Verbal Aspect in the Book of Revelation: The Function of Greek Verb Tenses in John’s Apocalypse

212 Pages·2010·1.67 MB·English

by  David L. Mathewson

Verbal Aspect in the Book of Revelation
Linguistic Biblical Studies
SeriesEditor
Stanley E. Porter
ProfessorofNewTestamentatMcMasterDivinityCollege
Hamilton,Ontario
VOLUME4
This series, Linguistic Biblical Studies, is dedicated to the
development and promotion of linguistically informed
studyoftheBibleinitsoriginallanguages.Biblicalstudies
hasgreatlybenefitedfrommoderntheoreticalandapplied
linguistics,butstandspoisedtobenefitfromfurtherinte-
gration of the two fields of study. Most linguistics has
studied contemporary languages, and attempts to apply
linguistic methods to study of ancient languages requires
systematic re-assessment of their approaches. This series
is designed to address such challenges, by providing a
venue for linguistically basedanalysis of the languages of
theBible.Asaresult, monograph-lengthstudies andcol-
lectionsofessaysinthemajorareasoflinguistics,suchas
syntax,semantics,pragmatics,discourseanalysisandtext
linguistics, corpus linguistics, cognitive linguistics, com-
parative linguistics, and the like, will be encouraged, and
any theoretical linguistic approach will be considered,
bothformalandfunctional.Primaryconsiderationisgiven
totheGreekoftheNewandOldTestamentsandofother
relevantancientauthors,butstudiesinHebrew,Coptic,and
otherrelatedlanguageswillbeentertainedasappropriate.
Verbal Aspect
in the Book of Revelation
The Function of Greek Verb Tenses
in John’s Apocalypse
By
David L. Mathewson
LEIDEN•BOSTON
2010
Thisbookisprintedonacid-freepaper.
LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData
Mathewson,David.
VerbalaspectintheBookofRevelation:thefunctionofGreekverbtensesinJohn's
Apocalypse/byDavidL.Mathewson.
p.cm.–(LinguisticBiblicalstudies,1877-7554;v.4)
Includesbibliographicalreferencesandindex.
ISBN978-90-04-18668-2(hardback:alk.paper)
1.Bible.N.T.Revelation–Language,style.2.Greeklanguage,Biblical–Aspect.3.Greek
language,Biblical–Tense.I.Title.II.Series.
BS2825.6.L3M372010
220.4'04–dc22
2010020326
ISSN 1877-7554
ISBN 9789004186682
Copyright2010byKoninklijkeBrillNV,Leiden,TheNetherlands.
KoninklijkeBrillNVincorporatestheimprintsBrill,HoteiPublishing,
IDCPublishers,MartinusNijhoffPublishersandVSP.
Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,translated,storedin
aretrievalsystem,ortransmittedinanyformorbyanymeans,electronic,mechanical,
photocopying,recordingorotherwise,withoutpriorwrittenpermissionfromthepublisher.
AuthorizationtophotocopyitemsforinternalorpersonaluseisgrantedbyKoninklijkeBrillNV
providedthattheappropriatefeesarepaiddirectlytoTheCopyrightClearanceCenter,
222RosewoodDrive,Suite910,Danvers,MA01923,USA.
Feesaresubjecttochange.
