The solecisms of the Apocalypse

THE

SOLECISMS OF THE APOCALYPSE

T. COWDEN LAUGHLIN

A DISSERTATION

PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF PRINCETON UNIVERSITY

FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

1902

PRINCETON, N. J.
C. 6. ROBINSON & CO., TJNIVKRSITT PRINTERS

3,0'

&

<&

^ t^ WoioBbm g

**t.

'*

%

PRINCETON, N. J.

#

TVe.se.-n "bed by Tres. Tcvbbon

/>/;

JL.L31

THE

SOLECISMS OF THE APOCALYPSE

T. COWDEN LAUGHLIN

A DISSERTATION

PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF PRINCETON UNIVERSITY

FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

1902

PRINCETON, N. J.
C. 6. ROBINSON & CO., UNIVERSITY PRINTERS

THE SOLECISMS OF THE APOCALYPSE

BIBLIOGRAPHY

The leading works consulted in the preparation of this disserta-
tion are the following :

Blass, " Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Griechisch." Gottingen, 1806.
Botjsset, " Die Offenbarung Johannis." 5 Aufl. Gottingen, 1896.
Burton, " Syntax of the Moods and Tenses in New Testament Greek." Chi-
cago, 1893.
Cheyne & Black, " Encyclopaedia Biblica." New York, 1899-1903.
Ebrard, " Das Evangelium Johannis." Ziiruch, 1845.
Ebrard, " Wissenschaftliche Kritik der evangelischen Geschichte." Dritte

Aufl. Frankfurt a. M., 1868.
Eusebius, " Ecclesiasticae Historiae " — Migne, " Patrologia 6?-aeca."
Ewald, " Commentarius in Apocalypsin Johannis Exegeticus et Criticus."

Lipsiae, 1828.
Ewald, "Grammatik der hebriiischen Sprache des A. T." Zweite Aufl.

Leipzig, 1835.
Ewald, "Die Johanneischen Schriften iibersetz und erkliirt." Gottingen,

1861-1862.
Green, "A Grammar of the Hebrew Language." New York, 1889.
Guillemard, " Hebraisms in the Greek Testament." Cambridge, 1879.
Harnack, Article on Word " Revelation " in " Encycl. Brit.," Vol. XX.
Hastings, " Dictionary of the Bible." New York, 1898-1902.
Hatch, " Essays in Biblical Greek." Oxford, 1889.
Lightfoot, "St. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians." London and New

York, 1900.
LtiCKE, " Versuch einer VolUtandigen Einleitung in die Offenbarung Johannis

und in die gesammte apokal) ptische Litteratur. " Bonn, 1852.
Milligan, " Discussions on the Apocalypse." London, 1893.
Moulton & Geden, "A Concordance to the Greek Testament." 2d Edition,

New York, 1900.
Salmon, "A Historical Introduction to the Study of the Books of the New

Testament." 9th Edition, London, 1899.
Spitta, " Die Offenbarung des Johannes." Hallo, 1889.

Swbte, "An Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek." Cambridge, 1900.
Swete, "The Old Testament in Greek according to the Septuagint." 3 vols.

Cambridge, 1887-1894.
Thayer, "Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament." New York, 1887.
Tischendorf, " Novum Testamentum Graece." Lipsiae, 1872.
Toy, " Quotations in the New Testament." New York, 1884.
Viteau, "Etude sur le Grec du Nouveau Testament." Paris, 1893-6.
"Westcott, "The Gospel According to St. John." London, 1894.
Westcott & Hort, "The New Testament in the Original Greek." London

and Cambridge, 1885. (The references in this dissertation are to this text.)
Winer, "A Grammar of the Idiom of the New Testament." Thayer's

Edition, Andover, 1874.

The Solecisms of the Apocalypse.

THE SOLECISMS OF THE APOCALYPSE.

The Greek of the Apocalypse is marked by a series of most
striking peculiarities which, as has long been recognized, are due
in large part to the influence of the Hebrew idiom. They appear
in passages imitating the style of the Hebrew Prophets x (with
whose writings the Apocalyptist was so familiar 2) or in sentences
or phrases transferred directly from the Hebrew of the Old
Testament or from its Greek translation — the LXX.a The fol-
lowing pages present the evidence of this Hebrew influence in
sufficient volume and with sufficient discussion of detail to make,
it is hoped, a complete demonstration.4 The solecisms will be
considered under three heads.

1 Ebrard, in speaking of the more glaring solecisms of the Apocalypse, says,
that " dieseiben nicht unwillkiihrlich, sondern in halbabsichtlicher Nachahmung
des Colorits der a. t. Sprache entstanden sind. Der Autor der Apokalypse wollte
offenbar hebraisirend schreiben ; die Sprache und der Stil der a. t. I'ropheten war
es, die ihm allein in ihrer grossurtigen Sehlichtheit genitgte, das Ungeheure wieder-
zugeben, was er geschaut hat." (" Wissensehaftliche Kritik der cvangelischen
Geschichte." Dritte Aufl. Frankfurt a. M. 1868, S. 1106.)

2 Ewald, " Die Jolmnnei.-chen Schriften." Bd. II., S. 52.

3 The LXX translation is more Hebraic than the N. T. and does not represent
a type of Greek established and in actual currency at the time it was made, but " its
distinctive character is due rather to the translators' exaggerated deference to the
Hebrew sacred text and their mechanical reproduction of it." (Thayer on " Lan-
guage of the New Testament" in Hasting's " Dictionary of the Bible," Vol. Ill,
p. 40.) It is not surprising, then, that solecisms are found in the LXX nor in the
writings of those who quoted or made use of that translation.

4 There are no less than 460 O. T. passages made use of in the Apocalypse.
Westcott and Hort give a list of the-e in their " N. T. Greek," pp. 612 ft', and
under the heading " Quotations from the O. T." ; but the Apocalypse contains no
quotations proper, although a great part of its language is taken from the O. T.
(Toy, "Quotations in the N. T.," p. 253. Cp. Swete, "An Introduction to the
O. T. in Greek," pp. 392 and 404 )

The Solecisms of the Apocalypse. 5

I.

PECULIAR WORDS.1

1. ISov.- It is often followed by a Nominative without verb.

The LXX of the Old Testament prophecies invariably
uses ISov (1) as a translation of the Hebrew word H^H (behold,
lo). Thus, for example, in such passages as Gen. 12:19 HJil
™|nE^> the LXX. of which is /cat vvv ISov tj <yvvq aov (ivavriov
o-ov). Gen.^16 : 6 -jnriDP T\T\ "HEr^N D^ON, the LXX of
which is elirev Se 'Afipap, 7rpb<; Idpav 'ISov f) TraiSCaKr) aov
(ivamiov aov). Gen. 18:9 7H&Q H3TI LXX o Se cnrotcpiBek
(Tnrev 'ISov iv -rrj aKrjvrj. Gen. 19:2 ^IfcOO H3H 1Q&01
LXX is /cat €t7rei' 'I Sou, /cvpioi, ifacXivare 7t/jo? toz; ot/cov, &c.
Ps. 134:1 ni»T"p« "0*0 rOn ^XX 'ISov ^ ev\o7etTe to*
Kvpiov. (2) 'I So u is the LXX translation also of the Hebrew word
TIN (behold), which is from the Chaldaic, in such passages as
Dan. 7:5, 6, 7 and 13. It is the translation (3) of the Hebrew
'PN (behold), which is also from the Chaldaic, in Dan. 2:31,
for example. The LXX translation of each of these three words
01^1, HN and I^N) is always ISov.

