The NASB violates its own practices of translation when it inserts "him"
not in italics, but in bold-faced type giving the impression it is in the
original. It is not. You are right. It is literally, "and what
restrains now you know, so that he may be revealed in his time." The
purpose or telic clause (so that he may ...) should preferrably to taken
back to the immediately preceding OIDATE (you know), not back to the more
distant TO KATECHON (what restrains). This, of course, changes the
meaning altogether. Paul's argument then becomes an a fortiori. "What
restrains now you know" (explained in v. 7 as the mystery of lawlessness
already at work (which believers know and understand)) implies their
recognition of the greater evil, the man of lawlessness, when he is
revealed (6b).
Why did the translators insert "him" in verse 6? Probably because they
thought it referred to the "he" in the last half of the verse. Funny
thing, though. Even if the word is included, then it should refer back
God or "all that is called God" in v. 4 where the perspective is begun
and continued in v. 6, note the kai (and denotes continued perspetive,
not contrasting, so that "what restrains" parallels the man of
lawlessness (v. 4)).
Paul S. Dixon, Pastor Check out my doctoral product:
Ladd Hill Bible Church "The Evangelism of Christ: a Model for
Wilsonville, OR 97070 Evangelism Today"
http://users.aol.com/dixonps/evangelism.htm
On Fri, 30 Aug 1996, David Wilens wrote:
>
> To all,
>
> verse 6. Apparently the EIS TO APOKALUFQHNAI AUTON can refer
> back to either KATEXON or OIDATE. That is, if it refers back to OIDATE,
> it implies "you know, so that he may be revealed." And if it refers
> back to KATEXON, it implies "he is restrained, so that he may be
> revealed." But where do the NAS and the NIV get the extra "HIM?"
> instead of "The restrainer you know." Can someone show me, please?
>
> verse 7. The phrase EWS EK MESOU GENHTAI is supposed to mean
> "until he is taken out of the way." I assume this is an idiom. To
> me it seems like "until he appears out of the midst." Is there good
> evidence that it is an idiom and that the traditional translation is
> correct?
>
> Peace in the LORD,
> David Wilens
>
> Signature: Just an engineer and a little Geek.
>
>
> 2 Thess. 2:6 KAI NUN TO KATEXON OIDATE EIS TO APOKALUFQHNAI AUTON
> EN TW EAUTOU KAIRW
> 2 Thess. 2:7 TO GAR MUOTHRION HDH ENERGEITAI THS ANOMIAS MONON O
> KATEXWN ARTI EWS EK MESOU GENHTAI
>
> 2 Thess. 2:6 kai nun to katechon oidate eis to apokaluphthEnai auton
> en tO eautou kairO
> 2 Thess. 2:7 to gar muotErion EdE energeitai tEs anomias monon o
> katechOn arti eOs ek mesou genEtai
>
> NAS
> 2 Thess. 2:6-7 And you know what restrains HIM now, so that in his
> time he may be revealed. (7) For the mystery of lawlessness is
> already at work; only he who now restrains [will do so] until he is
> taken out of the way.
>
> P.S. Pleease RUSH your response - the rapture depends on it.
>
> P.P.S. Please ignore the former statement. It was just my other self's
> attempt at humor. And I do apologize to the more experienced scholars
> on the list for again bringing up an old and overexamined sripture. But
> seriously, I am working hard on this and would appreciate any input.
>