complete
Loyal
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2009
- Messages
- 3,189
‘For I am in a strait betwixt two,
having a desire to depart,
and to be with Christ;
which is far better:’
(Php 1:23)
Hello there,
The desire of the Apostle was not “to depart” himself, by dying; but his desire was for the return of Christ; the verb rendered “depart” being used elsewhere in the New Testament only in Luke 12:36, where it is rendered “return”: “when he shall RETURN from the wedding”. May we not fairly ask, “Why are we not to translate it in the same way in Phil. 1:23?”
The preposition ‘ana’ (again), when compounded with the verb ‘luo’ (to loosen), means to loosen back again to the place from whence the original departure was made, not to set out to a new place; hence, ‘analuo’ means to loosen back again or to return, and it is so rendered in the only other place where it occurs in the New Testament, Luke 12:36: “when he shall RETURN from the wedding” It does NOT mean to depart, in the sense of setting off from the place where one is, but to return to the place that one has left. The noun ‘ ‘analusis’ occurs in, 2 Tim. 4:6, and has the same meaning, 'returning' or' dissolution', i.e. the body returning to dust as it was, and the spirit returning to God who gave it
The English verb DEPART occurs 130 times in the New Testament; and is used as the rendering of 22 different Greek words. But this one verb 'analuo' occurs only twice, and is rendered ‘depart’ only once; the other occurrence being rendered ‘return’, and used by the Lord Himself of His own return from heaven.
Please note, it is not the simple infinitive of the verb to return. It is a combination of three words: the preposition ‘eis’ (unto), and the definite article ‘to ‘(the), with the aorist inference ‘analusai’ (to return); so that the verb must be translated as a noun - “having a strong desire unto THE RETURN”; i.e. of Christ, as in Luke 12:36. These words must be interpreted by the context, and from this it is clear that the Apostle's whole argument is that the Gospel might be furthered (v. 12); and that Christ might be magnified (v. 20). To this end he cared not whether he lived or died; for, he says, “to me, living (is) Christ, and dying (would be) gain. But if living in the flesh (would be Christ), this (dying) for me, (would be) the fruit of (my) labour. Yet, what I shall choose I wot not, for I am being PRESSED OUT OF these two [i.e. living or dying (vv. 20, 21), by a third thing (v. 23), viz.], having a strong desire unto THE RETURN (i.e. of Christ), and to be with Christ, which is a far, far better thing”. (The word ‘ek’ occurs 857 times, and is never once translated “betwixt” except in this place. It is translated “out of” 165 times). Paul's imprisonment had made many brethren “more abundantly bold” (v. 12 R.V.) to preach the gospel. His death might produce still more abundant fruit of his labour; for these brethren were the fruit of his labour (v. 11; 4:17. Romans 1:13).Christ would be magnified in his body whether Paul lived or died. That was why he did not know what to choose of these three things: Living would be good; for he could himself preach Christ. Dying might be even better, and further the preaching of Christ more abundantly, judging by the result of his imprisonment. But there was a third thing, which was far, far better than either; and that was the return of Christ, which he so earnestly desired.
Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris
having a desire to depart,
and to be with Christ;
which is far better:’
(Php 1:23)
Hello there,
The desire of the Apostle was not “to depart” himself, by dying; but his desire was for the return of Christ; the verb rendered “depart” being used elsewhere in the New Testament only in Luke 12:36, where it is rendered “return”: “when he shall RETURN from the wedding”. May we not fairly ask, “Why are we not to translate it in the same way in Phil. 1:23?”
The preposition ‘ana’ (again), when compounded with the verb ‘luo’ (to loosen), means to loosen back again to the place from whence the original departure was made, not to set out to a new place; hence, ‘analuo’ means to loosen back again or to return, and it is so rendered in the only other place where it occurs in the New Testament, Luke 12:36: “when he shall RETURN from the wedding” It does NOT mean to depart, in the sense of setting off from the place where one is, but to return to the place that one has left. The noun ‘ ‘analusis’ occurs in, 2 Tim. 4:6, and has the same meaning, 'returning' or' dissolution', i.e. the body returning to dust as it was, and the spirit returning to God who gave it
The English verb DEPART occurs 130 times in the New Testament; and is used as the rendering of 22 different Greek words. But this one verb 'analuo' occurs only twice, and is rendered ‘depart’ only once; the other occurrence being rendered ‘return’, and used by the Lord Himself of His own return from heaven.
Please note, it is not the simple infinitive of the verb to return. It is a combination of three words: the preposition ‘eis’ (unto), and the definite article ‘to ‘(the), with the aorist inference ‘analusai’ (to return); so that the verb must be translated as a noun - “having a strong desire unto THE RETURN”; i.e. of Christ, as in Luke 12:36. These words must be interpreted by the context, and from this it is clear that the Apostle's whole argument is that the Gospel might be furthered (v. 12); and that Christ might be magnified (v. 20). To this end he cared not whether he lived or died; for, he says, “to me, living (is) Christ, and dying (would be) gain. But if living in the flesh (would be Christ), this (dying) for me, (would be) the fruit of (my) labour. Yet, what I shall choose I wot not, for I am being PRESSED OUT OF these two [i.e. living or dying (vv. 20, 21), by a third thing (v. 23), viz.], having a strong desire unto THE RETURN (i.e. of Christ), and to be with Christ, which is a far, far better thing”. (The word ‘ek’ occurs 857 times, and is never once translated “betwixt” except in this place. It is translated “out of” 165 times). Paul's imprisonment had made many brethren “more abundantly bold” (v. 12 R.V.) to preach the gospel. His death might produce still more abundant fruit of his labour; for these brethren were the fruit of his labour (v. 11; 4:17. Romans 1:13).Christ would be magnified in his body whether Paul lived or died. That was why he did not know what to choose of these three things: Living would be good; for he could himself preach Christ. Dying might be even better, and further the preaching of Christ more abundantly, judging by the result of his imprisonment. But there was a third thing, which was far, far better than either; and that was the return of Christ, which he so earnestly desired.
Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris
