"The Lord's Day" Revelation 1:10 - Is NOT Sunday!
"The Lord's Day" Revelation 1:10 (Is Not a reference to Sunday, but the eschatological DAY OF THE LORD!)
Among today's commentators there continues to be an argument about the meaning of the phrase ἐν τῃ̂ κυριακῃ̂ ἡμέρᾳ in Revelation 1:10. Should it be translated in such a way that it is read to mean the Lord's Day, or another way of saying, the first day of the week, or, should it be translated and understood as an expression equivalent to the day of the Lord?
Most scholars today prefer the view that John was indicating what day of the week he received the Revelation, but a new view of the evidence seems to point in a different direction.
In Revelation 1:10 John uses what was then apparently a unique (dative) expression. However, John’s unique use in the New Testament of the dative expression, the Lord ’s Day (τῃ̂ κυριακῃ̂ ἡμέρᾳ ), appears to be a product of the frequently used and similar dative expression that day ( ἐκείνῃ τῃ̂ ἡμέρᾳ) in the Septuagint (LXX), to designate the day of the Lord (Zech 12-14, etc.). It logically follows that since, in John's Bible, the day of the Lord is often represented by the shortened dative phrase, "that day," we would hardly be surprised, and should even expect John to use the shortened phrase "Lord's day," to refer to "the day of the Lord." This observation seems to have been overlooked by those who insist that John’s use of Lord's day refers to Sunday (Thomas, Osborne). John likely would have been quite familiar with the dative construction of that day from the Septuagint (Zech 12:8 ἐκείνῃ τῃ̂ ἡμέρᾳ) and could have quite easily penned the dative Lord's day instead of that day, with the same intended eschatological meaning, having just been confronted with a vision of the glorified Christ. Indeed, John had just finished quoting Zechariah 12:10 (Rev 1:7) where we find a passage (Zech 12-14) with repeated use of that day (LXX) referring to the day when the Lord comes.
The context of Chapter One: (1:1) "revelation of Jesus Christ...", (1:7) "Behold He is coming with the clouds...", (1:8) "the One who is to come...", point to "Lord's day" as John's choice of words to describe the eschatological day of the Lord. To propose, as some do, that John would believe it necessary to reveal what day of the week he received the Revelation, and leave out the time frame for the events, is without precedent among God's prophets. Some might object to this assertion and point out that John was writing "Sunday" in much the same way he had just written that he was "on the island called Patmos," just as unnecessary a detail to include as saying it was "Sunday." However, John's epistolary remarks in verse nine set the stage for the dramatic contrast in verse ten, that he went from being a prisoner on an island called Patmos, to being present in the Spirit in the day of the Lord.
The fact that Lord's Day is preceded by in the Spirit (ἐν πνεύματι) also tends to point the meaning in the direction of the day of the Lord. John uses the phrase in the Spirit four times, 1:10, 4:2, 17:3, 21:10. Each use introduces or is followed by John being transported to a place, or shown a vision, inaccessible to him under normal circumstances. Why would John find it necessary to tell us that such was necessary to get to a day of the week? Lord's Day clearly follows in the Spirit and is separate and distinct from John's remarks in verse nine. Any attempt to pluck Lord's Day away from its position and relation to in the Spirit in 1:10 appears to introduce an inconsistent exegesis of the text (ἐν πνεύματι).
Certainly of importance is the additional fact that following John's notice that he was in the Spirit in the Lord's day, John immediately begins presenting information about the coming of the Lord, the day of the Lord. First, Jesus speaks to His churches, warning and encouraging them about His coming, and then, the events preceding, attending, and following His coming are revealed.
[It is noteworthy that, just as the coming of Christ is announced with a trumpet (1 Thess. 4:16; Matt.24:31), so is all that John reveals to us here (Rev. 1:10).]
