Announcement

Collapse

Biblical Languages 301 Guidelines

This is where we come to delve into the biblical text. Theology is not our foremost thought, but we realize it is something that will be dealt with in nearly every conversation. Feel free to use the original languages to make your point (meaning Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic). This is an exegetical discussion area, so please limit topics to purely biblical ones.

This is not the section for debates between theists and atheists. While a theistic viewpoint is not required for discussion in this area, discussion does presuppose a respect for the integrity of the Biblical text (or the willingness to accept such a presupposition for discussion purposes) and a respect for the integrity of the faith of others and a lack of an agenda to undermine the faith of others.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

ἃ δεῖ γενέσθαι ἐν τάχει

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ἃ δεῖ γενέσθαι ἐν τάχει

    Please do not post any cabala, gematria, or other such esoterica in this thread.

    I request that Geert van den Bos not post in this or in any other thread that I may have started or may ever start.
    .

    The thread title is the phrase in Revelation 1:1 that is rendered 'the things that must soon take place' (ἃ δεῖ γενέσθαι ἐν τάχει / ha dei genesthai en tachei) in TNIV.

    That clause at the beginning of the first chapter is repeated in the final chapter: Revelation 22:6 The angel said to me, “These words are trustworthy and true. The Lord, the God who inspires the prophets, sent his angel to show his servants 'the things that must soon take place.”

    The prepositional phrase used as adverb rendered "soon" in the first and last chapters of Revelation is ἐν τάχει, the noun in the phrase being a form of τάχος. The noun τάχος and the prepositional phrase, used adverbially, ἐν τάχει, are defined as follows in BDAG:
    τάχος
    1. a very brief period of time, with focus on speed of an activity or event, speed, quickness, swiftness, haste, μετὰ τάχους with speed (Pla., Prot. 332b, Leg. 944c; POxy 2107, 4 [III AD]) MPol 13:1.—ἐν τάχει (Pind., Aeschyl. et al.; Galen, CMG V/9/2 p. 25, 25 al.; ins, pap, LXX; Jos., Ant. 6, 163; 17, 83) quickly, at once, without delay Ac 10:33 D; 12:7; 17:15 D; 22:18; 1 Cl 48:1; 63:4.—τάχει (Tetrast. Iamb. 2, 6, 1 p. 287; SibOr 1, 205; in Plut., Caes. 717 [20, 4], Lys. 438 [11, 2] w. the addition of πολλῷ, παντί; cp. Just., D. 68, 3 σὺν τάχει) quickly Rv 2:5 v.l. {p. 993} (s. Tdf.).—τὸ τάχος as accusative of specification, adverbially (very) quickly, without delay (PHib 62, 13; PPetr II, 9, 2, 9; PSI 326, 12; 495, 17; 18 [all III BC]; LXX; Jos., Ant. 13, 8. Without the art. as early as Aeschyl.) 1 Cl 53:2; B 4:8; 14:3 (w. all three cp. Ex 32:7).
    2. pertaining to a relatively brief time subsequent to another point of time, ἐν τάχει as adverbial unit soon, in a short time Lk 18:8; Ro 16:20; 1 Ti 3:14; Rv 1:1; 22:6; 1 Cl 65:1; shortly Ac 25:4. Cp. ταχύς 2.—DELG s.v. ταχύς.

    A synonym (ταχύ) is used about half a dozen times in Revelation to say the same thing with the same meaning; however, for the sake of brevity and simplicity I will limit this thread to the two occurrences of the phrase ἐν τάχει in Revelation 1:1 and 22:6.

    There are three textual occurrences that reinforce the facts noted above:

    1. In verses that closely follow both Revelation 1:1 and 22:6, the meaning expressed in the latter two verses is strongly reinforced by an expression that affirms the same sense of imminence by means of different terminology:
    Revelation 1:3 Μακάριος ὁ ἀναγινώσκων καὶ οἱ ἀκούοντες τοὺς λόγους τῆς προφητείας καὶ τηροῦντες τὰ ἐν αὐτῇ γεγραμμένα, ὁ γὰρ καιρὸς ἐγγύς. (TNIV: Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is near.)

