The Preterist Blog ~ 100% Hyperpreterist Free|we can haz rezurekshun?

I have very little knowledge of the original languages used by the authors of Scripture.  Therefore when someone makes a claim about how the original word in a given text should have been conveyed I have little capability to argue the point.  Recently I’ve witnessed a couple of Hyper-Preterist’s attempting to foist upon on the reading public the concept conveyed through the translation of the Greek word “Mello” is wrong as it appears in our Bibles.  On the surface one of the Hyper-Preterist’s presented what appeared to be a legitimate argument.   However after performing a little research I soon found out the Hyper-Preterist, identified below as HP1 was misrepresenting the meaning of the word and totally lacked an understanding of the translation process.  The 2nd Hyper-Preterist, proving that this unwarranted view is supported by those who willingly check their brains at the door in an effort to justify their position, makes a claim more akin to what one would hear on George Noory’s late night radio show, fit in between programming covering topics like the lost continent of Atlantis and area 51.

HP1 wrote, (Acts 17:30-31) 30 “Therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all people everywhere should repent, 31 because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead.”

In verse 31 the word “will” is the Greek word “mello”. Mello in the Greek means, “to be about to be” or “to be on the point of something”. The passage could just as easily read, “He has fixed a day in which he is about to judge the world”. The Greek word “mello” helps us to understand the imminence of this judgment.

mello>
signifies (a) “of intention, to be about to do something,” e.g., Acts 3:3; 18:14; 20:3; Heb. 8:5; (b) “of certainty, compulsion or necessity, to be certain to act,” e.g., John 6:71. See ALMOST, BEGIN, COME, INTEND, MEAN, MIND, POINT OF (at), READY, SHALL, SHOULD, TARRY.
(source-Vines Expository NT Dictionary)

Citing as his source Vines Dictionary HP1 makes the argument that what the Apostle really told the Greek’s at the Areopagus in Athens was that judgment was “about to” come upon them.  Using a slight of hand HP1 claims the meaning of the word “Mello” is, “to be about to be” or “to be on the point of something”, which is the 1^st definition provided in the reputable source he cites.  This might be very convincing to the unsuspecting reader because the definition provided by Vine’s isn’t all that detailed.  

 Thinking that perhaps HP1 was onto something I began to check several translations of Acts 17:31 to determine if any supported his assertion.  What I found was that none of the mainline translations, KJV, NIV, NRSV, NAB, NASB, ESV, Rheims, or Amplified supported his claim.  Clearly something was up with HP1’s conclusion, but Vines seemed to support his argument so I sought the advice of a friend who is thoroughly versed in the original languages. What I found out was that “Mello” has a much broader range of meaning than HP1 was claiming.

The semantic range is presented in *A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature* revised and edited by Frederick William Danker (BDAG = *the* world standard exegetical lexicon; brackets added):

1. To take place at a future point of time and so to be subsequent to another event, *be about to*, used with infinitive following. (a) [...] with the future infinitive *mellw* denotes certainty that an event will
occur in the future. *will certainly take place or be* Acts 11:28;`
24:15; 27:10. (b) with the aorist infinitive [...] *be on the point of, be about to* [...] Romans 8:18 [...] Revelation 3:2, 16. (c) with the present infinitive [...]
(alpha) *be about to, be on the point of* [...] *he was at the point of
death* [...] Luke 7:2 [...] John 4:47 [...] of heavenly glory 1 Peter 5:1, Cp. Luke 19:4; John 6:6; Acts 3:3; 5:35; 18:14; 21:27; 22:36; 23:27. — occasionally almost = *begin* [...] Revelation 10:4 [...] *when all things are are* (or *begin*) *to be accomplished* Mark 13:4; cp. Luke 21:7; Revelation 10:7.
(beta) in a weakened sense it serves simply as a periphrasis for the future [...] *what I tell or shall tell him* [...]. — Substitute for the disappearing future [...] Acts 28:6; for the future participle [...] Matthew 11:14. [...] *the one who was going to do this* Luke 22:23; cp.
24:21; Acts 13:34. [...] *those who were to believe* (in him) *in the
future* 1 Timothy 1:16. [...] *those who were to be ungodly in the
future* 2 Peter 2:6 variant reading [...]. Of Christ [...] 2 Timothy 4:1; [...] *raging fire that will devour the opponents* Hebrews 10:27.
(gamma) denoting an intended action: *intend, purpose, have in mind* [...] *Herod intends to search for the child* Matthew 2:13, [...] *where he himself intended to come* Luke 10:1, [...] *they intended to come* John 6:15. Cp. vers 71; 7:35; 12:4; 14:22; Acts 17:31; 20:3, 7, 13ab; 23:15; 26:2; 27:30; Hebrews 8:5; 2 Peter 1:12. [...] *what do you intend to do?* Hs 1:5 [...] *I have no intention of doing* MPol 8:2 [...] *they wanted to nail him fast* [...] *wanted to take him out* 17:2.

