From: David Moore (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Feb 14 1996 - 11:47:07 EST
On Wed, 14 Feb 1996, Russ Reeves wrote:
> The first phrase of Matthew 24:30 (I'm not sure if I'm
> transliterating in the standard way for this group - I'm using "H"
> for eta) "KAI TOTE PHANHSETAI TO SHMEION TOU UIOU TOU ANTHROPOU EN
> OURANW," is usually rendered "the sign of the Son of Man will appear
> in the sky" (NIV) or along those lines. But is it the "sign" that
> is in heaven or the "Son of Man"? Is it grammatically possible that
> the "sign" is that the Son of Man is in heaven?
What is called the epexegetical genitive (or genitive of content), with
"Son of Man" being an explanation of "sign," is identified by many here.
In answer to the question: yes, it is grammatically possible to understand
that the Son of Man is referred to as appearing in heaven.
Others have identified the "sing of the Son of Man" with
Constantine's vision of the cross in the clouds, still others, by taking
SHMEION in the sense of "ensign" or "standard" understand "sign of the Son
of Man" as His banner which unfurls in the heavens at His coming. See D.
A. Carson's treatment of these three possibilities in his commentary on
Mat. in the _Expositor's Bible Commentary_ series(vol. 8, p. 505). He
takes SHMEION in the latter sense and presents fairly convincing arguments
for his choice.
David L. Moore Southeastern Spanish District
Miami, Florida of the Assemblies of God
email@example.com Department of Education
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:38 EDT