rock and mountains to fall on them and hide them, their quoted words may be restored:

      pélū ᶜᵃlḗnɔʾ waḥᵃp̅ṓnɔʾ
      min ʾapḗ ḏī yɔṯéb ᶜal kurᵉsᵉyɔ́ʾ│ūmin rū́gᵉzeh dī́ ʾmmᵉrɔ́ʾ
      ʾᵃrē ʾᵃṯɔ́ʾ yōm rūgᵉzᵉhōn rábɔʾ│ūmán yikū́l limᵉqɔ́m


      The metric regularity is not accidental

      To be continued...

      Comment


      • The Apocalypse of John

        Continuation of excerpts from the CRITICAL NOTES section of The Apocalypse of John (Yale University Press, 1958) by Charles Cutler Torrey:
        15:3 f. continued. The passage also illustrates the Apocalyptist's way of using O.T. scripture. In the Gospels in their original Semitic form, verbal quotation was the rule and the sacred text was given in its own Hebrew, rarely in Aramaic paraphrase. In Revelation direct quotation is purposely avoided, a most significant fact. There is remarkably wide and obvious use of the Old Testament, especially the prophets, but in the form of free reminiscence. Thus in the present instance familiar phrases from Hos. 10:8, Isa. 2:19, and Joel 2:11 are combined, but with no one of them in its original form. It is remarkable that in the many other borrowings of the same sort (always from the Hebrew, never the Greek), such as 7:16 f., 10:9-11, 14:15, 18:7 f., 21:23-27, there should be no citation of the original words, but only free combination in Aramaic. The fact has already been remarked, with an attempt at explanation, in the earlier sections of these notes.

        Comment


        • The Apocalypse of John

          Continuation of excerpts from the CRITICAL NOTES section of The Apocalypse of John (Yale University Press, 1958) by Charles Cutler Torrey:
          15:4. Regarding the evident mistranslation of Aramaic in this verse, where the word is not a conjunction but the relative pronoun, see the note on 13:4.

          Comment


          • The Apocalypse of John

            Continuation of excerpts from the CRITICAL NOTES section of The Apocalypse of John (Yale University Press, 1958) by Charles Cutler Torrey:
            15:5 [Καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα εἶδον, καὶ ἠνοίγη ὁ ναὸς τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ]. There is here no definite quotation from the Old Testament. The sanctuary in heaven was not a tent, but a temple, and so it is here styled with the significant addition of the sacred name of the Tabernacle (Hebrew ʾohεl mōᶜed or ʾohεl hͻedūt): not the temple of Solomon, nor of Zerubbabel, nor of Herod, but the sanctuary of Moses the man of God. Ho naòs tês skēnēs toû martyríou [ὁ ναὸς τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ] is the rendering of hēḵᵉlͻʾ ḏī mašᵉkan sahᵃḏuṯͻʾ; cf. Targ. Exod. 38:21, Num. 9:15, etc. It is perhaps needless to say that there is no influence of the LXX to be seen here. The translator renders, as usual, without regard to any other Greek version.
            Last edited by John Reece; 12-19-2014, 11:32 AM.

            Comment


            • The Apocalypse of John

              Continuation of excerpts from the CRITICAL NOTES section of The Apocalypse of John (Yale University Press, 1958) by Charles Cutler Torrey:
              15:6. The original reading of the Greek translation was líthon, not línon. This is a mistranslation, which Charles (2, 38) explains convincingly. The word translated was šeš [שֵׁשׁ], which in Hebrew means "byssus, fine linen," in the LXX rendered nearly forty times by bússos, bússinos, and in the Targums regularly by būṣ. In Aramaic the same word (at least in form) means "marble, alabaster," and it is thus rendered in three passages in very late Hebrew: Esther 1:6 líthos, Song of Songs 5:5 márminos, 1 Chron. 29:2 párion. The true Aramaic word for "byssus, fine linen," is būṣ, also found a few times in the latest O.T. Hebrew (Chronicles, Ezekiel, Esther).