The Lord's Day expression is never used in the Bible to designate Sunday, the Sabbath, or a day of the week meant for worship (unless, as Mounce, p. 76, and others argue, this is the meaning here). Thomas (vol. 1, p. 91) suggests that this is possibly "the first use of this name for Sunday." But all the writers of the New Testament who made any reference to Sunday, including Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Paul, designated Sunday exclusively with the phrase "first day of the week" (cf. Mt. 28:1, Mk. 16:2, 9; Lk. 24:1, John 20:1, 19; Acts 20:7; 1 Cor 16:2).
Thomas (ibid.) says the Lord's Day is used "a short time after the writing of the Apocalypse" to designate Sunday. But, a check of his sources raises questions about this conclusion. The Didache (14:1) has the word for Lord, but does not have the word day, the expression under discussion does not appear. Ignatius' Epistle to the Magnesians, in a similar style, simply has the word Lord, but not day. The Gospel of Peter (Evangelia Petri) likewise makes no mention of day. Melito of Sardis (165-175 AD) is claimed by Eusebius to have written a paper entitled, The Lord's Day, but again the word for day does not actually appear in the title, and the contents of the book have not survived for our examination. And the time when Melito wrote, between 165-175 AD, is certainly not "a short time" after John wrote the book of Revelation, especially if the early dating of Revelation proves to be true. The argument for Lord's Day meaning Sunday would be far more persuasive if the evidence for the use of the term pre-dated John's use in 1:10.
[Note: "Etymology is not particularly helpful as a guide to the meaning of a term in any given context. Semantic context is the more reliable guide." Reference Manual for New Testament Interpretation (© various). This document reflects the latest edition of a variety of sources prepared or employed by various professors who have taught New Testament exegesis at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary over many years.]
Later in church history (as in our day) Christians would refer to Sunday, or the day set aside for worship, as "the Lord's day." However, "the day of the Lord," "that day," and "the day" are used throughout the Bible to designate the eschatological day of the Lord, the event when the Lord Jesus comes again. John is saying that the Revelation he received pertained to the time concerning the events surrounding the coming of the Lord Jesus. The observation (Thomas, op. cit.) that John uses the dative of Lord (adjectival, "Lord's day") contributes nothing to his argument that the meaning is Sunday. The genitive is the customary case for adjectives; the dative for adverbs (Wallace, p.76). Peter, using the genitive as John uses the dative, writes (2 Peter 3:12), "God's Day," της του θεου ἡμέρας, an adjectival use of God in the genitive with the noun, "day." This is especially noteworthy in that Peter uses this construction as a synonymous way of stating "the day of the Lord," which he had referenced in the same passage (ἡμέρα κυρίου 2 Peter 3:10). Walvoord says, "The adjectival form can be explained on the ground that in the Old Testament there was no adjectival form for "Lord," and therefore the noun had to be used" (p.42). Nothing from history, or from the way John uses the Greek language, compels us to conclude that by "Lord's day," he meant anything different than "day of the Lord." Kittel observes, "A genitive του κυρίου might have been used instead of the adjective." [Gerhard Kittel, Editor. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, 1976), p.1096] The attempts to import the later future meaning of this phrase, "Sunday," into the present context is an example of the exegetical fallacy (Carson, p. 32) described as "semantic anachronism." The reader should refer to Carson's discussion of μάρτυς (Rev. 2:13).
If John wished to communicate to his readers the day of the week on which he received the Revelation, we would not expect him to select a term which was virtually unheard of as a designation for a day of the week. It still remains a fact that no historical document establishes "Lord's Day" as a designation for any day of the week up to the time of the writing of the Revelation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It still remains a fact that no historical document establishes "Lord's Day" as a designation for any day of the week up to the time of the writing of the Revelation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is especially critical to note that at the outset John is giving us the time frame of the events and revelation he is about to show his readers. All that follows is to be found in the Lord's Day. Compromising this point has resulted in the mess we are in today with all the different suggestions for other time frames for the events portrayed in the Revelation given us by John. Please prayerfully consider re-thinking and changing your position if yours is different. Remember the warning at the end of the book.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Isn't it ironic to see the warnings at the end of Revelation 22, look at the mess our evangelical teachers have made of the book of Revelation, and then raise our eyes to the horizon where we see the coming means of the plagues warned of for those who would tamper with this book.
