Hebrews 1:3 (Looking at the Syntax and Morphology)

Greek (THGNT): ὃς ὢν ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης καὶ χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως αὐτοῦ, φέρων τε τὰ πάντα τῷ ῥήματι τῆς δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ, καθαρισμὸν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ποιησάμενος ἐκάθισεν ἐν δεξιᾷ τῆς μεγαλωσύνης ἐν ὑψηλοῖς

ὃς-a relative pronoun (see Hebrews 1:2); translate "he" or "who." This Greek form is masculine nominative singular. Jody A. Bernard argues that Hebrews 1:3-4 depends grammatically on Hebrews 1:1-2 and refers back to the noun "Son" (Bernard, The Mysticism of Hebrews, page 132).

ὢν-nominative singular masculine present participle of εἰμί: translate "is" or "being." It is the first of three participles "that describe the person and work of the Son" (Harris, Hebrews); B.F. Wescott opines that ὢν rules out adoptionism "and affirms the permanence of the divine essence of the Son during his historic work" (The Epistle to the Hebrews, page 9). That seems to be asking a Greek present participle to bear a heavy load which it cannot sustain.

ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης-ἀπαύγασμα is nominative singular neuter; the word occurs 1x in the GNT. LSJ gives this definition: "radiance, effulgence, of light beaming from a luminous body." See Wisdom 7:26 and compare Abbott-Smith Manual Lexicon, page 45. Understood passively, which is the most probable meaning, ἀπαύγασμα would denote "reflection." See Louw-Nida 14.48. Ken Schenck argues for a passive sense of ἀπαύγασμα at https://kenschenck.blogspot.com/2021/06/hebrews-11-4-explanatory-notes.html

Westcott's analysis of ἀπαύγασμα is not that helpful for me since he focuses more on lexical semantics and other features of Hebrews, and his commentary is heavily colored by theological impositions. For instance, he imposes the notion of homoousios upon ἀπαύγασμα and χαρακτὴρ. On the other hand, Attridge writes:

The context of Hebrews itself, where ἀπαύγασμα is paralleled with "imprint" (χαρακτὴρ), may support a passive understanding of ἀπαύγασμα, although that second term is not entirely free from ambiguity. On the other hand, the parallelism may not be synonymous, but antithetical, as in the two preceding clauses. In such poetic language complete precision is not to be expected. The image, in whatever sense it may be taken, serves, like the following, to affirm the intimate relationship between the Father and the pre-existent Son, through whom redemption is effected.

τῆς δόξης is part of a genitive chain: the construction is potentially an objective genitive signifying that the Son expresses the Father's radiance (see David L. Allen), but Rogers and Rogers also note that the genitive of content is possible here. The mention of "glory" in Hebrews likely depends on the OT word, kabod, which the LXX translates with doxa (Allen).

Harris (Hebrews) posits that "Δόξης is likely a descriptive gen. (Wallace 79–81), although it is possibly a gen. of quality or attrib. gen. (R 496; 'glorious radiance'). Thus the Son perfectly radiates God’s own glory."

καὶ χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως αὐτοῦ, φέρων τε τὰ πάντα τῷ ῥήματι τῆς δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ-Allen contends that both ὢν and φέρων (present participles) "should be construed as concessive adverbial modifiers" of ποιησάμενος. He observes that these participles make affirmations about the Son of God (mentioned in 1:2) although they're adverbial rather than adjectival. William L. Lane concurs with Allen's assessment in his WB commentary.

See Allen, David L. Hebrews: 35 (New American Commentary) (Kindle Location 3299). B&H Publishing. Kindle Edition.

ἀπαύγασμα and χαρακτὴρ predicate similar functions of the Son since they occur in synonymously parallel fashion (Lane), but Harold Attridge offers the rejoinder that the parallelism might be antithetical. In any event, Lane adds (Hebrews 1-8, WB Commentary):

The term χαρακτήρ occurs only here in the NT. It is found three times in the LXX, but in a nontechnical sense (Lev 13:28; 2 Macc 4:10; 4 Macc 15:4; cf. T. Sim. 5:5). Philo shows a strong preference for this term, which occurs fifty-one times in his works with a variety of associated meanings. He applies it frequently to man, whose soul bears the imprint (χαρακτήρ) of God (Allegorical Interpretation 3.95; On the Virtues 52; The Worse Attacks the Better 83). But if the soul may be compared to the image of the invisible God bearing the engraving of the divine seal, the stamp of that seal is the eternal Logos (ἧς ὁ χαρακτήρ ἐστιν ὁ αἴδιος λόγος On Noah’s Work as a Planter 18). It is imperative, however, not to exaggerate the importance of such alleged “parallels” to the expression in v 3. In his work On the Unchangeableness of God (55), Philo states that God’s being is “simple” (ψιλὴν τὴν ὕπαρξιν), “without other definite characteristic” (ἄνευ χαρακτῆρος).

χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως αὐτοῦ-Rogers and Rogers favor the genitive of description for this portion of 1:3 (i.e., "the exact representation of his substance"). But as Lane, Allen, Ellingworth inter alia point out, χαρακτὴρ is tricky to define and so is ὑπόστασις--particularly when the latter term has been shaped and understood through the lens of fourth-century debates about Christology. See Attridge, Hebrews, page 44; Moses Stuart, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, page 269; James Moffatt, Epistle to the Hebrews, page 6; Westcott, The Epistle to the Hebrews, page 13. Stuart opts for the classical denotation of ὑπόστασις pre-Nicaea, that is, substance or essence, not person. See Jeremiah 10:17.

The rendering "substance" is possibly not the best way to translate ὑπόστασις in Hebrews 1:3. BDAG Greek-English Lexicon gives this observation for ὑπόστασις:

"the essential or basic structure/nature of an entity, substantial nature, essence, actual being, reality . . ."

BDAG glosses Heb. 1:3 this way:

"a(n) exact representation of (God's) real being (i.e. as one who is in charge of the universe)"

φέρων is present active participle of φέρω, meaning "carry, bear, bring forth."

φέρων τε τὰ πάντα τῷ ῥήματι τῆς δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ-Attridge identifies the construction as a descriptive genitive, which bears possible marks of Semitic influence via the LXX. The subject of this passage is apparently the Son (Christ) as Westcott explains; LEB translates: "sustaining all things by the word of power" but NET renders "and he sustains all things by his powerful word"; See Deuteronomy 1:9.

Postpositive τε-"and" or "but." τε suggests a change in the relation spoken about in the discourse (Westcott, page 13): its purpose is likely adjungit rather than conjungit (ibid.). Mounce defines the particle this way: enclitic, can function as a conj., serving either as a lightly-appending link, Acts 1:15; and, Acts 2:3; or as an inclusive prefix, Lk. 12:45; both, Lk. 24:20; Acts 26:16.

τὰ πάντα ("all things" or "the universe")-for a comparison, see Romans 11:36; Colossians 1:17; Hebrews 2:10; Revelation 4:11.

τῷ ῥήματι is dative singular neuter of ῥῆμα ("word") and it could be an instrumental dative (see Rogers and Rogers), which would yield the sense "by means of His word." Westcott points to Genesis 1:3 (LXX) and Hebrews 11:3: he finds significance in the use of ῥῆμα over against the occurrence of λόγος as we see in John 1:1-3, but the term refers to the Son's utterance here.

Bill Mounce: δυνάμεως is clearly an Hebraic genitive and hence the NLT translates, “he sustains everything by the mighty power of his command.” A “literal” translation would produce a meaningless phrase if all it did was translate words.

See https://www.billmounce.com/monday-with-mounce/literally-there-no-such-thing-literal

Albert J. Coetsee reckons that τῆς δυνάμεως is a genitive of quality, that is, "a Hebraism where the genitive functions as an adjective (cf. Black 1987:190; Blass & Debrunner 1961:§165; Cockerill 2012:95)." So he favors the translation, "by his powerful word," and Coetsee infers that the Son is Creator and Sustainer of the cosmos like a number of other commentators.

καθαρισμὸν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ποιησάμενος ἐκάθισεν ἐν δεξιᾷ τῆς μεγαλωσύνης ἐν ὑψηλοῖς:

καθαρισμὸν ("purification") is a noun whose form is accusative singular masculine. Cf. 2 Exodus 30:10; Peter 1:9. ποιησάμενος is aorist participle middle of ποιέω: translate "having made." Zerwick-Grosvenor explain that the participle along with its object communicate the same idea as καθαρίσας (the cognate verb of καθαρισμός). See Zerwick-Grosvenor, A Grammatical Analysis, page 654. For Harris (Hebrews), ποιησάμενος is temporal ("after making purification") or causal ("because he made purification").

τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν (genitive plural feminine) is employed "of sins generally" (Westcott, Hebrews, page 15): John 1:29 is supposed to provide a contrast with τὴν ἁμαρτίαν. The action signified by ποιησάμενος also occurs before the Son ἐκάθισεν ἐν δεξιᾷ τῆς μεγαλωσύνης ἐν ὑψηλοῖς.

ἐκάθισεν is the first aorist active of καθίζω; "make one sit" or when used intransitively, "take one's seat, sit down" (Zerwick-Grosvenor, page 654). I agree with Benjamin J. Ribbens that the purification happens in the heavenly sanctuary (the greater Most Holy): note the use of ἐν ὑψηλοῖς and compare Hebrews 10:11-13. See 4.3.1 of Ribbens. As Philip Church writes, καθαρισμὸν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ποιησάμενος adverbially modifies ἐκάθισεν (Hebrews and the Temple, page 283).

