[B-Greek] PAROUSIA
furuli at online.no
furuli at online.no
Sat Apr 5 03:42:04 EST 2003
Dear K.Bratanov
The use of lexicons to answer questions about the meaning of Greek
words is legitimate. But we should keep in mind that in a lexicon we
do not find the *meaning* of a word, but only glosses representing
the way a Greek word has been translated into English. The meaning of
a word is not found in manuscripts or books but in the minds of
living people, those who have the same presupposition pool (native
speakers of Greek). Moreover, lexicons often base their glosses on
theology rather than philology (See the fine criticism of TDNT by
Barr, J. (1975) "Semantics of Biblical Language", Oxford: Oxford
University Press.)
The basic question regarding PAROUSIA is whether the word signals a
state (which by definition is durative), whether it signals a
punctiliar event (the act of coming), or whether it signals the
entrance into the state of being present. We may illustrate the case
by taking a look at verbs. The characteristics "durativity" and
"punctiliarity" are Aktionsart terms (not aspectual terms), and it is
important to keep in mind that a verb marked for durativity, never
ceases to be durative. Thus durativity is a semantic (uncancellable)
characteristic.The characteristic "punctiliarity", on the other hand,
is not semantic, that is, a verb whose default interpretation is
punctiliar can in some contexts be interpreted as durative as well.
This illustrates that the characteristic durativity is rather easy to
pinpoint, but punctiliarity is more elusive.
In the NT PAROUSIA occurs 24 times. The word signalled a concept in
the minds of native speakers of Greek, and the author of a text would
use the context the help the reader see which side of the concept he
wanted to make visible in each case. (The context does not generate
lexical meaning, all such meaning is connected with the concept in
the human minds, but the context helps make visible a part of this
concept.) A native Greek would in most cases instantly ascertain the
part of the concept that the author had made visible. We, who have a
different presupposition pool (connected with English) can only find
the side of the concept signalled by a word that the author has made
visible, by a more tedious study of the context.
As to the NT use, the state of being present is made visible in
Philippians 2:12 where PAROUSIA is used in contrast to APOUSIA. But
what about "coming", which is a punctiliar action, can we see in any
of the instances that this is what is made visible? I would say "no".
Firstly, actions that are punctiliar (instantaneous) are, because of
their nature (punctiliar words can also have a durative
interpretation), very difficult to pinpoint. For instance, if I say
"Please sit down", do I stress (make visible) the instantaneous
action of lowering oneself from standing to sitting position, or do I
stress (make visible) the result of being seated? Secondly, the gloss
"coming" as an entry for PAROUSIA in the NT is based on theology and
not on philology. In no place in the NT do the context forbid the
stative sense of PAROUSIA "to have come and being present". And in no
place do the context demand the punctiliar sense "coming". As to the
PAROUSIA of Jesus, the context even suggests the stative and durative
meaning in Matthew 24:34 where the parallel is "the days of Noah" and
not "the day of Noah". it is claimed that PAROUSIA is used as "a
technical term for the coming of Christ". The word "technical" should
cause alarm bells to ring in our mind; this is theology and not
philology! When the term "technical" is used, we should always ask
"Where is the evidence?", and even be more critical than in other
instances.
In the Classical Greek examples that are cited in the lexicons as
evidence of the instantaneous sense "coming" I find exactly the same
problem as in connection with the NT use. Turner, N (1981)
"Christian Words" Nashville:Thomas Nelson Publishers discusses
PAROUSIA (pp 404-409). He cites Sophocles' "Elecvtra" 1104 which he
translates: "Would you announce our arrival?" But how can we know
that it is the action of "coming" and not the state of "being
present" that is made visible? Why could we not translate: "Would you
announce our presence?" I do not say that PAROUSIA cannot be given
a punctiliar interpretation. But I have never seen a clear-cut
example of this sense, so I will be happy if someone on the list
could give a Classical example where the context *demands* the
instantaneous sense "coming".
Best regards
Rolf Furuli
University of Oslo
>Hello!
>
>Would you help me with the translation of the word PAROUSIA ?
>Does it denote "arriving, appearing" or just "presence (without
>coming)" ?
>
>Some people point out that PAROUSIA literally means "to be present"
>and thus applying this meaning to the "coming of the Lord Jesus" they
>deny that there is such coming.
>As I have read the context of many passages I think that it means
>"coming" or "being present by the result of appearing,coming" , that
>is, "coming" would be more accurate translation.
>So does PAROUSIA mean "coming" or just "presence"?
>
>Thank you
>
>__________________________________________________
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list