(a) Many passages in the Apocalypse contain ISov direct
from the LXX as, for example : Rev. 1 : 7 ISov 'ipx^ai fxera twv
v€(f>e\(ov. This follows Dan. (LXX) 7:13 /cat ISoi) eVt rcav
ve<pe\a>v, which follows the Aramaic original (Toy) and the Heb.
WfiW *WDy Vm Rev. 14:14 koI elSov, teal ISov
(vecpeXr) \evicr)) icai eirl rrjv v€<j>eXr]v Kadrjpevov opoiov vlbv avdpcoTrov.
This follows the LXX of Dan. 7: 13 /cat ISoi) eVt twv ve<pe\<ov
tov ovpavov w? vlbs avdpdnrov, the Hebrew of which is

m* -dd mem way rm

1 These can scarcely be called solecisms in strictest sense, yet they are peculiar
especially to the Apocalypse, whose author quotes them from the LXX.

2 Ebrard, in refuting Hitzig, who regards the Gospel of Mark and the Apoca-
lypse as written by the same author, speaks of Idov in the Apocalypse as " Nachah-

mung des Prophetenstiles wer mochte da das oftmalige t'Soi/ c. ptc. fur ein

unwillkuhrliches, ziifalliges halten " ? (" Evangelium Johannis," S. 166.)

6 The Solecisms of the Apocalypse.

and the LXX of Dan. 10:16 Kal 18 ov <w? 6/AoiWt<? %etpo<?
avdpcoTTov, the Hebrew of which is QHN *>3S HID^D H^iT1
(Cp. also Rev. 21 : 3 18 ov -q o-Krjvrj rod deov which follows Ezek.

37: 57). Rev. 12 : 3 Kal 18 ov 8pd/c(ov e%<oz/ /ce(/>a\,a? eirra

Kal Kepara 8e/ca, which follows direct the Hebrew ^fr$ of Dan.

7 : 7 and l8ov of the LXX of Dan. 7 : 8.

(b) Many other passages in the Apocalypse are imitations of
the LXX usage. Rev. 6 : 2, 5 and 8 Kal el8ov, Kal 18 ov t7T7ro<?

Xev/cos ; ittttos Trvppos Kal 18 ov Xinros yueXa?

Kal l8ov i7r7ro? ^X&)/305, which are from the LXX of Zech. 1 : 8
Kal 18 ov avrjp eVt/Se^/cco? iirl lttttov irvppov &c, to which pas-
sages the Apocalyptist here refers.1

2. UavTOKparcop.2 The influence of the LXX explains
the use of this word. It is found in the following Apocalyptic
passages . Rev. 1 : 8 Kvpios 6 0eb$, (6 &v Kal 6 rjv Kal ip^6p,€vo<;),
6 TravTOKpdreop . Rev. 4 . 8 ayios ayios ayios Kvpios, 6 Oeb?
6 iravTKpdrwp (6 rjv Kal 6 cbv Kal 6 tpypiievos;). Rev. 11:17
Kvpie, 6 deos, 6 TravTOKparap (6 wv Kal 6 rjv). Rev. 15:3
(M.e<yd\a Kal davfiaara ra epya crov), Kvpie, 6 Be 6$, 6 rravro-
Kpdrwp. Rev. 16:7 {vaC) Kvpie, 6 0eo'<?, 6 iravroKpaTdip.
Rev. 16:14 (rjfiepas tt}? fie<yd\r)$) rov Oeov tr avroK pdrco p.
Rev. 19:6 ' AWrjXovid, on ifiao-cXevaev Kvpio<i^ 6 #ed?, 6 irav-
roKpdrwp. Rev. 19 : 15 T779 6pyr)<; rov Oeov rov iravTOKpd-
to/005. Rev. 21: 22 (jcal vabv ovk el8ov iv avry) 6 yap /ev/mo?, 6
#eo'?, 6 iravTOKpdrwp vao<; avrfjs Io-tLv. Cp., also, 2 Cor. 6 : 18.

In every one of the passages just specified, the expression
6 Kvpios, 6 #eo's, 6 iravroKpdrtop is direct from the LXX of

1 In other books of the New Testament, and especially in the Gospels, id 06 is
found in quotations from the LXX. of the Old Testament as, Matt. 1 : 23 ISoii v
irapdivos iv yacrrpl ££« Kal r^erai vlbv, Kal Ka\t<rov<riv rb 6vop.a avrov 'E/j.p.avovrj\. This is
the LXX from Isaiah 7:14 (Cp. Matt. 12:18; 21:5; Matt. 11:10 l5oi> iyu
d7i-ocrT<?X\w rbv S.yye\6v /xov, &c, which is the LXX for Mai. 8 : 1. Cp. Mk. 1:2;
Lk. 7 : 27 ; Jno. 12 : 15 ; Rom. 9 : 33 ; Heb. 2 : 13 ; Heb. 8:8; Heb. 10 : 7, 9 :
1 Pet. 2 : 6.)

2 IlavTOKp&Twp is not found in John's Gospel and only once elsewhere in the
New Testament, i. e., 2 Cor. 6 : 18, where it occurs in a quotation from the LXX.

The Solecisms of the Apocalypse. 7

Amos 4 : 13 Kvpios 6 0ed<?, 6 TravTOKpdrwp (ovopa avra)), which, in
turn, is the translation of the Hebrew of the same passage, i. e.,
Amos 4: 13 flotf) DHOm!?* DIPT-

3. In the Apocalypse, we always find the word " Jerusalem "
written 'lepovcraXr/p, (indeclinable), but in the Gospel (and
Acts, &c, where quoted) it invariably has the form 'lepocroXv p.a.
(Cp. Thayer's Winer, p. 68.) But this difference is easily ac-
counted for when we note that the writing of the word in the
Apocalypse is the same as that of the LXX (from the Hebrew
D^EH^T) from which the Apocalyptist so often quotes. The
Apocalyptic passages in which tbe word appears and the LXX.
passages from which they are quoted follow: Rev. 21 : 2 Kal rrjv
ttoXiv tt]v dyiav 'I epovcaXr) p Kaivrjv elSov. This is quoted from
Isa. 52:1 Kal crv evSvaai rrjv Bogav crov, 'lepovcraXrj p,, 7ro\i? 17
dyia. Rev. 21 : 10 Kal eSeifjev p,oi ttjv ttoXiv tt)v dyiav 'lepovcra-
A.77/X, &c, which follows the LXX of Isa. 52 : 1 Kal crv evBvcrai rr)v
Sogav crov, 'Ie pova aXr] p , ttoXis r) ciyia. Rev. 3: 12 Kal ypd\}r(o

to ovopa t?}? 7ro'Xe&)9 rod deov pov, rf)<; Kaivrjs 'lepova aXrj p,1

Cp. Ezek. 48:35.2 Thus we have: — Jno. 1:19 01 'lovSaloi eg
'lepocroXv pcov. Jno. 2:13 Kal avefir) eh 'lepocroXvpa 6
'Irjcrovs. Jno. 2:23 'H? 8e r)v iv rots 'lepocroXvpois . Jno.
4: 20 Kal vpetf Xeyere oti iv 'lepocroXv p,ois iarlv 6 T07ro?. All
the other instances in John's Gospel show the declinable
'lepocroXvpa. If John wrote the Apocalypse, direct and conscious
use of the LXX form is the only possible explanation of the vari-
ation of this word.