    Revelation 22:10 Καὶ λέγει μοι· μὴ σφραγίσῃς τοὺς λόγους τῆς προφητείας τοῦ βιβλίου τούτου, ὁ καιρὸς γὰρ ἐγγύς ἐστιν. (TNIV: Then he told me, “Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this scroll, because the time is near.

    2. Note carefully the same language with different time terminology in the following OT scripture:
    Daniel 2:28-29 LXX: 28 ἀλλ᾿ ἔστι θεὸς ἐν οὐρανῷ ἀνακαλύπτων μυστήρια ὃς ἐδήλωσε τῷ βασιλεῖ Ναβουχοδονοσορ ἃ δεῖ γενέσθαι ἐπ᾿ ἐσχάτων τῶν ἡμερῶν βασιλεῦ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα ζῆθι τὸ ἐνύπνιον καὶ τὸ ὅραμα τῆς κεφαλῆς σου ἐπὶ τῆς κοίτης σου τοῦτό ἐστι 29 σύ βασιλεῦ κατακλιθεὶς ἐπὶ τῆς κοίτης σου ἑώρακας πάντα ὅσα δεῖ γενέσθαι ἐπ᾿ ἐσχάτων τῶν ἡμερῶν καὶ ὁ ἀνακαλύπτων μυστήρια ἐδήλωσέ σοι ἃ δεῖ γενέσθαι (WEB: Dan. 2:28 but there is a God in heaven who reveals secrets, and he has made known to the king Nebuchadnezzar what shall be in the latter days. Your dream, and the visions of your head on your bed, are these: 29 as for you, O king, your thoughts came into your mind on your bed, what should happen hereafter; and he who reveals secrets has made known to you what shall happen. Cf. also Daniel 2:45.

    Note that whereas Daniel says ἃ δεῖ γενέσθαι ἐπ᾿ ἐσχάτων τῶν ἡμερῶν (what will be in the latter days), Revelation says the things that must soon take place reinforced by the supplemental statement the time is near.

    The wording in Daniel is wording used with reference to a distant future; the wording in Revelation is wording that is used with reference to an imminent (i.e., happening very soon) future.

    The entire prophesy that is Revelation is bracketed at the beginning and the end with doubly emphasized expressions of imminence and nearness of time that stand in remarkable distinction from the way the Daniel referred to what was destined to happen during a time that was not near to him but that was near to John.

    3. Note the contrast between what John was told in Revelation 22:10 (Then he told me, “Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this scroll, because the time is near) on the one hand and on the other hand what Daniel was told in the following texts:
    Dan. 9:24 Seventy weeks are decreed on your people and on your holy city, to finish disobedience, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up vision and prophecy,' and to anoint the most holy.
    Dan. 12:4 But you, Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run back and forth, and knowledge shall be increased.”
    Dan. 12:9 He said, Go your way, Daniel; for the words are shut up and sealed until the time of the end.

    There is only one exception to John's being told “Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this scroll, because the time is near; that is Revelation 10:4 'When the seven thunders sounded, I was about to write; but I heard a voice from the sky saying, “Seal up the things which the seven thunders said, and don’t write them.”'
    Last edited by John Reece; 03-06-2014, 06:21 PM.

  • #2
    Moderator's note:

    The thread creator has requested no esoteric material be posted.
    Last edited by KingsGambit; 03-02-2014, 12:14 PM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Excellent posts, John & Geert. I suspect you are both in agreement about the eternal Jerusalem; is that correct?

      I am not so sure that the author would make a fine distinction between 'soon' and 'quickly', but I'm not familiar enough with the book of Revelation to form my own opinion about this.
      Last edited by robrecht; 03-02-2014, 11:14 AM.
      βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
      ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

      אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

      Comment


      • #4
        Excellent post John.
        The State. Ideas so good they have to be mandatory.

        sigpic

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by robrecht View Post
          Excellent posts, John & Geert. I suspect you are both in agreement about the eternal Jerusalem; is that correct?
          The eternal Jerusalem is not the subject of this thread. I would be happy to address that subject, but not in this thread and not in response to a cabalist who has just blatantly disregarded the opening line of the OP of this thread:
          Please do not post any cabala, gematria, or other such esoterica in this thread.