ἐν δεξιᾷ is a prepositional phrase coupled with the dative singular feminine of δεξιός: "at/in the right hand [of the Majesty]" (Psalm 16:8, 11; 110:1; 1 Chronicles 6:39; Isaiah 44:20; 63:12; Acts 2:33; 5:31; Romans 8:34; Ephesians 1:20; Colossians 3:1; 1 Peter 3:22; Hebrews 1:13; 8:1; 10:12-13; 12:2). Most scholars insist that the locative statement "at the right hand" should not be understood locally or spatially: "It denotes entrance into a position of divine authority" (Moffatt, Epistle to the Hebrews, page 8).

τῆς μεγαλωσύνης ἐν ὑψηλοῖ is apparently a circumlocution for God (YHWH or the Father): " 'The Majesty' expresses the idea of God in His greatness" (Westcott, Hebrews, page 16) and Philip Church maintains that "μεγαλωσύνη seems to be a reverential periphrasis for God" (Hebrews and the Temple, page 282). Compare Buchanan, Hebrews, page 8 and Hebrews 8:1; Jude 25; 1 Clement 16:2; 17:4; 36:2; 58:1. For LXX examples, see Deuteronomy 32:3; Psalm 79:11 (78:11 LXX); 145:3 (144:3 LXX). Moffatt uses similar language as Church in Epistle to the Hebrews, page 8.

τῆς μεγαλωσύνης is genitive singular feminine of μεγαλωσύνη and the morphological ending tells us the noun is abstract as opposed to being concrete (compare δικαιοσύνη and related nouns). August Tholuck maintains that the abstract is more prominent than the concrete in Hebrews 1:3, just as "the Majesty" (an abstraction) is apparently more emphatic than "the majestic" which is concrete (Tholuck, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, page 132); however, Henry Alford suggests that one should drop the article in English translation to make "Majesty/majesty" more emphatic in terms of the abstract and concrete distinction. See Alford, The Greek Testament, page 4:146; Moses Stuart, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, page 287.

ἐν ὑψηλοῖ-another prepositional phrase coupled with the dative case that could be rendered "in the highest" or "in the heights." Again, the phrase is likely not to be understood spatially, but probably is a metaphorical utterance. Moffatt thinks the phrase should go grammatically with ἐκάθισεν (cf. Hebrews 8:1), but the Expositor's Greek Testament proffers that  ἐν ὑψηλοῖ should go with μεγαλωσύνης. Henry Alford indicates that the reading in the EGT is more natural, but compare Westcott, op. cit., page 16.

Lessons We Can Learn from Balaam (A Talk Modified for This Blog)

We live during a time when heartache, tribulation, and calamities are multiplying. All of us are being affected by Covid-19, and we still have to contend with other health or money issues and natural disasters. Where should we turn when facing such challenges?

Tonight, we'll consider three lessons from the biblical account regarding Balaam. Let's first read Numbers 22:3-6.

After Israel conquered the Amorites, they camped on the desert plains of Moab. What effect did Israel have on the Moabites? Numbers 22:3 reports that Moab became "sick with fear" toward Israel. As a result, they tried to harm Israel by hiring the prophet Balaam. How did Jehovah react to the curses of Balaam?

Read Numbers 22:12, 34-35; 23:11-12

Did you notice how Jehovah acted in behalf of his ancient people, Israel? He turned a curse into a blessing. Balaam tried to curse God's people (call down evil on them), but Jehovah prevented him from doing it. So what lessons do we learn from this account? Please turn to Numbers 24:12-13 (Read)

One lesson we learn from this account is that no one can successfully oppose Jehovah: Balaam could only speak what Jehovah wanted him to speak; he could not curse Israel if Jehovah wanted to bless the the nation. Jehovah overruled and prevented his efforts.

Finally, we learn that our immovable place of refuge is Jehovah. When we experiences trials, hardships, health challenges and economic reversals, to whom do we turn? God's Word exhorts us to trust in Jehovah at such times. Why is that the case? Because Jehovah will give us the necessary strength we need to endure any trial Satan brings upon us, and remember that Jehovah can turn any curse into a blessing.

Revelation 2:9-10: Poor, Yet Rich

Greek (SBLGNT): Οἶδά σου τὴν θλῖψιν καὶ τὴν πτωχείαν, ἀλλὰ πλούσιος εἶ, καὶ τὴν βλασφημίαν ἐκ τῶν λεγόντων Ἰουδαίους εἶναι ἑαυτούς, καὶ οὐκ εἰσίν, ἀλλὰ συναγωγὴ τοῦ Σατανᾶ. μηδὲν φοβοῦ ἃ μέλλεις πάσχειν. ἰδοὺ μέλλει βάλλειν ὁ διάβολος ἐξ ὑμῶν εἰς φυλακὴν ἵνα πειρασθῆτε, καὶ ἕξετε θλῖψιν ἡμερῶν δέκα. γίνου πιστὸς ἄχρι θανάτου, καὶ δώσω σοι τὸν στέφανον τῆς ζωῆς.

