2 Thess. 2:1 KJV (With Strong’s)

+
1
Now
de (Greek #1161)
but, and, etc.
KJV usage: also, and, but, moreover, now (often unexpressed in English).
Pronounce: deh
Origin: a primary particle (adversative or continuative)
we beseech
erotao (Greek #2065)
to interrogate; by implication, to request
KJV usage: ask, beseech, desire, intreat, pray. Compare 4441.
Pronounce: er-o-tah'-o
Origin: apparently from 2046 (compare 2045)
you
humas (Greek #5209)
you (as the objective of a verb or preposition)
KJV usage: ye, you (+ -ward), your (+ own).
Pronounce: hoo-mas'
Origin: accusative case of 5210
, brethren
adephos (Greek #80)
a brother (literally or figuratively) near or remote (much like 1)
KJV usage: brother.
Pronounce: ad-el-fos'
Origin: from 1 (as a connective particle) and δελφύς (the womb)
, by
huper (Greek #5228)
"over", i.e. (with the genitive case) of place, above, beyond, across, or causal, for the sake of, instead, regarding; with the accusative case superior to, more than
KJV usage: (+ exceeding, abundantly) above, in (on) behalf of, beyond, by, + very chiefest, concerning, exceeding (above, -ly), for, + very highly, more (than), of, over, on the part of, for sake of, in stead, than, to(-ward), very. In the comparative, it retains many of the above applications.
Pronounce: hoop-er'
Origin: a primary preposition
the coming
ho (Greek #3588)
the definite article; the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)
KJV usage: the, this, that, one, he, she, it, etc.
Pronounce: ho
Origin: ἡ (hay), and the neuter τό (to) in all their inflections
parousia (Greek #3952)
a being near, i.e. advent (often, return; specially, of Christ to punish Jerusalem, or finally the wicked); (by implication) physically, aspect
KJV usage: coming, presence.
Pronounce: par-oo-see'-ah
Origin: from the present participle of 3918
of our
hemon (Greek #2257)
of (or from) us
KJV usage: our (company), us, we.
Pronounce: hay-mone'
Origin: genitive case plural of 1473
Lord
ho (Greek #3588)
the definite article; the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)
KJV usage: the, this, that, one, he, she, it, etc.
Pronounce: ho
Origin: ἡ (hay), and the neuter τό (to) in all their inflections
kurios (Greek #2962)
supreme in authority, i.e. (as noun) controller; by implication, Master (as a respectful title)
KJV usage: God, Lord, master, Sir.
Pronounce: koo'-ree-os
Origin: from κῦρος (supremacy)
Jesus
Iesous (Greek #2424)
Jesus (i.e. Jehoshua), the name of our Lord and two (three) other Israelites
KJV usage: Jesus.
Pronounce: ee-ay-sooce'
Origin: of Hebrew origin (03091)
Christ
Christos (Greek #5547)
anointed, i.e. the Messiah, an epithet of Jesus
KJV usage: Christ.
Pronounce: khris-tos'
Origin: from 5548
, and
kai (Greek #2532)
and, also, even, so then, too, etc.; often used in connection (or composition) with other particles or small words
KJV usage: and, also, both, but, even, for, if, or, so, that, then, therefore, when, yet.
Pronounce: kahee
Origin: apparently, a primary particle, having a copulative and sometimes also a cumulative force
by our
hemon (Greek #2257)
of (or from) us
KJV usage: our (company), us, we.
Pronounce: hay-mone'
Origin: genitive case plural of 1473
gathering together
episunagoge (Greek #1997)
a complete collection; especially a Christian meeting (for worship)
KJV usage: assembling (gathering) together.
Pronounce: ep-ee-soon-ag-o-gay'
Origin: from 1996
unto
epi (Greek #1909)
properly, meaning superimposition (of time, place, order, etc.), as a relation of distribution (with the genitive case), i.e. over, upon, etc.; of rest (with the dative case) at, on, etc.; of direction (with the accusative case) towards, upon, etc.
KJV usage: about (the times), above, after, against, among, as long as (touching), at, beside, X have charge of, (be-, (where-))fore, in (a place, as much as, the time of, -to), (because) of, (up-)on (behalf of), over, (by, for) the space of, through(-out), (un-)to(-ward), with. In compounds it retains essentially the same import, at, upon, etc. (literally or figuratively).
Pronounce: ep-ee'
Origin: a primary preposition
him
autos (Greek #846)
the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative 1438) of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other persons
KJV usage: her, it(-self), one, the other, (mine) own, said, (self-), the) same, ((him-, my-, thy- )self, (your-)selves, she, that, their(-s), them(-selves), there(-at, - by, -in, -into, -of, -on, -with), they, (these) things, this (man), those, together, very, which. Compare 848.
Pronounce: ow-tos'
Origin: from the particle αὖ (perhaps akin to the base of 109 through the idea of a baffling wind) (backward)
,