          Originally posted by robrecht View Post
          I am not so sure that the author would make a fine distinction between 'soon' and 'quickly', but I'm not familiar enough with the book of Revelation to form my own opinion about this.
          As stated in the OP, I purposely confined myself the adverbial usage of the prepositional phrase ἐν τάχει, excluding consideration of the word ταχύς, -εῖα, -ύ in texts not included in this thread.

          The context of the book as a whole favors the meaning 'soon' for ἐν τάχει in the texts consider in the thread, a fact that is supported by BDAG as presented in the OP.
          2. pertaining to a relatively brief time subsequent to another point of time, ἐν τάχει as adverbial unit soon, in a short time Lk 18:8; Ro 16:20; 1 Ti 3:14; Rv 1:1; 22:6; 1 Cl 65:1; shortly Ac 25:4. Cp. ταχύς 2.—DELG s.v. ταχύς. M-M.ταχύς, εῖα, ύ (Hom.+)

          Geert ignores the semantic range of ἐν τάχει and the context of its usage in Revelation, as he merrily selects a different sense of a different word expressly excluded from consideration in the OP, so as to indulge himself in cabalistic loose associations that are not related to the exegesis presented in this thread.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by John Reece View Post
            The eternal Jerusalem is not the subject of this thread. I would be happy to address that subject, but not in this thread and not in response to a cabalist who has just blatantly disregarded the opening line of the OP of this thread:
            Please do not post any cabala, gematria, or other such esoterica in this thread.

            As stated in the OP, I purposely confined myself the adverbial usage of the prepositional phrase ἐν τάχει, excluding consideration of the word ταχύς, -εῖα, -ύ in texts not included in this thread.

            The context of the book as a whole favors the meaning 'soon' for ἐν τάχει in the texts consider in the thread, a fact that is supported by BDAG as presented in the OP.
            2. pertaining to a relatively brief time subsequent to another point of time, ἐν τάχει as adverbial unit soon, in a short time Lk 18:8; Ro 16:20; 1 Ti 3:14; Rv 1:1; 22:6; 1 Cl 65:1; shortly Ac 25:4. Cp. ταχύς 2.—DELG s.v. ταχύς. M-M.ταχύς, εῖα, ύ (Hom.+)

            Geert ignores the semantic range of ἐν τάχει and the context of its usage in Revelation, as he merrily selects a different sense of a different word expressly excluded from consideration in the OP, so as to indulge himself in cabalistic loose associations that are not related to the exegesis presented in this thread.
            Hi, John. I agree with all of your points and do not want to derail the thread into a discussion of the eternal Jerusalem. Sorry. I only wanted to minimize a distinction Geert may have thought represented a difference of opinion between the two of you. I too share a great dislike for gematria when applied to texts that bear no evidence whatsoever of using this 'method', and I use the term extremely loosely. But I must say I was pleasantly surprised to learn (in Obsidian's thread) that Geert is indeed competent in Greek and is capable of commenting merely on the basis of the text, and I wanted to encourage that. I didn't think he was going down the road of cabbalistic gematria in this thread. But, anyway, I apologize for the distraction.
            βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
            ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

            אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by robrecht View Post
              Hi, John. I agree with all of your points and do not want to derail the thread into a discussion of the eternal Jerusalem. Sorry. I only wanted to minimize a distinction Geert may have thought represented a difference of opinion between the two of you. I too share a great dislike for gematria when applied to texts that bear no evidence whatsoever of using this 'method', and I use the term extremely loosely. But I must say I was pleasantly surprised to learn (in Obsidian's thread) that Geert is indeed competent in Greek and is capable of commenting merely on the basis of the text, and I wanted to encourage that. I didn't think he was going down the road of cabbalistic gematria in this thread. But, anyway, I apologize for the distraction.
              You are quite right that Geert was not going down the road of cabalist gematria; but he was indeed going down the road of cabalistic loose associations that were quite distracting from the exegetical focus of the thread.

