Translation of 2 Thessalonians 2:2

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by R. J., Sep 14, 2004.

  1. R. J.

    R. J.
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    138
    Likes Received:
    0
    Most modern versions of the bible, including the NIV, TNIV, NASB, NASU, NLT, RSV and ASV, use a unique version of the Greek text for translation purposes. This text is called the "Westcott-Hort with NA27/UBS4 variants (1881)" (WHNU). According to at least one translation "guru" the "NA27/USB4" means Nestle-Aland 27th Edition which has as its underlying text the United Bible Society Greek New Testament 4th Edition.

    No matter how insignificant the general differences, the specific WHNU Greek text varies significantly from the Received Text, the Stephanus - 1550 text (TR1550) and the Scrivner - 1894 text (TR1894) in 2 Thessalonians 2:2. The Greek words "nuepa xpiotou" (i.e. day of Christ) in the Received Text appear as "nuepa kupiou" (i.e. day of the Lord) in the WHNU text.

    For the serious bible scholar, this textual difference between "day of Christ" and "day of the Lord" changes the CONTEXT of 2 Thessalonians 2 from the GATHERING to a time period that starts with the GREAT TRIBULATION.
     
  2. natters

    natters
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    2,496
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm not sure I follow you. You seem to be basing the difference between "day of Christ" and "day of the Lord" purely on interpretation - in other words, other interpretations eliminate the "problem". For example, many (most?) would see "day of Christ" and "day of the Lord" as the same thing, since "Jesus is the Lord" (1 Cor 12:3) and Christ is Lord (Acts 2:36, Acts 10:38, Rom 1:3 and dozens of others). Even 1 Cor 1:8 refers to "the day of our Lord Jesus Christ". Also, one's view on rapture timing will color their interpretation of this passage to begin with. So I'm not sure exactly what you're getting at, maybe I misunderstand your point.
     
  3. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    Some have tried to make the "day of the Christ" and "day of the Lord" mean two different things. The textual variants in this case then WOULD make a difference.

    But natters correctly pointed out that this is based on a HYPOTHETICAL DISTINCTION between the two. (Day of Christ is only used a couple of times in Philippians so it is hard to judge how to define it). There is no shred of evidence that the "day of the Christ" and "day of the Lord" are not referring to the exact same time frame (day). If refers to the last time events, from the rapture to the kingdom.

    And obviously the church fathers found the two terms 100% interchangeable. Hence one family of documents in this single case have "christ" while other families of documents have "lord".
     
  4. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    BTW, didn't we have a thread a while back that condemned the MV's for using "the Christ" as a title for Jesus? Yet here it is the Greek underlying the AV1611 that uses the day of "the Christ".

    Don't want to get sidetracked here, but find that CONDEMNING it in one place and LAUDING it in another seems like fodder for Mr Ed's "doubles". [​IMG]
     
  5. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    10,074
    Likes Received:
    102
    Come on, Dr. Bob. If only you understood, you would understand.

    BTW: I thought "the Christ" argument was among the silliest I've seen here, right behind the one that the KJV was blessed because it was translated under an English king instead of queen.
     
  6. michelle

    michelle
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    2 Thess. 2

    2. That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.


    This verse does not indicate the "day of the Christ, but "the day of Christ".


    love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
    michelle
     
  7. Ziggy

    Ziggy
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    532
    Likes Received:
    2
    Michelle: "This verse does not indicate the "day of the Christ, but "the day of Christ".

    At least in the KJV as it stands. But Michelle, I have here in my hand the underlying Greek text that the KJV translators admitted they used (and it doesn't matter whether this text as a whole is Scrivener's later reconstruction, since *every* Greek text printed before 1611 is in total agreement at this point, from Erasmus 1516 to Beza 1598).

    The Greek text here says H HMERA TOU CRISTOU, which, being interpreted, is "the day of the Christ" (to make it simple: H = "the"; HMERA = "day"; TOU = "of the"; and CRISTOS = "Christ").

    Now, Michelle, since the KJV translators *left out* one of the God-breathed words that can be shown to have been present in *every* Greek text available to them and from which they translated, are they not guilty of *taking away* from the word of God, and thus in violation of Rev 22:19?

    This is a simple question based on demonstrable fact; whether you know Greek or not is irrelevant.
     
  8. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    10,074
    Likes Received:
    102
    Come on, Ziggy, don't drag the Greek into this. It's irrelevant.
     
  9. michelle

    michelle
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    Jesus may be "Jesus the Christ" to you, but he is Jesus Christ to me. It may be the day of the Christ to you, but my Holy Bible, and the Holy Bible of generations past, have and know that this is the day of Christ, NOT the Christ.

    If you can think for one minute, that YOU are smarter than 47 translators who KNEW these languages better than most people today, and that I would believe YOUR INTERPRETATION over that of what God has provided for generations, and over that of these scholarly men, I've got a bridge to sell ya.


    love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
    michelle
     
  10. Ziggy

    Ziggy
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    532
    Likes Received:
    2
    Michelle: "Jesus may be "Jesus the Christ" to you, but he is Jesus Christ to me."

    Then are you saying the KJKV translators got it *wrong* when they rendered the same Greek phrase "the Christ" in Mt 16:16,20; 26:63; Mk 8:29; 14:61; Lk 3:15; 9:20; 22:67; Jn 1:20,41; 3:28; 4:29,42; 7:41; 10:24; 11:27; 20:31; 1Jn 2:22; 5:1?