              The Aramaic author of Revelation made the mistake of employing in this one passage the long-familier Hebrew word (contrast the evident use of būṣ in 19:8, 14!), while the Greek translator of course rendered it as Aramaic líthon. Charles points out that the same mistranslation, recognized as such by Ball, was made in the Epistle of Jeremiah, verse 71.

              Comment


              • The Apocalypse of John

                Continuation of excerpts from the CRITICAL NOTES section of The Apocalypse of John (Yale University Press, 1958) by Charles Cutler Torrey:
                16:5 And I heard the angel in charge of the waters say, “Just are you, O Holy One, who is and who was, for you brought these judgments.[Καὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος· δίκαιος εἶ, ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν, ὁ ὅσιος, ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας,]

                Another example of the mistranslated hōti [ὅτι]. See Introduction, p. 42, and note on 13:4.

                Comment


                • The Apocalypse of John

                  Continuation of excerpts from the CRITICAL NOTES section of The Apocalypse of John (Yale University Press, 1958) by Charles Cutler Torrey:
                  16:7 [Καὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου λέγοντος· ναὶ κύριε ὁ θεὸς ὁ παντοκράτωρ, ἀληθιναὶ καὶ δίκαιαι αἱ κρίσεις σου].

                  Why should the alter be represented as speaking?―It may not be futile to raise the question. The words uttered are a deeply felt echo of what the angel had said in the preceding verses: The blood of the saints and prophets is now justly avenged! Below the alter were the souls of those who had been slaughtered for the faith (6:9 f.). They had no apparent connection with the alter itself, and on the former occasion it did not speak for them; they themselves cried out, "How long must we wait before our blood is avenged?" At this point we certainly should expect to hear from them again.

                  I would like to make a suggestion as a mere possibility that here again, as in 4:6, a single line of the Greek text fell out by accident, and that it was a spokesman of the martyrs who echoed the words uttered by the angel. Thus, kaì ḗkousa [henòs ek tôn esphagménōn tôn óntōn hupokátō] toû thusiastēríou légontos, etc.

                  The supposedly omitted portion has just thirty-four letters―one line―as in the case of 4:6; the grammatical connection with the line omitted is perfect, and there is now agreement with 6:9 f.
                  Last edited by John Reece; 12-22-2014, 10:36 AM.

                  Comment


                  • The Apocalypse of John

                    Continuation of excerpts from the CRITICAL NOTES section of The Apocalypse of John (Yale University Press, 1958) by Charles Cutler Torrey:
                    16:10 [Καὶ ὁ πέμπτος ἐξέχεεν τὴν φιάλην αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τὸν θρόνον τοῦ θηρίου, καὶ ἐγένετο ἡ βασιλεία αὐτοῦ ἐσκοτωμένη, καὶ ἐμασῶντο τὰς γλώσσας αὐτῶν ἐκ τοῦ πόνου].

                    There is something seriously wrong with the text of this verse., as is now generally recognized. Darkness does not make men writhe in anguish and gnaw their tongues "because of their sores" (ek tôn helkôn autôn [ἐκ τῶν ἑλκῶν αὐτῶν], verse 11). This word shows plainly enough that in some way two very different chastisements are confused here. That which descended on the kingdom of the beast was not the Egyptian plague of darkness, but the plague of boils, Exod. 9:9-11.

                    The source of the trouble is then easily seen. This is one of the numerous examples in Revelation of that most common source of textual error, the eye of the scribe or of the translator taking in at a glance a group of Semitic consonants with some change in their order.