Cross References

+

Ministry on This Verse

+
1-2:  Paul urges them to continue stedfast in the truth received;
3-8:  shows that there shall be a departure from the faith,
9-14:  and a discovery of Antichrist, before the day of the Lord come;
15-17:  and thereupon repeats his former exhortation, and prays for them.
we.
by the.
and by.
Gen. 49:10• 10The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be. (Gen. 49:10)
;
Matt. 24:31• 31And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. (Matt. 24:31)
;
Matt. 25:32• 32And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: (Matt. 25:32)
;
Mark 13:27• 27And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven. (Mark 13:27)
;
Eph. 1:10• 10That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him: (Eph. 1:10)
;
1 Thess. 3:13• 13To the end he may stablish your hearts unblameable in holiness before God, even our Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with all his saints. (1 Thess. 3:13)
;
1 Thess. 4:17• 17Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. (1 Thess. 4:17)
;
2 Tim. 4:1• 1I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; (2 Tim. 4:1)
 In answering this error and in guarding them from the wily efforts of seducers, he puts everything in its place here by appealing to precious truths of which he had already spoken. Their gathering together unto Christ in the air was a demonstration of the impossibility of the day of the Lord being already come. (2 Thessalonians 2 by J.N. Darby)
 Christ's coming and our gathering together unto Him are expressly bound together as closely associated events of the deepest moment to the saints. (On 2 Thessalonians 2:1 by W. Kelly)
 if the coming of the Lord be treated as the same as His day, what is the force of beseeching them touching the same matter as is denied to be then present? (On 2 Thessalonians 2:1 by W. Kelly)
 Can evidence then be asked more complete than what the context before and after furnishes that the apostle beseeches the saints for (or by) their inspiriting hope not to be upset in mind nor to be troubled about the day of the Lord as if come with its terrors? To beseech them touching that day, which he had himself painted in the most vivid colors, not to be uneasy as if it were now present, seems vapid and lame, as unlike the accustomed energy and precision of the apostle as can be conceived. (On 2 Thessalonians 2:1 by W. Kelly)
 How can any unbiased person fail to see that the coming in 2 Thess. 2:1 is self-evidently identical with the same terms in 1 Thess. 4? (On 2 Thessalonians 2:8 by W. Kelly)
 the saints were to be in the same position as Christ, to be gathered together unto Him, before He could manifest Himself in glory to those outside. (2 Thessalonians 2 by J.N. Darby)
 Their gathering together unto Christ before the manifestation was a truth known to the Thessalonians; it is not revealed here, it is used as an argument. (2 Thessalonians 2 by J.N. Darby)

J. N. Darby Translation

+
1
Now we beg you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to him,

W. Kelly Translation

+
1
aNow, we beseech you, brethren, for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together unto him,