    Michelle: "It may be the day of the Christ to you, but my Holy Bible, and the Holy Bible of generations past, have and know that this is the day of Christ, NOT the Christ."

    And so the KJV translators were correct in 2Thess 2:2 to *leave out* a word that was present in every Greek text available to them, and yet without violating Rev 22:19? How can that be?

    Michelle: "If you can think for one minute, that YOU are smarter than 47 translators who KNEW these languages better than most people today, and that I would believe YOUR INTERPRETATION over that of what God has provided for generations, and over that of these scholarly men, I've got a bridge to sell ya."

    No, Michelle, I admit I'm not very smart, and I don't know much about anything, including Greek and Hebrew. But I do know this, and it is not an issue of *me* versus the 47 KJV translators: *any* native Greek-speaking child from kindergarten and beyond knows that TOU is the definite article meaning "of the" and that if someone spoke of H HMERA TOU CRISTOU it meant "the day of the Christ". Every vocabulary word in that phrase is so elementary, that even a child could understand it. Bible College and Seminary students learn every one of those words within the first week or two of beginning Greek, so common are they.

    BTW, I don't need to buy any bridges, but I'm glad to know you have already purchased one. [​IMG]

    rsr: "Come on, Ziggy, don't drag the Greek into this. It's irrelevant"

    Au contraire, since the thread (for once) actually began with the issue of the Greek reading in this passage (with the Greek of the TR line miscited by leaving out the definite articles).
     
  11. AVL1984

    AVL1984
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=../ubb/avl1984.jpg>

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2002
    Messages:
    6,932
    Likes Received:
    3
    Sorry, Michelle, but it means exactly the same thing. Context, dear, context. Okay? ;)

    AVL1984
     
  12. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    10,074
    Likes Received:
    102
    Sorry, Ziggy. I guess my sarcasm indicator wasn't working. The Greek is never irrelevant.
     
  13. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    10,074
    Likes Received:
    102
    michelle said:

    "Jesus may be "Jesus the Christ" to you, but he is Jesus Christ to me."

    That's nice for you, but it is irrelevant. Ziggy has put it plainly: You are wrong and will never admit it, not for any reason, not when presented any evidence. It is not a matter of interpretation; it is a matter of the text.
     
  14. Ziggy

    Ziggy
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    532
    Likes Received:
    2
    rsr: "Sorry, Ziggy. I guess my sarcasm indicator wasn't working. The Greek is never irrelevant."

    Oh, I got it ok. I just made my statement for the benefit of anyone who might not have gotten it. Maybe [​IMG] should be used every time sarcasm is intended (but then some people would not pay attention to the point as much as they currently do. [​IMG]
     
  15. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,147
    Likes Received:
    322
  16. Ziggy

    Ziggy
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    532
    Likes Received:
    2
    HankD:
    1611 KJV Matthew 16:16 ...Thou art Christ...
    1769 KJV Matthew 16:16 ...Thou art the Christ...

    Oh no, Hank....What to do now? :eek:

    Did the *original* 1611 KJV contain a "printer's error" that had to be "corrected" to a "new age" reading in a later edition?

    Or did Blayney "new age"-up the original correct reading in 1769 without proper warrant?

    Of course the fact that every Greek text that had ever been printed up through 1611 says "the Christ" in Mt 16:16 as well as in 2Thess 2:2 is probably irrelevant, at least for those who have declared that the underlying Greek is of no significance for us English-speaking Christians.

    Now if I could only figure out which edition of the KJV is correct in Mt 16:16, I perhaps could reduce my list of those 19 new age "the Christ" readings found in the KJV and help the Christian world in the process.
     
  17. Ransom

    Ransom
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    0
    HankD said:

    1611 KJV Matthew 16:16 ...Thou art Christ...

    1769 KJV Matthew 16:16 ...Thou art the Christ...


    Oh no!

    New Age Bible Version!!!

    Run around! Panic! Write a 700-page book!
     
  18. Pastor_Bob

    Pastor_Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2002
    Messages:
    3,461
    Likes Received:
    45
    In my Stephens 1550 text (TR) I have, η ηεμερα τοσ Ψηριστοσ, which is literally translated "the day of the Christ."
     
  19. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    I said in that old thread that "JESUS THE CHRIST" is just as, if not MORE correct than "Jesus Christ". After all, the charlatan Miaitreya calls himself Christ(Messiah). But there's only one REAL Christ...JESUS OF NAZARETH of the Bible.

    "Messiah" comes from Hebrew "mashlha" and Aramaic "meshlha", literally, "anointed one". The Hebrews used this term any time they were referring to their expected King and Deliverer. Chrystos in Greek means "anointed one", and came to mean the same as Messiah to the Greek-speaking Jews.(And our English term "Christ" comes from the Greek.)

    What would be incorrect would be referring to Jesus in English as "a" Christ.
     
  20. Marcia

    Marcia
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    0
    One or even several "The Christ" does not the New Age make. What makes the New Age are the beliefs as to who Christ is.

    Jesus is the Christ, because he is the Messiah, the Anointed One, the unique son of God. There is nothing wrong with saying he is the Christ since the Christ means "the anointed one." There is only one true Christ but many false ones. We look at the beliefs behind the false Christs to distinguish them from the one true Christ.

    Well, going out of town so can't follow this. I'm sure this thread will be closed by the time I get back. [​IMG]
     

Share This Page

Loading...