ἄνθρωπος, υἱός (2 Thessalonians 2:3)

Guest · 3 · 4093

Maatchen

  • Guest
In the NT, in the epistle B to the Tessalonians we can find the following words:

apokalephthe ho antroopos tes amartias (anomas) ho huios tes apooleias

Is it possible to read the singular /anthropos/ and /huios/ as pointing at a group/plural. Like when we talk about 'modern man' we do not think about one person in special but rather about todays humans/humanity. Or is this style figure, pars pro toto, unknown in ancient Greek; Or not possible in this case?
« Last Edit: 16 Apr, 2008, 20:18:18 by billberg23 »


wings

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 70814
    • Gender:Female
  • Vicky Papaprodromou
Hi there!

Everything you have just mentioned can apply to Ancient Greek.

It is exactly as in English, i.e.:

One can be sinful.
You can be sinful.
We are sinful.

Ancient Greek was such a complex language that there is no standard rule. You could express any idea in multiple forms.




Maatchen

  • Guest
Thanks Wings for the quick reply.

So if I understand you well, paraphrasing:

"...ean me elthe he apostasia proton kai apokaluphthe ho antroopos tes amartias (anomias) ho huios tes apooleias"
 
with:

"....should not the apostacy be coming first and be unveiled [the] men of sin [the] children of destruction"

is a possible 'translation'? Where "men of sin children of destruction" are the people who are the 'result' of the apostacy.

Maatchen

« Last Edit: 08 Dec, 2004, 20:02:41 by Maatchen »


 

Search Tools