See https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+2%3A9-10&version=SBLGNT

Revelation 2:9-10 constitutes part of the resurrected Christ's direction to the seven congregations: the ecclesia and "angel" he now addresses is Smyrna. The city was in Asia Minor (now Izmir, Turkey), "about forty miles north of Ephesus." See the extended note in C. Koester, Revelation,  271-273.

Strabo writes: "the distance from Ephesus to Smyrna is a journey, in a straight line, of three hundred and twenty stadia, for the distance to Metropolis is one hundred and twenty stadia and the remainder to Smyrna, whereas the coasting voyage is but slightly short of two thousand two hundred" (Geography XIV.1.2).

One source defines stadia (plural of stadium) as "an ancient Greek and Roman unit of length," with a stadium equaling approximately 607 feet (185 meters). See https://www.wordreference.com/definition/stadia

With some of the historical context in mind, I will now provide a translation and analysis of 2:9-10, drawing on numerous NT sources (books, journal articles, and lexica).

Οἶδά σου τὴν θλῖψιν καὶ τὴν πτωχείαν, ἀλλὰ πλούσιος εἶ-"I know your tribulation and poverty, but you are rich"

Beckwith, Apocalypse, page 453: θλῖψιν, tribulation : the context shows that persecution of some kind is meant ; the meaning cannot be restricted to the sufferings of poverty. That the poverty of the Smyrnaean Christians was due to the confiscation of their property and so was a part of their persecution (the view of some com.) is without intimation here, though it is conceivable. —πλούσιος, rich: i.e. in spiritual possessions, cf. [Rev] 3:18, 2 Co. 6:10, Mt. 6:20. For the writer's habit of inserting a parenthesis see p. 243.

τὴν πτωχείαν conveys the idea of extreme poverty and destitution--being completely impoverished (Stefanovic, Revelation of Jesus Christ).

David Aune (Revelation 1-5, WBC) says the Smyrnaean poverty is literal, " but it is used in opposition to πλουσίος, 'rich,' understood figuratively, probably in terms of eschatological wealth (Luke 6:20 = Matt 5:3; Matt 6:19–21 = Luke 12:33–34; Luke 12:21; 2 Cor 6:10; Jas 2:5). The Stoics also used the Greek and Latin terms for 'wealth' figuratively (Seneca Ep. 62.3). Philo was dependent on the Stoic paradox that only the wise and virtuous person was really 'rich' (Philo, Praem. 104; Som. 1.179; Plant. 69 [here he uses παραδοξολογεῖν, 'paradox']; Sob. 56; Fuga. 17; Quod Omn. Prob. 8, 'You call those rich [πλουσίους] who are utterly destitute'; Arnim, SVF 1, § 220; 3, § 589–603). The term πτωχοὶ, 'poor,' is used literally in 13:16 (in opposition to πλουσίοι, 'rich') but figuratively in 3:17. The fact that no mention is made of the economic poverty of the other six Christian communities suggests that the situation of this congregation is unusual."

καὶ τὴν βλασφημίαν ἐκ τῶν λεγόντων Ἰουδαίους εἶναι ἑαυτούς-"and the blasphemy by those saying they are Jews" (claiming themselves to be Jews)

Beckwith (Apocalypse) has "reviling, calumny" for βλασφημίαν. He adds these observations:

ἑαυτούς: for this use of the reflex. pron. in the acc. with an infin., especially εἶναι, whose subject is the same as that of the governing word (λεγόντων), cf. 3:9 Ac. 5:36, 8:9; see Blass § 72,2. Usually a certain emphasis is given to the pron., but that is not the case here.

See Jan Lambrecht. "Jewish Slander: A Note On Revelation 2,9-10." Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses, vol. 75.4, 1999, pp. 421-429.

καὶ οὐκ εἰσίν, ἀλλὰ συναγωγὴ τοῦ Σατανᾶ-"and they are not, but [they are] a synagogue of Satan"

Robert H. Mounce (The Book of Revelation): The hostile Jews of Smyrna were, in fact, “a synagogue of Satan” (the latter term is Hebrew and means “adversary”; its Greek equivalent means “slanderer” or “false accuser”). Regardless of their national descent, they had become, by their bitter opposition to the church and its message, a synagogue carrying out the activities of God’s supreme adversary, Satan.

William Mounce defines Σατανᾶς as "an adversary, opponent, enemy"; it has special reference to Satan the Devil in the GNT. Compare Revelation 12:9-10; 20:2.