Among today's commentators there continues to be an argument about the meaning of the phrase ἐν τῃ̂ κυριακῃ̂ ἡμέρᾳ in Revelation 1:10. Should it be translated in such a way that it is read to mean the Lord's Day, or another way of saying, the first day of the week, or, should it be translated and understood as an expression equivalent to the day of the Lord?
Most scholars today prefer the view that John was indicating what day of the week he received the Revelation, but a new view of the evidence seems to point in a different direction.
In Revelation 1:10 John uses what was then apparently a unique (dative) expression. However, John’s unique use in the New Testament of the dative expression, the Lord ’s Day (τῃ̂ κυριακῃ̂ ἡμέρᾳ ), appears to be a product of the frequently used and similar dative expression that day ( ἐκείνῃ τῃ̂ ἡμέρᾳ) in the Septuagint (LXX), to designate the day of the Lord (Zech 12-14, etc.). It logically follows that since, in John's Bible, the day of the Lord is often represented by the shortened dative phrase, "that day," we would hardly be surprised, and should even expect John to use the shortened phrase "Lord's day," to refer to "the day of the Lord." This observation seems to have been overlooked by those who insist that John’s use of Lord's day refers to Sunday (Thomas, Osborne). John likely would have been quite familiar with the dative construction of that day from the Septuagint (Zech 12:8 ἐκείνῃ τῃ̂ ἡμέρᾳ) and could have quite easily penned the dative Lord's day instead of that day, with the same intended eschatological meaning, having just been confronted with a vision of the glorified Christ. Indeed, John had just finished quoting Zechariah 12:10 (Rev 1:7) where we find a passage (Zech 12-14) with repeated use of that day (LXX) referring to the day when the Lord comes.
The context of Chapter One: (1:1) "revelation of Jesus Christ...", (1:7) "Behold He is coming with the clouds...", (1:8) "the One who is to come...", point to "Lord's day" as John's choice of words to describe the eschatological day of the Lord. To propose, as some do, that John would believe it necessary to reveal what day of the week he received the Revelation, and leave out the time frame for the events, is without precedent among God's prophets. Some might object to this assertion and point out that John was writing "Sunday" in much the same way he had just written that he was "on the island called Patmos," just as unnecessary a detail to include as saying it was "Sunday." However, John's epistolary remarks in verse nine set the stage for the dramatic contrast in verse ten, that he went from being a prisoner on an island called Patmos, to being present in the Spirit in the day of the Lord.
The fact that Lord's Day is preceded by in the Spirit (ἐν πνεύματι) also tends to point the meaning in the direction of the day of the Lord. John uses the phrase in the Spirit four times, 1:10, 4:2, 17:3, 21:10. Each use introduces or is followed by John being transported to a place, or shown a vision, inaccessible to him under normal circumstances. Why would John find it necessary to tell us that such was necessary to get to a day of the week? Lord's Day clearly follows in the Spirit and is separate and distinct from John's remarks in verse nine. Any attempt to pluck Lord's Day away from its position and relation to in the Spirit in 1:10 appears to introduce an inconsistent exegesis of the text (ἐν πνεύματι).
Certainly of importance is the additional fact that following John's notice that he was in the Spirit in the Lord's day, John immediately begins presenting information about the coming of the Lord, the day of the Lord. First, Jesus speaks to His churches, warning and encouraging them about His coming, and then, the events preceding, attending, and following His coming are revealed.
[It is noteworthy that, just as the coming of Christ is announced with a trumpet (1 Thess. 4:16; Matt.24:31), so is all that John reveals to us here (Rev. 1:10).]
The Lord's Day expression is never used in the Bible to designate Sunday, the Sabbath, or a day of the week meant for worship (unless, as Mounce, p. 76, and others argue, this is the meaning here). Thomas (vol. 1, p. 91) suggests that this is possibly "the first use of this name for Sunday." But all the writers of the New Testament who made any reference to Sunday, including Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Paul, designated Sunday exclusively with the phrase "first day of the week" (cf. Mt. 28:1, Mk. 16:2, 9; Lk. 24:1, John 20:1, 19; Acts 20:7; 1 Cor 16:2).