WK Translation Notes

+
a
for [or, for the sake of]: With the strongest desire to avoid exaggeration and, yet more, falsely accusing any soul, one is bound for the truth's sake to record the conviction that grave mischief is here done in the Revised Version, by the introduction of "touching" into their text, and "in behalf of into their margin (2:1). It will be shown that neither suits the context. We are in no way limited to these reflexions of the Greek, especially where connected with words of entreaty. The Authorized Version, in the main point before us, is substantially better; yet the misrendering has been considered by not a few as a decided improvement: so thoroughly has the aim or argument of the apostle been for the most part misapprehended....
But the great question is, what is the real bearing, in this connection, of that joint object before the reader? and what in particular is the true force of the preposition employed by the Spirit of God? The Authorized Version says "by," the Revisers give "touching" in the text, and in the margin they add "Gr. in behalf of." The usage of ὐπὲρ if we come to facts even in the New Testament alone, is pretty wide; but the context as ever has immense and distinct and decisive control in helping us to determine the intended import. There is the difficulty that ἐρωτᾶν is only found here, whereas ἐρωτᾶν περί is of frequent occurrence and unquestioned meaning. Compare John 17 where it is found repeatedly, and can have but one force—to pray or make request for—in the sense of "touching" or "concerning." Is it critical, or reasonable, that ἐρωτᾶν ὐπέρ should mean the same? It appears to me beyond doubt that it is not. The Revisers themselves give us not only "in behalf of" but "for the sake of," or more briefly and far more commonly "for." Now, "in behalf of" renders no just sense in this context; but what of "for," i.e. "for the sake of?" "Now, we beseech you, brethren, for (or, for the sake of) the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together unto Him," etc.
Here we have a definite sense which fits in admirably with the connection.... How far the Authorized translators may have so regarded the context, it is difficult to say; but the transition from "for the sake of," or "for," to "by reason of" or "by" is easy, and in this case might perhaps be allowed to approximate. Even Bishop Ellicott, who adopted "touching" for want of duly appreciating the contextual bearing if not necessity, admits that an adjurative meaning is grammatically tenable; and certain it is that, from the Vulgate to Erasmus, Zwingle, Calvin, Piscator, Beza, Estius, etc., a crowd of others hold to this as the true scope. Meyer first assumes that it is strange to the New Testament, and then argues against the reasonableness of the apostle's choosing for the object of adjuration the very point he is going to instruct them on. But this is his own oversight. They are distinct and even contrasted objects.
I cannot but think therefore that, while the Authorized Version in substance gives the sense, the Revisers have missed it completely, and substituted a meaning which tends to obscure and falsify the passage. The adjurative force "by" with a verb of entreaty is known from the earliest extant remains of classical Greek; and none can deny that the force of a motive or a plea ("for the sake of or "for") abode to the last, and is nowhere more usual than in the Hellenistic Greek of the New Testament. So rendered, the phrase runs consistently, and the argument or ground of entreaty yields a meaning in perfect accordance with the verse that follows, and the entire paragraph. (Epist. to Thessalonians, p.101-104)
for [or, for the sake of]: Did not the Revisers, like others who have thus translated the clause, assume that the presence (or coming) of our Lord is identical with His day, and render ὐπέρ here "touching," either because they quite identified these events in their thoughts, or because they had no distinct notion of the context? (Epist. to Thessalonians, p.105-106)
for [or, for the sake of]: It may be remarked here that not only older scholars like Erasmus and Beza hold to "by" as the true sense in this connection, but Wahl, of recent years adds his high authority, as also Matthiae and Jelf allow the principle, and the late Greek Professor Scholefield, of Cambridge, though preferring "concerning" from not understanding the argument and context. (Epist. to Thessalonians, p.115)