CONTENTS
ChapterOne.Introduction............................................ 1
TheChallengeofRevelation’sLanguage............................ 1
TheProblemofVerbTenses........................................ 3
Summary............................................................ 14
MethodandApproach.............................................. 16
ChapterTwo.VerbalAspectTheory .................................. 19
VerbalAspect ....................................................... 19
DefiningtheAspects................................................ 29
Summary............................................................ 39
AspectandDiscourseAnalysis..................................... 40
AspectandtheGenreofRevelation................................ 45
Conclusion.......................................................... 46
ChapterThree.VerbalAspectinRevelation.......................... 49
Introduction......................................................... 49
TheMajorGreekTensesinRevelation............................. 51
TheAoristTense ................................................. 51
ThePresentTense................................................ 66
TheImperfectTense ............................................. 89
ThePerfectTense................................................. 91
TheFutureTense................................................. 108
Conclusion.......................................................... 114
ChapterFour.ShiftingTensesintheApocalypse..................... 117
Introduction......................................................... 117
AnalysisofSelectedTexts........................................... 123
Revelation ...................................................... 123
Revelation.– ................................................ 129
Revelation ...................................................... 134
Revelation.–............................................... 137
Revelation–................................................. 143
Revelation.–............................................... 150
Revelation.–............................................... 154
Revelation.– ............................................. 158
vi contents
Summary............................................................ 162
OtherNewTestamentTexts ........................................ 164
Extra-BiblicalTexts ................................................. 166
Conclusion.......................................................... 169
ChapterFive.Conclusion:VerbalAspectandtheNatureof
Revelation’sGreek................................................... 173
Bibliography ........................................................... 183
AuthorIndex........................................................... 193
ReferenceIndex........................................................ 197
chapterone
INTRODUCTION
TheChallengeofRevelation’sLanguage
Amongthenumerousinterpretivechallengesconfrontingstudentsofthe
book of Revelation, the nature of the language of the Apocalypse con-
tinues to elicit considerable fascination and perplexity by both gram-
mariansandcommentators.ThemostdisputedfeatureofJohn’s1Greek
is the apparent grammatical infelicities or solecisms, ostensible depar-
tures from “correct” Greek Grammar.2 These apparent irregularities in
theGreekofRevelationhaveledtojudgmentsthatitsgrammaris“abso-
lutely unique.”3 Consequently, much ink has been spilt in an attempt to
explainthisuniquegrammaroftheApocalypse.Thepresenceofostensi-
blegrammaticalirregularitiesintheApocalypsehasengenderedavariety
oftheoriesofexplanation.ThussomeseeJohn’sGreekasbad,sloppy,or
careless(particularlywhenmeasuredagainstClassicalGreekstandards),
orperhapstheresultofJohn’secstaticvisionaryexperience.4Somecon-
strue John’s awkward or unusual grammar as a deliberate attempt to
flauntgrammaticalconventionasameansofprotestagainsttheGreco-
Romanempire.5GregoryK.Bealehasrecentlyarguedthatsomeofthe
grammaticalsolecismsareintentionalauthorialsignalsofOldTestament
allusions, while Iwan M. Whitely thinks the solecisms are part of the
hermeneuticalstrategyoftheauthor.6
1 I find it necessary to offer the same caveat that most everyone else does in dis-
cussingRevelation:bycallingtheauthorJohnIamnotpresupposinganyparticularview
regardingthehistoricalidentityoftheauthor.Rather,Isimplyreferto‘John’asthebook’s
impliedauthor.
2 SeetheearlycommentsofDionysiusofAlexandriacitedbyEusebius,Hist.Eccles.
..–.
3 R.H.Charles,StudiesintheApocalypse(Edinburgh:T.&T.Clark,).Italics
his.
4 For this latter view see E.C. Selwyn, The Christian Prophets and the Prophetic
Apocalypse(London:Macmillan,).
5 A.D.Callahan,“TheLanguageoftheApocalypse,”HTR()–.
6 Gregory K. Beale, John’s Use of the Old Testament in Revelation (JSNTSS ;
 chapterone
Perhaps the most common assessment of the apparent grammatical
incongruities in the Apocalypse is to posit some level of Semitic influ-
enceuponJohn’sgrammar.WhilespeculationsthatRevelationisatrans-
lationfromanoriginalHebreworAramaicsourcelackplausibility,7the
grammatical solecisms in Revelation are frequently attributed to some
degreeofinfluencefromthegrammarofbiblicalHebrew,perhapsdelib-
eratelytogiveitanOldTestamentorpropheticflavor.8Thewell-known
andoft-quoteddictumofR.H.CharlesregardingRevelationisindicative
of this approach: “while he writes in Greek, he thinks in Hebrew, and
the thought has naturally affected the vehicle of expression.”9 Reflect-
ing the perspective of Charles, Steven Thompson similarly writes that
“at least in the Apc., the Greek language was little more than a mem-
brane,stretchedtightlyoveraSemiticframework,showingmanyessen-
tial contours beneath,”10 or for a different metaphor, “Nowhere is the
Greek ‘ground cover’ over Semitic ‘subsoil’ as thin as it is here.”11 More
recently, David E. Aune has reiterated this persistent perspective: “The
GreekofRevelationisthemostpeculiarGreekintheNT,inpartbecause
it exhibits interference from Semitic languages, perhaps both Hebrew
and Aramaic.”12 Quite often this results in scholars postulating that the
authorofRevelationwroteinanextanthybridJewishGreek.“TheApc.
canaccuratelybedescribed ... andwithnohesitancybecategorisedas
‘JewishGreek’,tothefullestextentoftheterm....”13Additionally,conclu-
sionstothesevariousissueshavesometimesbeenpressedintoserviceto
Sheffield: Academic Press, ) –; Iwan M. Whitely, “An Explanation for the
AnacoluthaintheBookofRevelation,”FN()–.