2. to be inevitable, *be destined, inevitable* (a) with present infinitive to denote an action that necessarily follows a divine decree *is destined, must, certainly* … [...] *he is destined to suffer* Matthew 17:12; [...] *must be crucified* 12:1 [...] Mt 17:22; Lk 9:44; B
16:5 [...] John 11:51; 12:33; 18:32, [...]. Cp Mt 16:27; 20:22; Romans
4:24 8:13; Revelation 12:5, [...] *they should no more see … Acts 20:38. [...] *what must come to pass 26:22; cp. Revelation 1:19. [...] *those who are to inherit salvation* Hebrews 1:14. [...] *that were to be afflicted* 1 Thess. 3:4, — Mark 10:32; Luke 9:31; John 7:39; Hebrews 11:8. [...] *on the day on which Paul was to fight the wild animals AcPl Ha 3, 9 [...] *in expectation of the city’s destruction* 5, 16. [...]
*I* (Jesus ) *am about to be crucified once more* 7, 29. (b) with aorist infinitive [...] *that is destined (according to God’s will) to be
revealed* Galatians 3:23.

3. The participle is used absolutely in the meaning *(in the) future, to
come* [...] *the age to come* [...] which brings the reign of God [...] Mt. 12:32; Ephesians 1:21; [...] Hebrews 6:5. [...] 1 Tim. 4:8 [...] Hebrews 2:5. [...] 13:4 [...] 9:11; [...] *the judgment to come Acts 24:25; [...] Mt. 3:7. [...] Romans 5:14. [...] *for the future* [...] 1 Tim. 6:19; specifically *(in the) next year* [...] Lk 13:9 [...] *the things to come* [...] Colossians 2:17 [...]. [...] Romans 8:38; 1 Cor.
3:22 [...] 2 Peter 2:6.

In addition to the quality and quantity of information from the bell weather Lexicon my friend provided, after reviewing the comments of HP1 he also went on to provide the view of an recognized expert in the field of analyzing the text, along with his own translation and stated reason.

I see that A. T. Robertson, the estimable author of *A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research*, has this comment on the occurrence of the word *mellw* in Act 17:31 : “*Will
judge* (*mellei krinein*), Rather, is going to judge, *mellw* and the present active infinitive of *krinw*.

I would render the clause “He has fixed a day in which he is going to judge the world,” expressing a nuance of certainty rather than imminence. A good English parallel to the relevant Greek text of Acts 17:31 : that is, in my comment saying, ‘a friend who *is going to pick…up …*’, *is going to* (= *will*) has the sense of *mellw*, and *to pick…up* is a present infinitive that corresponds to the present infinitive following *mellw* in the Greek text of Acts 17:31.

That’s illustrative of the fact that it is not the word itself but rather the context of the word that determines the nuance of the word in the biblical text : that is, the word ‘tomorrow’ in my comment reveals that the action of the verbs (*mellw* + infinitive) is a soon-impending event. Lacking that word in the immediate context, the term in question could refer to a (relatively, from an historical perspective) distant future event — such as (hypothetically speaking) the friend picking up the computer when he finishes a 4-year tour of duty in government service abroad in another country.

In Acts, there is nothing in the immediate context of the clause in question, or within the context of the entire book, that indicates when or how soon the judgment (referred to by Paul in 17:21) might occur. That’s why I say the notion that the word may mean *about to* in 17:31 ‘lacks sufficient contextual warrant’. Said notion is proposed not because it is indicated in or by either the word itself or the context of the word, but rather because of a presupposition for which someone is seeking to find justification in the text. That’s how interpretations are read into scripture, rather than derived from scripture.

You can take it (or leave it ) from one who actually reads the Greek text, that the natural reading of the Greek text (of Acts 17:31a) corresponds to the renderings in all the English versions. Example:
‘because he has fixed^ a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed’ (ESV).

Clearly the claim of HP1 was wrong. There is no reason for one to presuppose “imminence” in the passage as the HP1 was suggesting. This was just another example of Hyper-Preterist’s utilizing eisegesis aided by ignorance with the original languages to shore up their unwarranted position.  However, this was not the worst of it.

Soon after exposing HP1’s slight of hand, I came upon this explanation for why “Mello” isn’t exclusively translated indicating the concept of “imminence”.  

HP2, (Mello) …. is an important GREEK word. This is why you won’t find it in the ENGLISH text. The futurists who did the translating often left the Greek rendering of “mello” as a very hazy relation to the future, such as “will,” “shall,” “would,” or “should.“ I believe there are more than 30 uses of “mello” in regards to end-time events… Is it any wonder why the difficulty in seeing the nearness of the Lord’s Parousia has been enhanced by a biased rendering of these very meaningful words?

Showing signs of delusional thought HP2 makes the claim that all the translators of the English Bible versions conspired together to suppress the actual meaning of the word.  The claim of HP1 is at best merely a demonstration of ignorance fueled by some bad information and an unwillingness to test the validity of a claim or at worst is evidence of intellectual dishonesty in knowingly conveying an illegitimate concept, that being the range of meaning for “Mello” was restricted.  However, the claim of HP2 leads one to wonder how many cards are in the decks of these purveyors of heresy.  In fashion akin to a Hollywood fiction flick, HP2 was positing a mass conspiracy and cover-up.  Forsaking their academic calling, according to HP2, the translators of Scripture had assigned a “fuzzy” meaning just to hinder the truth from coming out.  

Both of these Hyper-Preterist arguments are taken from Christian discussion boards designed to fuel discussion between believers.  Clearly the administrations of those cites have neither the time or see the need to prohibit Hyper-Preterist’s from misrepresenting the facts or challenging the sanity of those posting.  Therefore, buyer, beware, what Hyper-Preterist’s are selling on internet sites isn’t based on sound reasoning or for that matter necessarily the product of a lucid, sound mind, that is unless you go for area 51 cover-ups.