              I too am impressed with Geert's competence in the biblical languages ('always have been) and would enjoy seeing more of his quite interesting (in and of themselves) posts; however, when I am trying to do serious exegesis it drives me batty and gets my goat whenever he comes into my threads with distracting loose associations that are not focused on the meanings words have in the contexts in which they are used in whatever text or texts that may be the focus of a given thread and/or post.

              I would like to see Geert start threads of his own in this forum for the purpose of sharing his extensive, interesting, and valuable knowledge. I would relish reading such threads; I just cannot deal with his posts when they hijack my threads and shatter their focus.

              Comment


              • #8
                I agree completely. In fact I think some of his associations were actually more interesting to me with respect to other New Testament texts, not specifically the book of Revelation. Again, I apologize for the distraction.
                βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by John Reece View Post
                  [size=4][font=times new roman][COLOR="#800000"]

                  Apparently, unlike the clearly prophesied and emphasized as imminent fulfillment of the message of the prophesy of the book of Revelation as a whole, the message of the seven thunders relates to a far distant future, indicating that whereas God revealed to the first generation what they needed to know as the 1st century destruction of Jerusalem approached, there are other things about the future that God has chosen not to reveal.
                  How do you know that Revelation was written before 70AD, and how do you come to that it it foretells the destruction of Jerusalem?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Moderator's note:

                    Removed by moderator.
                    Last edited by KingsGambit; 03-03-2014, 11:31 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Geert van den Bos View Post
                      And now we come to the name of God, the Tetragrammaton, about which you don't want to know.

                      (Babylonian dispersion, Hebrew "haflagah", took place in the dying year of Peleg, the 15th generation of the 26 generations from Adam to Moses (revelation at mount Sinai), etc.)
                      You have repeatedly ignored my request that you not post cabala in this thread, so I will ignore your questions and comments except when I choose to do otherwise.

                      Originally posted by Geert van den Bos View Post
                      Note that the number 666, as numerical value of an inscription on a coin, rather points to Domitian than to Nero. http://socalcoins.blogspot.nl/2008/0...m-i-t-i-n.html.
                      I note that E. Stauffer's theory is referenced in your link above. What John A. T. Robertson says about Stauffer on page 237 of Redating the New Testament thus applies likewise to you.
                      The purple passages in which E. Stauffer reconstructs the scene by which John (in his view the apostle) was confronted in Ephesus under Domitian are, alas, highly imaginative if not wholly imaginary. They are marked by turns of phrase which constantly slur the evidence and at points force and distort it. When a great scholar is driven to such lengths one may suspect that his case is weak. He has his own elaborate interpretation of the cipher 666* as referring to Domitian, but offers no explanation of how he can possibly be the 'sixth king' who 'is now reigning' (Rev. 17:10). All one can say is that while the evidence from the imperial cultus does not rule out a Domitianic dating, it does not establish it either.
                      *A(utokrator) KAI(sar) DOMET(ianos) SEB(astos) GER(manikos) (179 cf. his article, '666' CN, 1947, 237-41). Like many another ingenious attempt it cannot be disproved, but, as Caird says, Revelation, 175, 'Apart from its complexity it has only one flaw: although each of these abbreviations by itself is well attested, there is no single coin on which all five occur together.'
                      Last edited by John Reece; 03-03-2014, 11:52 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by John Reece View Post


                        You have repeatedly ignored my request that you not post cabala in this thread, so I will ignore your questions and comments except when I choose to do otherwise.

                        That's rather weak, John.
                        You could answer the question whether you think Revelation's Babylon is meant to be Jerusalem or not.