4. 'AXXrjXovid. In Rev. 19:1. 3, 4 and 6 we have the
word 'AXXrjXovid. This word is taken from the LXX of Pss.
106:1; 146:1; 147:1; 148:1; 149:1; 150:1 and 6.
'AXXrjXovtd is the Greek translation of the Hebrew n*1""!/?!"!'

1 For examples of'Iepovo-aX-fi/x in the LXX, cp. Zech. 3:2; 9:9; Josh. 10: 1 ;
Ezek. 1:2; 2:8; 2 Chron. 12 : 2, 9, 13 ; 19 : 1, 4, 8 ; 20 : 18, 27, 28, 31 ; 21 : 5 ;
13 : 20 ; 22 : 1, 2 ; 23 : 2 et al.

2 In view of the possible common authorship of the Apocalypse and John's
Gospel, it may he noted that in the Gospel the word is always written in its declin-
able form 'Iepo(r6Xi//xa.

8 The Solecisms of the Apocalypse.

5. In Rev. 12 : 5 we have koi eTifeev vlov, ap<rev, o? fieWei
TTOi/xatveiv iravra tcl e6vq. Cp. Isa. 66 : 7. Here viov is mascu-
line and apo-ev is neuter. The word for "male" is either
6 apo-qv (masc.) or to apaev (neut.) (Cp. Thayer's Greek
Lex.) In this verse, the writer uses the neuter form while in vs.
13 of the same chapter he employed the masc. (i. e., iSicogev ttjv
yvval/ca i]Ti<i erucev tov apo-eva). Since he did not use the
neuter form in both sentences, we should rather expect the mas-
culine in the first instance in connection with the masc. viov, of
which it is an appositive (although an appositive need only agree
in case). But as Ewald suggests, "vlov, apo~ev," (i. e., the
masc. and the neut. together) is "bloss Nachahmung von
IDT X2 em Sohn ein mannliches." (" Die Joh. Schriften." Bd. II.
S. 53).*

II.
PECULIAR PHRASES.

1. In Rev. 15:5, (Cp. Acts 7 : 44), occurs the phrase " t^?
o-K7}vrj<i tov /jbaprvpiov" or more fully, "6 rao? t?}? o-Krjvrj^ tov
fiaprvptov iv to) ovpavw." This is a very striking statement, but
it is simply the Greek translation of *iyiQ~7nN in such passages
as Ex, 40 : 34, the Hebrew of which is ^fiR-fiR pjJPI DD^l
"1JHD ; the LXX for this is, /ecu iKakvyfrev rj ve<pe\r) tt)V o-kwvtjv
tov ftaprvpCov and Rev. 15:5 quotes it. Cp., also, Lev. 24 : 3
(LXX) iv T7j o~K7)vrj rov p,apTvp(ov; Num. (LXX) 17:7 and 8
iv Tri o-ferjvrj tov papTvpiov ; Ex. (LXX) 27 : 21 is iv ttj o-/cr)vf) tov
fxapTvptov ; Ex. 40 : 22 ; 40 : 24 and Num. 17 : 49.

It is also the LXX translation of miyiVjDEPD in sucn
passages as Num. 1: 50 (LXX) e7rt Tr)v cr/cr]VT)v tov fiapTv-
piov. Num. 1:53 (LXX) kvk\g> tyj<; crKTjvrj^ tov papTV-
piov. Num. 10 : 11 (LXX) f) ve<f>€\r] curb t?)? crtcvvr]*; tov

* [Note. — Another interesting word is x«^'«>M/3a»'o" (Rev. 1 : 15 and 2 : 18). It
is a compound word coined by the author, who here follows the Hebrew of Dan.
10 : 6. (Cp. Toy, '■ Quotations in the N. T., p. 254.) Notice, also, the compound
words irora/xo(p6p7]Tos (Rev. 12 : 15) and ixeuovpavrj^a (Rev. 8 : 13 ; 14 : 6 ; 19 : 17)].

The Solecisms of the Apocalypse. 9

fiaprv p lov. Ex. 38:21 (LXX) f) avvTa^is t^9 atcrjvrj? rod
fiaprv p lov.

It is further the LXX translation of rYnjJPl /{"IK in Num.

18 : 2 (LXX) cnrevavTi rrjs GK7)vv)<i tov fiaprvp lov. 2 Chron.
24 : 6 (LXX) ek ttj v a ktj vrjv tov fiaprv p Cov.

2. Strings of Genitives. Strings of genitives hanging on one
noun or on one another are frequent in the Apocalypse. Rev.

19 : 15 ttjv Xrjvbv rov olvov tov 6vfiov t?}? dpyrjs tov 0eov tov ttclvto-
KpaTepos. Rev. 14 : 10 ical ai/Tos irteTaL etc tov olvov tov Ovfiov tov
Oeov tov ev to> TroTrjpia) tyjs 0/37779 clvtov. Rev. 16 : 19 to

7T0T7]pi0V TOV olvov TOV OvfJiOV Tt}? Opyfj? CLVTOV. ReV. 14 ." 8 7} €IC TOV

olvov tov Ov/xov tt)9 iropvelas. Rev. 18 : 3 oti iic tov olvov tov
dvpiov T?}? iropveias ai/r?)?, &c. (Cp., also, Rev. 22: 19 anrb twv
Xoycov tov /3i/3\lov t/}? irpo^Tela^ TavTT]?. Cp. Rev. 21 : 6.)

The passages above are not only imitations of the LXX, but
are all more or less directly quoted from the LXX of Jer. 25 : 15
which is, to TTOTrjpiov tov olvov tov a/cpd.Too- tovtov. Cp. Isa. 51 : 17.

3. Repetition of Prepositions before a series of nouns, as in
Rev. 16 : 13 ical elSov i/c tov o-Top,aTO<i tov 8pdfcovTO<i ical i k tov
<7T0/iaT0? tov Orjplov ical i/c tov o-To'/iaro? tov ■yjrevSoTrpocp'qTOV. Rev.
21 : 13 airb avaToXrfi irvkoives Tpet?, ical airb /3opoa irvkSive? Tpet?,
/ecu a 7ro votov Trv\oive<i Tpet9, ical airb hvap,o)v irvXoivei Tpels. Rev.
17:6 ical elSov ttjv yvvaitca /xeOvovaav i k tov ai/JLaTO<; twv dylcov
ical €K tov aifiaTos tcov p,apTvpo)v 'Itjctov. (Cp. Rev. 9 : 21.) Rev.
7 : 1 tva fxr) Trverj ave/AOS i ir I t?}? 777? p.r\Te i ir I tt)? da\daari<; firJTe
eirl irav SeSpov. Rev. 3 : 5 ical 6/j,o\o<yrjo-co to ovofxa avTov i v d> ir 1 0 v
tov TraTpos /xov ical ivwirtov TOiv a<y<ye\a)v avTov. Rev. 7:9
£crTC0Tr)<; iva>7rLov tov dpovov ical iv our lov tov apviov. (Cp.
4 : 5 and 4 : 10, &c.) Here is displayed not only a repetition of
prepositions, but, in the last two examples, an unusual preposition.1

1 The preposition ev&wiov is very common in the LXX and is the Greek
translation of the Hebrew words T^a and ^aS. Thus, for example, the word
Ivdmov in Rev. 3:9 occurs in the LXX of Isa. 66:23 i. e., ?£ei vaja <rap£ tov
vpo<TKvvT)o-ai evibwiov 4/j.ov ev'IepovadXrffji, from which it is quoted, ev&iriov being the
LXX of JsjS from the phrase Hirr 1DK ' J31? mnwn1? IBO"1?:) 813" of Isa. 66 : 23.
Cp. Isa. 49: 23; 60 : 14.) (Op. ivuir 10 v in Rev. 15 : 4, which is quoted from Ps.
86 : 9). Wherever this word occurs in the Apocalypse (and it occurs thirty-one
times) it is, the LXX translation direct, or in imitation of the Hebrew word ""JD/.