for [or, for the sake of]: The authorized version appears to be substantially right in thus translating ὐπὲρ when we bear the context in mind. Such is the rendering of the Vulgate, as well as of Luther. Professor Scholefield also, though choosing the sense "concerning," because of his interpretation, admits the sense "by" to be "an unquestionable one." The fact cannot be disputed that "on account of," "for the sake of," are most common renderings: this sense of the word, connected with expressions of prayer and entreaty, is pretty nearly equivalent to our "by." None of the passages, such as Rom. 9:27; 2 Cor. 7:4; 9:3; Phil. 1:7, cited by Rosenmilller, Schleusner, Macknight, Whitby or Elliott, is apposite, because not one occurs after such a verb as ἐρωτάω. Let an instance be produced of ὐπὲρ, after a word of beseeching, where it can be rendered in any other way. In certain cases, it is used, as Phavorinus says, ὀμοίως τῷ περὶ, but not, I believe, in a connection parallel to the present, where it assimilates to προς, as Stephanus observes, and translates it "per: ut Greg. ὐπἐρ Χριστοῦ δέομαι, rogo to per Christum. Sic.Il. ω. Καί μιν ὐπὲρ πατρὸς καὶ μητέρος ἠῦκόμοιο Λίσσσεο, καὶ τέκεος." (Prospect 1:167, Bible Treasury N1:367)
for [or, for the sake of]: No doubt the preposition may, and does often, mean "in regard to," or "on behalf of," a little stronger than περί. But the question is the meaning of ὐπέρ, neither in itself, nor in other constructions, but with such words of entreaty as ἐρωτάω, as distinguished from ἐρωτάω περί, where the sense of "in the place of," or "instead of" is excluded, as here. To me it appears that the precise meaning of ἐρ. ὐπὲρ in such a case as the present, can only be "by reason of," or briefly "by," and, if motive be made more prominent, "for the sake of," or briefly "for." (Bible Treasury 11:187)
for [or, for the sake of]: ἐρωτᾶν περί, I submit to the Revisers or any competent biblical scholars, is "to beseech touching" (as in John 17); ἐ has the different sense of giving the motive or ground of the entreaty. (Bible Treasury 18:15)
for [or, for the sake of]: I take the opportunity of stating my conviction, which I have reason to know Mr. Birks shares, that the auth. ver. is quite justified in giving "by the coming (or presence) of our Lord Jesus Christ," rather than "with regard to." So it is in the Æthiopic probably, the Arabic, Gothic, Syriac, and Vulgate. Mr. Elliott, and the commentators he follows, have overlooked the most important elements for deciding the true meaning. It is not a question of ὐπέρ only, but of ὐπέρ with a verb of entreating, which yields regularly the sense "for the sake of" or "by." (Matthiae's Gr. Gram. vol. ii. § 582; Jelf, vol. ii. § 630.)
Bp. Ellicott avoids the error of Mr. Elliott, who doubts whether ὐπέρ ever bears what he calls the "adjurative sense;" but, while admitting that it is "grammatically tenable," he contends that it is by no means "exegetically probable," and that it is without precedent in the New Testament. But the latter is an unreasonable objection; because there is no other instance in the New Testament, that I know, of ἐρωτὰω, or an equivalent word, with this preposition (save 2 Cor. 5:20, which Wahl takes as = per, Mr. Green as "on behalf of," which is inapplicable here; but I wave this as doubtful); and therefore we must be regulated by its ordinary force in such constructions. (Lect. on Rev., p. 299-300)
for [or, for the sake of]: As some have questioned the exact force of the phrase, ἐρωτῶμεν δὲ ὐμᾶς, ἀδελφοὶ, ὐπὲρ τῆς π. κ. τ. λ., let me take this opportunity of remarking that it is an undoubted case of the genitive of relation after a verb of entreaty. This, with περὶ would point to that "in respect of" which one entreated; but with ὐπὲρ it is rather the motive "for," or "for the sake of," "by reason of" or simply "by," which the appeal was made. This is so true that we find it in so early a Greek author as Homer, λίσσομαι ὐπὲρ (Il. xv. 660; xxii. 338; xxiv. 467); and in the same sense without the preposition (Il. ix. 451; Od. ii. 68). Liddell and Scott say, even in their seventh edition, ὐπὲρ in Homer only joined with λ.; but even Homer joins it with γουνάζομαι. (Il. xv. 665.), another like verb, as they admit was done later. It is certain therefore that "by" as in the A.V. is no desperate shift but justified from the earliest writings in Greek letters. "In the interest of" might pass if it offered a reasonable meaning, but it seems barely intelligible. But to say that "the day of the Lord" was their hope is a pure blunder and untrue. The fact is that this sense is only a case of a far more general principle, as any student can see in Donaldson's Greek Grammar, § 453 (ee) (a). In the New Testament we have ἐρ. περὶ where a person or thing is in question, touching whom or for which one beseeches, as in John 17 passim; 1 John 5:16. It is natural to suppose, therefore, that the apostle would have used περὶ if he had meant no more here than the subject concerning or touching which he was entreating them. This however he is not doing, but more.