7 SeeR.B.Y.Scott,TheOriginalLanguageoftheApocalypse(Toronto:Universityof
Toronto, ) and C.C. Torrey, The Apocalypse of John (New Haven: Yale University
Press,)respectively.
8 Forbriefsummariescf.C.G.Ozanne,“TheLanguageoftheApocalypse,”TynB
()–;G.Mussies,“TheGreekoftheBookofRevelation,”L’Apocalypsejohannique
et l’Apocalyptique dans le Nouveau Testament (ed, by J. Lambrecht; Leuven: Leuven
University Press, ) –; Nigel Turner, A Grammar of New Testament Greek,
Vol.IV,Style(ed.byJamesH.Moulton;Edinburgh:T.&T.Clark)–.
9 Charles,Studies,.
10 StevenThompson,TheApocalypseandSemiticSyntax(SNTSMS;Cambridge:
UniversityPress,).
11 JürgenRoloff,TheRevelationofJohn:AContinentalCommentary(Transl.byJohn
E.Alsop;Minneapolis:FortressPress,).
12 DavidE.Aune,Revelation–(WBCa;Dallas:WordBooks,)clxii.
13 Cf. Thompson, Semitic Syntax, . See also Nigel Turner, A Grammar of New
TestamentGreek,Vol.III,Syntax(ed.byJamesH.Moulton;Edinburgh:T.&T.Clark,
).Cf.BrianK.Blount,Revelation(NTL;Louisville:WestminsterJohnKnox,)
(“hewritesinakindofSemitizedGreek”).
introduction 
argueforacertainviewofauthorship,ortoteaseoutunderlyingsources
oftheApocalypse.14Furthermore,DarylD.Schmidthasarguedforthe
presence of numerous ‘Septuagintalisms’, rather than Semitisms, in the
Apocalypse’sgrammar.15
TheProblemofVerbTenses
Whilemuchremainstobesaidconcerningvirtuallyalloftheseissues,the
intentionofthisworkisfarlessambitiousandwillfocusmorenarrowly
on only one limited aspect of the issue of the Greek language of Reve-
lation which seems to have attracted its share of the attention: the verb
tensesintheApocalypse.Mussieslamentedthat“thegreatshortcoming
in the study of the morphology of the Apc. is the lack of a systematic
descriptionoftheuseoftense ....”16Oneoftheconspicuousfeaturesof
John’suseofGreektensesistheirappearanceincontextsthatseemtovio-
latetheirassumed(temporal)values.Specifically,Revelation’svisionary
material commonly exemplifies a shifting between all the major Greek
tenses(present,aorist,imperfect,future,perfect)whileoftenapparently
maintainingthesametemporalsphereofreference(thenarrationofwhat
Johnsaw,ε(cid:3)δ(cid:5)ν).ThusinrecordinghisvisionstheauthoroftheApoca-
lypseemploysafullarrayoftenseformstodepicttheprocessesthatmake
uphisvisionarynarrative.Frequently,thisuseoftensesinRevelationis
characterizedas“irregular,”“confused,”or“inconsistent,”duetothefact
thatJohn’suseoftensesseemsatoddswithcommonconceptionsofthe
valuesofGreektenses(e.g.aorist=pastandpunctiliar;present=present
timeandlinear;perfect=pastactionwithpresentresults).Forexample,
inthethronevisionofCh.,thetensesoffiniteindicativeverbscanbe
brokendownaccordingtothefollowingnumberofoccurrences:17
14 Cf. R.H. Charles, The Revelation of St. John ( vols.; ICC; New York: Charles
Scribner’s,)I:cxvii–clix;Ozanne,“LanguageoftheApocalypse,”.
15 DarylD.Schmidt,“SemitismsandSeptuagintalismsintheBookofRevelation,”NTS
()–.SchmidtdefinesSeptuagintalismsas“syntacticalpeculiaritiesthatare
nottypicalofSemiticsyntax,butarestylisticfeaturescharacteristicofoneofthevarieties
oftranslationGreekwithintheSeptuagint”().
16 G. Mussies, The Morphology of Koine Greek as Used in the Apocalypse of John
(NovTSup;Leiden:Brill,),.
17 Forreasonsdiscussedbelow,Ihaveonlyincludedtheindicativeformsoftheverb.
Furthermore,aswillbeexplainedbelow,Ihavenotincludedformsoftheverbε(cid:7)μ(cid:8)inmy
count.