10 The Solecisms of the Apocalypse.

This repetition of prepositions is in imitation of the LXX usage
which shows it constantly. Note, for example, Zech. 6 : 10 Aa/3e
to, ere tt)s alxpakmaias irapa tmv ctpyovTcov real irapa t5>v xpt)-
(Ti/xtov avTrjs real irapa t<ov eireyvootcoTcov avrrjv. Zech. 1 : 4
'Kiroarpe-^rare ctirb twv oScov v/juoov t&v irovqpSiV ical air o rwv
iirtTrjSevfxaTCov vp,a>v tcov irovrjpwv. Zech. 8 : 7 rd8e Xeyet tcvptos
iravTOtcpaToop 'ISou iyco er(b%oo tov Xaov fxov ctirb <yr)s avardXoiv teat
ctirb yr)s 8va/xa>v. (Cp. Isa. 43 : 5.) Zech. 1 : 6 rcaO&s TrapaTerarcTat
rcvptos rravTOfcpaTwp tov irotrjcrat r/fxayv Kara ra? oSovs rjfjtwv teat
Kara ra eirtTrjSev^aTa r)p,SiV.

4. Repetition of Other Words. Not only are prepositions re-
peated in the Apocalypse, but other words as well. The follow-
ing examples may be given: Rev. 19:18 Xva <f>d<yr)Te era pic as

fiacrtXeoov ical a dp tc as xtXtdpxcav real a- dp k as /cal & a pre as

real era pre as. (Cp. Ezek. 39: 17, 18.) Rev. 16:13 ical

elSov etc tov ctto fiaros ical iic a to fiaros ical e/c

tov ctto /jtaTOS. Rev. 8:12 teal eirXrjyr) to t ptT ov to

T p LTOV TO T p IT OV TO T p IT OV TO TpiTOV

to TpiTov. (Cp. Rev. 8 : 9.) Rev. 18 : 2 /cat ical

ical real. Rev. 14:1 e%ovcrai to ovo/Jta avTOv

ical to 6vop,a tov iraTpbs avTOv.

This recurrence of special words is " preeminently character-
istic of Oriental expression " (Thayer's Winer, p. 606). In the
Apocalyptic passages just quoted, it is due to the influence of the
LXX which again reproduces the Hebrew original. Cp. Zech.
6 : 14 6 Be crTecpavos ecrrat t 0 Is virojxevovatv ical tols XPV0'^0^ avTrjs
real to Is iireyvwrcocrtv. (Cp. Zech. 6 : 10.) Zech. 8 : 12 r) dfiireXos
8 (beret tov tcapirbv avTrjs, ical rj yrj 8 (beret to yevr]ixaTa avTrjs, rcai
6 ovpavbs B (beret ttjv Spocrov avTov. Zech. 8:19 Xeyet rcvptos
iravTorcpaToop vrjcrTeia r) TeTpas real vrjaTeta 1) irefxirTt) real
vrjo-Teia r) e/386/jbr) teal vrj erreta r) Be/carr) eerovTat tw ottcw 'lovSa.

5. Another anomalous phrase is found in Rev. 12 : 14 tcatpbv
real rcatpovs real r/ptov tcatpov. Liicke l speaks of this phrase as

1 "Einleitung in die Offenbarung des Johanes," Bd. II, S. 455. (Cp. Toy,
'Quotations in N. T.," p. 2 64.)

The Solecisms of the Apocalypse. 11

" vollig eigenthiinilieh und anomalisch. Hier ist tcaipovs so viel als
zwei Zeitraume, Jahre, aber dies ist der technische apokalyptische
Sprackgebrauch aus Daniel 7 : 25 ; 12 : 7 genommen, wo die
LXX ]"'^"iy durch /ecu/aou? ubersetzt."

m.

PECULIAR CONSTRUCTIONS.

1. In Rev. 2 : 14 occurs the expression o? iScSaa/cev tu> fidkdic
in which the word " teach " is followed by a Dative of person in
imitation of the Hebrew ? IE*?- (Cp. Thayer's Lexicon on the
word SiMcr/ccD ; also Job 21 : 22, L e., njH 1D^ ^?&6n and
Ewald, "gr. Hebr.," p. 588.)

2. The Preposition airb with the Nominative. Rev. 1 : 4 airb 6
wv Kal 6 r)v Kal 6 epxopevos. This solecism is striking in the
highest degree.1 Some authors have tried to soften the expres-
sion by inserting the article tov after airo. But this would not
explain the anomaly here, " quod scriptor omnino praepositiones
cum nominativo jungere soleat."2 The phrase 6 gov ical 6 tjv Kal
ipxonevevos5 is the Greek equivalent for the Hebrew name

1 Guillemard speaks of this as "an anomalous construction clearly traceable to
absence of inflexion in Hebrew nouns which made such a violation of grammar less
startling to a Jew writing Greek." (" Hebraisms in the Greek Testament, p. 116.)

2 Ewald, " Com. in Apoc," p. 46.

3 Ebrard regards this phrase as intentional on the part of the writer, saying of
it, " die absichtliche Uehandlung der ganzen Formel 6 uv Kal 6 rjv /ecu 6 ipx^evos als
unveranderlichen nom. propr. wo das erste 6 sowie das zweite und dritte als integ-
rirender Theil des Namens betrachtet wird, liegt hier gar zu klar am Tage "
("Evangelium Johannis," S. 165-166) and Harnack, in speaking of the same
phrase, says, "the gross violations of Greek grammar are not to be explained from
ignorance."* ("Encycl. Brit." on word " Kevelation.")

* The proper construction of an-6 with the Genitive occurs in the same verse (i. e., 1 : 4),
arrb riv Ittto -nvtvuaTiav, proving that the author did not use anb with the Nominative
through ignorance.

12 The Solecisms of the Apocalypse.

Jehovah. Lucke regards it " als ein Begriff anzusehen, wodurch
nach Eabbinscher Deutung des JSTamens Jehova der ewige Gott
bezeichnet wird."1 'O wv is directly quoted from the LXX of
Ex. 3 : 14 Kal elirev 6 #eo? 777305 M(ov(xr)v Xeycoy 'E7W elfu 6 a>v.
Kal elirev Ovieos ipels iocs viols 'lo-parjX 6 &> v aireaia\Kev fxe irpb?
vfid<;, the phrase 6 cbv being the translation of *-)E^ HTl^
rPn&$ -2 Thus the Apocalyptist used the expression 6 &> v directly
from the LXX3 and does not change the form to the Genitive
after air 6. Naturally the other words or parts of the phrase,
namely, 6 rjv Kal 6 ip^ofievos, are in the same construction as 6 wv
" da es kein Particip des Praeteritums von elvai giebt, so ist
schwer einzusehen, wie der Verfasser das 6 rjv (der war) anders
hatte ausdriicken sollen." i

3. The Genitive and Accusative joined by Kal, instead of two
Genitives, after a Word of Fullness. The use of the accusative after
the idea of fullness is a Hebrew idiom. Thus, Rev. 17 : 46
eyovcra Troirjpiov j^pvaovv iv irj %et/H avir)$ ye'fiov /38e\v<y fid-
rcov Kal 1a clkclQ a pi a ir}<; iropvelas avirjs. (Cp. Jer. 51 : 7).
la aKadapia instead of icov ctKaOdpicov, imitates the Hebrew. A
capital illustration of this usage is found in 2 Sam. 23:7

rvon syi brn xbw am yr btw

Even the LXX translation of this passage has followed the
Hebrew entirely, namely, Kal ir\r)pe<; aiSrjpov Kal gv\ov
Sopaios. Again, the LXX of Ezek. 39 : 20 has the accusative
after the word " filled," thus : Kal ep,ir\rjo-6r]aea6e{eirl 7-77? irpairefrs
fiov) Xirirov Kal ava/3dirjv Kal ytyavra. The same thing is

found in Ex. 1 : 7 DnN JPlKPI fe&Dllij tne Lxx of wnicn bas
ir\rjdvvev he r) <yr) aviovs. The accusative is the usual con-
struction after a word of fullness in Hebrew. " Worter wie K7O

gewohnlich mit dem Accusative sich verbinden." (Ewald,

"Die Joh. Schriften," S. 53.) In further proof of this, cp.