According to Ranko Stefanovic, emperor worship was mandatory and persecution from the local Jewish population was at fever pitch in the late first century: he also points to the slander that early Christians reportedly endured (Revelation of Jesus Christ, page 118).

μηδὲν φοβοῦ ἃ μέλλεις πάσχειν-"Do not fear the things you are about to suffer"

μηδὲν is accusative singular neuter of μηδείς ("no one, not anyone").

Grant R. Osborne (Revelation): They are not to fear ἃ μέλλεις πάσχειν (ha melleis paschein, what you are about to suffer). Their “suffering” is imminent and unavoidable. Radl (EDNT 2:404) points out that in this book the two categories of μέλλω in the NT epistles are combined: imminent persecution and the anticipation of the eschaton, as “martyrdom is connected with the end” (2:10; 3:10; 6:10–11; cf. 1:9; 8:13; 10:7; 12:4–5; 17:8). Their lot was not a pleasant one, but God assures them that he will be with them.

G.K. Beale (The Book of Revelation) notes that the μηδὲν φοβοῦ formulation comes from Isaiah. See Judges 6:23; Isaiah 41:10, 13; 43:1, 5; 44:2; 54:4; Lamentations 3:57; Daniel 10:12, 19.

ἰδοὺ μέλλει βάλλειν ὁ διάβολος ἐξ ὑμῶν εἰς φυλακὴν ἵνα πειρασθῆτε-"Look, the Devil will throw (cast) some of you into prison that you might be tested"

Osborne on ἰδοὺ: The imminent persecution is now further clarified by imminent imprisonment. John introduces this segment with his characteristic ἰδού (idou, behold), a term found twenty-six times in the Apocalypse, six times in the seven letters, where its purpose is to draw attention to a particularly crucial point, here the extent of the suffering awaiting them.

Moses Stuart points out that ἵνα could be telic ("in order that") or ecbatic ("so that"): he prefers the telic sense here, which might signify Satan's reason for tempting the Smyrnaean Christians. See A Commentary on the Apocalypse, page 472.

καὶ ἕξετε θλῖψιν ἡμερῶν δέκα-"and you will have tribulation ten days"

Beale: That they “will have ten days of tribulation” is an allusion to Dan. 1:12–15, where the “testing” of Daniel and his three friends “for ten days” is repeated twice. Most commentators seem to concur that ἡμερῶν δέκα represents a short period of time. See Stuart, page 472; Jurgen Roloff, Revelation, pages 48-49.

γίνου πιστὸς ἄχρι θανάτου, καὶ δώσω σοι τὸν στέφανον τῆς ζωῆς-"be faithful to death, and I will give you the crown of life"

γίνου is present middle imperative second singular of γίνομαι (see 1 Timothy 4:12; Revelation 3:2): the verb form occurs 5x in the GNT. It has the sense here of "prove to be, be found, show yourself to be" (BDAG 199).

Trench (Commentary on the Epistles to the Seven Churches in Asia, pages 146-147) argues that ἄχρι θανάτου "is an intensive, not an extensive, term." In other words, he believes the focus of Christ's utterance is not temporal, but it focuses on the quality or degree of suffering imposed on the Smyrnaeans (i.e., be faithful even unto death).

θανάτου likely signifies a "violent death" (Stuart) or the death penalty (ultimum supplicium).

"He who died and lived again will bestow upon them the crown of life, the crown of the kingdom, incorruptible, undefiled, and unfading. He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death."

See Milligan, William. The Expositor's Bible: The Book of Revelation (Kindle Locations 742-743). Kindle Edition. 

For δώσω σοι τὸν στέφανον τῆς ζωῆς, see also 1 Corinthians 9:24, 25; Philippians 3:14; 2 Timothy 4:8; James 1:12; 1 Peter 5:4; Revelation 3:10; 4:4. Robert L. Thomas explains τῆς ζωῆς in this verse and others: "A genitive of apposition, 'the crown which is life,' renders a more satisfactory sense for the expression" (Revelation 1-7, page 173). See how the NET Bible renders Revelation 2:10.

In the scholarly literature, there has been some discussion about the "crown of life." Margaret Barker offers this information (Revelation of Jesus Christ, page 105): "Peter exhorted the church elders to tend their flocks: 'And when the chief Shepherd is manifested you will obtain the unfading crown of glory' (1 Pet. 5.4), and the Community Rule at Qumran promised to the faithful 'healing, great peace in a long life and fruitfulness together with everlasting blessing and eternal joy in life without end, a crown of glory and a garment of majesty in unending light' (1QS IV). It has been suggested that this image derived from the victor's crown at the games, but it is more likely to be a reference to the high priest's golden diadem which was worn around his turban (Ben Sira 45.12; 1 Macc. 10.20)."

