kai ‘jewel’ phrases

Grace (to you-all) KAI Peace

by

To the saints and faithful brothers in Christ at Colossae:
Grace to you and peace from God our Father. 

τοῖς ἐν Κολοσσαῖς ἁγίοις καὶ πιστοῖς ἀδελφοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ, 
χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη ἀπὸ θεοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν.

Col 1:2 (ESV and NA27, where such “you” is in the plural)

As highlighted above, χάρις is the Koine word Charis from which we also get “Charity” in the sense of expressed love, commonly translated as Grace. And Peace is the translation of the Koine εἰρήνη (Iray-nayn, from which we get the female name “Irene”). Then in this phrase in addition to our familiar “kai” there is the pronoun ὑμῖν (hue-min) which references the plural form of “you” (as you’al).

KAI Exemplar Used to Hinge Two Key Words

The above shown phrase from Col 1:2–“Grace to you kai Peace“–is the predominant greeting to Believer-Saints in the NT. The exact same phrase in the Koine occurs in 12 additional verses, thus it is given to us in 13 Books of the NT:

  • Rom 1:7
  • 1 Cor 1:3
  • 2 Cor 1:2
  • Gal 1:3
  • Eph 1:2
  • Phil 1:2
  • 1 Thes 1:1
  • 2 Thes 1:2
  • Phile 3
  • 1 Pet 1:2
  • 2 Pet 1:2
  • Rev 1:4

These many occurrences are significant because of their repeated usage but also because they express two of the most-important realities of the NT and the Christian life, Grace and Peace. Such references are distinctive of the NT, and is the default address toward a Christian. (And, so, it would in our day a most-appropriate greeting to a Christian brother / sister).

For these (and other) reasons it is well worth the effort to dig into such simple four-word phrase. Let us not just pass them by without stopping to think, absorb, and experience the wonder of it.

Is “kai” Merely ‘Hingeing’ Two Words?

As discussed elsewhere, the default translation of “kai” is “and” as above in the ESV and likely in every other English translation. And the default experience of reading / hearing “and” is that it conveys a simple “plus,” as with ham and eggs, peanut butter and jelly.

The unfolding premise of this website is that every “kai” deserves a pause to consider whether it indeed is weighted with a deeper meaning. So, in these 13 occurrences, is “kai” only conveying that there are two things (ideas, the nouns of grace and peace) expressed as a both, a simple independent pairing?

Here in this site, our first leaning is to consider “kai” as designating “unto,” “herein,” namely a flowing toward from the first word (or word string), A, toward the next (final) word, B. Such flowing toward is not of cause / effect, for which there is a clear, exact Koine alternative expression. Rather it gives us the idea that B emerges (flows) from A.

So, let us ask, what is the standing of our B (Peace) with respect to A (Grace)?

As is often the case, it is helpful to think back to Gen Ch 3. How serious was the Fall? Was it not the judgement of death, literally dying unto death? And was it not immediately demarcated by expulsion from the Garden out from the immediate presence of God, and further guarded against any attempt to re-enter it by God’s appointed and armed defenders?

What then? Was there any possible resolution, restoration to Gen Ch 2? If so, by what means?

Adam, The First Adam, as Redeemer?

Upon Eve’s deception and Fall, Adam was presented with the very forbidden fruit of her ruin by Eve and then: “she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate” (Gen 3:6, ESV, where in the LXX the Koine has it that after Eve had eaten both Adam and Eve then ate of the fruit together, as the final “ate” of Gen 3:6 is in the plural).

We know that Eve was deceived but Adam was not: ” 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve; 14 and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor.” (1 Tim 2:13-14, ESV). As will considered more deeply in a separate writing Adam had before him the ultimate choice of opposites: not eat what God had forbade and remain in his state of sinlessness, or partake with Eve and join her in the fallen state of death.

What could be more dramatic than this? Further as we know from the full unfolding of the Scriptures, Adam (with Eve) was the father of us all, spreading the judgment of death to each one of us. He was our father, and from his being we have been given our individual being, and we bear the dying unto death consequences, every one of us.

What could have spawned Adam to make such a consequentially horrific choice? Was it his overwhelming passion toward Eve? His fear of being alone, as he had been before God’s provision of Eve? Was it the loss of a part of himself (which part God used in some transformative way to create Eve)? “21 So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh.22 And the rib that the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man.” (Gen 2:21-22, ESV; “rib” is the common translation, and an unfortunate choice, but it requires an explanation beyond our present context)

If we focus on the moment preceding Adam’s choice to eat, prior to his departure from his moral standing to be in the presence of God, what would his motivating impulse have been–would it not?–have been seeking to make something good our what had become something deadly bad right before him, bone of his bone, flesh of his flesh? Does it then seem most-reasonable that Adam would have submitted himself to join in Eve’s judgment to be with her as her with the intended aspiration to be–if at all possible–to become both her and his own, rescuer / restorer.

Did he think it was possible? Was it just a bare hope? Did he not fully grasp the consequences of what had occurred? Did he reason that if he could not be their restorer of this great evil, he would as a self-choosing judgment-of-justice to perish with Eve given that he had not protected her from the Serpent’s power of deception?