1 " Einleitung in die Oflenbarung des Johannes," S. 462.

2 Cp. Isa. 41 : 4 KIH-JK D'JinKTiKI pBWl Hirr ^X.

3 Cp. Thayer's Winer, p. 68.

4 Lucke, " Einleitung in die Oflenbarung des Johannes," 2 Aufl., S. 462.

The Solecisms of the Apocalypse. 13

Gesenius' "Hebrew and Eng. Lex." on the word &OQ, P- 473.
Also Liicke, " Einleitung u. s. w." S. 461. Rev. 17:46, then,
(the passage in question) is a mixture of Greek and Hebrew
constructions, the Genitive fiSeXvy fidrcov after ye'fiov being a
Greek construction while the accusative ra aicdQapra is
Hebrew.

4. A Double- Gender. The word Xrjvds (wine-press) is given a
double gender in Rev. 14 : 19 and 20. Thus, ical efiaXev et? rrjv
Xrjvbv rod dv/xov rov deov rov fieyav [the great wine-press] ical
iirar^dv rj Xrjvb? igcodev tt}? 7ro'A.e«o5 ; the feminine rr]V Xrjvov
and then the masculine rov /xeyav [Xtjvov]. This construction
is found in Isa. 63:3, from which this verse is suggested ; thus

Here fcOID is feminine and DDT"lfc$ is masculine. Thayer re-
marks that this is a variation in gender which can hardly be
matched in Greek though not rare in Hebrew.1

5. Disagreement in Gender. Feminine nouns are frequently
followed by an adjective or participle in the masculine. Rev. 4 : 1

/cal r) (jjcovr) rj rrpwrn rjv ijtcovaa Xe'ycov ; <pa>vr) is followed

by the masculine participle Xeywv. Rev. 9:13 and 14 ical

rjKovcra (fxovrjv fiiav ifc rwv /cepdroov Xeyovra ra> etcrai ayyeXw ;

Xeyovra instead of Xeyovaav. Rev. 11:4 at, Svco eXalai

ivcoTTiov rov /cvpiovrrjs 7?}? kcrr fares', eo~r<bre<i instead of earcoaac
follows the feminine noun iXalai. Rev. 11:15 ical eyevovro (pcoval
HeydXai iv rq> ovpava), Xeyovra ; Xeyovres following $<ovaL Rev.
17 : 3 Ka\ elSov yvvaiica Kadvfie'vrjv iirl Qr\piov kokklvov, y e/xovr a
ovofiara f3Xacr<pvfALa<;. Rev. 17 : 3 ical elhov yvvaiica /cadvp>evr]v

yefxovra ovofiara e%ovra ice(j)aXa<; eirra icaX icepara

Se'/ca. (Cp. Dan. 7 : 7.) Such neglect of agreement in gender, as
above described, follows the Hebrew structure. On this Green
remarks : " Masculines are often used in Hebrew when females
are spoken of or when the nouns to which they refer are femi-
nine, from a neglect to note the gender where no stress is laid

1 " Greek Eng. Lex. of 1ST. T.," p. 377; Cp., also, Green's " Heb. Gram.",
p. 359.

14 The Solecisms of the Apocalypse.

upon it." (" Heb. Gram.," p. 359.)1 The Apocalyptist imi-
tates this Hebrew construction in the passages just given. His
defiance of grammar in those instances was intentional. He
knew, for example, that the feminine adjective should agree with
the feminine noun, as a number of texts show. This is seen
in Rev. 6 : 9 and 10, where there is a feminine noun followed by a
masculine participle and also a feminine noun followed by a
feminine adjective, namely, (poavrj peydXr). The same expression
occurs also in Rev. 7:2; 14:7 and 18. Cp. 16:1, 3, 17;
18 : 2, 4, &c. The disagreement in gender is clearly due to
Hebrew influence and Liicke in speaking of such constructions
says, " Diese Anomalien losen sich grosstentheils durch die
Annahme einer constructio ad sensum, wie sie auch den besten
Schriftstellern nicht fremd ist."2

6. Disagreement in Case. (1) A Nominative replaced by an
Accusative. Rev. 7:9 eo-Twres evwirtov tov dpovov zeal evonnov
tov apviov, TrepifiefiXr) fxevovs aroXas Xetwa?. Again Rev.

11:3 Kal TrpcxpwTevcrovcriv {they) rjfiepas %tXta<? 7re/u/3e/3-

X^/ieVou?. Rev. 10 : 8 /cat 97 (pcovij \a\ovcr av per' ip>ov

Kal Xeyovcrav.

(2) An Accusative replaced by a Nominaiive. Rev. 5 . 6 /eat
elSov apviov ey^wv icepara eTrra Rev. 14:

1 Neglect of gender is very frequent (a) in pronouns referring to females. Thus
Kuth 1 : 8 nnjN DTIOn-D? OJVBW 1IMO nDfl D:iD,y nirr rWJP. The word DDK}!
(masc.) is used although the reference is to Kuth and Orpah ; also DJVtSPJ? (masc),
reference still being to Ruth and Orpah. This is illustrated again in Exodus 1 : 21.
DTU UTlh PJH D'H^arrnK mS-DH WT-O TP1, the word mb-on being feminine
and DnS masculine. Cp., also, Ex. 2:17; Num. 36:6; Jud. 11:34; 19:24;
1 Sam. 6:7; 2 Sam 6 : 22 ; Jud. 21 : 12.

(b) Neglect of gender is most frequent in pronouns (masc.) referring to feminine

nouns, as Ex. 11:6 1J1031 1HM "WN nSnj npjW nJVffl. Here the word

np^V is feminine and )T\DD (referring to np#¥) is masculine. Levit. 27 : 9
tiHp-rrrv nin,l7 1JDD |JV "l»K Sd nam "MO. Here the word HOTO is femi-
nine and USD is masculine.*

2 " Einleitung in die Offenbarung des Johannes," S. 463.

* Cp. for similar disagreement in gender, the Hebrew of Ex. 22:25; Lev. 6:8; 27:9;
Num. 3:27, 33; Deut. 27:5; 1 Sam. 10:18: Isa. 34: 17, &c, and for further lack of agreement
in adjectives and participles, cp. 1 Kings 22 : 13 ; Ps. 119 : 137 and 2 Chron. 3 : 11. Cp. Green's
" Heb. Gram.," pp. 357-359.

The Solecisms of the Apocalypse. 15

6 and 7 a Kal elhov aWov dyyeXov \eycov Rev.