BDAG:  award or prize for exceptional service or conduct, prize, reward fig. (LXX; ApcEsdr 6:17, 21 p. 31, 26 and 31 Tdf.; as symbol of victory ANock, ClR 38, 1924, 108 n. 11). In 1 Cor 9:25 (ref. to incorruptibility) and 2 Cl 7:3 (s. 1 above) the ref. to crown or wreath is strongly felt, but in the pass. that follow the imagery of the wreath becomes less and less distinct, yet without loss of its primary significance as a symbol of exceptional merit (Ael. Aristid. 27, 36 K.=16 p. 397 D.: τῶν ἀθανάτων στ.; PSI 405, 3 [III b.c.]; Danker, Benefactor 468–71). Obj. gen. τ. δικαιοσύνης for righteousness (recognition of uprightness is a common topic in Gr-Rom. decrees; s. δικαιοσύνη 3a; on the implied exceptional character of the wearer of a crown s. LDeubner, De incubatione capitula duo, 1899, 26) 2 Ti 4:8 (on posthumous award s. New Docs 2, 50; cp. Soph., Phil. 1421f of glory after suffering). W. epexegetical gen. (this is the sense of στ. δικαιοσύνης EpArist 280; TestLevi 8:2) ὁ στέφ. τῆς ζωῆς (s. ζωή 2bβ) Js 1:12; Rv 2:10; cp. 3:11; ὁ τῆς ἀφθαρσίας στ. MPol 17:1; 19:2; ὁ ἀμαράντινος τῆς δόξης στ. 1 Pt 5:4 (cp. Jer 13:18 στ. δόξης; La 2:15; cp. 1QS 4:7; 1QH 9:25; τῆς βασιλείας στ. Hippol., Ref. 9, 17, 4).—ἐλευθέριος στ. AcPl Ha 2, 31.—MBlech, Studien zum Kranz bei den Griechen 1982 (lit.).—Schürer III/1 103f, n. 60 (lit). Pauly-W. XI 1588–1607; Kl. Pauly III 324f; BHHW II 999f.—New Docs 2, 50. DELG s.v. στέφω. M-M. EDNT. TW. Sv.

See Ralph Earle, Word Meanings, page 459; Trench, Commentary on the Epistles to the Seven Churches in Asia, pages 146-150; Roloff, Revelation, page 49.

"Power" in 2 Corinthians

 All References Are From SBLGNT

2 Corinthians 1:8-Οὐ γὰρ θέλομεν ὑμᾶς ἀγνοεῖν, ἀδελφοί, ^[a]ὑπὲρ τῆς θλίψεως ἡμῶν τῆς ^[b]γενομένης ἐν τῇ Ἀσίᾳ, ὅτι καθ’ ὑπερβολὴν ^[c]ὑπὲρ δύναμιν ἐβαρήθημεν, ὥστε ἐξαπορηθῆναι ἡμᾶς καὶ τοῦ ζῆν·

2 Corinthians 4:7-Ἔχομεν δὲ τὸν θησαυρὸν τοῦτον ἐν ὀστρακίνοις σκεύεσιν, ἵνα ἡ ὑπερβολὴ τῆς δυνάμεως ᾖ τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ μὴ ἐξ ἡμῶν·

2 Corinthians 6:7-ἐν λόγῳ ἀληθείας, ἐν δυνάμει θεοῦ· διὰ τῶν ὅπλων τῆς δικαιοσύνης τῶν δεξιῶν καὶ ἀριστερῶν,

2 Corinthians 8:3-ὅτι κατὰ δύναμιν, μαρτυρῶ, καὶ ^[a]παρὰ δύναμιν, αὐθαίρετοι

2 Corinthians 12:9-10-καὶ εἴρηκέν μοι· Ἀρκεῖ σοι ἡ χάρις μου· ἡ γὰρ ^[a]δύναμις ἐν ἀσθενείᾳ ^[b]τελεῖται. ἥδιστα οὖν μᾶλλον καυχήσομαι ἐν ταῖς ἀσθενείαις ^[c]μου, ἵνα ἐπισκηνώσῃ ἐπ’ ἐμὲ ἡ δύναμις τοῦ Χριστοῦ. διὸ εὐδοκῶ ἐν ἀσθενείαις, ἐν ὕβρεσιν, ἐν ἀνάγκαις, ἐν διωγμοῖς ^[d]καὶ στενοχωρίαις, ὑπὲρ Χριστοῦ· ὅταν γὰρ ἀσθενῶ, τότε δυνατός εἰμι.

2 Corinthians 12:12-τὰ μὲν σημεῖα τοῦ ἀποστόλου κατειργάσθη ἐν ὑμῖν ἐν πάσῃ ^[a]ὑπομονῇ, σημείοις ^[b]τε καὶ τέρασιν καὶ δυνάμεσιν.

