Hi OM or anyone else who might be interested,
Okay, it’s really gotten quiet around here. So how about another post?
I just wanted to say, that if there is anything about 2 Thessalonians 2 that has me stumped, it would be the latter part of verse 7.
Not that I don’t find the whole passage to be enigmatic, to a certain extent; because, obviously the whole passage is somewhat of a mystery, or can be if not properly understood,
as has been evidenced by this thread. (I'm not saying that my understanding is correct; but there is a correct understanding, whatever it may be.)
But the part that I, personally, feel the most uncertain about, in terms of its meaning; imo, would be the latter part of verse 7.
Here is verse 7 in its entirety. However, I will highlight the part that has me confused:
2 Thessalonians 2:7
King James Version (KJV)
7For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
The way this was written in the Greek is as follows:
7το γαρ μυστηριον ηδη ενεργειται της ανομιας μονον ο κατεχων αρτι εως εκ μεσου γενηται
And here is how the latter part, which I have high-lighted translates.εως
(of the middle/the middle of) γενηται
The reason why this is confusing, to me, is because μεσου usually means the middle of something else
, not just the middle.
I’m not sure what the correct terminology is, but the word “μέσου” is what I would call a possessive word.
Again, this is just my own terminology. I’m not sure what it’s really
called. But, in any case, let me try to explain.
You see, when a word is modified so that it ends in “ου,” it usually means that it belongs to something/someone else; or that something/someone else belongs to it.
So, the word “μέσου” is actually a modified form of the word “μέσος,” which means: middle, midst, amongst.
See definition here:http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=2Th&c=2&v=1&t=KJV#conc/7
So, basically, μέσος…………when it is in the form of, μέσου…………………actually means................OF the middle/midst...................or..................BELONGING TO the middle/midst.
Now see how the word “μέσου” is used elsewhere in the New Testament.http://concordance.biblos.com/mesou.htm
So, as you can see, the word…………or maybe I should say……….the phrase………… ἐκ μέσου………………..usually means “from the midst OF……SOMETHING.”
That is because the word ἐκ means “from” or “out”..............
.............And the word μέσου is, as I said, what I would call a possessive word, so it usually belongs to something else, or something else belongs to it............
So μέσου means “the middle OF……” or “the midst OF……….SOMETHING”.................
.................Or it could mean “OF the middle” or “OF the midst.”
In other words, “something else could be BELONGING TO the middle.” However, when that is the case it is usually preceded by the word "τοῦ."
Now, here are some examples of how the word μέσου was used in the New Testament:
Matthew 13:49 οὕτως ἔσται ἐν τῇ συντελείᾳ τοῦ αἰῶνος ἐξελεύσονται οἱ ἄγγελοι καὶ ἀφοριοῦσιν τοὺς πονηροὺς ἐκ μέσου τῶν δικαίων
ἐκ μέσου τῶν δικαίωνfrom the midst OF the righteous
So will it be in the end of the world. The angels will come forth, and separate the wicked from among the righteous,
So, another way to say, “from among the righteous,” would be, “from the midst OF the righteous.”
Acts 17:33 οὕτως ὁ Παῦλος ἐξῆλθεν ἐκ μέσου αὐτῶν.
ἐκ μέσου αὐτῶν from the midst OF them
Thus Paul went out from among them.
Acts 23:10 πολλῆς δὲ γινομένης στάσεως φοβηθεὶς ὁ χιλίαρχος μὴ διασπασθῇ ὁ Παῦλος ὑπ' αὐτῶν ἐκέλευσεν τὸ στράτευμα καταβὰν ἁρπάσαι αὐτὸν ἐκ μέσου αὐτῶν ἄγειν [τε] εἰς τὴν παρεμβολήν.
ἐκ μέσου αὐτῶνfrom the midst OF them
When a great argument arose, the commanding officer, fearing that Paul would be torn in pieces by them, commanded the soldiers to go down and take him by force from among them, and bring him into the barracks.
1 Corinthians 5:2 καὶ ὑμεῖς πεφυσιωμένοι ἐστέ καὶ οὐχὶ μᾶλλον ἐπενθήσατε, ἵνα ἀρθῇ ἐκ μέσου ὑμῶν ὁ τὸ ἔργον τοῦτο πράξας;
ἐκ μέσου ὑμῶν ὁfrom the midst OF you
You are puffed up, and didn't rather mourn, that he who had done this deed might be removed from among you.
2 Corinthians 6:17 διὸ ἐξέλθατε ἐκ μέσου αὐτῶν καὶ ἀφορίσθητε, λέγει κύριος, καὶ ἀκαθάρτου μὴ ἅπτεσθε κἀγὼ εἰσδέξομαι ὑμᾶς
ἐκ μέσου αὐτῶν from the midst OF them
Therefore, "'Come out from among them, and be separate,' says the Lord. 'Touch no unclean thing. I will receive you.
