From: Paul S. Dixon (email@example.com)
Date: Sat Jun 28 1997 - 21:11:57 EDT
The dozen or so suggested interpretations of TO KATECON
in 2 Thess 2:6 may be reduced to two: a good KATECON
versus an evil KATECON.
For the most part interpreters have assumed a good
KATECON. Paralleling this assumption is the assumption
that KATECON is the antecedent of the EIS TO ... clause.
The verse says:
KAI NUN TO KATECON OIDATE EIS TO
APOKALUFQHVAI AUTON EN TW hEAUTOU KAIRW
I checked other occurrences of EIS TO clauses in the
epistle and found that in every case the clause depends
on the nearest verb. In fact, a cursory look at the NT
reveals that there may not be an example of an EIS TO
clause depending upon a substantive, such as KATECON,
and not the main verb.
If the nearer OIDATE is the antecedent of the clause, then
the picture changes drastically. Paul would then be saying
something like this:
and now what restrains (or, holds sway) you know; you know
this so that he may be revealed to you in his time. To explain:
(GAP, v. 7) the mystery of lawlessness (paralleling and explaining
KATECON - TO KATECON ... TO MYSTERION) is already at work.
is already at work.
My question: Does any one know of any other occurrence in
scripture (NT or LXX) where the antecedent of an EIS TO clause
is anything other than the main verb, especially where that verb
is immediately preceding the clause? How about Classical Greek?
Paul S. Dixon, Pastor
Ladd Hill Bible Church
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:20 EDT