2 Corinthians 13:4-καὶ ^[a]γὰρ ἐσταυρώθη ἐξ ἀσθενείας, ἀλλὰ ζῇ ἐκ δυνάμεως θεοῦ. καὶ γὰρ ἡμεῖς ἀσθενοῦμεν ἐν αὐτῷ, ἀλλὰ ^[b]ζήσομεν σὺν αὐτῷ ἐκ δυνάμεως θεοῦ εἰς ὑμᾶς.

See 2 Corinthians 1:9

Excerpt from Kingdom Through Covenant: Remarks About Bara (Screenshot)

Gentry, Peter John, and Stephen J. Wellum. Kingdom Through Covenant: A Biblical-Theological Understanding of the Covenants. Wheaton, Ill: Crossway, 2012.

Why Give to Jehovah? (A Modified Talk)

                                  What are our reasons for giving to Jehovah?

1) Just as a young child might give a small present to his parent in order to show love and respect for the parent, so we give to Jehovah out of love and appreciation for him. Jehovah's actions cause us to feel deep gratitude. Notice how King David acknowledged that all we receive from Jehovah makes us give to him in return. Let's read 1 Chronicles 29:11-14.

David pointed out that when we give to Jehovah, we're merely returning what he has already bestowed on us. He is the giver of every good gift and perfect present (James 1:17).

2) Secondly, giving is an expression of our worship. Revelation 4:11 exclaims: “You are worthy, Jehovah our God, to receive the glory and the honor and the power, because you created all things, and because of your will they came into existence and were created.”

Do you not agree that Jehovah is worthy to receive our best? Today, we have the same privilege that ancient Israel did, to give our best to Jehovah and in support of his organization. As he told Israel when they attended their yearly festivals, we don't want to appear empty-handed before Jehovah (Deuteronomy 16:16). He is worthy of our valuable things (Proverbs 3:9-10).

3) Lastly, giving is good for us: it is healthy to be a generous giver, and not just a receiver. Notice what Proverbs 29:21 tells us. Read.

This scripture reminds us of the child who gives a small gift to a parent, from the allowance that the child's parents gave to him. How does a parent feel when a child offers this kind of gift? Do their hearts not become filled with spontaneous joy? Just as a child's giving allows him or her to show love for parents, so giving to Jehovah expresses our love for him. As we continue to give, we imitate Jehovah's goodness and generosity. Giving benefits us and we draw closer to Jehovah.

Zechariah 4:6 (By Spirit, Not by Might)

Zechariah 4:6

The purpose of this entry is to understand the potential meaning of Zechariah 4:6 and its contextual setting.

ESV: Then he said to me, 'This is the word of the Lord to Zerubbabel: Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, says the Lord of hosts."

NET: Therefore he told me, "This is the Lord’s message to Zerubbabel: ‘Not by strength and not by power, but by my Spirit,'" says the Lord of Heaven’s Armies.

NWT 2013: He then said to me: “This is the word of Jehovah to Ze·rubʹba·bel: ‘“Not by a military force, nor by power, but by my spirit,” says Jehovah of armies.

Robert Alter (The Hebrew Bible): And he answered and said to me, saying, “This is the word of the LORD to Zerubbabel, saying, Not by might and not by power but by My spirit, said the LORD of Armies.

Historical Setting: Daniel F. O'Kennedy locates the historical setting for Zechariah sometime between the second and fourth year of Darius I, which possibly occurred circa 520-518 BCE. Hebrew Bible readers will recall that the Persian king Darius governed numerous areas by means of twenty satrapies or jurisdictional districts. He used satraps (governors) to administer these provinces: "Judah (Yehud in Aramaic) was part of the fifth satrapy called Abar Nahara. Yehud was ruled by a governor and consisted of a greatly reduced territory comprising Jerusalem and its environments" (O'Kennedy).

Conditions in sixth century BCE Judah apparently were less than favorable: the repatriated Jews were suffering economically, spiritually, and emotionally. So YHWH roused the prophets Haggai and Zechariah to initiate the rebuilding of Jerusalem's temple and to promote a spiritual revival in Judah. (See O'Kennedy). Along the way, the temple project would encounter much resistance from the surrounding peoples: this persecution is likely suggested by Zechariah 4:7-10.

Within the context of these events, Zerubbabel was appointed as governor of Judah and he led the Jews back to their homeland after the Babylonian Exile (Haggai 2:21). Haggai 1:1, 12, 14; 2:2 refers to him as the son of Shealtiel, but see 1 Chronicles 3:19. In any event, Zerubbabel was picked to oversee temple rebuilding in Judah; his name possibly means "seed of Babylon" or "scion of Babylon," but Zerubbabel also might have been known as Sheshbazzar, which could have been his royal court name.

