Possible parentheses (1 John 1:1)

How do I work out the meaning of a Greek text? How can I best understand the forms and vocabulary in this particular text?
Forum rules
This is a beginner's forum - see the Koine Greek forum for more advanced discussion of Greek texts. Please quote the Greek text you are discussing directly in your post if it is reasonably short - do not ask people to look it up.

Re: Possible parentheses (1 John 1:1)

Postby John Brainard » July 4th, 2012, 7:38 pm

The NET Bible supports my position as well.

here is a cut and paste:

tn In the Greek text the prologue to 1 John (vv. 1-4) makes up a single sentence. This is awkward in Greek, and a literal translation produces almost impossible English. For this reason the present translation places a period at the end of v. 2 and another at the end of v. 3. The material in parentheses in v1.

I am thinking that maybe I am not alone on this one.

john
John Brainard
 
Posts: 72
Joined: September 18th, 2011, 5:17 pm

Re: Possible parentheses (1 John 1:1)

Postby John Brainard » July 4th, 2012, 8:51 pm

Here is the entire thought from the NET Bible. My last post was some what limited. Sorry

4 tn In the Greek text the prologue to 1 John (vv. 1-4) makes up a single sentence. This is awkward in Greek, and a literal translation produces almost impossible English. For this reason the present translation places a period at the end of v. 2 and another at the end of v. 3. The material in parentheses in v. 1 begins the first of three parenthetical interruptions in the grammatical sequence of the prologue (the second is the entirety of v. 2 and the third is the latter part of v. 3). This is because of the awkwardness of connecting the prepositional phrase with what precedes, an awkwardness not immediately obvious in most English translations: “what we beheld and our hands handled concerning the word of life…” As J. Bonsirven (Épîtres de Saint Jean [CNT], 67) noted, while one may hear about the word of life, it is more difficult to see about the word of life, and impossible to feel with one’s hands about the word of life. Rather than being the object of any of the verbs in v. 1, the prepositional phrase at the end of v. 1 (“concerning the word of life…”) is more likely a parenthetical clarification intended to specify the subject of the eyewitness testimony which the verbs in v. 1 describe. A parallel for such parenthetical explanation may be found in John 1:12 (τοῖς πιστεύουσιν εἰς τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ, toi" pisteuousin ei" to onoma autou).

John
John Brainard
 
Posts: 72
Joined: September 18th, 2011, 5:17 pm

Re: Possible parentheses (1 John 1:1)

Postby timothy_p_mcmahon » July 4th, 2012, 8:53 pm

John,

Your approach doesn't make sense to me. It seems straightforward to me that John is recounting his previous experiences - visual, auditory and tactile - with Jesus (the word of life). When he gets to the phrase "word of life" that prompts him to go off on a tangent about that word of life (v.2). By the time he's ready to return to his original thought, the parenthetical description is so long he feels compelled to recapitulate Ὃ ἦν ἀπ' ἀρχῆς ὃ ἀκηκόαμεν ὃ ἑωράκαμεν τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς ἡμῶν ὃ ἐθεασάμεθα καὶ αἱ χεῖρες ἡμῶν ἐψηλάφησαν as ὃ ἑωράκαμεν καὶ ἀκηκόαμεν and continues on with his original thought. Without the tangent, it would have read something like Ὃ ἦν ἀπ' ἀρχῆς ὃ ἀκηκόαμεν ὃ ἑωράκαμεν τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς ἡμῶν ὃ ἐθεασάμεθα καὶ αἱ χεῖρες ἡμῶν ἐψηλάφησαν περὶ τοῦ λόγου τῆς ζωῆς ἀπαγγέλλομεν καὶ ὑμῖν ἵνα καὶ ὑμεῖς κοινωνίαν ἔχητε μεθ' ἡμῶν. περὶ τοῦ λόγου τῆς ζωῆς simply describes specifically what the subject of his visual, auditory and tactile experience was, or, more directly, whom he saw, heard and touched. There just doesn't seem to be any structure into which περὶ τοῦ λόγου τῆς ζωῆς can be a parenthetical insertion.

