[B-Greek] PAROUSIA

Ann Nyland accuratebibles at ozemail.com.au
Thu Apr 10 18:21:00 EDT 2003


> 2. What other connotations did PAROUSIA have in the first century? Ann
> Nyland has given evidence to show that it referred to a person's
> arrival.
I also gave evidence as to where it meant "presence".

> 3. What meaning did PAROUSIA have to the first-century congregation?
> This can only be determined by a study of the word's usage in the NT;

No, this would be pretty scary lexical method. There was no special
"Biblical Greek" - it needs to be looked at on a wider basis - what meaning
did it have for the average Fred Smith or Mary Bloggs in 1st c. - 1st c.
Christians didn't speak in a special code. Btw, there are several references
to PAROUSIA in the NT that are not to do with Jesus' coming - it's a good
idea to consider those also.

Ann Nyland
----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel Glick" <lists at danielglick.com>
To: <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Friday, April 11, 2003 2:29 AM
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] PAROUSIA


> Rolf:
>
> I apologize if I was unclear... I'm not advocating the rendering of
> PAROUSIA as 'coming'. In fact, I agree with you--from my very limited
> knowledge of Greek--that 'presence' is probably the correct translation.
> However, as you are undoubtedly aware, making an argument about the
> meaning of a Greek word merely based on its closest English equivalent
> would be the height of folly.
>
> So staying within the realm of Greek, there are three lexical issues here:
>
> 1. What is the literal meaning of PAROUSIA? Undoubtedly, it means
> 'presence', plain and simple. I take it we agree on that.
>
> 2. What other connotations did PAROUSIA have in the first century? Ann
> Nyland has given evidence to show that it referred to a person's
> arrival. This is not necessarily punctilliar. A person's arrival, after
> all, would be followed by their presence. That is why the word PAROUSIA
> is used. The person's entire presence is being referred to... but the
> /emphasis/ is on their arrival.
>
> 3. What meaning did PAROUSIA have to the first-century congregation?
> This can only be determined by a study of the word's usage in the NT;
> and since it's very difficult to keep that separate from theology, I'll
> e-mail you about it off-list.
>
> Just to address a couple of your more relevant arguments on-list:
>
> > Do they ask for a sign *before* the PAROUSIA (to the effect that it is
> > best rendered "coming"), or do they ask for a sign indicating that the
> > PAROUSIA  has begun (to the effect that it is best rendered "presence")?
>
> I'm afraid that you are conflating the translational and interpretive
> issues here. Even if the correct rendering is 'presence', the disciples
> could still be asking for a sign that the presence was imminent.
>
> > their question could simply mean: "When you return to the land of
> > Israel, if you are in an area where we are not,  what is the sign that
> > you have returned, so we can start looking for you?" Jesus' words in
> > Matthew 24:23-27 could imply that Jesus understood the question in
> > this way:
>
> That passage begins: TOTE EAN TIS hUMIN EIPH. What is the referent of
> TOTE here? As I mentioned, I am a Greek novice, but my understanding is
> that TOTE, like the English word 'then', can refer either to a time
> period previous mentioned, or to the next time period in a sequence of
> events.
>
> If we take the first possibility, then it would appear to be referring
> to the time of the QLIFIS MEGALH in v21. If we take the second
> possibility, then it refers to a time following the QLIFIS. Either way,
> it is not referring to the PAROUSIA.
>
> > The conclusion on the basis of the points above is that the primary
> > tool for an understanding of PAROUSIA is the context of the NT.
>
> I would entirely agree. So I will send you more meterial in that regard
> off-list.
>
> Christian Regards,
> Dan Glick



More information about the B-Greek mailing list