Adam, nor any descendent of Adam (or Eve), the Scriptures and reason show could not rescue / restore / save another fallen being, nor even save himself. Adam as mortal, and fallen, would not, could not, reverse the irreversible. Time, and the choosing that had been made, could not be reversed, not be undone. No restoration to what was could ever be would ever be humanly possible. There was no route, no work, no repentance, that could open that gate to Eden. Adam and Eve never received another word from God upon the closing of the gate based on the only record we have of the post-Exile period in Gen Ch 4 and following.

Can Time, and Its Consequences, Ever Be Reversed?

Our interest here is not of the wisdom of secular philosophers, even those ancient and wise. But there are postulates sometimes expressed that capture the essence of our deepest Spiritual mysteries. And such is the below claim of an ancient playwright:

This alone is denied to god: the power to undo the past.

Agathon (445 – 400 B.C.), Greek playwright

Agathon was immersed in a polytheistic Greek culture of mythically powerful ‘gods’ and ‘goddesses’ who intervened in human affairs. His pithy claim was to express the boundary on even the pantheon of such all powerful ‘gods,’ namely that what came into existence was irreversible.

A really deep question is whether Agathon was correct if one applies it to The One True God? What the Scriptures reveal in an astonishing revelation that God Himself–The Logos of John Ch 1–became truly human, but born without sin directly by the Spirit of God joined / acting upon an NT woman (Mary). This One, and only this One, was able to “undo the past” as to its otherwise eternal consequence by becoming the Substitute, the Second Adam:

12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death [!] through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned— 13 for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. 14 Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.

15 But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man’s trespass, much more have the grace [Charis] of God and the free gift by the grace [Charis] of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. 16 And the free gift is not like the result of that one man’s sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift [Charis] following many trespasses brought justification. 17 For if, because of one man’s trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life [LIFE! Koine: zoe] through the one man Jesus Christ.

18 Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life [LIFE! Koine: zoe] for all men. 19 For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous. 20 Now the law came in to increase the trespass, but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, 21 so that, as sin reigned in death, grace [Charis] also might reign through righteousness leading to eternal life [LIFE! Koine: zoe] through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Rom 5:12-21 (ESV; highlights mine)

We cannot delay here though the above passage from Romans deserves a book of exposition itself. Our essential point is that neither Adam nor any human successor was capable of the restoration of life. It required the Unique One as our Substitute. And such occurred not because of the dealmaking or merit of the recipients but of Grace and Grace Alone. Such Great Gift was, is, and will always be “free” to us, but at unimaginable cost to God Himself. Agathon’s claim has been overturned in the most material and marvelous way, that of God’s Work of Grace.

Grace Hence Peace

The keyword Peace designates our great longing even in family, community, and social contexts, but especially, predominantly, with respect to our Creator God. Peace is the undoing of the sentence of death under which we have each been humanly conceived and individually affirmed by our self-will. Peace is again being in the Garden of God’s favor and presence, though not yet fully so. There is the old man and its nature that must yet experience the death we earned from Adam and ourselves. The Peace is the unearned by great reality of our present state, and it flowed from Grace.

Grace was initiated by God Himself. It was acted out by Him in Christ. And it was transacted between The Son and the Father on the Great Exchange of Judgment at the Crucifixion. Thus Grace was fully realized as had been long hoped for and promised in the OT. Among the boundless consequences flowing from such Grace is the present Peace we have with God, which reminder God used multiple authors to repeat over and over again for us to fully embrace the simple five-word phrase: Grace to you kai Peace.

So, “grace plus peace” is not wrong, as both are true and a present reality. But the “plus” obscures a deeper reality, namely and finally, that Grace flowed to the establishment of Peace, final, permanent, and irreversible.

When Jesus risen from Death appeared to the Apostles gathered in terror and hiding, He appeared before them, the very embodiment of Grace, and spoke directly: “And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace [Koine be unto you.” (John 20:26, KJV). Hence we have the very foundational moment of our keyword phrase: “Grace to you kai Peace.“

Watch kai Pray

by

Here we consider another jewel of a phrase. As discussed in a previous post, “phrases” (and clauses) are segments of the architecture of a sentence, which is itself representative of a “whole thought.” As a whole thought, sentences traditionally have a subject (S), verb (V), and object (O, as a direct object) which is commonly framed in both English and Koine as SVO, in that order. Our traditional versified Bibles were man-created in the 16th Century and have no inherent Biblical significance nor do they always align with sentences as we would interpret them; verses can run on to multiple sentences and they can be incomplete as to a sentence.

The phrase in focus here, “watch and [kai] pray” is memorable. And it is noteworthy as to this site because two words of the three ‘hinge’ around the theme word of this website, the Koine word kai.

kai as ‘Flow’

Throughout this website we have been considering richer meanings, sometimes just hints / directions, for the Koine word “kai” that goes beyond its default translation of “and.”

One central thesis is that kai does not mean always, perhaps not even mostly, “and” in the sense of “plus,” such as “ham and eggs” (we want both, and the order has no significance), orthe identification of two categories, such as “good and bad”(they do not ‘go’ together but paired they represent a certain broad range of conditions).

