An interesting exegetical article on 2 Thessalonians 1:9
Some English translations of 2 Thessalonians 1:9 support the notion that unbelievers will experience eternal conscious separation from God, while other translations support that notion that God will annihilate unbelievers. These two notions are dramatically different. Supporters of each position pick specific translations of this passage to support their own position and refute the opposition. For that reason, I have spent significant effort trying to understand what Paul truly intended when he wrote this passage.
To determine which set of translations are most accurate, we must examine the original Greek source. Here is a scanned image of II Thessalonians 1:9 from
Greek to English Interlinear New Testament, published by World Publishing
:
The ability to read Greek will not be necessary to understand my analysis, but I want to show the correspondence between the Greek and the English words in this passage.
The table below presents three translations of II Thessalonians 1:9. The first is the word-for-word Greek translation take directly from the above image, the second is the NASB translation and the third is the King James translation. The NASB translation is often quoted by those who support the notion of eternal conscious separation, while the King James translation appears to support the notion of annihilation. (Note that I’ve underlined the word ‘away’ in the NASB translation.)
To clarify the respective positions, I have written two paraphrases of this passage, one from the perspective of those who believe in eternal torment and one from those who believe in annihilation:
By comparing those paraphrases to the actual translations, I hope it becomes clear how each side has interpreted the passage to come to their respective positions.
Now, to determine the intended meaning of the passage, two key questions must be answered:
1. When Paul said that these men would suffer 'destruction', did he mean that they would
cease to exist, or did he mean that they would suffer
ongoing existence in a ruined state?
2. On the day described by Paul in this passage, will God act to
annihilate unbelievers and end their existence, or will he act to
separate unbelievers to some other place?
I will first address the question of
cessation of existence versus
ruin, and then address the question of
annihilation versus
separation.
Destruction or Ruin?
The word translated as ‘destruction’ in this verse is OLETHROS (or OLETHRON is an alternative spelling). The basic definition is ‘ruin, destruction’. Let’s initially consider the English meaning of those two words.
‘Ruin’ tends to imply a loss of function and therefore normally applies to objects that have some function. For example, we say that a cell phone was ruined by water. In that instance, the phone continues to exists, but it no longer functions as phone. Or, we might say a shirt was ruined by a stain. In that case, the shirt continues to exist, but it ceases to function as a shirt for us because we no longer want to wear it due to the stain. In both of these instances, the object continues to exist, but no longer functions as intended.
‘Destruction’, along with the verb form ‘destroy’, tends to imply the cessation of existence. For example, we might write that the records were destroyed in the fire, and the reader would understand that the records no longer exists. Or, we might write that a person's confidence was destroyed by an incident, and the reader would understand that his confidence no longer exists. On the other hand, sometimes the word ‘destroy’ in English can mean ruin - a loss of function with continued existence. We might write that the car was destroyed in the wreck. In that case, we would understand that the car continued to exist as a mass of twisted metal, but no longer functions as a car. Therefore, our English word ‘destruction’ could be used to mean either
loss of function or
cessation of existence.
In that way, the Greek word OLETHROS parallels very closely the way the word ‘destruction’ is used in English – it can be used to express either
loss of function or
cessation of existence. Given the multiple meanings of OLETHROS, we can’t know purely by definition whether Paul intended to express the
loss of function or the
cessation of existence.
Even so, we can gain additional clues by examining how Paul uses that word elsewhere in Scripture.
OLETHROS is used by Paul only four other times (Note: My bible software groups Hebrews with those books written by Paul. That seems unlikely, but I think it's fair to use Hebrews as an additional example of how words were used near the time of Paul). The table below lists those instances in the left column, with my conclusion as to its meaning in the right column:
By my count, OLETHROS is used twice to express
cessation of existence, once to express
ruin with ongoing existence, and once in a way that is unclear. This score of 2-1-1 lends credence to the suggestion that Paul intended to communicate that those who suffered the destruction in II Thessalonians would cease to exist, but it is not conclusive.
Unfortunately, the passages above are the only passages in the entire New Testament where OLETHROS is used, so we can't refer there for other instances. But we can continue our investigation by asking this question:
Does the Bible contain passages that demonstrate the presence of God as an annihilating force?
Biblical Precedence for Annihilation Coming from the Presence of the Lord
Even though we have limited data to examine the specific word (OLETHROS) that Paul used, we can see if there are other examples in the Bible regarding this concept of annihilation in the presence of God. If we do conduct that investigation, we see multiple instances where God's presence is undoubtedly presented as a force of annihilation. Here are some examples:
Many places in Scripture express the idea that the presence of God causes the cessation of human existence. Here are some passages that discuss the destruction that comes from the presence of God:
- Lev 10:1-2 Now Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, took their respective firepans, and after putting fire in them, placed incense on it and offered strange fire before the LORD, which He had not commanded them. And fire came out from the presence of the LORD and consumed them, and they died before the LORD.
- Exo 33:18-23 Then Moses said, "I pray You, show me Your glory!" And He said, "I Myself will make all My goodness pass before you, and will proclaim the name of the LORD before you; and I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show compassion on whom I will show compassion." But He said, "You cannot see My face, for no man can see Me and live!" Then the LORD said, "Behold, there is a place by Me, and you shall stand there on the rock; and it will come about, while My glory is passing by, that I will put you in the cleft of the rock and cover you with My hand until I have passed by. Then I will take My hand away and you shall see My back, but My face shall not be seen."