It does therefore seem not quite satisfactory to take ὐπὲρ here, with Bishop Ellicott, as involving some traces of the idea of benefit to, or furtherance of, the παρουσία. It was really the "day," not the presence, which had been misinterpreted or misused, as we see in verse 2; but, had it been otherwise, is it not vague, if intelligible, that the apostle wished to promote its commodum? “On behalf of” is right in 2 Cor. 5:20, but here surely inapplicable. Thus Bp. Chr. Wordsworth develops this idea, as if the apostle here pleaded on behalf of what had been misrepresented by others. But this is just the root error. He is here arguing the presence of Christ as our hope against the misrepresentation. The subject matter of which he had been treating in 2 Thess. 1 was the "day of the Lord"; and of this he again resumes in verse 2 and onward. His "presence" comes in as a distinct though connected point of consolation and joy, by or for the sake of which he besought them not to be troubled by the false alarm about the awful day. He is not conjuring them by that concerning which he was about to explain; nor is it a question of doing justice to a misrepresented subject, but of entreating them by their heavenly hope as a motive why they should not be agitated by the baseless rumor that the awful day of the Lord's judgment of the earth had arrived.
It seems then that the force of the context, and especially the modification rendered necessary by the verb of beseeching, have not been duly weighed by those who contend for "concerning," or "touching," a meaning which here leads to the confounding the ground of entreaty in verse 1 contrasted with the subject the apostle is discussing from verse 2 and onward, after having paved the way for it in chap. 1. Besides, is ὐπὲρ ever so used with a verb of entreaty save in this case? The special instance naturally calls for a rendering equally special. No scholar has treated the question with less exactness than the late Prof. B. Jowett; and the reason was no lack of ability or scholarship, but that he had no perception of the apostle's meaning. He was misled unconsciously by the confusion of that theology for which he had scant respect: this he too often avenged on scripture. The same defect pervades almost all others who had more respect for the written word than that learned man. (Bible Treasury N4:249, N10:232, Three Prophetic Gems (2nd art.) p.28-32.)
for [or, for the sake of]: "touching" or “in behalf of” the coming or presence of our Lord Jesus Christ seems to be founded on a misapprehension of the contextual requirement. Nobody doubts that either is a good rendering of the preposition itself. But the connected language may modify, as well as the subject-matter; and all this has to be weighed. Was it not assumed by the Revisers, as in Alford's Commentary, that the coming of our Lord was the theme which he was about to explain to the Thessalonians? "It is most unnatural," says the Dean in objection to the rendering of the Vulgate, Authorized Version and many ancient commentators, "that the apostle should thus conjure them by that, concerning which he was about to teach them." This however is exactly opposed to the fact; for he is beseeching them ὺπὲρ τῆς π. τ. κ. ἠ. Ἰ. Χ’κ. ἠ. ἐ. ἐ. ἀ. not to be quickly shaken by a false impression about the day of the Lord. This, not His presence, is the real subject in hand. They are so distinct, that the apostle entreats ὐπὲρ the one not to be troubled about a wrong view of the other. It is the confusion of the two which led to the wrong rendering, as it also forbids the right understanding of the argument and of the truth in the context. It is impossible to read attentively the chapter before and the following verses without perceiving that the apostle is treating of that day, as the Authorized translators rightly saw in verse 3. And therefore it is that in verse 8 we have, not of the Lord's coming merely, but "of the manifestation of his coming," which really for the sense coalesces with His day. The one is for the gathering to Him of His friends; the other, for the destruction of His foes. Hence it is most intelligible to beseech the