Now the next one is a little different:
Colossians 2:14 ἐξαλείψας τὸ καθ' ἡμῶν χειρόγραφον τοῖς δόγμασιν ὃ ἦν ὑπεναντίον ἡμῖν καὶ αὐτὸ ἦρκεν ἐκ τοῦ μέσου προσηλώσας αὐτὸ τῷ σταυρῷ•
ἐκ τοῦ μέσουout OF the middle
wiping out the handwriting in ordinances which was against us; and he has taken it out of the way, nailing it to the cross;
Now let me try to explain why Colossians 2:14 is a little different from the others.
In Colossians 2:14, the middle “itself” is what has the ownership (for lack of a better way to explain this), because it says………… τοῦ μέσου
τοῦ μέσου………means…………….. BELONGING TO the middle………….or OF the middle
so “ἐκ τοῦ μέσου,” in a literal sense, means “out of” or “from what belongs to” “the middle”
So, basically, ἐκ τοῦ μέσου means “out of the middle.”
means, “of the”
or “belonging to the”
means, “of the middle.”
Now for 2 Thessalonians 2:7…………….
2 Thessalonians 2:7 τὸ γὰρ μυστήριον ἤδη ἐνεργεῖται τῆς ἀνομίας• μόνον ὁ κατέχων ἄρτι ἕως ἐκ μέσου γένηται.
ἐκ μέσουfrom the middle OF
For the mystery of lawlessness already works. Only there is one who restrains now, until he is taken out of the way.
So, in 2 Thessalonians 2:7, it says says “from the middle OF………” or “from the midst OF..…,” but it doesn’t say from the middle of………..WHAT.
So, here is how 2 Thessalonians 2:7 would literally translate:For the mystery is already at work of lawlessness only the one who is holding now until ἐκ “from” μέσου “the middle OF……” γένηται he becomes.
So, in this case ἐκ
would mean "from."
would mean "the middle OF..........we don't know what."
However, I guess another way to interpret this would be, as follows:For the mystery is already at work of lawlessness only the one who is holding now until ἐκ “out” μέσου “OF the middle” γένηται he becomes.
So, in this case, ἐκ
would mean “out.”
would mean “OF the middle.”
So, I guess this is where the logic of “being taken out of the way” comes from.
However, there is just something about the way this was written in the original Greek, that just doesn’t seem to be entirely complete, to me.
Because, as I said, that is not how it was usually done in most cases. Because I have also looked at several of the entries of how this phrase was used in the Septuagint in the Old Testament, as well. And the phrase ἐκ μέσου, in almost every case that I looked at, was used to say “from the middle of………something
,” not just………“out of the middle.”
See link here: http://lexicon.katabiblon.com/index.php?search=MESOU
(Btw, you can see how many I looked at.)
For it to say, "out of the middle" it seems, to me, that it should have been worded the way it was worded in Colossians 2:14, which was as follows:
ἐκ τοῦ μέσου
So, in short, in seems to me, that it should have been either ἐκ μέσου...........something""
Or "ἐκ τοῦ μέσου"
. (However, even if the sentence were more thorough, it still wouldn't prevent it from being ambiguous; because it still could be understood in more than one way, due to the fact that the word γένηται could mean TO BECOME something from something else, or it could just mean TO BECOME, as in, "to come into existence.")
In any case, whatever the reason may be for some of these seeming
gaps or seemingly
missing words in the New Testament, I believe that it’s quite possible that the gaps in the original text, or the omissions of certain words in the text, could be just as important, in their omission, as are the words that are included in the text.
Of course, when the translators translate the text they have to fill in the gaps as much as possible, in order for the text to make sense to the reader.
However, when one is trying to get a deeper understanding of the scripture by looking into the text to see how it was originally written, they might find that these gaps or omissions may have a meaning of their own. In other words, they could have been intentionally left out for a reason.
Only God knows.
And only God knows how all of these prophecies will be fulfilled, to the letter, whenever they will be fulfilled, in time.
But, in any case, it may just be, that, in verse 3, for example, that the words “that day shall not come” were left out for a reason.
2Th 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for [that day shall not come], except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
Or, it could be, that in verse 7, that the words [will let] were not included in the text for a reason, as well.
2Th 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth [will let], until he be taken out of the way.
And finally, it could be that the latter part of verse 7 was intentionally written so that it could be understood in, at least, two different ways.
One way to understand it, or not understand it
, would be:
For the mystery is already at work of lawlessness only the one who is holding now until “from” “the middle OF……something
” or “from the midst OF ……..something
” he becomes, i.e. comes into existence.Edit: Or another combination of the above would be as follows:
For the mystery is already at work of lawlessness only the one who is holding now until "from" the middle OF........something" or "from the midst OF............. something" he becomes, i.e. is taken out of the way
Or another way would be:
For the mystery is already at work of lawlessness only the one who is holding now until “out” “OF the middle” he becomes, i.e. “taken out of the way.”Edit: Or another combination of the above would be as follows:
For the mystery is already at work of lawlessness only the one who is holding now until "out" "OF the middle" he becomes, i.e. "comes into existence."
Or then again, it could be that it was meant to be understood in both combinations of
ways; and that both ways will be fulfilled.
I really don’t know for sure.
And I’m really not trying to make any presumptions about what the text might mean.
I am, however, just trying to explain what the text actually says; or doesn’t say, at least, to the best of my understanding, anyway.