Rev 12:11 and 13:14 - δια + acc as instrumental

The forum for those who still struggle with morphology, syntax, and idiom, or who wish to discuss basic questions about the meaning of Greek texts, syntax, or words.
Forum rules
This is not a place for students to ask for the answers to their homework assignments. Users who do that may be banned.
Matthew Longhorn
Posts: 756
Joined: November 10th, 2017, 2:48 pm
Contact:

Re: Rev 12:11 and 13:14 - δια + acc as instrumental

Post by Matthew Longhorn »

Can you clarify on that?
Idiomatic perhaps, but truly private?
Stirling Bartholomew
Posts: 1141
Joined: August 9th, 2012, 4:19 pm

Re: Rev 12:11 and 13:14 - δια + acc as instrumental

Post by Stirling Bartholomew »

Matthew Longhorn wrote: October 11th, 2020, 1:18 pm Can you clarify on that?
Idiomatic perhaps, but truly private?
You need to familiarize yourself with secondary literature on the language of the Apocalypse. I don't have a bibliography on hand. It has been argued that the idioms of Apocalypse form a coherent system but it isn't a system found anywhere else. So looking in Classical authors is a waste of time. Finding examples in Thucydides proves nothing. The best place to look is within the book itself.
C. Stirling Bartholomew
Matthew Longhorn
Posts: 756
Joined: November 10th, 2017, 2:48 pm
Contact:

Re: Rev 12:11 and 13:14 - δια + acc as instrumental

Post by Matthew Longhorn »

Thanks, that makes some sense.
So in that case, shifting the question along - would you see 12:11 and 13:14 as functioning as BDAG and BDF assert?
Barry Hofstetter
Posts: 2159
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm

Re: Rev 12:11 and 13:14 - δια + acc as instrumental

Post by Barry Hofstetter »

Stirling Bartholomew wrote: October 11th, 2020, 1:16 pm
Matthew Longhorn wrote: October 11th, 2020, 1:10 pm Which doesn’t answer my question in the original post :D
Namely whether this usage in 12:11 and 13:14 is found in other texts in Koine / classical.
And to be fair, with regards to the meta language - surely it is important to understand in what sense BDF / BDAG are using their terminology?
Your looking for answers in the wrong place. The author of the Apocalypse has a private language.
Not as much as one might think if we only compare the rest of the NT. A look at the documentary papyri will also show quite a variety of usage in the language.
N.E. Barry Hofstetter, M.A., Th.M.
Ph.D. Student U of FL
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
καὶ σὺ τὸ σὸν ποιήσεις κἀγὼ τὸ ἐμόν. ἆρον τὸ σὸν καὶ ὕπαγε.
Stephen Carlson
Posts: 3350
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Rev 12:11 and 13:14 - δια + acc as instrumental

Post by Stephen Carlson »

Matthew Longhorn wrote: October 11th, 2020, 4:10 am The argument in the book is a touch complex so I can't really explain why he argues for this beyond that he says the concept of dying in Revelation as a metaphor for conversion. Those killed by God and his agents are those who come to be persuaded by the gospel; those killed by Satan are those who turn to him.

Theology aside, it raises the question of whether δια + acc is reasonable as an indicator of instrumental cause.
This question is imperiled by a crucial lack of specificity. Apparently, there's some book (which is not named) that makes a claim (which is not quoted) that διά + acc in one of these contexts is an indicator of "instrumental cause" (which is not defined). That's not enough to work with.

In my experience, complex arguments from books with seeminly unusual claims that are relayed second hand and without citation are often garbled and misunderstood. The only answer I can give is to go ad fontem, to the original source, and check to see if the exact claim is actually made and properly supported. Otherwise, we may be building castles in the air.
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia
Matthew Longhorn
Posts: 756
Joined: November 10th, 2017, 2:48 pm
Contact:

Re: Rev 12:11 and 13:14 - δια + acc as instrumental

Post by Matthew Longhorn »

A tad blunt but fair :) . In my defence, I did post after a night of no sleep - against me... I need to not do that. That said, I didn’t sleep last night either so it proves I don’t learn from my mistakes

