I need to know what the below text is speaking about. It mentions Jesus’ coming, using the words παρουσία and ἔλευσις coupled with the word δευτέρα. Can someone translate the three marked sentences?
I see that no on has yet taken pity on you, but hopefully this is more motivation actually to learn the language (it really helps when reading texts such as this). However, perhaps you’ve learned enough to make a stab at guessing what δευτέρα modifying ἔλευσις and παρουσία means?
Hi Barry,
This is somewhat off topic, but I just wanted you to know that even though you took some flac for it, your ζηθ line made my day! I wish you could have seen me LMAO. I know it’s probably an old joke (reminds me a lot of Groucho) but I’d never heard it and it cracked me up!
Mine too. However it was intended, I took it as feigned stupor expressing his lack of understanding, rather than anything overtly negative like derision directed at the content.
From what I can see in the text, the phrases δευτέρα παρουσία and δευτέρα ἔλευσις in the text are used with reference to the same second coming. Since this is a very rare instance where these two phrases occur in the same context, I am interested to know what the text says. I can only use such programs as Google translate to guess what the text means.
What does δευτέρα mean? Second, Deuteronomy, the second giving of the law. By now, you should have a sense of what the synonyms παρουσία and ἔλευσις mean. Sigh. Painfully literally to capture something of the structure of the Greek:
Thank you for the translations. I was aware that the phrases δευτέρα παρουσία and δευτέρα ἔλευσις are used interchangeably and mean “second coming.” The word δευτέρα is a feminine form of the adjective δεύτερος (“second”). I needed to see what the surrounding context says, and have to ask others for help in such cases.
I spent years of my life studying both Greek and Hebrew apocalyptic literature (over 25 years ago). The author of this text appears to be employing a lot of stock (stereotyped) phrases which can be found in canonical sources. Someone who has read the New Testament and the Greek versions of the OT prophets will have only a few problems reading this text.
Translating is not the same as reading. Translating is all about solving problems with the target language. I looked around but wasn’t able find a translation of this online. People who have mortgaged their house to buy bible software my have it in English.
As you say, it’s not difficult Greek, with a few interesting exceptions, but nothing requiring a crux frustrationis. Logos doesn’t have it (and I didn’t mortgage anything to get it – you can do quite well with the free version of Logos and then add materials as time goes on, many of them offered for free at various times). I think I saw it on Accordance, but that may only be the Greek text.
I don’t see why παρουσια should not be translated “presence” (or “Presence”) and ελευσις “coming” (or “Coming”). In specialized Christian contexts they may refer to the same event, but that doesn’t make παρουσια mean ελευσις (or vice versa) any more than it makes “presence” mean “coming.”
Perfectly acceptable, I should think, but going against the grain. The specific translation tends to take into account the history of interpretation on the subject as well, going back at least as far as Jerome, e.g., Sicut enim fulgur exit ab oriente et paret usque in occidente ita erit et adventus Filii hominis. “Second presence” sounds distinctly odd to people.
In the other thread, Pseudo-Zonaras has “<Ἐλθεῖν>. τὸ γυμνῇ τῇ παρουσίᾳ χρήσασθαι.” Surely παρουσία is arrival there?
Lampe has a very long entry for “παρουσία B. arrival, appearance, personal visit, advent.” But some of the examples struck me as iffy. Here is his “of appearance of a demon in response to magic, Eus. d.e. 3.6”:
Jerome’s own amillennialist views may have, in translation, conflated any difference the words held for a Greek authour, who held other eschatological beliefs. If Bernd’s ultimate question is whether the use of the two words παρουσία and ἔλευσις in any way lends support to dispensational (pre-tribulation) premillennialism, with the (aborted) first approach being ἔλευσις and the actual touchdown being the παρουσία, then that may be worth discussing.
Bernd, are you fishing for linguistic support for a particular (eg pre-trib - post-trib) eschatological viewpoint?
I think the context clearly indicates “presence” here. This translator agrees with you:
But I must again attack my opposer, and inquire if he has ever seen or heard of sorcerers and enchanters doing their sorcery without libations, incense, and the invocation and presence of daemons.
The text which I quoted is marked as “versio tertia.” It may be a different text or another version of the same text.
by mwh » Wed Aug 01, 2018 10:37 pm
I don’t see why παρουσια should not be translated “presence” (or “Presence”) and ελευσις “coming” (or “Coming”). In specialized Christian contexts they may refer to the same event, but that doesn’t make παρουσια mean ελευσις (or vice versa) any more than it makes “presence” mean “coming.”
The word παρουσια means “presence” in a lot of instances. But when a person speaks about Christ’s eschatological παρουσια, he is referring to Jesus’ coming at the final judgment, which corresponds to the Latin word adventus. I do not remember ever seeing English translators using the phrase “second presence” when rendering the phrase δευτέρα παρουσία in Greek texts.
by ἑκηβόλος » Thu Aug 02, 2018 3:13 am
Bernd, are you fishing for linguistic support for a particular (eg pre-trib - post-trib) eschatological viewpoint?
I am looking for the linguistic support of the view that the word παρουσία is not an invisible presence preceding for some years the visible coming, but is the visible coming itself. Therefore, I am collecting instances from early Greek texts where the word παρουσία is used interchangeably with the word ἔλευσις and synonymously with such words as ἔρχομαι. When there is no English translation, I have to ask someone about what the sentences mean where the words appear.
Well, if we do have “presence” or “appearance” to choose from, the τε makes “appearance” the better choice. The thought is a little awkward if ἐπικλήσεώς is really unlinked from παρουσίας. And Lampe really does have a very long list of examples buttressing this usage.
And isn’t the pseudo-Zonaras interesting? It really seems as if there is a connotation of having just arrived.
Well, Eusebius is talking about what sorcerers need to have to do their sorcery (contrasting how Jesus performed miracles), and this indicates to me that “presence” better captures the usage here. And yes, Pseudo-Z is interesting, and is part of the abundant evidence that shows part of the semantic range is also what we mean by “arrival” or “coming.”