brethren, for the sake or on account of that blessed hope, not to be soon agitated nor yet troubled by the error that the day of the Lord was there. He begs them by a motive of deepest comfort not to be upset by the delusion that the day was present. How could this be, as the Lord had not yet come and gathered His own to Himself on high? How could it be, seeing that the apostasy and the man of sin were not yet developed in all their matured and manifested lawlessness, as they must be for the Lord to execute His judgment on them when that day dawns? This may serve to convince serious readers that the actual misunderstanding was about the ἠμέρα or day, not the παρομσία or presence, as has been erroneously taken for granted. Accordingly too the rendering with a verb of entreaty as here, is properly "for the sake of," "by reason of," or, more tersely, "by," as in all the well-known English versions (Wiclif, Tyndale, Cranmer, Geneva, Rhemish, and Authorized Version). It is uncritical to confound ἐρωτᾷω περί with ἐρ. ὐπέρ, as the Revisers have done; when it was a question of beseeching for a person or asking about a thing, the former is the constant and correct phrase. We are therefore entitled to infer that ἐρ. ὐπέρ has its own distinctive force; and as “on behalf” or "instead of is excluded by the nature of the case, so the bearing of the context most naturally points to some such rendering as is in the Authorized Version, and beyond just doubt disproves "touching" in the Revised Version or any other rendering of like import. (Bible Treasury 14:15-16)
for [or, for the sake of]: (See also Lectures on Revelation, p. xxviii-xxix, Lect. on the Second Coming, p. 212, Bible Treasury N4:248, N12:15,63, Pamphlets p. 415)
^ our: In a comparatively minor detail that follows in the verse, the Revisers have shown better scholarship; for neither "by" nor any substitute for it has a right to stand in the last clause. The structure of the phrase not only requires no such insertion but absolutely precludes and condemns any supplement of the kind.... The older translation shows that those responsible for it paid no heed to this (the two items as closely associated events), the unequivocal import of the construction; for they have, on the contrary, interpolated a word which, however small, severs the objects, which the form of the original does and could not but intimate to be in the strictest union. The Revisers were therefore at liberty and indeed responsible as faithful translators to expunge the second "by." They thereby represent the coming of the Lord Jesus and our gathering together unto Him as two parts of the joint idea brought before us by the Holy Spirit. (Epist. to Thessalonians, p.102)
^ our: And these two wondrous events are so closely associated by one article in the Greek, that the second "by" in the A.V. is an impertinent and injurious intrusion. (Three Prophetic Gems (2nd article), p.58, Bible Treasury N4:270).
^ our: The word "by" has no business there at all. It is printed in italics to show you that it is not in the original, but there is even more than that: the original excludes the word, and, therefore, it was really a mistake on the part of our translators to introduce it. The particular form of phrase employed by the Holy Ghost brackets the two ideas, and makes them to be one connected whole. The coming of our Lord Jesus and our gathering are the two parts of one great transaction. Now, if you bring in the word "by," it separates them, instead of combining them together. It is remarkable that the translators, who were real scholars, should have overlooked the point; but any person to whom it is pointed out, who knows the Greek language, will see in an instant what I mean. It is one of the peculiarities of that language that one article is used when it is intended to bring in two things. If they mean to separate the two, they bring in a second article. There is no second article in this case. For instance, where it is said, "Our God and Father" there is one article used, because the same person that is God is also Father, and in order to combine the two the one article is used. (Bible Treasury N12:46)
^ our: The Revisers however have correctly expunged the "by" of the Authorized Version in the same clause; for the one article of course forms the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ into one closely connected object of thought with "our gathering together unto him," instead of dissociating them as the unwarranted insertion of "by" does. (Bible Treasury 14:16)
^ our: [See note on 2 Thess. 2:2]