- Num 16:20-21 Then the LORD spoke to Moses and Aaron, saying, "Separate yourselves from among this congregation, that I may consume them instantly."
- Deu 9:3 "Know therefore today that it is the LORD your God who is crossing over before you as a consuming fire. He will destroy them and He will subdue them before you, so that you may drive them out and destroy them quickly, just as the LORD has spoken to you.
- Heb 10:26-27 For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a terrifying expectation of judgment and THE FURY OF A FIRE WHICH WILL CONSUME THE ADVERSARIES.
- Heb 12:28-29 Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear: For our God is a consuming fire.
There are many more. Those passages that reference fire are especially applicable to II Thessalonians 1:9 because we are told immediately preceding this verse that, “the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ”
Conversely, I know of no place in Scripture where the presence of God leaves a man alive, but in a
ruined state. Are we to believe that the God who is repeatedly described as a consuming fire will, at the final judgment, be transformed into a
ruining fire?
A clear precedent exists that the presence of God will totally consume unbelievers. The annihilationist's view of this passage is the view that is most consistent with other passages that describe what happens when the fire of God’s presence is directed toward men.
Separation
In my mind, the most significant difference among various translations is whether Paul intended express an action of
separation in this passage, or an action of
annihilation. In the NASB translation above, this notion of separation is indicated by the insertion of the word ‘away’ into their translation. What is the justification for this?
At the heart of the issue is the correct translation of the Greek word APO. APO is defined to mean ‘from, off from, away from’. In II Thessalonians 1:9, the NASB translators have translated the Greek word APO as ‘away from’. Given that ‘away from’ is one option included in the Greek to English dictionaries, it might appear that ‘away from’ is a valid translation in this instance. A deeper investigation reveals some problems with that conclusion.
APO is used in Greek almost exactly the way ‘from’ is used in English. There are many variations of what APO can mean, but it most often expresses either the idea of
source or the idea of
separation. You might say, ‘I received a letter from (APO) John’. In that use, APO is used to connect a letter to its
source, John. Alternatively, you might say, ‘Step away from (APO) the edge.’ In that use, (APO) is used to connect the verb (step away) to the object from which
separation is desired, the edge.
As an undergraduate at DePauw University, I took two semesters of Greek. That does not qualify me as an expert in Greek. However, it does give some skill in making use of Greek dictionaries and other resources. One of those resources is Dr. Carl Huffman, who was my professor for those two semesters of Greek. Dr. Huffman is a wonderful Greek scholar but is not a theologian, by his own admission. I asked him if this word APO should be translated as ‘from’ or ‘away from’ in this passage.
He did generally concur with the Greek-to-English dictionary in saying that APO should sometimes be translated as ‘away from’. Here is an example he gave:
EBOKETO MOUNOS APO ALLON
grazing alone away from the others
In this passage, a man comes upon a cow that is grazing alone, away from the other cows. The best translation of APO is ‘away from’. Why is that? Because the context demands it. The words immediately preceding APO are ‘grazing alone’ and the words immediately after are ‘the others’. That context makes it unambiguously clear that APO is intended to express
separation and therefore validates the translation of APO as ‘away from’. Because of situations like this, authors of a Greek to English dictionary would need to include the possibility of translating APO as ‘away from’.
However, nothing about the word APO expresses separation on its own. APO
can properly be used in situations where the context demands an understanding of separation, but the presence of APO does not
bring to a passage any connotation of separation – it is only a connector.
Consider this passage from Paul in Romans 1:7
- to all who are beloved of God in Rome, called as saints: Grace to you and peace from (APO) God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
It would be absurd to assert that Paul intended to mean, "Grace to you and peace
away from God..." Nothing in the immediate vicinity of APO implies any concept of separation, so we clearly understand that God is the
source of the grace and peace.
Let’s look at another example from Scripture that closely resembles II Thessalonians 1:9. The exact phrase ‘from the presence of the Lord’ that is found in II Thessalonians is also found in another book of the New Testament. In Acts 3:19, Peter says this:
- Therefore repent and return, so that your sins may be wiped away, in order that times of refreshing may come from (APO) the presence of the Lord;
If the translators of the NASB were to translate this verse in the same way they translated II Thessalonions, they would translate it this way:
- Therefore repent and return, so that your sins may be wiped away, in order that times of refreshing may come away from (APO) the presence of the Lord;
Of course they didn’t do that. Why? Because there is no context expressing the idea of separation in this passage. It would be poor translating to insert the word ‘away’ into Acts 3:19. It makes much more sense to say that the presence of the Lord is the
source of the refreshing.
I would like to demonstrate this even more clearly. Referring back to my undergraduate professor Dr. Huffman, he went on to say that the best way to understand what Paul meant is to look at other examples of his own writing. To properly translate passages, general examples from the language can be helpful, but specific examples from the same writer are the most conclusive.
I used software to find every instance in the NASB where Paul used the word APO.
You can see those verses here. I found 105 verses (Note: my software includes ‘Hebrews’ as one of Paul’s letters) Of those 105 instances, only 5 times did the resulting English sentence include the phrase ‘away from’. That is, in 100 times out of 105 possibilities, APO is translated simply as ‘from’. Clearly, the translators of the NASB believe that APO should
not be translated as ‘away from’ in the vast majority of situations.
to be continued...