                    The kingdom was eskotōménē [ἐσκοτωμένη], "smitten with darkness," maḥᵉyɔʾ bᵉhɛšᵉkɔʾ, according to our text. But the original reading, beyond doubt, was maḥᵉyɔʾ bᵉšiḥᵉnɔʾ, "smitten with boils." This is the Aramaic word regularly used in the Targums, whether for the Egyptian plague (Exod. 9:9-11; Deut. 28:27, 35) or for the boils with which Job was smitten (Job 2:7). The man who made the mistake in this passage knew that the Egyptian plagues were being repeated and thought he saw the word "darkness." The example is especially valuable because of the certainty of the explanation, given by the Greek text (helkôn [ἑλκῶν]) itself. In the LXX hélkos [ἕλκος], hélkē, is used only to translate Hebrew šᵉḥīn [ שְׁחִין ] (a dozen times or more), and the Hebrew word is never otherwise rendered. As in the other instances of the kind, the mistake might have been made either by the translator or by a copyist of the text.
                    Last edited by John Reece; 12-23-2014, 08:14 AM.

                    Comment


                    • The Apocalypse of John

                      Continuation of excerpts from the CRITICAL NOTES section of The Apocalypse of John (Yale University Press, 1958) by Charles Cutler Torrey:
                      16:13 f. Καὶ εἶδον ἐκ τοῦ στόματος τοῦ δράκοντος καὶ ἐκ τοῦ στόματος τοῦ θηρίου καὶ ἐκ τοῦ στόματος τοῦ ψευδοπροφήτου πνεύματα τρία ἀκάθαρτα ὡς βάτραχοι· 14 εἰσὶν γὰρ πνεύματα δαιμονίων ποιοῦντα σημεῖα, ἃ ἐκπορεύεται ἐπὶ τοὺς βασιλεῖς τῆς οἰκουμένης ὅλης συναγαγεῖν αὐτοὺς εἰς τὸν πόλεμον τῆς ἡμέρας τῆς μεγάλης τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ παντοκράτορος.

                      The difficulty here, and especially the nominative case of bátrakhoi, is the result of false division of the sentence. The Greek translator began as follows: "I saw coming out of the mouth of the dragon . . . three unclean spirits." The text which followed he divided thus: kᵉᶜūrᵉdᵉᶜīn ʾiṯēhōn, rūḥē šeḏīn ᶜɔḇᵉḏē ʾɔṯīn dī ʾɔzlīn ᶜal malᵉḵayyɔʾ dī ʾarᵉᶜɔʾ ḵolloʾ, "They are like frogs, demon-spirits working miracles, that go forth to the kings of the whole earth," etc.

                      Subsequent editors of the Greek text saw plainly that the opening sentence must include the frogs; there must be no pause after akátharta. Reading in this way necessitated the insertion of gár (the Aramaic needed no conjunction), while the nominative case of bátrakhoi could be regarded as quite characteristic of the Greek of this apocalypse!

                      The correct translation of the original Aramaic would have been: "I saw coming out of the mouth of the dragon . . . three unclean spirits like frogs; they are demon-spirits working miracles, who go forth to the kings of the whole earth, to gather them," etc.

                      Comment


                      • The Apocalypse of John

                        Continuation of excerpts from the CRITICAL NOTES section of The Apocalypse of John (Yale University Press, 1958) by Charles Cutler Torrey:
                        16:16. The demons (pneúmata daimoníōn [πνεύματα δαιμονίων, verse 14]) who arouse the armies of the pagan world for an overwhelming attack on Israel assemble them at the place called Har Magedon: kaì sunḗgagen autoùs eis tòn tópon tòn kaloúmenon Ebraïstí Hàr Magedṓn [Καὶ συνήγαγεν αὐτοὺς εἰς τὸν τόπον τὸν καλούμενον Ἑβραϊστὶ Ἁρμαγεδών].

                        The specification "in Hebrew" was probably in the original text; so also in 9:11. The meaning "Har Magedon" and the origin of the form given by our Greek were discussed at length by the present writer in the Harvard Theological Review, 31 (1938), pp. 237-48. It was there shown that the scene of the final conflict of Israel with the armies of the hostile nations, definite in this apocalypse as in all other Jewish eschatology, is the mountain about Jerusalem. This unvarying feature of the apocalypses is set forth very clearly by the author of Revelation in chapter 20, verses 7-9. We therefore can be fairly certain that the strange geographical term designates either the city of Jerusalem or some part of its immediate vicinity. The initial har, which obviously represents the Hebrew word for "mountain," gives strong support to this conclusion. It is the same picture which we see in chapter 13 of 2 Esdras and in chapters 38 and 39 of Ezekiel. The Greek text is faulty here. The original (Aramaic) reading was Har Mōᶜed, "Mount of Assembly." The translator, not understanding this, translated HRMᶜD as Har Maged, which―perhaps under the influence of the familiar name Megiddo―became Magedon.

