2 Thess 2:6

Sun, 8 Sep 1996 18:59:28 -0400


Cocnerning your question on the word order in 2 Thess 2:6 in the case to the
EIS clause being dependent on OIDATE, but TO KATEXON being emphatic. It would
probably be the same as in the case of the EIS clause being dependent of TO
KATEXON. This then would be a question of which syntactical choice is more
natural. Since action verbs tend to take purpose clauses more naturally than
cognitive verbs, then TO KATEXON would be the more natural choice. There are
no other instances where EIS TO plus the infinitive follows OIDA, and none
with GINWSKW or GINWRIZW. I could only find one instance of a purpose clause
following a cognitive verb and that is Eph 3:19 with GINWSKW follwed by a INA
clause. But in that case, the subject of the two verbs arre the same. In 2
Thess 2:6 the subjects of the verbals involved are different. It seems to me
that tying the EIS clause to TO KATEXON has the stronger arguments.

Charle Powell