19 : 14 Kal rd crrpaTev/xara rjKoXovOei, avra) ivSe-

Bvpevoi fivaatvov \evicbv icaOapov. Cp., also, Rev. 13: 1; 14:14;
17:3 and 20:4. This neglect of agreement in case is common
enough in Hebrew. Especially when clauses intervened, accurate
constructions were thus neglected.1

7. Anomalous Use of Apposition. The well-known rule that
an appositive agrees with its noun in case, is broken many times
by the language of the Apocalypse.

(1) Nominative in Apposition with Genitive. Rev. 1 : 5 «al airb
'\rjcrov xpiarov, 6 /jbciprv; 6 ttlctto^. The phrase 6 pudprvs 6 tticttos
is directly quoted from the LXX of Ps. 89 :37. (Cp. Prov. 14:5).
Ebrard says of this, " das scheint mir beabsichtigt, scheint mir
Manier zu sein,"2 and Liicke (speaking of this and similar anom-
alies) says, " sie scheinen ihren Grund in dem rhetorischen

charakter der Apokalypse zu haben."3

This occurs again in Rev. 3:12 to ovopua rr}<; iroXeca rov
6eov fiov, tt)? Kaivrjs 'lepovcraXtfp, rj Karafiaivovcra €K tov ovpavov ;
i) Kara/3aivov(ra, instead of a Genitive, in apposition with t^9
Katvrjs 'lepovaaXrjfjL. Another instance of this is found in Rev.
14 :12 w8e rj viropovrj ra)v dyioov icrTiv, ol rrjpovvres ras ivroXas, &c,
oi tv povvra where we should expect rS>v rypovvTcov in ap-
position with tS)v dyicov.

(2) Nominative in Apposition with Dative. Rev. 9 : 14 Xeyovra
to) e/cro) a<yye\a>, 6 e^wv rrjv adXiriyya.

(3) Nominative in Apposition with Accusative. Rev. 2:20
dWd e%&) Kara crov ort cupel? rrjv yvvaiKa 'Ie^a/SeX, rf \e<y ovcra
eavrrjv 7rpo(f>rjrcv. Rev. 20 :2 Kal i/cpaTwcrev rbv 8 pciKovra, 6 6 (pis
6 ap%alo<;.

(4) Nominative in Apposition with Vocative. Rev. 16:7 Ncu,
/cvpie, 6 0eo<?, 6 TravTOfcpdroop. (Cp. Rev. 16:5). Rev. 11:7. Eu-

1 Cp. Green's '-Hebrew Gram.." p. 357. Cp., also, Ewald, "Die Joh.
Schriften," Bd. II., S. 53.

2 " Evangelium Johannis," S. 165.

3 '• Einleitung in die Offenbarung des Johannes," Bd. II, 2 Aufl., S. 459. Cp.
Toy's "Quotation in the N. T.," p. 253.

16 The Solecisms of the Apocalypse.

^apiCTTovfxiv croi, tcvpie, 6 #eo<?, 6 iravTOKpa/rwp. Rev. 15:3 Kvpie, 6
0eo'<?, 6 TravTo/cpaTajp, as in the LXX of Zech, 3 :8 aicove S77, 'I^crou?
6 lepov? 6 /Lteya?, cry /cat, &c. In the above examples, we find the
Nominative in apposition with every single oblique case. In each
of these examples (except Nominative in apposition with Vocative),
the connection between the preceding substantive and the adjec-
tive clause describing it, is a loose one. This is especially true
of the first two examples under (1) and the second, under (3).
Of these constructions Ewald writes, "Cujus dictionis causa licet
in hebraismo casus non distinguente quaerenda sit."1 In regard
to the examples under (4), we may say that the name Jehovah
appears in the Nominative as in apposition to the Vocative Kvpie
perhaps because it is a direct translation of a Hebrew proper
name, the author having in mind the appositive construction of
the Hebrew, where a more extended use is made of it than in
occidental languages ;2 or, again, this construction may have been
used because the Greek article has no form for the Vocative case.
This is Ewald's view who says " denn da die Hebraer keine
Interjection fur den Vokativ haben, so steht das Nomen in
Anredeton ganz ungeandert ; " 3 or, further, the writer in these
two instances may have had in mind the Aramaic construction
which has no case endings.4

8. The Absolute Use of the Participle Xeymv. Rev. 11:1 Kal

iSodrj p,ot /cdXa/Aos \e<ya>v, eyeipe Kal fierpr/aov k. t. A,. Rev.

19:6 Kal rjKOVaa eo9 (pcovrjv /cat co? (f)a>vr]V ftpovrwv la^vpojv

Xeyovres k.t.X. This is LXX usage, corresponding to ")££05
as the following examples show: Gen. 15 : 1 pera 8e ra prjixara
ravra i<yevq6r) prj/jia Kvpiov 7T/30? 'Afipaafi ev opafiarc \eya>v, &C.
Gen. 22:20 Kal avr)<yye\r) ra> 'Afipaap, \e<yovT€<; k.t.X. Gen.
38 : 13 Kal aTrrjyyeXr) Qdjxap Xeyovres k. t. X. Gen. 40:16

" Commentarius in Apocalypsin," p. 44.

Cp. Green, " Heb. Gram.," p. 281.

" Gram. d. heb. Sprache," S. 568. Cp. Zech. 3 : 8.

Cp. Salmon, " Introd, to N. T.," p. 240.

Cp. Thayer's Winer, p. 536.

The Solecisms of the Apocalypse. 17

Kal hiefiorjOri rj (fxovrj et? rbv oIkov Qapaoo Xeyovre<i k. t. X. Gen.
48: 2 a7r7)<yye\T) Se ru> 'Ia/cw/3 Xe<yovT€<; k. t. X. Josh. 10: 17
Kal airrjyyeXri t&) 'Itjctov XeyovTes k. r. X. Judges 16:2 Kal
avrjyyeXr] rot? Ta^aiois Xe<y ovres k. t. X. 1 Sam. 15:12 Kal
air-qyyeXT] t<£ ILaovX Xeyovres k. t. X.

9. In Hebrew, very often the emphasized word stands at the
beginning of a sentence without any grammatical connection
with any word in that sentence. The accustomed order is re-
stored by a demonstrative pronoun placed later in the sen-
tence. Examples of this are numerous, as in

Gen. 47:21 ma twa Dyrrrm

Jer. 25:31 niiT~D*0 T)tfb D^nJ D'Win.
Gen. 2:17 )^D bltoT) *6 JTVI 21D Pl^lH WD1-
1 Sam. 25:29 ^pn "p -Jim H^jT "yrPN EfDm«l-
The Apocalypse reproduces this peculiarity of structure : Eev.
2:26 Kal 6 viKtav Kal 6 rrjpcov dyjpi reXov? ra ep<ya fxov, Saxra)
avrai k. r. X. Rev. 3:12 6 vlkwv iroLrjaco avrbv arvXov k. t. X.
Rev. 3:21 6 vlkwv Sqxto) avra> KaQLaai k. t. X.Rev. 6:8 Kal 6
Kadrjfievo^ eirdvco (avrov) ovofia avru> [6] ddvaros.

10. Sentences Joined by KaL Rev. 11:3 Kal Sdxrco rot? Sva-lv
fidprvaiv fxov Kal irpo^revcrova-iv. (Cp. Rev. 20:4; 9:4, 5.)
Rev. 3 :9 has the same kind of a sentence, but with Xva1 and a
xal following. Thus, ISov 7tol^(tco avrov<; Xva rj^ovaiv Kal irpoaKv-
vr\<rov<nv €V(07tlov twv iroZSiv crov. This follows the Hebrew of
Isaiah 44:14 which is l^BrV T^N linnCT1 T^N"1 TQJP 2

11. Kal (Hebrew )) in the Apodosis.s It is similar to the
German " so." The following examples may be given : Rev.
10:7 aXX' iv Tat? rjp,epai<i rij<i <fx0vf}s rod e/386fjLov ayyeXov, orav

1 A similar example of the use of Xva is found in Kev. 13 : 12 Kal touit^v yfy
Kal robs iv airy KaroiKovvras tva ir pocr KW"f)<T ov<x iv rb Orjplov rb irpurrov. Also,

Kev. 13 : 16 Kal iroitT ir&vras, roi/s p.iKpoiis Kal rods pxy&Xovs tva dttxrei avroit

Xdpaynat. (Cp. Eev. 22 : 14.) *

2 Cp. Isa. 49 : 23 and 60 : 14 ; Toy, " Quotations in the N. T.", p. 257.

3 Cp. Thayer's "Greek Eng. Lex.", p. 316a f.
* Cp. Ewald, •' Die Jon. Schriften," Bd. II, S. 53.

18 The Solecisms of the Apocalypse.

fxeWr] aaXTTL^eLV, teal erekeaOrj to fxvaTijpiov rov Oeov. Rev. 14 :

9 and 10 el Tt? irpoaKvvel to Or^pCov icai civtos Trierai eic tov

olvov k. t. X. Rev. 3 :20 lav ti? atcovarj r?}9 4>(ovr]<i p,ov ical

elaeXevao/xat 7rpo? avTov This use of icai in the apodosis

is exactly similar to ) in such Hebrew passages as Gen. 3:5,

Ps. 78:34 imBTTTI Dann"DK Judges 4:8 p-Q iT^N nOWl

12. The Demonstrative auTos Redundantly Used in Relative
Sentences. The Hebrew relative pronoun, which always stands at
the beginning of its clause, has only the one simple form-'-^^-
which admits of no inflection to represent case. Consequently,
when this relative " is governed by a verb, noun or preposition,
this is shown by appending an appropriate pronominal suffix to
the governing word",1 as for example, IflW *) \tf N or tym\] *]&#
This use in Hebrew may be seen in the following examples:

Lsa.4i:8*i»K Dpjr ,,"ny b^w r\nw -nmrn nc^^
■»anw nrmx jni 7mm a* 41 : 9 -pnpinn new. a

splendid illustration is found in Amos 9:12 ifttCWlpJ "1E?N
OTVby Tne LXX follows the Hebrew exactly here, namely, icaX
TvdvTa to, WvT) i(f> oil? eirucdicXiyrai to ovofxd /xov iir* avTovs.2
This Hebraism very often occurs 3 in the LXX.4

Examples of this redundant use of aurds in relative sen-
tences are found in the following Apocalyptic passages: Rev.
3:8 tjv ovBeU Svvarai Kkelaai avT-r)V. Rev. 7:2 oU i&odr) civtois
ahucrfaaL Tr)v <yr)V k. t. \. Rev. 7:9 ov ctpiO \xr\o~ai avTov ovSels

1 Green, " Heb. Gram.", p. 367; Cp. p. 106.

2 This LXX passage is directly quoted in Acts 15 : 17, thus proving that the
writer of Acts employed Hebraisms when quoting from the LXX.

3 Cp. Thayer's " Grk. Eng. Lex.", p. 86 (5) ; Bousset, " Offenbarung Johan-
nis," S. 184. Cp. Ewald, «'gr. hebr.", ss. 647-648; Green, "Hebrew Gram.",
p. 368.

*Cp., for example, Ex. 3:5; Eccl. 10:17; Deut. 4:7, 8, 19, 32; Deut
14:9; 19:17; Josh. 2: 10.

The Solecisms of the Apocalypse. 19

iSvvaro. Rev. 13:8 ov ov 'ye<yparmat to ovo/xa avTov iv t<o
ftifiXttp. Rev. 13:12 ov iOepairevdv r/ 77X77777 tov davdrov avrov.
Rev. 20:8 ft) 1/ 6 apidp,bs ai)T<av ft)9 77 a/JLftos T77? daXdaa-qs. Cp.
Rev. 17:9.

13. Pleonastic 4 k el. Where a preceding adverb (or relative
pronoun) has " already attracted the verb, e'/cet is added to this
verb pleonastically."1 Examples of this in Hebrew may be found

in Dent. 4:5 nn»^ HOP D"»«3 QH^ *IPN, the LXX
translation of which is et? ?)p vftefc et? iropeveade i/cel Kk-qpovo-
fielvavrrjv. Deut. 4:14 nH^*!^ HEE? D^HDI? OfM *)EW, the
LXX of which has et? 771/ vfjuels elairopeveaQe e/cet K\r)povop,elv

avrjv. Deut. 4:26 nn^ HOP JTTTTnK D^D DHN IV X

and the LXX is els ^ t>/iei? hiaftaivere tov 'lopSdvrjv eKel /cXrjp-
ovofJL7)crai avrrjv.

Examples of this Hebraism in the Apocalypse are : Rev.
12:6 Kal 77 yvvrj ecf)vyev ek ttjv eprjfxov, ottov e^ei e k el tottov
r}TOifiao~fA€Vov airb tov deov. Rev. 12 :14 els tov tottov avTrj<i, ottov
TpecpeTai i/cel k. t. X. (Cp. Rev. 17:9.)

14. The Present Tense Passes into the Future. The present
and future tenses are found coordinately in the same clause or
sentence where, according to the usage of the language, we should
expect the future of both verbs. Rev. 1:7 IBov epx€Tai pueTa
TOiv vecpeXcov, Kal o-fyeTai avTov ttcls b(p6aXp,6<$. Ewald remarks
"oratio continuata in futurum tempus abit, ut ISov ep%eTai Kal
8-^reTai prorsus hebraeum J"|&01 H/H rUH-" 2 Rev- 2:5 el 8e ^77,
1/3%0/Ltai croi, Kal Kcvrjaa> T7)v\vyyiav aov ck tov tottov avTr)s.
Rev. 2:16 el Se /J.77, epxofiai o~oi ra^v, koI TroXefi^a-o) fieT*

avT<av k. t. X. Rev. 2:22 ISov /3aX\© avTrjv els kXivtjv

Kal Ta TeKva avTrj<i airoKTevS) iv 6avaT(p. Cp. Rev. 3:9; 17:13-
14. Examples of this breach of grammar in LXX passages are :
Zech. 2:9 Sloti ISov iyco iir Kpe'peo ttjv %elpd fxov eir avTovs, Kal

1 Thayer, "Greek Eng. Lex.", p. 194; Bousset, " Offenbarung Johannis,"
S. 184.

2 " Commentarius in Apocalypsin," p. 39.

20 The Solecisms of the Apocalypse.

eaovrai aKvXa rots SovXevovaiv avroh. Zech. 2:10 Slotl ISov
iyco e p%o pa i KaX KaraaKrjvcaaw iv \ieaw crov.

15. Neuter Plural Subject with Plural Verb. In the Apoca-
lypse, neuter plural nouns are very frequently followed by plural
verbs.1 Rev. 4:5 a eiaiv ra errra rrvevpbara rov 6eov. Rev. 4:8

KaX ra re a- ere pa£a>a yefxovo- lv 6(pdaX/Mcov. Rev. 4:9

/cal orav hdxxov <tiv ra %cpa k. r. X. Rev. 5:14 teal ra reaaepa
£q>a eXeyov 'Apr/v. Rev. 9 : 20 a ovre ^Xeiretv Svva vrai K.r.X.