                        Har Mōᶜed, "Mount of Assembly," in pagan Semitic mythology the abode of the gods (Isa. 14:13), was taken over by the Jews into their own religious terminology as a designation of Mount Zion, as is shown by Pss. 2:2 f., 48:2 ff. It is both the place of meeting God with his people (cf. ʾohel mōᶜed, the "Tent of Meeting") and the place of assembling of the heathen armies at the great day of the final reckoning.

                        This designation of Mount Zion, doubtless familiar and in frequent use in the time when Psalm 48 was written and still occasionally employed, seems to have been unknown to the Greek translator of this apocalypse.

                        Comment


                        • The Apocalypse of John

                          Continuation of excerpts from the CRITICAL NOTES section of The Apocalypse of John (Yale University Press, 1958) by Charles Cutler Torrey:
                          16:19. "And Babylon the great was remembered in the sight of God," dounai autȩ̄ to potērion tou oinou tou thymou tēs orgēs autou. [δοῦναι αὐτῇ τὸ ποτήριον τοῦ οἴνου τοῦ θυμοῦ τῆς ὀργῆς αὐτοῦ], "to give her the cup of the wine of the wrath of his wrath."

                          The intolerable tautology has called forth much comment, but has remained unexplained. Bousset remarks that though the phrase is "überladen" it will not do to emend the text, for the very same form of words occurs in 19:15.

                          The source of the difficulty has already been shown in the notes on 14:8 [here and here] and 14:19 [here and here]. Greek thumós regularly renders Aramaic lᵉwɔṭ, whether the meaning is "wrath," or "poison," or "intoxication." In the LXX thumós orgês is the standing translation of ḥᵃrōn ʾap, "burning anger," tendered regularly in the Targums by toqɛp rᵉgaz. That is not, however, the phrase employed here, as is evident from 14:8 (and the O.T. parallels adduced in the note on the passage), in which thumoû, "intoxicating," is descriptive of the wine, as also in 18:3; and from 17:2, where its effect is described by the verb emethysthēsan [ἐμεθύσθησαν].

                          We have here an example of another favorite compound with lᵉwɔṭ, the "intoxicating cup," or "poison cup." kɔs lᵉwɔṭ is a standing phrase, occurring in the Targums even where nothing in the Hebrew corresponds to it; see Isa. 13:1; Jer 1:5; and Psa. 75:9. Other examples are Targum Isa. 51:22; Jer. 25:15; see also the similar phrases quoted in the note on 14:8.

                          The meaning of the phrase in the present passage, and likewise in 19:15, is therefor clear. The original Aramaic text here was kɔsɔʾ ḏī ḥᵃmar lᵉwɔṭɔʾ ḏī rūgᵉzeh, "the cup of the intoxicating wine of his wrath."

                          Comment


                          • The Apocalypse of John

                            Continuation of excerpts from the CRITICAL NOTES section of The Apocalypse of John (Yale University Press, 1958) by Charles Cutler Torrey:
                            17:4 (SBL Greek) [NRSV: The woman was clothed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and jewels and pearls, holding in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the impurities of her fornication].