Perhaps if you presented your understanding of the flow of the text it might make more sense to me how you believe this phrase is parenthetical.
timothy_p_mcmahon
 
Posts: 141
Joined: June 3rd, 2011, 10:47 pm

Re: Possible parentheses (1 John 1:1)

Postby David Lim » July 5th, 2012, 12:05 am

John Brainard wrote:#2 was what I had in mind.

Interestingly enough I picked up a few of my Commentaries and W. Harris Hall III seems to view as I do. Not sure if that is important or not.

But yes, you understand what I am saying.

John


Hmm what you picked out of Jonathan's options still doesn't have "περι του λογου της ζωης" as a parenthesis in my opinion. "ο ην απ αρχης", "ο ακηκοαμεν", "ο εωρακαμεν τοις οφθαλμοις ημων" and "ο εθεασαμεθα και αι χειρες ημων εψηλαφησαν" are all in apposition, together forming a reference to some entity, thus there is no complete sentence until it is resumed by "ο εωρακαμεν και ακηκοαμεν απαγγελλομεν υμιν ...", making verse 2 a parenthetical statement. "περι του λογου της ζωης" on the other hand simply modifies the combined reference, thus further describing "[that] which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen by our eyes, which we beheld and our hands felt" as "concerning the word of the life".
δαυιδ λιμ
David Lim
 
Posts: 885
Joined: June 6th, 2011, 6:55 am

Re: Possible parentheses (1 John 1:1)

Postby John Brainard » July 5th, 2012, 3:37 am

When I read the Greek (not the English) of the first portion of 1 John namely ο ην απ αρχης ο ακηκοαμεν ο εωρακαμεν τοις οφθαλμοις ημων ο εθεασαμεθα και αι χειρες ημων εψηλαφησαν I see no structural problems. The First Relative pronoun is Nominative and the following relatives are accusative in apposition.

When We arrive at περι του λογου της ζωης we have three possible options

1.) Genitive apposition
2.) Attributive Genitive
3.) Objective Genitive

It appears as if scholars are divided over this. If it is an apposition it is still as clear as mud. If it is an attributive Genitive it would be speaking of the Christ but if it is an Objective Genitive it is words about life. (The Message itself)

This might be where our differences lie. I see it as number 3 as is the case with many scholars. If that is the case and I believe that it is, then it is not consistent with the preceding thought that John penned. You do not touch the Gospel message.

Even if it were a double entendre it would still be out of place here.

By the way, why is this in the beginner Greek area? Just curious. :D

John
John Brainard
 
Posts: 72
Joined: September 18th, 2011, 5:17 pm

Re: Possible parentheses (1 John 1:1)

Postby David Lim » July 5th, 2012, 7:34 am

John Brainard wrote:When I read the Greek (not the English) of the first portion of 1 John namely ο ην απ αρχης ο ακηκοαμεν ο εωρακαμεν τοις οφθαλμοις ημων ο εθεασαμεθα και αι χειρες ημων εψηλαφησαν I see no structural problems. The First Relative pronoun is Nominative and the following relatives are accusative in apposition.


You are wrong. The first relative pronoun is accusative. There is no such thing as a nominative and accusative in apposition. If you read my earlier post you will see that the whole chunk is the object of "απαγγελλομεν".

John Brainard wrote:When We arrive at περι του λογου της ζωης we have three possible options

1.) Genitive apposition
[...]


Likewise, there is no such thing as an accusative and a genitive in apposition. I don't know what exactly you are getting at in the other options, but as others have said, "περι του λογου της ζωης" can hardly be considered parenthetical in Greek.

John Brainard wrote:[...] You do not touch the Gospel message. [...]


And perhaps I should say, please do not touch "the Gospel message" on B-Greek. Hope you understand.
δαυιδ λιμ
David Lim
 
Posts: 885
Joined: June 6th, 2011, 6:55 am

Re: Possible parentheses (1 John 1:1)

Postby David Lim » July 5th, 2012, 7:43 am

David Lim wrote:
John Brainard wrote:When We arrive at περι του λογου της ζωης we have three possible options

1.) Genitive apposition
[...]


Likewise, there is no such thing as an accusative and a genitive in apposition. I don't know what exactly you are getting at in the other options, but as others have said, "περι του λογου της ζωης" can hardly be considered parenthetical in Greek.


