Greek (SBLGNT): Τοῦτο δὲ γίνωσκε ὅτι ἐν ἐσχάταις ἡμέραις ἐνστήσονται καιροὶ χαλεποί·
(LEB): "But know this, that in the last days difficult times will come,"
The NWT uses "critical times," so why the difference?
BDAG Entry: χαλεπός, ή, όν ⟦chalepós⟧ (s. next entry; Hom.+; ins, pap, LXX, TestSol, Philo; Jos., Ant. 4, 1 βίος, 13, 422 νόσος; Just., D. 1, 5; Tat.; comp. χαλεπώτερα Just., A II, 2, 6) pert. to being troublesome, hard, difficult καιροὶ χ. hard times, times of stress 2 Ti 3:1. Of words that are hard to bear and penetrate deeply (Hes., Works 332; Dio Chrys. 49 [66], 19) Hv 1, 4, 2 (w. σκληρός). Of pers. (Od. 1, 198; Chion, Ep. 15, 1f; SIG 780, 31; EpArist 289; Jos., Ant. 15, 98) hard to deal with, violent, dangerous Mt 8:28. Of animals (Pla., Pol. 274b; Ps.-X., Cyneg. 10, 23; Dio Chrys. 5, 5) B 4:5 (comp.). In the sense bad, evil (Cebes 6, 2 of the πόμα of Ἀπάτη) τὰ ἔργα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῆς πονηρίας χ. ἐστι the deeds of the angel of wickedness are evil Hm 6, 2, 10.—Subst. τὰ χ. (that which is) evil (X., Mem. 2, 1, 23; POxy 1242, 36) MPol 11:1 (opp. τὰ δίκαια). ἀρχὴ πάντων χαλεπῶν φιλαργυρία everything that is acrimonious begins with love of money Pol 4:1 (cp. 1 Ti 6:10).—B. 651. DELG. M-M. Spicq.
Spicq observes: When applied to things, chalepos can mean simply “difficult, hard,”1but sometimes it also takes on the nuance of “regrettable” (2Macc 4:4), “grievous” (Wis 3:19), “severe” (Plutarch, De sera 4), and “cruel” (Wis 19:13; 4Macc 7:24). It is used fairly often for dangerous circumstances,2 which is precisely the case in 2Tim 3:1, which announces the onset of the last days: there will be kairoi chalepoi, dangerous or perilous times for the faith and the existence of the church, harmful for Christians, with a nuance of violence and aggressiveness3 that befits calamities.4
The whole entry is worth reading.
William Mounce (WB Commentary on the Pastorals):
Τοῦτο δὲ γίνωσκε, ὅτι ἐν ἐσχάταις ἡμέραις ἐνστήσονται καιροὶ χαλεποί, “But take note of this, that in the last days there will be stressful times.” In an attempt to place Timothy and his conflict at Ephesus in historical perspective, Paul reminds Timothy that he is living in the last days. In vv 2– 5 Paul will describe in detail what χαλεποί, “stressful,” involves, and in vv 6–9 he will apply this description of “moral decadence” (Guthrie, 156) to Timothy’s opponents.
Mounce thinks 2 Timothy 3:1-5 delineates Timothy's current situation rather than the future: I tend to disagree. See his commentary for the grammatical arguments made in favor of a then present understanding. For a different analysis, see Raymond F. Collins. I &II Timothy and Titus in the NTL series.
Sporadic theological and historical musings by Edgar Foster (Ph.D. in Theology and Religious Studies and one of Jehovah's Witnesses).
I think, for determining when the καιροὶ χαλεποί will be, and how they will manifest themselves, the preceding statement is that it refers to the last days ἐν ἐσχάταις ἡμέραις. On the face of it, this is clear: it will be at the "end of the world" when the Lord comes, but since the events will be very numerous, the question of "when" they will be καιροὶ χαλεποί becomes more complex.
ReplyDeleteFirst, however, how I understand the term χαλεπος. This noun is derived from the verb χαλεπαίνω which, though not found in the NT, belongs to the group of verbs that describe the emotions of anger, annoyance, rage: αγανακτειν, οργιζομαι, χολαω, παροξυνω, (παρα)πικραινω.
The basic interpretation of χαλεπος is illustrated, in my opinion, by Matt 8:28, where two people who were possessed by demons are described as very furious. The parallel text in Mk 5:1 ff and Lk 8:26 ff, which focuses on one of them, then details that he was naked, homeless, shouting loudly day and night, beating himself with stones. As Matthew states, because of the χαλεπος of these people, no one could pass that way. Handcuffs on their hands or feet could not prevent their χαλεπος.
From the perspective of eschatology, then, the scene in Matt. 8:29ff. points to a "causal connection" between the "activation" of the demons and the coming of Jesus. The main driving force behind the χαλεπος are the demons, for after they beg not to be cast out into the abyssos (cf. Lk 8:31 cf. Rev 20:1 and 20:7), the people - previously possessed by demons - become mild.
Returning to the question of the last days, when the demonic χαλεπος will be manifested, it is worth mentioning the term καιρος, or rather, the plural καιροὶ. Commonly translated as some fixed period of time, the plural καιροὶ is said by many exegetes to have - in a special case - a length of two years (see 3 ½ time according to Rev 12:14).
If we look more closely, we find that καιρος has no uniform or specific time length. Rather, it is characteristic of the καιρος that it begins with some change in some situation and the καιρος ends again, with some change. It is only from this that the temporal duration of the καιρος is derived. In a word, one could express that the καιρος represents some "time limit", some "fixed period" from-to...