Rev. 11:13 KaX arzeKravdrjaav ovofiara k. t. X. Rev.

18:23 iirXavrjOrj <j av rrdvra ra eOvrj. Rev. 16:20 ical opr/
oi/% evpedr/o-av. Rev. 20:12 KaX fiifiXta rjvo t^dr/ o~av
(quoted from Dan. 7:10 (Hebrew)). Cp. Rev. 3: 2, 4; 11 : 2 ;
16:14; 17:12; 17:15; 21:4, &c. The neuter pleural with
plural verb is also LXX usage, as may be seen in Zech. 2 :11 KaX
Kara<f>ev%ovraL e0 vr/ rroXXa iirX rov Kvptov iv ry r)ixepa
eiceivr}. Zech. 10 :7 /cat ra reKva avrcov o^ovrai KaX eixppav-
Qr)<j ovrai. Ezek. 39:7 KaX yvmaovrai ra edvq on eya>
elfu Kvpios. Nahum 3:10 KaX to vrfiria avrrj? i8a<f>iovo~iv.
Cp., also, LXX passages quoted by Justin Martyr in "Il/ao?
Tpv<f>Q)va 'lovBaiov AtciX.0709." (Otto's Edition, Vol. I,
pp. 408, 426, 434, 444, 480, &c.) But what is of special interest
here, is the fact that this anomaly often occurs in passages quoted
directly from the LXX. This is true of the following: Rev.
15:4 otl rrdvra ra, eOvrj egovaiv KaX it poa Kvvr)o~ ova- iv ivcoiriov
aov. KaX ra 8iKaid>fiard arov i(pavepa)07]o-av — a direct quo-
tation from the LXX of Ps. 86:9 rdvra r a edvrj (pa a erroCrjo-as)
7Jjf over iv KaX rrpocrKwrjcrovo'LV evtomov o~ov. (Cp. Isa. 66:23.)
Rev. 18:3 rr err ran Kav (or ireiraKav) rrdvra ra e6vq. This is
LXX of Jer. 51:7 (28:7) arro rov ocvov avrrj? err Co a av edvrj
Bia rovro icraXevdrjcrav. Rev. 21:24 KaX rrepirrarrjaooa-iv ra
edvrj 81a rov </>o>to? avrr}s. This is from the LXX of Isa. 60:3
KaX 7r 0 pevcr ovrai /3aaiXel<; rq> ^xori gov, KaX e d vrj ry Xa jx-
rrporrjrC gov. Rev. 11 :18 KaX ra edvrj wpy CaOrja av. The

1 The neuter plural is often found, however, with singular verbs, as in Rev.
Rev. 2 : 27 ; 8:3; 13 : 14 ; 14 : 13 ; 16 : 14 ; 18 : 14 ; 19 : 14 ; 20 : 3, 5, 7, 12 ; 21 : 12.

The Solecisms of the Apocalypse. 21

LXX of Ps. 46 (45) : 6 is erapaxdr^crav eOvr], e/cXivav
fiao-iXeiat. Cp. Ps. (LXX) 2:1, i. e., tC icppvai; av e6vr]. Rev.
19 :21 zeal Trdvra opvea e^oprdd-qcrav i/c rSiv aapKwv avrSiv. This is
from the LXX of Ezek. 39 : 17-21, i. e., elirov travil opvew irereLvu)

Kal 7T/30? Trdvra t« Qr\pid rod irehiov d^Orire /cal epyeade

(frdyecrde nrieade ifiTrXijcrd^aeade Such pas-
sages show conclusively the influence of the LXX upon the writer.
This completes our examination of the Solecisms of the Apoca-
lypse,1 which, as we have shown, are clearly clue to the influence
which the prophetic writings of the Old Testament, either in their
Hebrew form or in that of their translation into Greek — the
Septuagint — exerted upon the Author.

lSee Corollaries on next page.

22 The Solecisms of the Apocalypse.

COROLLARIES.

We present the following corollaries which grow out of the
preceding discussions :

1. Since the solecisms of the Apocalypse are to he accounted
for in the manner just described, they form no argument in favor
of the " Early Date " J for the composition of the Apocalypse as
maintained by Westcott,2 Lightfoot3 and Salmon.4

2. The Solecisms of the Apocalypse do not invalidate the
testimony of Irenaeus 5 as to the composition 6 of the Apocalypse.

3. Those writers7 who hold that John's Gospel and the
Apocalypse were written by the same author, need not infer that
an interval of from twenty to thirty years intervened between the two
compositions.

4. Viewing the evidence as a whole, the impression is strong
that the author of the Apocalypse made use of the LXX and
Hebrew idiom in a conscious effort to reproduce the manner and
spirit of the ancient Prophets ; it was not through ignorance of
correct Greek usage.

Note. — The difference between the language of John's Gospel
and the Apocalypse, due mainly to the solecisms of the latter, has

1 About the year 68 A. D.

2 "The Gospel According to St. John," p. lxxxvi of ihe Introduction.
s "St. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians," Sixth Edition, p. 363.

4 "A Historical Introduction to the Study of the Books of the New Testament,"
Edition 1889, pp. 241-242.

5 Cp. his treatise entitled u'E\tyxov Kai Awrp&nji ttjs ifreudurffiov yvuaeus,'" (the
more familiar title of which is, "Contra Haereses "), where he says, "El yap e5e«
dvafpavbbv rf vvv Kaipf K-qpiirrecrOai Toivopta avrov, 8i CKelvov av tpptdT] tou ko.1 ttjv Atto-
k&Xv^iv eupandros. Oi/di yap irpb iroWov XP^V0V eu>pa$7], dWa (Tx^Sbf iirl ttjs i)p.fT^pas
7eveas, irpbs t$ rfKei rrjs Aapunavov apxyi" Lib. V. 30, 3.

6 The Irenaean date (about 96 A. D ) is usually spoken of as the " Late Date"
for the composition of the Apocalypse.

7 Referred to in corollary 1.

*

The Solecisms of the Apocalypse. 23

led to very different opinions as to the Authorship l of the two
writings. Thus besides Dionysius2 of the third century A. D.,
the following writers, Schleiermacher, Credner, De Wette,
Neander (David Mendel), Liicke, Bleek, Ewald and Diisterdieck,
hold that the Apostle John wrote the Gospel, but not the Apoc-
alypse ; other writers, such as Kostlin, Zeller, Schwegler, Baur,
Davidson and Hilgenfeld, maintain that the Apostle wrote the
Apocalypse but not the Gospel.3

1 The Authorship of the Apocalypse is discussed at length hy Bousset in " Die
Offenbarung Johannis," SS. 33-51 and by Milligan in his "Discussions on the
Apocalypse," pp. 148-179.

2 Eusebius, " Eccl. Hist.", Lib. VII. 25.

3 Still other writers, for a different reason, or reasons, such as Keim, Volkmar,
Scholten, Lipsius, Harnack, Pfleiderer, Weizsacker and Bousset, regard the Apostle
John as the author of neither the Gospel nor the Apocalypse.*

* Cp., for example, Bousset, in " Die Offenbarung Johannis," SS. 33-51.

DATE DUE

?m&*-

h«.«w.'

e***~*

CATLCHa

PKINTCOIN t