The goal of this entry is not to give definitive answers to questions about Zerubbabel but rather to elucidate Zechariah 4:6: the aforementioned details simply provide a contextual setting for this important Bible verse.

Analysis of Zechariah 4:6: 

 וַיַּ֜עַן וַיֹּ֤אמֶר אֵלַי֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר זֶ֚ה דְּבַר־יְהוָ֔ה אֶל־זְרֻבָּבֶ֖ל לֵאמֹ֑ר לֹ֤א בְחַ֙יִל֙ וְלֹ֣א בְכֹ֔חַ כִּ֣י אִם־בְּרוּחִ֔י אָמַ֖ר יְהוָ֥ה צְבָאֹֽות׃

The speaker in 4:6 is the malak of the preceding verse, who acts as angelus interpres within Zechariah's prophetic work. Verse 6 is part of the night visions given to the prophet: it encompasses the fifth night vision in the series, and it's a response to Zechariah's inquiry. The angel or messenger now speaks these fateful words to the prophet, letting him know that YHWH (Jehovah) will be the ultimate source of the temple project.

Although an angel makes the utterance, what he speaks is debar-YHWH (the Word of Jehovah): the Most High God is the prophecy's absolute source (Zechariah 4:6-9; 6:9). Furthermore, these divine words were spoken to encourage both Zechariah and Zerubbabel: the former would stir the repatriated Jews to action while the latter would lead the rebuilding of Jehovah's temple in Jerusalem. Zerubbabel was appointed not only by humans, but by God (Haggai 2:20-23).

Jehovah's angel exclaims that the temple in Jerusalem will not be constructed by human strength, or might; the Hebrew term hayil potentially signifies effectual ability/power, an army or wealth (Boda, The Book of Zechariah). See 2 Samuel 23:20; Proverbs 31:10. Hayil "is never used in relation to God’s might, but it is not by definition ungodly (cf. Exod. 18:21, 25) and can be used for God’s purposes (Judg. 6:12; Isa. 60:5)." (Boda, The Book of Zechariah)

On the other hand, Bible writers use the word koah to describe God's creative activity, power conferred by God (Isaiah 40:29; Micah 3:8), God's governance of the world, and his dealings with ancient Israel. See the BDF entry for koach/koah.

George Klein writes: The next negative, “nor by power” (be-koah) indicates human resources in a more general sense (see Neh 4:10 where the same term describes the laborers' strength).311 The preposition be (NIV “by”) indicates agency or means.312 Together, the terms “might” and “power” form a hendiadys encompassing the panoply of human resources that one might marshal in order to effect God's will.

The point is that the temple would not be rebuilt by human strength or military might, but only through/by the ruah YHWH: the work would be accomplished by God's spirit operating on Zerubbabel, Joshua the priest, and the prophets.

Carol and Eric Meyers note the use of hendiadys in Zechariah 4:6 like Klein does: they point out that hayil "often means army or military force" (page 244). So the prophetic utterance strongly decries the use of human force or ingenuity; total dependence must be on the spirit of Jehovah: "God's 'spirit' is his involvement in and control over human events" (Meyers, ibid.). Jehovah's Witnesses describe God's ruah in this context as his "active force," which is distinguished from God's power. The holy spirit of God has been operative since the beginning of creation (Genesis 1:2; Psalm 33:6), and it would be the divine force that helped Judah to have a new temple despite malaise, opposition or interference from opposers:

"These memorable words have great resonance, but how do they follow from the vision of the golden lampstand? The golden lampstand, with its seven burning oil lamps, is to be a focal point in the Temple, its light a token of God’s radiant presence in His house, in the midst of His people. Thus the rebuilding of the Temple, in difficult material conditions and perhaps with some resistance from the Persian imperial power, will be consummated through God’s spirit, which is symbolized in the lampstand. The idea of imposing obstacles that are set as naught is spelled out in the next verse" (Alter, The Hebrew Bible).

References:

https://www.sots.ac.uk/wiki/zerubbabel/

O'Kennedy, Daniel F. : http://www.scielo.org.za/pdf/ote/v32n1/11.pdf

Insight on the Scriptures. Brooklyn, N.Y., U.S.A: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, International Bible Students Association, 1988. Print.

Hill, Andrew E. Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi: An Introduction and Commentary. Downers Grove, Illinois: IVP Academic, 2012. Print.

Klein, George. New American Commentary Vol. 21B: Zechariah (Kindle Locations 4848-4853). B&H Publishing. Kindle Edition.

Boda, Mark J. The Book of Zechariah. The New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2016.

Meyers, Carol L. and Meyers, Eric M. Haggai, Zechariah 1-8. AB 25B. New York: Doubleday, 1987.  

Alter, Robert. The Hebrew Bible. New York: WW Norton, 2018.

Paradise Restored to Mankind By Theocracy. New York: Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, 1972.