Examples illustrate this very well: when the angel spoke to Zechariah in Luke 1:20, he told him that he would be speechless from his visitation, and would be mute until the καιρος was fulfilled. Zechariah was mute for about 10 months, so the καιρος lasted from the visitation until the birth of John the Baptist. The καιρος represents the time of harvest (Mat 13:30) = the ripeness of the grain, and the end of the harvest determines the duration of the καιρος; the same is true of the vintage (Mat 21:34) or the fig harvest (Mk 11:13). The καιρος can denote a period of time of several days (Mat 26:08 Jesus' reference to the time when He had the Passover lamb), as well as - from our point of view - a period of time, several thousand years, before the opening scenes of the Apocalypse (Rev 1:3). From an eschatological point of view, it is also significant that although the length of a time or deadline is predetermined, it may not be known to all - it is the exclusive prerogative and knowledge of God (Acts 1:7 "it is not for you to know times or deadlines").
ReplyDeleteReturning to 2 Tim. Tim 3:1, then καιροὶ χαλεποί would express a kind of "waves" of fury, where they would last for a time, then disappear and reappear again. They would be manifested against the background of the 'last days'. If I were to try to focus on a more precise determination of when this phenomenon occurs, I would see the time when the beast from the sea/abyss (chapters 13 and 17), the false prophet, appears. These human formations (motivated by Satan and demons, therefore they will exhibit "fury" ) will then make an image of the Beast, and I understand this image (Rev. 13:14) to be the Antichrist.
I do not derive kαιροὶ χαλεποί from police/court statistics or sociological research, because that would seemingly "prove" it has already "occurred"...but isn't there a hidden risk that the result will be the same as what Hymenaeus and Philetus and Alexander (cf. 2. Tim cap. 2) once arrived at as well, claiming their resurrection had already occurred?
Since "but of that day and hour knoweth no man," negative social phenomena, can hardly be used to exclusively identify "the last days" = "for ye have the poor round about you always" (Matt. 26:11ff.).
Thank you, Boris. I appreciate your feedback and additional information regarding the times spoken about in 2 Tim. 3:1-5.
ReplyDeleteMuch has been written about eschatology and people throughout church history have thought they were living in the "last days." While some want to criticize Jehovah's Witnesses for dates like 1914 or 1975, Witnesses are hardly alone in believing some year possibly constituted the end of this world. I've read similar expectations in the pre-Nicene Fathers and Martin Luther thought the end was near in his time.
I don't want to get away from the main thrust of this thread. However, statistics/sociological research might not be the sole determinant for how one determines times and seasons, but would not attitudes, bad actions, and fulfillment of prophecy tell us something about the time in which we're living?
@Edgar Foster
ReplyDeleteEschatology is indeed a complex subject. And I agree with you that it can be observed that almost every age has had its Apocalypse. If I were to assume that certain negative social, political and economic phenomena will condense - before the "end of the world", and retrospectively assume from that that the "end" is near, then it is a closed circle of evidence (which is not necessarily wrong!). But what bothers me most personally there is that the main "exegete" is Satan, as the source of all evil. As if, if I allow this way of interpretation, it would be Satan who determines the beginning of the end. I am reminded of Rom. 3:8: "Let us do evil that good may come".
How unreliable an indicator this can be is also shown by another passage - with a very strong bearing on the theme of eschatology = 1 Thess 5:1-3. Paul writes directly about the end times and καιροὶ (see above, my previous post) and confirms Jesus' words that the Lord will come unobtrusively, almost unnoticed, and then adds the - given the issue of determining the time of the end - important: "...they will say "peace and safety"...".
If I were to observe crime statistics or casualty figures in war conflicts while expecting security and peace to come, then this only reinforces the "unreliability" of such an observation.
It is clear that many will add the answer that this is not the only "indicator": many have gone into calculations/chronological speculation, some find confirmation in the identities of particular "entities" from Revelation such as: the seven-headed beast, the two-horned beast, the Great Babylon, etc. From the history of the interpretation of the Apocalypse, it can be seen that almost every power, government, religious system or even atheism, religious leaders or rulers, or institutions of some kind, were supposed to be this or that of the Apocalypse. We know that nothing happened...
Another, very significant element is that by claiming that Babylon the Great, for example, represents the institution of the papacy or even the RCC, such a statement often becomes a theological "stick" with which to beat one's competitors. Such an exegesis becomes a judicial pronouncement, some institution, government or alliance is "demonized", which I believe is contrary to the call to not judge. An exegete who knows that the RCC or UNO is something nasty that will succumb to destruction according to his interpretation of the Apocalypse is exhibiting a negative prognosis for the future that the RCC or UNO can never change. Nineveh will be subverted! Or...can it too, such a Nineveh, still repent and avert its doom?
*
Jesus could have come in the 5th century, or in the 13th century. There was no Russia, USA or covid and chips and bar codes. But Jesus could come in the 23rd century: again, no Russia or USA or covid or chips or barcodes need be.
*
Rather, as you can see, it's considerations like this that make me avoid determining the end. I'm more focused on looking for roles, relationships and functions of, for example, that Great Babylon or the image of the seven-headed animal or the two-horned beast. I don't need any current geopolitical constellations in there, because - if Jesus comes in the next 20 years - then yes, I can imagine what the King of the South might be like, but if he doesn't come until the 23rd century, then my predictive ability disappears. But the point remains - it's not necessary to "materialize", for example, the Great Babylon, into any particular institutions or phenomena (to be specific, I'm writing one paper on the identity of the Great Babylon, but I need to finish it...no, in my opinion it's not just the RCC, or other churches, or Islam, or just and exclusively "something" associated with religion...but that's another topic).