Sinking the Ship of "Hyper-Preterism"
Torpedo #3
"Mellowing out on 'mello'"
A pivotal point that hyper-Preterists make is that the Greek word “μέλλω” (mello) always functions as a time indicator, and that whenever we see this word we are to understand that the subject under consideration is ABOUT to, or on the point of happening. But my conclusion is that nothing is proven for the full nor for the Partial Preterist by the Greek word “mello”. The debate must be settled with other considerations.
Joe Puckett Jr.
A pivotal point that hyper-Preterists make is that the Greek word “μέλλω” (mello) always functions as a time indicator, and that whenever we see this word we are to understand that the subject under consideration is ABOUT to, or on the point of happening. In other words, they suggest that where “mello” is used, then the prophecy under discussion is intended to be imminent, i.e. within that existing generation.
It would be foolish to deny that “mello” is used as a time indicator in many texts. But it is an exegetical fallacy to think that a word MUST mean the EXACT same thing in EVERY place it is found. For instance, the Greek word απολύω means divorce (as in ending a marriage) in Matthew 19:9. But the same word is used in Matthew 14:22 where Jesus “sends” the multitude “away”. No one would argue that in this text the word means that Jesus was ending a marriage with the crowd. It is obviously used in a different sense even though the idea of “separation” is included in both texts.
D.A. Carson in his work on Exegetical Fallacies includes this concern in his section on “Unwarranted restriction of the semantic field”, pg. 57. In it he said, “There are many different ways of misunderstanding the meaning of a word in a particular context by illegitimately restricting the word’s semantic range…. We sometimes fail to appreciate how wide the total semantic range of a word is; therefore when we do not adequately consider the potential options and unwittingly exclude possibilities that might include the correct one.”
But are there other options for “mello” besides an imminent (“on the point of”) meaning? The vast consensus of lexical authorities suggest there are. Here are just a few.
μέλλω (mellō): vb.; ≡ Str 3195—1. LN 67.62 be about to, to occur at adj. point of time in the future (Mt 20:22); 2. LN 71.36 must be, to be inevitable (Mt 17:12); 3. LN 67.121 wait (to extend time, implying adj. lack of decision (Ac 22:16); 4. LN 67.135 τὸμέλλον (to mellon), future (Lk 13:9; 1Ti 6:19+)
Swanson, J. 1997. Dictionary
of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains : Greek (New Testament)
(electronic ed.). Logos Research Systems, Inc.:
________________________________________________________________________
3195 μέλλω [mello /mel·lo/] v. A strengthened form of 3199 (through the idea of expectation); GK 3516; 110 occurrences; AV translates as “shall” 25 times, “should” 20 times, “would” nine times, “to come” nine times, “will” seven times, “things to come” four times, not translated three times, and translated miscellaneously 33 times. 1 to be about. 1a to be on the point of doing or suffering something. 1b to intend, have in mind, think to. (Enhanced Strong’s Lexicon)
________________________________________________________________________
3516 μέλλω (mellō): vb ≡ STR 3195—1. LN 67.62 be about to, to occur at adj. point of time in the future (Mt 20:22); 2. LN 71.36 must be, to be inevitable (Mt 17:12); 3. LN 67.121 wait (to extend time, implying adj. lack of decision (Ac 22:16); 4. LN 67.135 τὸμέλλον (to mellon), future (Lk 13:9; 1Ti 6:19=+ (Dictionary of Biblical Languages With Semantic Domains : Greek (New Testament)
________________________________________________________________________
ΜΕΛ́ΛΩ: impf. ἔμελλον or ἤμελλον, Ep. μέλλον, Ion. μέλλεσκον: f. μελλήσω: aor. i ἐμέλλησα:— Pass., v. infr. 11:—to think of doing, intend to do, to be about to do, with inf., mostly inf. Fut., τάχ ἔμελλεδώσειν he was just going to give, Il.; μέλλεις ἀφαιρήσεσθαι ἄεθλον thou thinkest to strip me of the prize, Ib.; often with οὐκἄρα, as, οὐκἄρ ἔμελλες λήξειν; did you not think you might stop? could you not stop? Od., etc.; to be about to do (on compulsion), to be destined to do or to be, τὰ οὐ τελέεσθαι ἔμελλον which were not to be accomplished, Il.; μέλλεν οἶκος ἀφνειὸς ἔμμεναι the house was destined to be wealthy, Od.; εἰ ἐμέλλομεν ἀνοίσειν if we were able to refer, Plat.
2. to express a certainty, μέλλω ἀπέχθεσθαι Διί it must be that I am hated by Zeus, Il.; μέλλω ἀθανάτους ἀλιτέσθαι I must have sinned against the immortals, Od.
3. to mark a probability, when it may be rendered to be like to do or be, or expressed by an Adv., τὰ δὲ μέλλετ ἀκουέμεν be like ye have heard it, Hom.; μέλλει ςἴδ μεναι thou art like to know of it, Od.; ἐ μέλλετ ἆρα πάντες ἀνασείειν βοήν aye, all of you were like to raise (i.e. I thought you would raise) a cry of submission, Ar.
II. to mark mere intention, to be always going to do without ever doing, and so to delay, put off, hesitate, scruple, mostly with inf. Pres., τί μέλλομεν χωρεῖν; Soph.; often followed by μὴ, οὐ, or μή, τί μέλλομεν μὴ πράσσειν; Eur.
2. μέλλω often stands without its inf., τὸν υἱὸνἑ όρακας αὐτοῦ; Answ. τίδ οὐ μέλλω; why shouldn‘t I have seen him? i.e. be sure I have, Xen.; οὐδὲ νἐπάθετε οὐδὲἐ μελλήσατε (sc. παθεῖν) Thuc.:—so, when μέλλω seems to govern an acc., an inf. is omitted, τὸ μέλλει νἀγαθά (sc. πράσσειν) the expectation of good things, Eur.: hence 3. the part. μέλλων without an inf. (where εἶναι or γίγνεσθαι may be supplied), ὁμ. χρόνος the future time, Pind., Aesch,; esp. in neut., τὸ μέλλον, τὰ μέλλοντα things to come, the event, issue, future, Aesch., etc.:—so in Med., τὰἰ σχυρόταταἐ λπιζόμενα μέλλεται your strongest pleas are hopes in futurity, Thuc.
III. μέλλομαι as Pass., ὡς μὴ μέλλοιτο τὰ δέοντα that the necessary steps might not be delayed, Xen..; ἐν ὅσῳ ταῦτα μέλλεται while these delays are going on, Den. (An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon, Liddel)
________________________________________________________________________
To continue giving more lexical research would be redundant. But with these could be added Thayers, Perschbacher, Gingrich, etc.. The one thing they all have in common is that there is more than one option with regard to “mello”.
But let’s look at some examples of “mello” in scripture. First, let’s look at some passages in the OT (LXX) that uses the word in ways that do not mean imminent (within one generation).
In no particular order the word “mello” in its various forms occurs in Job 26:2,Psalm 64:1, Isaiah 15:7, Job 3:8, Isaiah 47:13, Job 19:25, Proverbs 15:18, Isaiah 48:6, Jeremiah 36:10 (which in the Hebrew Bible is Jer. 29:10), Isaiah 28:24, Isaiah 59:5, Genesis 25:22, Genesis 43:25, Exodus 4:12. (This is every instance in the LXX). Out of these, the following examples will be selected to show that immediacy is not always intended.
Jer. 36:10, which in the Hebrew Bible is Jer. 29:10, uses "mello" to refer to something that would happen after 70 years (almost two generations).
Is. 47:13 uses “mello” to refer to an event
more than 142 years. Isaiah lived until about 681 BC.
Job 19:25 "mello" refers to Job seeing his Redeemer "in the end". Even if this end is referring to AD 70 then this obviously is not referring to something immediate from Job's perspective. Thousands of years stood between Job and Jesus. For those of you who want it here is the Greek text for it, "οἶδα γὰρ ὅτι ἀέναός ἐστιν ὁ ἐκλύειν με μέλλων ἐπὶ γῆς.[1]" (Special note: Even some on this web site admit that Job 19:25 is looking forward to the Messiah. benja says in one post about this text "Job's friends did not seem to have the concept of a Messiah yet it seems to me that Job did. "For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth:" Job 19:14. Then 1manifestation said about his comment here, "Hi benja good point.")
Proverbs 15:18 is a general proverb and has no time frame in mind at all. There seems to be a lot of uses of “mello” this way. In other words it is always true and it is certain that, “A wrathful man stirs up strife. But he who is slow to anger allays contention.” (18νρ θυμώδης παρασκευάζει μάχας, μακρόθυμος δκατν μέλλουσαν καταπραΰνει.[1]) “μέλλουσαν” is the verb, present, active, participle, feminine, singular, accusative form of μέλλω.
Here is also a list of verses in the NT where the event was a long period away.
Mathew 11:14. In Matthew 11:10 Jesus quotes from Mal. 3:1 and refers it to the coming of John the Baptist. In verse 14 Jesus said that John was Elijah who the OT said was “to come” (“μέλλων” verb, present, active, participle, masculine, singular, nominative) Note: Even though the present tense is used here, Jesus’ reference to Mal. 3:1 makes it seem clear that John “is coming” from the standpoint of Malachi’s prophecy, not from the standpoint of the contemporaries of Jesus, since John had already come from their standpoint. This is why some translations choose the past tense rendering, i.e. “who was to come”, KJV, NIV, NASB. So again, hundreds of years stood between the prophecy of Malachi and the coming of John the Baptist.
Acts 22:16. The idea in this text is one of “delay” not of imminence.
2 Peter 2:6. Those who would (μελλόντων) live ungodly is referring to all those who are “intending” to living ungodly not those who are “soon” to live ungodly. Literally the verse could say “…an example of men intending to live impiously.” (Alfred Marshal, Parallel NT in Greek and English). (Compare this usage also with 1 Timothy 1:16)
Acts 26:22. Here is a case where what Moses said “would come” happened hundreds of years before it actually came, i.e. the resurrection of Christ and the proclamation of the Gospel, vs. 23. Paul is comparing what he was saying now about what did happen to Jesus with what Moses said back then what “was going to happen” to Jesus, (NASB). In conclusion, I suggest that nothing is proven for the full nor for the partial Preterist by the Greek word “mello”. The debate must be settled with other considerations.
Name: Joe
Puckett
Email Address:
Date:
November 13, 2007
Time:
10:43:04 AM
Comments
I have been wrestling with the subject of Biblical eschatology for quite some time now. Some time ago, I submitted a series of articles on a Preterist site entitled "Sinking the Ship of Hyper-Preterism". In this series I claimed to have shot some "torpedoes" which were supposed to have sunk the Preterist view. But since that time the "torpedoes" have taken an unexpected u-turn. While I have been tossed "to and fro" in times past, my studies have now led me to what I believe is the truth of Covenant Eschatology. But, like everyone else who becomes convinced of fulfilled eschatology, all sorts of issues and questions consequently come up. Questions like, "If Jesus has already come and is now present with His church, and if the resurrection is an accomplished reality, then what is left for us? What are the implications of fulfilled eschatology?" The answer to these questions is where many Preterists disagree the most. Frankly, there are many things that have not changed since my coming to Preterism. But there are many things that have changed. Additionally I don't have to be a prophet to know that more things will change as I continue to study and grow. But in this short piece I would like to explain some implications that have arisen since I now understand that Christ has come. Comments RKM: Please read: When Torpedoes Take A U-Turn