Function of the article

[GTM]

1 John 2:13

γραφω υμιν πατερες οτι εγνωκατε τον απ αρχης γραφω υμιν νεανισκοι οτι νενικηκατε τον πονηρον εγραψα υμιν παιδια οτι εγνωκατε τον πατερα

The article "τον" seems as if it could function in two different ways.

First: It seems to function to establish a substantive
Second: It appears as if it also functions as a pointer.(anaphoric)

Here is the question, "Is it possible for that the article functions as both in this verse"? (1 John 2:13)

If so the anaphor would seem to be speaking of 1 John 1:1

ο ην απ αρχης ο ακηκοαμεν ο εωρακαμεν τοις οφθαλμοις ημων ο εθεασαμεθα και αι χειρες ημων εψηλαφησαν περι του λογου της ζωης

Am I understanding this correctly?

GTM

[jaihare]

1 John 2:13

γραφω υμιν πατερες οτι εγνωκατε τον απ αρχης γραφω υμιν νεανισκοι οτι νενικηκατε τον πονηρον εγραψα υμιν παιδια οτι εγνωκατε τον πατερα

The article "τον" seems as if it could function in two different ways.

First: It seems to function to establish a substantive
Second: It appears as if it also functions as a pointer.(anaphoric)

Here is the question, "Is it possible for that the article functions as both in this verse"? (1 John 2:13)

If so the anaphor would seem to be speaking of 1 John 1:1

ο ην απ αρχης ο ακηκοαμεν ο εωρακαμεν τοις οφθαλμοις ημων ο εθεασαμεθα και αι χειρες ημων εψηλαφησαν περι του λογου της ζωης

Am I understanding this correctly?

GTM

The difference in gender (here masculine τὸν and there neuter ὃν) seems to be against the pointing to 1 John 1:1. I think it's referring here to a person rather than to a concept, which is the justification for the masculine.

I agree, though, that it's functioning both as a substantive ("the one [that is] from the beginning") and also as a pointer (specifically, "that one [that is] from the beginning"). It's functioning to point at someone, surely a reference to Jesus being "from the beginning".

Regards,
Jason

[GTM]

jaihare

I think it's referring here to a person rather than to a concept, which is the justification for the masculine.

Interesting thought.

Could we understand this as a personification of the Logos?

Thanks in advance

GTM

[jaihare]

Could we understand this as a personification of the Logos?

Why not? I think the audience was intended to know who was meant. It might be a reference to "God" in general -- the eternal one, him who is from the beginning.

[GTM]

jaihare

Why not? I think the audience was intended to know who was meant. It might be a reference to "God" in general -- the eternal one, him who is from the beginning.

It seems as if the Gospel of John was an attempt to define the Deity of Christ while the 1st Epistle sought to define the Humanity of Christ. If there is a personification here, which I believe there is, it has to do with the Messiah.


Once again thank you for your input

GTM

[GTM]

babymango

seems good .I like to write article too.

I am not sure that I understand what you mean.

GTM