                        Originally posted by John Reece View Post
                        I note that E. Stauffer's theory is referenced in your link above. What John A. T. Robertson says about Stauffer on page 237 of Redating the New Testament thus applies likewise to you.
                        The purple passages in which E. Stauffer reconstructs the scene by which John (in his view the apostle) was confronted in Ephesus under Domitian are, alas, highly imaginative if not wholly imaginary. They are marked by turns of phrase which constantly slur the evidence and at points force and distort it. When a great scholar is driven to such lengths one may suspect that his case is weak. He has his own elaborate interpretation of the cipher 666* as referring to Domitian, but offers no explanation of how he can possibly be the 'sixth king' who 'is now reigning' (Rev. 17:10). All one can say is that while the evidence from the imperial cultus does not rule out a Domitianic dating, it does not establish it either.
                        *A(utokrator) KAI(sar) DOMET(ianos) SEB(astos) GER(manikos) (179 cf. his article, '666' CN, 1947, 237-41). Like many another ingenious attempt it cannot be disproved, but, as Caird says, Revelation, 175, 'Apart from its complexity it has only one flaw: although each of these abbreviations by itself is well attested, there is no single coin on which all five occur together.'
                        Who says that the 'sixth king' who 'is now reigning' must be Nero?
                        Revelation plays very much on the number 7 (more I am not allowed to say ...)
                        Last edited by Geert van den Bos; 03-03-2014, 12:42 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Geert van den Bos View Post
                          That's rather weak, John.
                          You could answer the question whether you think Revelation's Babylon is meant to be Jerusalem or not.
                          John 19:15 has the Chief Priests say: “We have no king but Caesar.”

                          In Revelation's way of speech it would mean: "We are citizens of Babylon"

                          Note that John 20:28, Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” , hints at Caesar Domitian, who had himself name that way (according to many scholars, f.e. to Sjef van Tilborg, not one of the least).

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by John Reece
                            This was not intended to be a debate thread; not only do I have no stomach for debates, but my health is very fragile and I am quite at a disadvantage because of abysmal memory impairment.

                            I can only work at the computer by standing on my feet, but when I stand on my feet in one spot my feet and lower legs swell so painfully that I cannot persist in doing so except for brief spells of time; and for me to compose anything in terms of posting takes a lot of time because of the effects on my brain of a complex array of medical problems that enervate me mind and body to the point that it does not take much to put me in a condition in which I can do little more than only exist one day at a time eagerly looking forward to the day my body is interred.

                            I almost didn't come back to TWeb after the recent crash, because of the toll such involvement wreaks on my health, and because of the embarrassment I suffer from trying to function as though I were not in the pitiful state I am now in, mentally as well as physically.

                            So, excuse me while I attempt to recover from having to deal with you every time I come to the computer.
                            Ok.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by John Reece View Post
                              The purple passages in which E. Stauffer reconstructs the scene by which John (in his view the apostle) was confronted in Ephesus under Domitian are, alas, highly imaginative if not wholly imaginary. They are marked by turns of phrase which constantly slur the evidence and at points force and distort it. When a great scholar is driven to such lengths one may suspect that his case is weak. He has his own elaborate interpretation of the cipher 666* as referring to Domitian, but offers no explanation of how he can possibly be the 'sixth king' who 'is now reigning' (Rev. 17:10). All one can say is that while the evidence from the imperial cultus does not rule out a Domitianic dating, it does not establish it either.
                              *A(utokrator) KAI(sar) DOMET(ianos) SEB(astos) GER(manikos) (179 cf. his article, '666' CN, 1947, 237-41). Like many another ingenious attempt it cannot be disproved, but, as Caird says, Revelation, 175, 'Apart from its complexity it has only one flaw: although each of these abbreviations by itself is well attested, there is no single coin on which all five occur together.'
                              Here is the full comment referenced by Robinson in C. B. Caird's The Revelation of St. John (Black's New Testament Commentary: London, 1966):
                              An even more ingenious solution is that of Stauffer, who suggests that John was calculating the numerical value of the legend on the current coins of Domitian. Domitian's full title was Imperator Caesar Domitianus Augustus Germanicus, or in Greek Autokrator Kaisar Domitianos Sebastos Germanikos. The Greek title abbreviated to A.KAI.ΔOMET.ΣEB.ΓE. duly yields the required total. This theory fits well with what we have said about the mark of the monster. Apart from its complexity it has only one flaw: although each of these abbreviations by itself is well attested, there is no single coin on which all five occur together.
                              Last edited by John Reece; 03-06-2014, 06:25 PM.

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by DesertBerean, 11-02-2020, 02:57 PM
                              4 responses
                              34 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post DesertBerean  
                              Working...
                              X