Argument is War: Relevance-Theoretic Comprehension of the Conceptual Metaphor of War in the Apocalypse
Author - Clifford winters
Page 135 footnote 272
While it is true that δια + gen usually supplies "efficient cause", BDAG notes that this is not always the case with Revelation. It, in fact, uses both Rev 12:11 (the brothers "overcame by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony") and 13:14 (the beast misled the earth-dwellers "by signs") as examples where "efficient cause" is rendered by δια + acc (and they are the only biblical examples it uses, demonstrating that it is characteristic for Revelation in particular
italics in the source

He goes on to give a proposed reason for this routed in a possible dual meaning in his words
...he might be creating two possible meanings for the same phrase: one that works within the literal martyrological schema (the faithful being killed "because of" their faith) and one that works within the metaphorical, restoration schema (the faithful being killed or restored "by" their faith
same footnote

I didn’t cite the source in part due to embarrassment of referencing something with relevance theory in it again

His reference to "characteristic to Revelation in particular" would have been useful for me to have provided, but still didn’t change my desire to know if it does have wider support outside Revelation
Stephen Carlson
Posts: 3350
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Rev 12:11 and 13:14 - δια + acc as instrumental

Post by Stephen Carlson »

That's a bit more helpful, and I am able to find the passage in Google Books.

I suppose that there are two issues: (1) does διά + acc. in Rev 12:11, 13:14 = the normal διά + gen.? and (2) can διά + acc. in 6:9 and 20:4 be read the same way?

For (1), this is the kind of question that requires a specialist in the study of the Greek of Revelation, not the general Greek reader. If I read BDAG right, there may be parallels in Pindar, 2 Macc 12:11, EpArist), but I'm worried that Rev does know how to use διά + gen. (1:1 and 21:24).

For (2), the main difficulty is that the original meaning of διά + acc. alreadt makes such eminent sense of 6:9 and 20:4 (at least on the surface) that it seems strained to suppose that we are working with two more anomalous instances of it. It's much more economical to suppose that Winters's hypothesis about who uses iron instruments is not supported by the text.
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia
Matthew Longhorn
Posts: 756
Joined: November 10th, 2017, 2:48 pm
Contact:

Re: Rev 12:11 and 13:14 - δια + acc as instrumental

Post by Matthew Longhorn »

Stephen Carlson wrote: October 12th, 2020, 1:19 am For (2), the main difficulty is that the original meaning of διά + acc. alreadt makes such eminent sense of 6:9 and 20:4 (at least on the surface) that it seems strained to suppose that we are working with two more anomalous instances of it. It's much more economical to suppose that Winters's hypothesis about who uses iron instruments is not supported by the text.
In the context of Winter’s overall thesis is makes more sense, but my original post was spurred by some wariness of accepting it uncritically. I am not even convinced by some of the claims about parallels in the use of iron instruments yet. Moving from πελεκιζω to it being the πελεκυς specifically seems a reach
Unfortunately it is the kind of book that is going to require me to read other books to evaluate better, namely conceptual metaphor theory etc.
Stephen Carlson wrote: October 12th, 2020, 1:19 am For (1), this is the kind of question that requires a specialist in the study of the Greek of Revelation, not the general Greek reader.
This makes me feel less stupid
Jason Hare
Posts: 951
Joined: June 2nd, 2011, 5:28 pm
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Contact:

Re: Rev 12:11 and 13:14 - δια + acc as instrumental

Post by Jason Hare »

It quite obviously means that they were killed by the beasts that made war with the saints, and that it was "because of" or "on account of" the testimony that they kept. The διά clauses give the reason for their being killed. There is no ambiguity here.
Jason A. Hare
The Hebrew Café
Tel Aviv, Israel
Matthew Longhorn
Posts: 756
Joined: November 10th, 2017, 2:48 pm
Contact:

Re: Rev 12:11 and 13:14 - δια + acc as instrumental

Post by Matthew Longhorn »

Jason Hare wrote: October 12th, 2020, 4:46 am It quite obviously means that they were killed by the beasts that made war with the saints, and that it was "because of" or "on account of" the testimony that they kept. The διά clauses give the reason for their being killed. There is no ambiguity here.
Hey Jason, are you referring to 12:11 and 13:14? I really wasn’t trying to get into 6:9 and 20:4. I was just puzzled by the
use suggested by BDAG and BDF which I hadn’t come across before. The limited number of examples listed made me wary

The other stuff was just context for why I asked and proved unhelpful given my lack of quotation etc.
Post Reply

Return to “Beginners Forum”