                            This passage is a remarkable specimen of the method of the too-cautious translator. It illustrates the recognition of an untranslated (as shown above in numerous examples), and also, in two other particulars, loyalty to the Aramaic at the expense of the Greek. "The woman was clothed in purple . . . holding in her hand a golden cup (potērion chrysoun [ποτήριον χρυσοῦν]) filled (gemon! [γέμον]) with abominations and the unclean things (bdelygmatōn kai ta akatharta! [βδελυγμάτων καὶ τὰ ἀκάθαρτα])," etc. A wild bit of Greek, but produced with full knowledge and a definite plan. The editions have gemon [γέμον], but this is correction. The Greek participle translates Aramaic dī mᵉlɔʾ, and "cup" (kɔs) is masculine; gémōn therefore is the only reading that can accomplish the translator's purpose (see above). The sense of the passage is not harmed. In 21:14 "wall" (šūr [Hebrew שׁוּר, Greek τεῖχος]) is masculine.

                            As for the mixture of cases in the next phrase, the accusative is the regular Semitic construction with this verb, and the translator satisfies both languages; he does exactly the same thing with another verb in 22:5, see the note there. Compare also the use of the feminine gender in tēs kaiomenēs [τῆς καιομένης], 19:20, already described, and in pepyrōmenēs [πεπυρωμένης], 1:15. This interpreter felt himself at liberty to turn to the original text in such matters, no loss or misunderstanding being involved.

                            Comment


                            • The Apocalypse of John

                              Continuation of excerpts from the CRITICAL NOTES section of The Apocalypse of John (Yale University Press, 1958) by Charles Cutler Torrey:
                              18:5 hoti ekollēthēsan autēs hai hamartiai achri tou ouranou. "Here sins have reached to heaven" (the true meaning in spite of the Greek.

                              This is not a quotation, nor does the writer appear to have in mind any particular passage of O.T. scripture. The idea was familiar and probably often expressed, see especially Jer. 51:9 and Ezra 9:6.

                              To be continued...

                              Comment


                              • The Apocalypse of John

                                Continuation of excerpts from the CRITICAL NOTES section of The Apocalypse of John (Yale University Press, 1958) by Charles Cutler Torrey:
                                18:5 hoti ekollēthēsan autēs hai hamartiai achri tou ouranou. "Her sins have reached to heaven" (the true meaning in spite of the Greek.

                                This is not a quotation, nor does the writer appear to have in mind any particular passage of O.T. scripture. The idea was familiar and probably often expressed, see especially Jer. 51:9 and Ezra 9:6.

                                The language is not legitimate Greek, but can only be understood as translation. In Biblical Greek the verb kollâsthai [infinitive of κολλάω; occurs in 18:5 as aorist passive ἐκολλήθησαν] is the standing equivalent of DBQ (Hebrew and Aramaic) in its various forms. The ordinary meaning of the Semitic verb is "cleave to, stick fast to," exactly corresponding to the Greek; but in both Hebrew and Aramaic derived meanings, one of them illustrated in the present passage, are in frequent use. In English usage a man who continues to follow upon another is said to "stick to" him; thus also in Semitic usage. In Psa. 63:9 the Hebrew has the phrase dāḇᵉqāh nap̱šı̂ ʾaḥᵃrêḵā [ דָּבְקָה נַפְשִׁי אַחֲרֶיךָ ], and the LXX its translation-Greek rendering: ekollēthē hē psychē mou opisō sou [ἐκολλήθη ἡ ψυχή μου ὀπίσω σου]. Note the same idiom, "follow close after," in Jer. 42:16 where the Targum has dᵉḇaq and bɔṯar ("after"); the same two words are used in the Palestinian Syriac of John 10:5, "a stranger they will not follow."

                                Along with this is the meaning "overtake," as in Gen. 31:23 (DBQ [דבק] in both Hebrew and Aramaic) and elsewhere; and finally the simple meaning "reach to, extend to," especially in Aramaic, where the ʾp̱ᵉᶜel stem of the verb is regularly thus used. An O.T. example of the Greek word is given by Zech. 14:5, "the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azel"; where the LXX with its egkollēthēsetai . . . heōs [ἐγκολληθήσεται . . . ἕως] (Hebrew ʾεl [אֶל]) closely resembles the "Greek" of our passage in Revelation, where the original was ʾaḏᵉbeqū . . . lišᵉmayyɔʾ.

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X