Thomas (ibid.) says the Lord's Day is used "a short time after the writing of the Apocalypse" to designate Sunday. But, a check of his sources raises questions about this conclusion. The Didache (14:1) has the word for Lord, but does not have the word day, the expression under discussion does not appear. Ignatius' Epistle to the Magnesians, in a similar style, simply has the word Lord, but not day. The Gospel of Peter (Evangelia Petri) likewise makes no mention of day. Melito of Sardis (165-175 AD) is claimed by Eusebius to have written a paper entitled, The Lord's Day, but again the word for day does not actually appear in the title, and the contents of the book have not survived for our examination. And the time when Melito wrote, between 165-175 AD, is certainly not "a short time" after John wrote the book of Revelation, especially if the early dating of Revelation proves to be true. The argument for Lord's Day meaning Sunday would be far more persuasive if the evidence for the use of the term pre-dated John's use in 1:10.
[Note: "Etymology is not particularly helpful as a guide to the meaning of a term in any given context. Semantic context is the more reliable guide." Reference Manual for New Testament Interpretation (© various). This document reflects the latest edition of a variety of sources prepared or employed by various professors who have taught New Testament exegesis at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary over many years.]
Later in church history (as in our day) Christians would refer to Sunday, or the day set aside for worship, as "the Lord's day." However, "the day of the Lord," "that day," and "the day" are used throughout the Bible to designate the eschatological day of the Lord, the event when the Lord Jesus comes again. John is saying that the Revelation he received pertained to the time concerning the events surrounding the coming of the Lord Jesus. The observation (Thomas, op. cit.) that John uses the dative of Lord (adjectival, "Lord's day") contributes nothing to his argument that the meaning is Sunday. The genitive is the customary case for adjectives; the dative for adverbs (Wallace, p.76). Peter, using the genitive as John uses the dative, writes (2 Peter 3:12), "God's Day," της του θεου ἡμέρας, an adjectival use of God in the genitive with the noun, "day." This is especially noteworthy in that Peter uses this construction as a synonymous way of stating "the day of the Lord," which he had referenced in the same passage (ἡμέρα κυρίου 2 Peter 3:10). Walvoord says, "The adjectival form can be explained on the ground that in the Old Testament there was no adjectival form for "Lord," and therefore the noun had to be used" (p.42). Nothing from history, or from the way John uses the Greek language, compels us to conclude that by "Lord's day," he meant anything different than "day of the Lord." Kittel observes, "A genitive του κυρίου might have been used instead of the adjective." [Gerhard Kittel, Editor. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, 1976), p.1096] The attempts to import the later future meaning of this phrase, "Sunday," into the present context is an example of the exegetical fallacy (Carson, p. 32) described as "semantic anachronism." The reader should refer to Carson's discussion of μάρτυς (Rev. 2:13).
If John wished to communicate to his readers the day of the week on which he received the Revelation, we would not expect him to select a term which was virtually unheard of as a designation for a day of the week. It still remains a fact that no historical document establishes "Lord's Day" as a designation for any day of the week up to the time of the writing of the Revelation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It still remains a fact that no historical document establishes "Lord's Day" as a designation for any day of the week up to the time of the writing of the Revelation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is especially critical to note that at the outset John is giving us the time frame of the events and revelation he is about to show his readers. All that follows is to be found in the Lord's Day. Compromising this point has resulted in the mess we are in today with all the different suggestions for other time frames for the events portrayed in the Revelation given us by John. Please prayerfully consider re-thinking and changing your position if yours is different. Remember the warning at the end of the book.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Isn't it ironic to see the warnings at the end of Revelation 22, look at the mess our evangelical teachers have made of the book of Revelation, and then raise our eyes to the horizon where we see the coming means of the plagues warned of for those who would tamper with this book.
Comment
© 2024 Created by Raliegh Jones Jr..
Powered by
You need to be a member of Black Preaching Network to add comments!
Join Black Preaching Network