From: David Wilens (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu Aug 22 1996 - 08:36:01 EDT
Dear EGW EIMI mailing list,
I have a question that's a little off the subject - is that all
Paul Dixon wrote:
> The typical interpretation of the telic or final clause in 2 Thess 2:6
> (eis to ...) relates the clause back to the more distant to katechon
> (what restrains). The subsequent meaning becomes something like this:
> you know what now restrains him so that he may be revealed in his own
> time, that is, you know what is restraining the man of lawlessness from
> being revealed before his time.
> This interpretation ignores the fact that normally a telic or final
> clause refers back to its nearest antecedent, which in this case is not
> to katechon, but oidate (you know). If we relate it to its nearest
> antecedent, then the meaning changes drastically: and what restrains (or
> holds sway) you know so that he may be revealed in his time. The idea
> then becomes a fortiori, i.e., their present knowledge of what was
> restraining - that is, the mystery of lawlessness (v. 7) - was the
> guarantee that when the epitome of lawlessness was revealed (the man of
> lawlessness) then they would certainly know him.
No one responded to this so I assume that everyone is in agreement.
1. What do you mean by EIS TO relating back to OIDATE - you know that he will
2. What does fortiori mean? I couldn't find it in any dictionary.
3. Are you saying that this verse says that the man of lawlessness restrains
himself until the time of his choosing?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:49 EDT