If someone did get it previously, please let me know. Thanks.
On Sat, 28 Jun 1997 18:12:23 dixonps writes:
>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 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 more distant KATECON is the antecedent of the clause,
>then the thought is something like this: and now you know
>what restrains him (the man of lawlessness) from being revealed
>before his time. This, of course, conjures up only a good
>restrainer view, since only good could be envisioned as
>restraining evil.
>
>If, on the other hand, 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:
>the mystery of lawlessness (paralleling and explaining
>TO KATECON ...GAP ... TO MYSTERION) 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?
>
>Much thanks,
>
>Paul S. Dixon, Pastor
>Ladd Hill Bible Church
>Wilsonville, Oregon