Bible Lexicons

Bullinger's Figures of Speech Used in the BibleBullinger's Figures of Speech

Ellipsis

El-lip´-sis. This is the Greek word ἔλλειψις, a leaving in, from ἐν (en) in, and λείπειν (leipein) to leave.

'The figure is so called, because some gap is left in the sentence, which means that a word or words are left out or omitted. The English name of the figure would therefore be Omission.

The figure is a peculiar form given to a passage when a word or words are omitted; words which are necessary for the grammar, but are not necessary for the sense.

The laws of geometry declare that there must be at least three straight lines to enclose a space. So the laws of syntax declare that there must be at least three words to make complete sense, or the simplest complete sentence. These three words are variously named by grammarians. In the sentence "Thy word is truth," "Thy word" is the subject spoken of, "truth" is what is said of it (the predicate), and the verb "is" (the copula) connects it.

But any of these three may be dispensed with; and this law of syntax may be legitimately broken by Ellipsis.

The omission arises not from want of thought, or lack of care, or from accident, but from design, in order that we may not stop to think of, or lay stress on, the word omitted, but may dwell on the other words which are thus emphasised by the omission. For instance, in Matthew 14:19, we read that the Lord Jesus "gave the loaves to His disciples, and the disciples to the multitude."

There is no sense in the latter sentence, which is incomplete, "the disciples to the multitude," because there is no verb. The verb "gave" is omitted by the figure of Ellipsis for some purpose. If we read the last sentence as it stands, it reads as though Jesus gave the disciples to the multitude!

This at once serves to arrest our attention; it causes us to note the figure employed; we observe the emphasis; we learn the intended lesson. What is it? Why, this; we are asked to dwell on the fact that the disciples gave the bread, but only instrumentally, not really. The Lord Jesus Himself was the alone Giver of that bread. Our thoughts are thus, at once, centred on Him and not on the disciples.

These Ellipses are variously dealt with in the English Versions (both Authorized and Revised). In many cases they are correctly supplied by italics. In some cases the sentences are very erroneously completed. Sometimes an Ellipsis in the Text is not seen, and therefore is not taken into account in the Translation. Sometimes an Ellipsis is imagined and supplied where none really exists in the original.

Where an Ellipsis is wrongly supplied, or not supplied at all, the words of the Text have to be very freely translated in order to make sense, and their literal meaning is sometimes widely departed from.

But on the other hand, where we correctly supply the Ellipsis-one word, it may be-it at once enables us to take all the other words of the passage in their literal signification. This is in itself an enormous gain, to say nothing of the wonderful light that may be thus thrown upon the Scripture.

These Ellipses must not be arbitrarily supplied according to our own individual views; we are not at liberty to insert any words, according to our own fancies: but they are all scientifically arranged and classified, and each must therefore be filled up, according to definite principles which are well ascertained, and in obedience to laws which are carefully laid down.

Ellipsis is of three kinds:-

Absolute Ellipsis,

Relative Ellipsis, and the

Ellipsis of Repetition:-

A. Absolute, where the omitted word or words are to be supplied from the nature of the subject alone.

B. Relative, where the omitted word or words are to be supplied from, and are suggested by the context.

C. The Ellipsis of Repetition, where the omitted word or words are to be supplied by repeating them from a clause which precedes or follows.

These three great divisions may be further set forth as follows:-

A. Absolute Ellipsis, where the omitted word or words are to be supplied from the nature of the subject.

I. Nouns and Pronouns.

1. The Nominative.

2. The Accusative.

3. Pronouns.

4. Other connected words.

II. Verbs and Participles:-

1. When the verb finite is wanting:

a. especially the verb to say.

2. When the verb infinitive is wanting:

a. after לכֹיָ to be able.

b. after the verb to finish.

c. after another verb, personal or impersonal.

3. When the verb substantive is wanting.

4. When the participle is wanting.

III. Certain connected words in the same member of a passage.

IV. A whole clause in a connected passage:-

1. The first clause.

2. The latter clause or Apodosis (Anantapodoton).

3. A comparison.

B. Relative Ellipsis-

I. Where the omitted word is to be supplied from a cognate word in the context.

1. The noun from the verb.

2. The verb from the noun.

II. Where the omitted word is to be supplied from a contrary word.

III. Where the omitted word is to be supplied from analogous or related words.

IV. Where the omitted word is contained in another word: the one word comprising the two significations-(Concisa Locutio, Syntheton or Compositio, Constructio PrAEgnans).

C. Ellipsis of Repetition-

I. Simple: where the Ellipsis is to be supplied from a preceding or a succeeding clause.

1. From a preceding clause.

a. Nouns and Pronouns.

b. Verbs.

c. Particles.

i) Negatives.

ii) Interrogatives.

d. Sentences.

2. From a succeeding clause.

II. Complex: where the two clauses are mutually involved, and the Ellipsis in the former clause is to be supplied from the latter, and at the same time an Ellipsis in the latter clause is to be supplied from the former. (Called also Semiduplex Oratio).

1. Single words.

2. Sentences.

A. Absolute Ellipsis:

That is, the omission of words or terms which must be supplied only from the nature of the subject. The omitted word may be a noun, adjective, pronoun, verb, participle, adverb, preposition.

I. The Omission of Nouns and Pronouns

1. The Omission of the Nominative

Genesis 14:19-20.-Melchizedek said to Abram, "Blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thine hand. And he [i.e., Abram] gave him tithes of all."

From the context, as well as from Hebrews 7:4, it is clear that it was Abram who gave the tithes to Melchizedek, and not Melchizedek to Abram.

Genesis 39:6.-"And he left all that he had in Joseph’s hand; and he knew not ought he had, save the bread Which he did eat. And Joseph was a goodly person, and well-favoured."

Here it is not at all clear which it was of the two who "knew not ought he had." If we understand Potiphar, it is difficult to see how he only knew the bread he ate: or if Joseph, it is difficult to understand how he knew not ought he had.

If the Ellipsis, however, is rightly supplied, it makes it all clear.

The verse may be rendered, and the Ellipsis supplied as follows:- "And he [Potiphar] left all that he had in Joseph’s hand: and he [Potiphar] knew not anything save the bread which he was eating. And Joseph was beautiful of figure, and beautiful of appearance."

All difficulty is removed when we remember that "the Egyptians might not eat bread with the Hebrews, for that is an abomination unto the Egyptians" (43:32). Everything, therefore, was committed by Potiphar to Joseph’s care, except that which pertained to the matter of food.

2 Samuel 3:7.-"And Saul had a concubine, whose name was Rizpah, the daughter of Aiah, and … said to Abner, Wherefore, etc."

Here it is clear from the Sense of the next verse and 2 Samuel 21:8 that "Ishbosheth" is the word to be supplied, as is done in italics.

2 Samuel 23:20.-"He slew two lionlike men of Moab."

The Massorah points out* [Note: Ginsburg’s Edition, Vol. i., p. 106.] that the word Ariel occurs three times, in this passage and Isaiah 29:1. In Isa. the word is twice transliterated as a proper name, while in 2 Samuel 23:20, margin, it is translated lions of God: the first part of the word אֲרִי (aree) a lion, and the second part אֵל (çl) God. But if we keep it uniformly and consistently as a proper name we have with the Ellipsis of the accusative (sons) the following sense: "He slew the two sons of Ariel of Moab."

2 Samuel 24:1.-"And again the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah."

Here the nominative to the verb "moved" is wanting. Someone moved, and who that was we learn from 1 Chronicles 21:1, from which it is clear that the word Satan or the Adversary is to be supplied, as is done in the margin:-"And again the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel, and [the Adversary] moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah."

1 Chronicles 6:28 (12).-"And the sons of Samuel; the firstborn Vashni (marg. [Note: arg. Margin.] , called also Joel, ver. 33 and 1 Samuel 8:2) and Abiah."

Here there is an Ellipsis of the name of the firstborn: while the word וַשְׁנִי, Vashni, when otherwise pointed (וְשֵׁנִי) means "and the second"! so that the verse reads,

"And the sons of Samuel; the firstborn [Joel] and the second Abiah." This agrees with the Syriac Version. The R.V. [Note: The Revised Version, 1881.] correctly supplies the Ellipsis, and translates vashni "and the second."

"Joel" is supplied from ver. 33 (see also 1 Samuel 8:2, and the note in Ginsburg’s edition of the Hebrew Bible).

Psalms 34:17.-"[They] cry, and the Lord heareth, and delivereth them out of all their troubles."

The immediate subject in ver. 16 is evildoers. But it is not these who cry. It is the righteous. Hence the A.V. [Note: The Authorized Version, or current Text of our English Bible, 1611.] and the R.V. [Note: The Revised Version, 1881.] supply the words "the righteous" in italics. The nominative is omitted, in order that our attention may be fixed not on their persons or their characters, but upon their cry, and the Lord’s gracious answer.

The same design is seen in all similar cases.

Psalms 105:40.-"[They] asked, and he brought quails," i.e., the People asked. The nominative is supplied in the A.V. [Note: The Authorized Version, or current Text of our English Bible, 1611.] But the R.V. [Note: The Revised Version, 1881.] translates it literally "They asked."

Proverbs 22:27.-"If thou hast nothing to pay, why should one [i.e., the creditor] take away thy bed from under thee?"

Isaiah 26:1.-"In that day shall this song be sung in the land of Judah; we have a strong city; salvation will one [i.e. God] appoint for walls and bulwarks."

The A.V. [Note: The Authorized Version, or current Text of our English Bible, 1611.] interprets by supplying the nominative. The R.V. [Note: The Revised Version, 1881.] translates it literally.

Jeremiah 51:19.-"He is the former of all things, and Israel is the rod of his inheritance."

Here both the A.V. [Note: The Authorized Version, or current Text of our English Bible, 1611.] and R.V. [Note: The Revised Version, 1881.] supply the Ellipsis from 10:16. Had it been supplied from the immediate context, it would have come under the head of Relative Ellipsis, or that of Repetition.

Ezekiel 46:12.-"Now when the Prince shall prepare a voluntary offering or peace offerings voluntarily unto the Lord, one shall then open him the gate that looketh toward the East, &c.," i.e., הַשּׁעֵר the gate-keeper (supplied from the noun הַשַּׁעַר, the gate), which follows, shall open the gate.

Zechariah 7:2.-"When they (Heb. he) had sent unto the house of God, Sherezer and Regem-melech and their men, to pray before the Lord" [i.e., when the people who had returned to Judea had sent].

Matthew 16:22.-"Be it far from Thee, Lord."

Here the Ellipsis in the Greek is destroyed by the translation. The Greek reads, "Ἵλεώς σοι, κύριε" (hileôs soi, kyrie), which is untranslatable literally, unless we supply the Ellipsis of the Nominative, thus: "[God be] merciful to Thee, Lord!" Thus it is in the Septuagint 1 Chronicles 11:19, where it is rendered "God forbid that I should do this thing," but it ought to be, "[God] be merciful to me [to keep me from doing] this thing."

Acts 13:29.-"And when they had fulfilled all that was written, of him, they took him down from the tree, and laid him in a sepulchre," i.e., Joseph of ArimathAEa and Nicodemus took him down. But it is the act which we are to think of here rather than the persons who did it. Hence the Ellipsis.

1 Corinthians 15:25.-"For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet," i.e., "he [the Son] must reign, until he [the Son] shall have put all things under his [the Son’s] feet." Here the subjection refers to the period of Christ’s personal reign.

This is one of the seven New Testament references to Psalms 110:1, "Jehovah said unto Adon-Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool." The English word "make" occurs 1,111 times in the Old Testament, as the rendering of 49 Hebrew words. The one so rendered here is שִׁית (Sheeth) and means to put, place, set, or appoint, and is rendered make only 19 times out of 94. Its proper meaning is put or appoint. (See Genesis 3:15; Genesis 4:25; Genesis 30:40. Psalms 140:5. Isaiah 26:1, &c.)

The word in the N. T. is τίθημι (titheemi), and has the same meaning. It is rendered make only 10 times out of 91, but in these cases it means to set or appoint (Acts 20:28. Romans 4:17, &c.). In every case the verb is in the second aorist subjunctive, and should be rendered "shall have put."

Six of the seven references (Matthew 22:44. Mark 12:36. Luke 20:42. Acts 2:34. Hebrews 1:13; Hebrews 10:13) refer to Christ’s session on the Father’s throne (not to His reign upon His own, Revelation 3:21). And this session will continue until such time as the Father shall have placed Christ’s enemies as a footstool for His feet. When that shall have been done, He will rise up from His seat and come forth into the air for His people, to receive them to Himself, and take them up to meet Him in the air so to be ever with the Lord. Then He will come unto the earth with them, and sit upon the throne of His glory, and reign until He shall have put all enemies under His feet. The other six passages refer to Christ’s session. This one refers to His reign upon His own throne (not to His session on His Father’s throne, Revelation 3:21). And this reign will continue until He (Christ) hath put all His enemies under His feet.

Note, that in the six passages His enemies are placed "as a footstool for His feet," and there is not a word about their being under His feet. In the one passage (1 Corinthians 15:25) there is not a word about being placed "as a footstool," but the word "under" His feet is used. We must distinguish between placing and making, and Christ’s session and His reign. Then all these passages teach the Pre-Millennial and Pre-Tribulation coming of Christ for His people before His coming with them.* [Note: See Things to Come for October, 1898.]

1 Corinthians 15:53.-"For this corruptible [body] must put on incorruption, and this mortal [body] must put on immortality."

The noun "body" must also be supplied in the next verse.

Ephesians 1:8.-"Wherein he hath abounded towards us in all wisdom and prudence."

It is not "wherein," but ἧς (hees) which, i.e., "[the knowledge] or grace, which he hath made to abound in us in all wisdom and prudence."

Titus 1:15.-"Unto the pure all things are pure."

The noun "meats" (i.e., foods) must be supplied as in 1 Corinthians 6:12. "All [meats] indeed are clean to the clean." The word "clean" being used in its ceremonial or Levitical sense, for none can be otherwise either "pure" or "clean."

Hebrews 11:1.-"Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service." Here the word covenant is properly supplied in italics.

2 Peter 3:1.-"This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance," i.e., "In both which [epistles] I stir up," etc.

1 John 5:16.-"If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life, etc.," i.e., "[God] shall give him life." See also Matthew 5:11; Matthew 5:15; Luke 6:38, where men must be the word supplied.

2. The Omission of the Object or Accusative, etc., after the verb

2 Samuel 6:6.-"And when they came to Nachon’s threshing-floor, Uzzah put forth his hand to the ark of God."

Here the omission is supplied. The Ellipsis is used, and the accusative is omitted, in order to call our attention to the act, rather than to the manner of it.

1 Chronicles 16:7.-"Then on that day, David delivered first this psalm to thank the Lord, etc."

The Ellipsis might also be supplied thus: "David delivered first [the following words] to thank the Lord, etc."

Job 24:6.-"They reap everyone his corn in the field."

This hardly makes sense with the context, which describes the wicked doings of those who know not God.

The question is whether the word בְּלִילוֹ (beleelô) translated "his corn" is to be taken as one word, or whether it is to be read as two words בְּלִי לוֹ (belee lô) which mean not their own. In this case there is the Ellipsis of the accusative, which must be supplied. The whole verse will then read,

"They reap [their corn] in a field not their own:

They glean the vintage of the wicked,"

which carries on the thought of the passage without a break in the argument.

If we read it as one word, then we must supply the Ellipsis differently:-"They reap their corn in a field [not their own]," so that it comes, in sense, to the same thing.

Psalms 21:12 (13).-"When thou shalt make ready thine arrows upon thy strings."

Psalms 44:10 (11).-"They which hate us spoil for themselves."

The word spoil is שָׁסָה (shahsah), and means to plunder. And it is clear that the accusative, which is omitted, should be supplied:-"They which hate us plunder [our goods] for themselves." The emphasis being, of course, on the act and the motive in the verb "plunder," and "for themselves," rather than on the goods which they plunder.

In verse 12 (13), both the A.V. [Note: The Authorized Version, or current Text of our English Bible, 1611.] and R.V. [Note: The Revised Version, 1881.] have supplied the accusative, "thy wealth."

Psalms 57:2 (3).-"I will cry unto God most high; unto God that performeth all things for me." Here the object is supplied in the words "all things." Other translators suggest "His mercy," "His promises," "my desires." Luther has "my sorrow," the Hebrew being גָּמַר (gamar), to bring to an end, complete, etc. The Ellipsis is left for emphasis. Nothing is particularised, so that we may supply everything. The mention of any one thing necessarily excludes others.

In Psalms 138:8 we have the same verb (though with a different construction) and the same Ellipsis: but the former is translated "the Lord will perfect," and the latter is supplied "that which concerneth me": i.e., will consummate all consummations for me.

Psalms 94:10.-"He that chastiseth the heathen, shall not he correct [you among the heathen]?" This is evidently the completion of the sense. The A.V. [Note: The Authorized Version, or current Text of our English Bible, 1611.] fills up the Ellipsis in the next sentence. This is of a different character, and comes under another division: "He that teacheth man knowledge, shall not he know?"

Psalms 137:5.-"If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning."

Here both versions thus supply the accusative. But surely more is implied in the Ellipsis than mere skill of workmanship. Surely it means, "If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget me." Let it forget to work for me, to feed me and to defend me, if I forget to pray for thee and to defend thee.

Proverbs 24:24.-"He that saith unto the wicked, Thou art righteous; him shall the people curse, nations shall abhor him;" i.e., "He that saith to the wicked [king]." This is clear from the context.

Verses 21-25 read literally. "Fear the Lord, O my son, and the king. With men that make a difference (שָׁנָה, shanah see Esther 1:7; Esther 3:8), between a king and an ordinary man thou shalt not mingle thyself. For their calamity (whose? evidently that of two persons, viz., that of the king and also of the common man) shall rise suddenly; and who knoweth the ruin of them both? These matters also belong to the wise." To make no difference between man and man belongs to everyone alike, see Deuteronomy 1:17; but to make no difference between a man and a king is a matter that pertains only to the wise. "It is not good to have respect of persons in judgment. He that saith to the wicked [king, as well as common man], Thou art righteous; him shall the people curse, nations shall abhor him; but to them that rebuke him (i.e., the wicked king) shall be delight, and a good blessing shall come upon them."

Here there is accuracy of translation and consistency of interpretation. There is only one subject in verses 21-25.* [Note: Each "proverb" or paragraph in the book of Proverbs is occupied with only one subject, even if it consists of several verses. This may sometimes throw light on a passage, e.g., , where verses 4 and 5 follow up the subject of verse 3, not changing the subject but enforcing it; i.e., "For the horse a whip, for the ass a bridle, and for the fool’s back a rod." In other words you cannot reason with a horse or an ass, neither can you reason with a fool. Then follow two very finely stated facts, not commands. If you answer him according to his folly, he will think you are a fool like himself, and if you answer him not according to his folly, he will think that he is wise like yourself! So that we have a kind of hypothetical command:

Do this, and you will see that;

Do that, and you will see, &c.] Here it is the command not to flatter a wicked king; and this explains the word "both" in verse 22, and the reference to "people" and "nations" in verse 24. Unless the Ellipsis is thus supplied, the meaning is not clear.

That which is a true admonition as to kingcraft, is also a solemn warning as to priestcraft. The "wise" makes no difference between a so-called priest and another man; for he knows that all the people of God are made "priests unto God" (Revelation 1:6), and "an holy priest-hood" (1 Peter 2:5). Those who make a difference do so to their own loss, and to the dishonour of Christ.

Isaiah 53:12.-"Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong"; i.e., "Therefore will I [Jehovah] divide (or apportion) to him a great multitude [for booty], and the strong ones will he (i.e., Messiah) divide as spoil."

The structure shows that 53:12 corresponds with, and is to be explained by 52:15. The passage is concerning:-

Jehovah’s Servant-the Sin Offering.

A 52:13. His Presentation.

B 14. His Affliction.

C 15. His Reward.

A 53:1-3. His Reception.

B 4-10. His Affliction.

C 10-12. His Reward.

The word נָזָה (nazah) in 52:15, means to leap, leap out: of liquids, to spurt out as blood: of people, to leap up from joy or astonishment. So the astonishment of verse 15 answers to that of verse 14. Moreover the verb is in the Hiphil, and means to cause astonishment.* [Note: See Things to Come, August, 1898.]

Jeremiah 16:7.-"Neither shall men tear themselves for them in mourning." The word tear is פָּרַס (paras) to break, cleave, divide. So that the Ellipsis will be, "Neither shall men break [bread] for them in mourning" (as Ezekiel 24:17, Hosea 9:4, etc., and A.V. [Note: The Authorized Version, or current Text of our English Bible, 1611.] marg. [Note: arg. Margin.] and R.V. [Note: The Revised Version, 1881.] ).

See under Idiom.

Jeremiah 8:4.-"Thus saith the Lord, Shall they fall, and not arise? Shall he turn away and not return?"

This is unintelligible, and the R.V. [Note: The Revised Version, 1881.] is no clearer:-"Shall one turn away and not turn again?"

The fact is that the Massorah* [Note: See note on this passage in Ginsburg’s Edition of the Hebrew Bible.] calls attention to this passage as one of several examples where two connected words are wrongly divided. Here, the first letter of the second of these two words should be the last letter of the preceding word. Then the sense comes out most beautifully:

"Shall they return [to the Lord]

And He not return [to them]?"

Agreeing with Malachi 3:7, and with the context; and bringing out the parallel between the two lines as well as exhibiting more clearly the figure of Polyptoton (q.v. [Note: Which see.] )

Matthew 11:18.-"John came neither eating nor drinking."

Clearly there must be an Ellipsis here; for John, being human, could not live without food. The sense is clear in the Hebrew idiom, which requires the Ellipsis to be thus supplied in the English:-

"John came neither eating [with others] nor drinking [strong drink]." See Luke 1:15. Or, observing the force of the Greek negative: "John came [declining invitations] to eat and drink."

Luke 9:52.-"And sent messengers before his face; and they went, and entered into a village of the Samaritans, to make ready … for him," i.e., to prepare reception for him.

John 15:6.-"If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them and cast them into the fire, and they are burned."

Here the accusative "them" is not repeated.

But the meaning of the verse is obscured, or rather a new meaning is read into it by inconsistency of rendering. Why, we ask, are the words ἐὰν μή (ean mee) translated "except" twice in verse 4, and here in verse 6 "if … not"? It is an expression that occurs fifty-two times, and more than thirty of these are rendered "except."† [Note: See ; ; ; . ; . ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (twice); 20:25. ; ; . . ; ; . . . ; . εἰ μή (ei mee), if not, is also rendered "except" ; . . . ; . .] Here it should be rendered "Except anyone abide in me." In the preceding verses the Lord had been speaking of His disciples "you" and "ye." Here in verse 6 He makes a general proposition concerning anyone. Not, if anyone who is already in Him does not continue in Him, for He is not speaking of a real branch; but except anyone is abiding in Him he is cast forth "AS a branch."

Likewise, in verse 2, the verb is αἴρω (airô) to lift up, * [Note: As in . . . .] raise up. "Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he lifteth up," i.e., He raises it from the ground where it can bear no fruit, and tends it, that it may bring forth fruit, "and every branch that beareth fruit, he pruneth it, that it may bring forth more fruit."

Thus there are two conditions spoken of-two kinds of branches: one that bears no fruit, and one that does. The former He raises up that it may bear fruit, and the latter He prunes that it may bear more.

Acts 9:34.-"Arise, and make thy bed."

Here both versions translate the figure. The Greek reads, "Arise, and spread for thyself," i.e., spread [a bed] for thyself: in other words, "make thy bed."

Acts 10:10.-"But while they made ready, he fell into a trance," i.e., while they made ready [the food].

Romans 15:28.-"When therefore I have performed this, and have sealed to them this fruit, I will come by you into Spain": i.e., "When, therefore, I have performed this business."

1 Corinthians 3:1.-"And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual [men], but as unto carnal [men]." (See under 1 Corinthians 2:2).

1 Corinthians 7:17.-"But as God hath distributed to every man."

This is literally:-"Only as God hath apportioned [the gift] to each."

1 Corinthians 10:24.-"Let no man seek his own [advantage only], but every man that of his neighbour [also]."

"Wealth," in the A.V. [Note: The Authorized Version, or current Text of our English Bible, 1611.] is the old English word for well-being generally. As we pray in the Litany, "In all time of our wealth"; and in the expression, "Commonwealth," i.e., common weal. Compare verse 33, where the word "profit" is used. The R.V. [Note: The Revised Version, 1881.] supplies "good."

2 Corinthians 5:16.-"Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh (κατὰ σάρκα, kata sarka, according to flesh, i.e., according to natural standing): yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now, henceforth know we him [thus] no more."

Our standing is now a spiritual one, "in Christ" risen from the dead; a standing on resurrection ground, as the members of the Mystical or Spiritual Body of Christ.

2 Corinthians 5:20.-"Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ’s stead, be ye reconciled to God."

Here the word "you" is incorrectly supplied. Paul was not beseeching the saints in Corinth to be reconciled to God. They were reconciled as verse 18 declares, "Who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ." Then in verse 19 he goes on to speak of "men"; and in verse 20 he says that he beseeches them, as though God did beseech them by us; we pray them in Christ’s stead, and say:-"Be ye reconciled to God." This was the tenor of his Gospel to the unconverted.

2 Corinthians 11:20.-"If a man take [your goods]."

Philippians 3:13.-"Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended [the prize (from verse 14)]."

1 Thessalonians 3:1.-"When we could no longer forbear." Here στέγω (stegô) means to hold out, to bear, to endure, and must have the accusative supplied:-"Wherefore, when we could no longer bear [our anxiety], etc." The same Ellipsis occurs in verse 5, where it must be similarly supplied.

2 Thessalonians 2:6-7.-"And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way."

Here, there is an Ellipsis. But the A.V. [Note: The Authorized Version, or current Text of our English Bible, 1611.] treats it as though it were the verb that is omitted, and repeats the verb "will let." The R.V. [Note: The Revised Version, 1881.] avoids this, by translating it thus:-"only there is one that restraineth now, until, etc."

Both the A.V. [Note: The Authorized Version, or current Text of our English Bible, 1611.] and R.V. [Note: The Revised Version, 1881.] fail to see that it is the Ellipsis of the accusative after the verb in both verses. The verb is κατέχω (katechô), which is rendered "withhold" in verse 6 and "let" in verse 7 (and in R.V. [Note: The Revised Version, 1881.] "restrain" in both verses). But this verb, being transitive, must have an object or accusative case after it; and, as it is omitted by Ellipsis, it has therefore to be supplied.

The verb κατέχω (katechô) means to have and hold fast. The preposition κατά (kata), in composition, does not necessarily preserve its meaning of down, to hold down; but it may be intensive, and mean to hold firmly, to hold fast, to hold in secure possession. This is proved by its usage; which clearly shows that restraining or withholding is no necessary part of its meaning. It occurs nineteen times, and is nowhere else so rendered. On the other hand there are four or five other words which might have been better used had "restrain" been the thought in this passage.

Indeed its true meaning is fixed by its use in these epistles. In 1 Thessalonians 5:21 we read "hold fast that which is good," not restrain it or "withhold" that which is good! But the idea is of keeping and retaining and holding on fast to that which is proved to be good. So it is in all the passages where the word occurs:-

Matthew 21:38. Let us seize on his inheritance.

Luke 4:42. And stayed him, that he should not depart.

Luke 8:15. Having heard the word, keep it.

Luke 14:9. Thou begin with shame to take the lowest room.

John 5:4. Of whatsoever disease he had (i.e., was held).

Acts 27:40. And made toward shore (i.e., they held their course, or kept going for the shore).

Romans 1:18. Who hold the truth in unrighteousness.

Romans 7:6. Being dead to that wherein we were held (margin and R.V. [Note: The Revised Version, 1881.] ).

1 Corinthians 7:30. As though they possessed not.

1 Corinthians 11:2. And keep the ordinances.

1 Corinthians 15:2. If ye keep in memory what I preached.

2 Corinthians 6:10. And yet possessing all things.

1 Thessalonians 5:21. Hold fast that which is good.

Philemon 1:13. Whom I would have retained with me.

Hebrews 3:6. If we hold fast the confidence.

Hebrews 3:14. If we hold the beginning

Hebrews 10:23. Let us hold fast the profession.

This fixes for us the meaning of the verb κατέχω. But what is it that thus holds fast "the man of sin"? and who is it that holds fast something which is not mentioned, and which has therefore to be supplied? For, in verse 6, that which holds fast is neuter, τὸ κατέχον (to katechon), while in verse 7 it is masculine ὁ κατέχων (ho katechôn):so that in verse 6 it is something (neuter) which holds the man of sin fast, while in verse 7 some one is holding fast to something.

We submit that in verse 6, that something is τὸ φρέαρ (to phrear) the pit (Revelation 9:1-2; Revelation 11:7) out of which he ascends, and in which he is now kept in sure possession until the season arrive when he is to be openly revealed: meanwhile, his secret counsels and plans are already working, preparing the way for his revelation.

The whole subject of the context is the revelation of two person-ages (not of one), viz., "the man of sin" (verse 3) and "the lawless one" (verse 8). These correspond with the two beasts of Revelation 13:1-18

This is clear from the structure of the first twelve verses of this chapter:-* [Note: See The Structure of the Two Epistles to the Thessalonians by the same author and publisher.]

A 1-3-. Exhortation not to be believing what the apostle did not say.

B -3, 4. Reason. "For, etc."

A 5, 6. Exhortation to believe what the apostle did say.

B 7-12. Reason. "For, etc."

Or more fully, thus:-

A 1-3-. Exhortation (negative).

B a -3-. The Apostasy (open).

b -3. The Revelation of the "Man of Sin." (The Beast from the Sea, Revelation 13:1-10).

A 5-6. Exhortation (positive).

B a 7. Lawlessness (secret working).

b 8. The Revelation of the Lawless one. (The Beast from the Earth, Revelation 13:11-18).

Thus the open working Of the apostasy and the secret working of the counsels of the Lawless one are set in contrast. We must note that the word "mystery" means a secret, a secret plan or purpose, secret counsel.* [Note: See The Mystery, by the same author and publisher.]

Thus we have here two subjects: (1) "The Man of Sin" (the beast from the sea, Revelation 13:1-10), and the open apostasy which precedes and marks his revelation; (2) "The Lawless one" (the beast from the earth, Revelation 13:11-18), and the working of his secret counsels which precedes his revelation, and the ejection of the Devil from the heavens which brings it about.

An attempt has been made to translate the words, ἐκ μέσου γένηται (ek mesou geneetai) be taken out of the way, as meaning, "arise out of the midst." But this translates an idiomatic expression literally; which cannot be done without introducing error. ἐκ μέσου γένηται is an idiom,† [Note: See below under the figure Idioma.] for being gone away, or being absent or away.

This is clear from the other places where the idiomatic expression occurs.‡ [Note: in , the wicked are severed from among the just" (i.e., taken away). In , "Paul departed from among them" (i.e., went away). In 23:10, he was taken "by force from among them" (i.e., taken out of the way). is very clear, where he complains that they had not mourned that "he that hath done this thing might be taken away from among you." In , we are commanded, "Wherefore come out from among them and be ye separate." In we read of the handwriting of ordinances which was against us; Christ "took it out of the way." We have the same in the Septuagint in : "Depart ye.… go ye out of the midst of her," and : "the righteous is taken away from the evil to come."

The same usage is seen in Classical writers-Plutarch (Timol. p. 288, 3): "He determined to live by himself, having got himself out of the way," i.e., from the public; Herodotus (3, 83; and 8, 22): The speaker exhorts some to "be on our side; but, if this is impossible, then sit down out of the way," i.e., leave the coast clear as we should say, keep neutral and stand aside. The same idiom is seen in Latin-Terence (Phorm. v. 8, 30): "She is dead, she is gone from among us" (e medio abiit). The opposite expression shows the same thing. In Xenophon (Cyr. 5, 2, 26), one asks, "What stands in the way of your joining us?" (ἐν μέσῳ εἶναι).]

Thus the lawless one is, at present, being held fast in the pit (while his secret counsels are at work); and the Devil is holding On to his position in the heavenlies (Ephesians 2:2; Ephesians 6:12). But presently there will be "war in Heaven" (Revelation 12:1-17), and Satan will be cast out into the earth. Then in Revelation 13:1, we read, "and he (Satan) stood upon the sand of the sea" (R.V. [Note: The Revised Version, 1881.] ) Then it is that he will call up this lawless one, whom John immediately sees rising up out of the sea to run his brief career, and be destroyed by the glory of the Lord’s appearing.

The complete rendering therefore of these two verses (1 Thessalonians 2:6-7), will be as follows:-"And now ye know what holds him [the lawless one] fast, to the end that he may be revealed in his own appointed season. For the secret counsel of lawlessness doth already work; only, there is one [Satan] who at present holds fast [to his possessions in the heavenlies], until he be cast out [into the earth, Revelation 12:9-12; and "stand upon the sand of the sea," Revelation 13:1, R.V. [Note: The Revised Version, 1881.] ], and then shall be revealed that lawless one whom the Lord Jesus shall slay with the spirit of his mouth, and destroy with the brightness of his coming" (Isaiah 11:4).

James 5:3.-"Ye have heaped treasure together for the, last days." The R.V. [Note: The Revised Version, 1881.] is tame in comparison with this, "Ye have laid up your treasure in the last days." θησαυρίζω (theesaurizo) means simply to treasure up. In Romans 2:5, we have the expression "treasurest up wrath." So here, there is the Ellipsis of what is treasured up. We may supply "wrath" here. "Ye have treasured up [wrath] for the last days," or in last (or final) days, i.e., days of extremity.

1 Peter 2:23.-"But committed himself to him that judgeth righteously."

Here the omitted accusative is supplied, but it is a question whether it ought to be "himself," or rather as in the margin both of A.V. [Note: The Authorized Version, or current Text of our English Bible, 1611.] and R.V. [Note: The Revised Version, 1881.] "his cause."

3. The omission of the Pronoun

Where there can be no doubt to whom or to what the noun refers, the pronoun is frequently omitted in the Greek, and in most cases is supplied in italic type in the A.V. [Note: The Authorized Version, or current Text of our English Bible, 1611.]

The omission of the pronoun makes it more emphatic, attention being called more prominently to it.

Matthew 19:13.-"That He should put the hands [of Him] upon them," i.e., His hands.

Matthew 21:7.-"And put on them the clothes [of them]" i.e., their garments, "and he sat upon them." This is the reading of the critical editions.

Mark 5:23.-"Come and lay the hands [of thee] upon her" i.e., thy hands. Where the A.V. [Note: The Authorized Version, or current Text of our English Bible, 1611.] does not even put thy in italics. Compare Matthew 9:18, where the pronoun (σου, sou) thy is used.

Luke 24:40.-"And when He had thus spoken, He showed them the hands and the feet [of Him], i.e., as in A.V. [Note: The Authorized Version, or current Text of our English Bible, 1611.] , "his hands and his feet."

John 11:41.-"And Jesus lifted up the eyes [of Him]," i.e., his eyes.

Acts 13:3.-"And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid the hands [of them] on them," i.e., their hands on them.

Acts 19:6.-"And when Paul had laid the hands [of him] upon them," i.e., his hands.

Ephesians 3:17-18.-"That ye, being rooted and grounded in love, may know what is the breadth [of it], and length [of it], and the depth [of it], and the height [of it]," i.e., of love. "That ye may know what is [its] breadth, and length, and depth, and height, etc."

Hebrews 4:15.-"But was in all points tempted. according to the likeness [of us] apart from sin," i.e., according to [our] likeness.

Romans 6:3-4.-May be perhaps best explained by this figure. "Know ye not that so many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus, unto his death we were baptized? Therefore we were buried together with him by the baptism [of him] (i.e., by his baptism) unto death." For He had "a cup" to drink of (His death), and "a baptism to be baptized with" (His burial), and when He died and was buried, His people died and were buried with Him, and, as the next verse goes on to say, rose again with Him.

So the passage reads: "Therefore we were buried with him by his baptism-unto-death [i.e., his burial], in order that just as Christ was raised from among the dead by the glory of the Father, so we also, in newness of life should walk. For if we have become identified in the likeness of his death, certainly in that of his resurrection also we shall be: knowing this, that our old man was crucified together with [him] in order that the body of sin may be annulled, that we should no longer be in servitude to sin. For he that hath died hath been righteously acquitted from the sin [of him], i.e., his sin. Now if we died together with Christ, we believe that we shall live also together with him."

The whole argument lies in this that we are reckoned as having died with Him, and as having been buried with Him in His burial (or baptism-unto-death). (See Matthew 20:23; Mark 10:38-39; Luke 12:50). Hence all such are free from the dominion and condemnation of sin, and stand in the newness of resurrection life. This is "the gospel of the glory" (2 Corinthians 4:4), for it was by the glory of the Father that Christ was raised, and it is glorious news indeed which tells us that all who are in Christ are "complete in Him" (Colossians 2:10), "accepted in the beloved" (Ephesians 1:6), "perfect in Christ Jesus" (Colossians 1:28).

With this agrees Colossians 2:10-12. "And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power. In whom (ἐν ᾧ, en hô) also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ; buried with him in the baptism [of him] i.e., in his baptism-unto-death, in whom (ἐν ᾧ, not "wherein," but as it is rendered above) ye were raised together also through the faith of the operation of God, who raised him from among the dead," etc.

Here, again, the whole argument turns on the fact that the "circumcision" and the "baptism" spoken of are both "made without hands," and both are fulfilled in Christ. The whole context of these two passages must be studied in order to see the one point and the great truth which is revealed: viz., that in His death we are circumcised and cut off, "crucified with Him" (Romans 6:6): in His burial (or baptism-unto-death) we are baptized (Romans 6:4; Colossians 2:12): and in His resurrection we now have our true standing before God. We have all in Christ. Hence, our completeness and perfection in Him is such that nothing can be added to it. All who are baptized by Him with the Holy Spirit are identified with Him in His death, burial, and resurrection. Hence, those who are being baptized are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not (1 Corinthians 15:29, see below), for they do not rise if Christ be not raised. But, if Christ be raised, then we are raised in Him; and "Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more … for in that he died, he died unto sin once for all; but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. Likewise ye also reckon yourselves dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God, IN CHRIST JESUS" (Romans 6:8-11).

Romans 2:18.-Thou "makest thy boast of God, and knowest the will [of him]," i.e., his will: the will of God.

1 Timothy 6:1.-"That the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed." The R.V. [Note: The Revised Version, 1881.] reads "that the name of God and the doctrine be not blasphemed," but it is better "the doctrine [of him]," i.e., his doctrine, as in the A.V. [Note: The Authorized Version, or current Text of our Engl