Oh if you meant "του λογου" and "της ζωης" being in apposition, well it did not even occur as a possibility to me. :)
δαυιδ λιμ
David Lim
 
Posts: 885
Joined: June 6th, 2011, 6:55 am

Re: Possible parentheses (1 John 1:1)

Postby John Brainard » July 5th, 2012, 7:44 am

David Lim wrote:
John Brainard wrote:When I read the Greek (not the English) of the first portion of 1 John namely ο ην απ αρχης ο ακηκοαμεν ο εωρακαμεν τοις οφθαλμοις ημων ο εθεασαμεθα και αι χειρες ημων εψηλαφησαν I see no structural problems. The First Relative pronoun is Nominative and the following relatives are accusative in apposition.


You are wrong. The first relative pronoun is accusative. There is no such thing as a nominative and accusative in apposition. If you read my earlier post you will see that the whole chunk is the object of "απαγγελλομεν".

John Brainard wrote:When We arrive at περι του λογου της ζωης we have three possible options

1.) Genitive apposition
[...]


Likewise, there is no such thing as an accusative and a genitive in apposition. I don't know what exactly you are getting at in the other options, but as others have said, "περι του λογου της ζωης" can hardly be considered parenthetical in Greek.

John Brainard wrote:[...] You do not touch the Gospel message. [...]


And perhaps I should say, please do not touch "the Gospel message" on B-Greek. Hope you understand.


To start with, I did not say that the Accusative was in apposition to the Nominative. (That would be stupid of me) If you understood it that way then I apologize. The accusatives in this text function as direct objects in apposition. Like I said sometimes I have a difficult time conveying my thoughts on paper in this case cyber paper.

I must meet with the oncologists now. I will be back to address the rest of this.

Blessings

John
John Brainard
 
Posts: 72
Joined: September 18th, 2011, 5:17 pm

Re: Possible parentheses (1 John 1:1)

Postby David Lim » July 5th, 2012, 7:49 am

John Brainard wrote:
David Lim wrote:
John Brainard wrote:When I read the Greek (not the English) of the first portion of 1 John namely ο ην απ αρχης ο ακηκοαμεν ο εωρακαμεν τοις οφθαλμοις ημων ο εθεασαμεθα και αι χειρες ημων εψηλαφησαν I see no structural problems. The First Relative pronoun is Nominative and the following relatives are accusative in apposition.


You are wrong. The first relative pronoun is accusative. There is no such thing as a nominative and accusative in apposition. If you read my earlier post you will see that the whole chunk is the object of "απαγγελλομεν".

[...]


To start with, I did not say that the Accusative was in apposition to the Nominative. (That would be stupid of me) If you understood it that way then I apologize. The accusatives in this text function as direct objects in apposition.


You said that the first relative pronoun is nominative. That is what is incorrect. The reason why it is incorrect is that it is in apposition with the other phrases and together they form the object of "απαγγελλομεν", thus they must all be accusative.
δαυιδ λιμ
David Lim
 
Posts: 885
Joined: June 6th, 2011, 6:55 am

Re: Possible parentheses (1 John 1:1)

Postby John Brainard » July 5th, 2012, 11:18 am

"David Lim"

You said:

You are wrong. The first relative pronoun is accusative. There is no such thing as a nominative and accusative in apposition. If you read my earlier post you will see that the whole chunk is the object of "απαγγελλομεν".



To start with, I did not say that the Accusative was in apposition to the Nominative. (That would be stupid of me) If you understood it that way then I apologize. The accusatives in this text function as direct objects in apposition.

You said that the first relative pronoun is nominative. That is what is incorrect
. The reason why it is incorrect is that it is in apposition with the other phrases and together they form the object of "απαγγελλομεν", thus they must all be accusative.

I want to make sure that we are on the same page here. This is what I see. When I read verse 1

ο (Nominative) ην απ αρχης ο (Accusative) ακηκοαμεν ο (Accusative) εωρακαμεν τοις οφθαλμοις ημων ο (Accusative) εθεασαμεθα

Culy, Harris,Zerwick, Kittels, Westcott, Marshall and My parsing book all slate the first relative pronoun as Nominative. You seem to disagree. I would like to know why.


John
John Brainard
 
Posts: 72
Joined: September 18th, 2011, 5:17 pm

PreviousNext

Return to What does this text mean?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests