Dake Bible Discussion Board ⇒ HE WHO HINDERS

[titus213]

Nothing can be any clearer in scripture than that the Church is the body of Christ

Yes, but that description of the Church as Christ's body is also used in Ephesians 5:25-33, where the Church is specifically referred to as "she" and "her", using feminine pronouns (in the original language and most modern translations). I know that in his note on 2 Thess. 2:7 Dake says the Church is never referred to by feminine pronouns, but he is simply mistaken about that. As I've mentioned in previous posts, I do believe the Church will be removed before the Antichrist is revealed, but the view that "he" = "the church" because the church is the body of Christ and is therefore always referred to as masculine, doesn't really fly. It's just not the case. I don't want to use dubious arguments for biblical positions which are valid for other reasons.

[bibleman]

Nothing can be any clearer in scripture than that the Church is the body of Christ

Yes, but that description of the Church as Christ's body is also used in Ephesians 5:25-33, where the Church is specifically referred to as "she" and "her", using feminine pronouns (in the original language and most modern translations). I know that in his note on 2 Thess. 2:7 Dake says the Church is never referred to by feminine pronouns, but he is simply mistaken about that. As I've mentioned in previous posts, I do believe the Church will be removed before the Antichrist is revealed, but the view that "he" = "the church" because the church is the body of Christ and is therefore always referred to as masculine, doesn't really fly. It's just not the case. I don't want to use dubious arguments for biblical positions which are valid for other reasons.

Hi fatherfisher,

Have you read Dake's "The Rapture and the Second Coming?"

Third, not once is the New Testament Church called a woman, a lady, or a virgin. Furthermore, the Church is never referred to by a feminine pronoun. Some think that Eph. 5:22-31 would be an exception to this, but a closer reading of the passage will make the meaning clear. Paul illustrates the headship of Christ to the Church and His relationship with it by comparing this headship and relationship to a similar headship and relationship which exist between a man and his wife. Christ and His Church are one thing and the man and his wife are another, with the feminine pronoun referring to the woman who is the wife of the man, not to the Church as the wife of Christ. Finis J. Dake, The Rapture and the Second Coming of Christ, (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Publishing, Inc., 1998), WORDsearch CROSS e-book, 146.

Much like Paul travailing in birth.

Galatians 4:19 (KJV) 19 My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,

Even though Paul was travailing in birth it does not make him a pregnant woman!

Ephesians 5:22-31 is only making a comparison not saying the church is a woman which would contradict other Scripture.

Ephesians 2:15 (KJV) 15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

[titus213]

Christ and His Church are one thing and the man and his wife are another, with the feminine pronoun referring to the woman who is the wife of the man, not to the Church as the wife of Christ.

Hi Leon,

Yes, I have read that; he's mistkaken there, too. The text in Ephesians specifically says "Christ loved the church and gave himself for her" . . . "that he might present her to himself a glorious church", and so forth.

[bibleman]

Christ and His Church are one thing and the man and his wife are another, with the feminine pronoun referring to the woman who is the wife of the man, not to the Church as the wife of Christ.

Hi Leon,

Yes, I have read that; he's mistkaken there, too. The text in Ephesians specifically says "Christ loved the church and gave himself for her" . . . "that he might present her to himself a glorious church", and so forth.

I know that there are translations that translate the it - her.

Ephesians 5:25 (KJV) 25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;

That word it was also translated him more that her.

English Words used in KJV:
him 1952
his 1084
their 318
he 253
her 242
they 121
same 80
himself 58
miscellaneous translations 1679

[Total Count: 5787] James Strong, Strong's Talking Greek & Hebrew Dictionary, (Austin, TX: WORDsearch Corp., 2007), WORDsearch CROSS e-book, Under: "846".

Given the rest of Scripture along with the meaning of the word itself, I think that is why Dake came to his conclusion.

[titus213]

I know that there are translations that translate the it - her.

Right, but I'm not talking about translations; I'm talking about the original language. The Greek pronoun used is feminine. No matter how Engish, Dutch, German or anything else translates it, the original Greek is very specific and cannot be confused as anything but feminine.

Now, that being said, as I mentioned the other day the whole matter of "feminine" and "masculine" in Greek doesn't mean the same as we think of in English. It's strictly a grammatical peculiarity of the Greek language that a noun can be "feminine" and therefore require "feminine" pronouns; in English we just don't assign gender to our nouns.

The illustration I used the other day was the Greek noun for "sword", which is also feminine, and will therefore have a feminine pronoun used in the original Greek. I don't think anyone would try to argue that a sword is actually feminine based on that. In the same way, I would not try to argue that the Church is feminine simply because it's a feminine noun in Greek.

But it's a mistake to claim that the Church is never referred to by feminine pronouns, especially when anyone who knows the original language (or is Greek) can read what Paul wrote and see that he did just that.

[Justaned]

I know that there are translations that translate the it - her.

Right, but I'm not talking about translations; I'm talking about the original language. The Greek pronoun used is feminine. No matter how Engish, Dutch, German or anything else translates it, the original Greek is very specific and cannot be confused as anything but feminine.

Now, that being said, as I mentioned the other day the whole matter of "feminine" and "masculine" in Greek doesn't mean the same as we think of in English. It's strictly a grammatical peculiarity of the Greek language that a noun can be "feminine" and therefore require "feminine" pronouns; in English we just don't assign gender to our nouns.

The illustration I used the other day was the Greek noun for "sword", which is also feminine, and will therefore have a feminine pronoun used in the original Greek. I don't think anyone would try to argue that a sword is actually feminine based on that. In the same way, I would not try to argue that the Church is feminine simply because it's a feminine noun in Greek.

But it's a mistake to claim that the Church is never referred to by feminine pronouns, especially when anyone who knows the original language (or is Greek) can read what Paul wrote and see that he did just that.

Fatherfisher
You are absolutely right and I'm pleased to see someone that does not try to claim things that simply aren't correct in an effort to support their position.

[bibleman]

I know that there are translations that translate the it - her.

Right, but I'm not talking about translations; I'm talking about the original language. The Greek pronoun used is feminine. No matter how Engish, Dutch, German or anything else translates it, the original Greek is very specific and cannot be confused as anything but feminine.

Now, that being said, as I mentioned the other day the whole matter of "feminine" and "masculine" in Greek doesn't mean the same as we think of in English. It's strictly a grammatical peculiarity of the Greek language that a noun can be "feminine" and therefore require "feminine" pronouns; in English we just don't assign gender to our nouns.

The illustration I used the other day was the Greek noun for "sword", which is also feminine, and will therefore have a feminine pronoun used in the original Greek. I don't think anyone would try to argue that a sword is actually feminine based on that. In the same way, I would not try to argue that the Church is feminine simply because it's a feminine noun in Greek.

But it's a mistake to claim that the Church is never referred to by feminine pronouns, especially when anyone who knows the original language (or is Greek) can read what Paul wrote and see that he did just that.

Hi fatherfisher,

The fact that it is a feminine pronoun does not mean that it is to be translated "her" in every case.

The KJV translated the word as "him" 1950 times.

English Words used in KJV:
him 1952
his 1084
their 318
he 253
her 242
they 121
same 80
himself 58
miscellaneous translations 1679

[titus213]

The KJV translated the word as "him" 1950 times.

It translated the masculine form of the word as "him" that many times; it did not translate the feminine form of the word (which is what Paul used) that many times. Not even close.

You are running a search based on the Stong's number, which links to the pronoun "autos", which by default is the masculine form. That is what the KJV translated as "him" 1950 times. But the feminine form of the pronoun is "auteis". And the KJV did not translate that form of the pronoun as "him" 1950 times. Not by a long shot. The problem is there are not separate Strong's numbers for the masculine, feminine, and neuter forms of the pronoun. So you get all the results for all forms, and would have to look at the Greek of each occurrence to see what it actually says.

What your results are trying to show is how the pronoun, in whatever gender, has been translated in the KJV. When it is the masculine form of the pronoun, which occurs most often by far, the KJV translated "him". But that is not the form of the pronoun used in Ephesians 5. There it is the feminine form. And by far the KJV translates that by "she".

So why didn't they in Ephesians 5? I can only guess, and my guess would be it's for the same reason they didn't translate the feminine pronoun for "sword" as "she". In English, it would make no sense to talk about a sword like this: "When he took his sword and used her to kill the enemy" . . . and I assume the KJV translators felt that, in English, the word "church" is really neither masculine nor feminine, so it made no sense to speak of it as a "her" or a "him". Instead, they referred to the church as "it".

[bibleman]

The KJV translated the word as "him" 1950 times.

It translated the masculine form of the word as "him" that many times; it did not translate the feminine form of the word (which is what Paul used) that many times. Not even close.

You are running a search based on the Stong's number, which links to the pronoun "autos", which by default is the masculine form. That is what the KJV translated as "him" 1950 times. But the feminine form of the pronoun is "auteis". And the KJV did not translate that form of the pronoun as "him" 1950 times. Not by a long shot. The problem is there are not separate Strong's numbers for the masculine, feminine, and neuter forms of the pronoun. So you get all the results for all forms, and would have to look at the Greek of each occurrence to see what it actually says.

What your results are trying to show is how the pronoun, in whatever gender, has been translated in the KJV. When it is the masculine form of the pronoun, which occurs most often by far, the KJV translated "him". But that is not the form of the pronoun used in Ephesians 5. There it is the feminine form. And by far the KJV translates that by "she".

So why didn't they in Ephesians 5? I can only guess, and my guess would be it's for the same reason they didn't translate the feminine pronoun for "sword" as "she". In English, it would make no sense to talk about a sword like this: "When he took his sword and used her to kill the enemy" . . . and I assume the KJV translators felt that, in English, the word "church" is really neither masculine nor feminine, so it made no sense to speak of it as a "her" or a "him". Instead, they referred to the church as "it".

To me it makes perfect sense to translate it as "him."

Since the church is the body of Christ who is a man.

[Justaned]

So, the grammatical gender is probably irrelevant as can be seen in ships and storms getting feminine names.

The fact that the Church is the body of Christ makes a good argument that the "he" who restraineth CAN BE the Church.

The best argument that the "he" IS the Church, in my opinion, is that the God-filled, angel assisted Church is the most logical answer to who is restraining evil today in the world based on my original list of scriptures above.

the problem is anytime scripture refers to the church is always uses a female pronoun, in this case the pronoun He is used. That says this is unusual if it is talking of the church. And since Paul never reveals exactly who he is talking about we can't assume it is the church. Especially in the light of the fact that in most places where the church is thriving the church is underground and isn't restraining anything. And where the church is visible the church is so filled with the world it isn't restraining anything.

What is more likely is the hinderer is an Angel and is restraining the prince of Isalm from totally devouring the world.