If there is a best default translation for kai it is, in my view, “unto.” Such is not “unto” in the sense of cause and effect–there is an unambiguous Koine expression for cause and effect–nor is suggesting “on the one hand this and the other hand that” because again their is a clear Koine form, which commonly occurs, for making such point. We will consider both of these other hinge types below.

A nuanced way of understanding kai as “unto” is by the metaphor of “flow.” Recapping the above, kai is not A causes B (cause and effect), nor is it A on the one hand and B on the other, nor simply two things A + B as completely equivalent to B + A (which presumes that kai expresses the equivalent of the mathematical commutative law as 2 + 3 = 5, exactly as 3 + 2 = 5).

Rather kai can be expressive as “the flow” of thought, or action, A “unto” B. We could show this as: A → B, or by other arrow forms to represent stronger or weaker such flow-connections: A → B, A → B, A ⇢ B (stronger to weaker).

Let us now apply the flow-concept for kai to our the phrase-jewel of our present study: “watch kai pray.”

Context of “Watch and Pray”

The phrase “watch and (kai) pray” most notably occurs during the final moments of Jesus’s pre-resurrection life as it is said prior to his night arrest, which arrest was followed by the infamous nighttime trial, and the judgment of crucifixion the following morning. Below is our context in Mark 14:

32 And they went to a place called Gethsemane. And he said to his disciples, “Sit here while I pray.” 33 And he took with him Peter and James and John, and began to be greatly distressed and troubled.34 And he said to them, “My soul is very sorrowful, even to death. Remain here and watch.” 35 And going a little farther, he fell on the ground and prayed that, if it were possible, the hour might pass from him. 36 And he said, “Abba, Father, all things are possible for you. Remove this cup from me. Yet not what I will, but what you will.” 37 And he came and found them sleeping, and he said to Peter, “Simon, are you asleep? Could you not watch one hour? 38 Watch and pray that you may not enter into temptation. The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.” 

Mark 14:32-38, ESV (Highlights mine, the bold font being our phrase of study, and the words translated “that” and “but” representing two other categories of ‘hinge-connectors’ to be discussed)

There is an exact parallel account at Matt 26:41 that mirrors the above verse Mark 14:38. The only other text in the Bible that has “watch” near “pray” occurs at Col 4:2: “Continue steadfastly in prayer, being watchful in it with thanksgiving.”

What distinguishes the memorable form of “watch and (kai) pray” from the text of Col 4:2, and other passages enjoining us to pray, is that our phrase occurs during a dramatic point in the narrative of Christ’s incarnation. What has just prior transpired is the so-called “Triumphal Entry” wherein the crowds see Jesus riding the prophesied donkey coming as King into His City / Throne of Jerusalem, with the crowds shouting “Hosanna!” meaning God has made it wonderfully so. Of course the crowds shouting, as is customarily the case, understood nothing of the words they used, but spoke as the Providence of God the Father dictated, affirming the OT fulfillment. Then that night was “The Last Supper” at which time Jesus inaugurated the New Covenant in His blood, at which time Judas–representing The Religion Industry (TRI) and its most-intimate betrayal–committed to departing that supper to conduct the dealmaking event with the leadership of TRI by agreeing on the sign of betrayal, being Judas finding Jesus where only he knew to do, and identifying him by the kiss of betrayal to direct the arresting armed force of the TRI to their target.

From the context of Mark 14 and Matt 26 we know that Jesus’s private prayer with His Father occurred during the final moments of the advance of the TRI army up the Mount of Olives directly east of the Temple Mount across the Kidron Valley. Because it was night, and a significant armed force was in procession necessarily with torches to light the way, the advance would have been discernible to those at the Garden of Gethsemane, had they been watching.

It would have been reasonable for the Lord’s 11 disciples that night at Gethsemane, after the Triumphal Entry and The Communion Supper, to have believed that at the Passover celebration the very next day Jesus would inaugurated as both the “religious” and “political” authority, transforming the situation in Jerusalem, Judea, and all of the territory of Israel, and even the Roman world itself. Of course they had heard the Lord on multiple occasions tell them that He would be rejected, killed, and resurrected, but they did not understand this as the subsequent text of the Gospel narratives makes clear.

What was taking place during the very time of the Lord’s words “watch kai pray” was the instantiation of the ultimate rebellion of both TRI and The Political Industry (TPI) against God, the former out of its fallen belief that “religion” and “piety” could save itself, both individually and corporately, and the latter believing that meaning and salvation was in centralized power and codified law (Pax Romana).

Watch ‘Flowing Toward’ Prayer

Both the Koine verbs translated “watch” and “pray” are in the imperative / command form (“mood”). So they are direct, immediate instructions to which the Lord is desiring obedience. It is clear, again from the passage itself, that the three core members of the 11 disciples (Peter, James, and John), and likely the other eight as well, were doing neither “watching” nor “praying,” but were in fact sleeping.

Here’s what we also know. The armed representatives of TRI, and Judas, were not sleeping. They were in fact sneaking up seeking to overwhelm by force and surprise the followers of Jesus, arresting Jesus (and others too). Also not sleeping was the Lord.

What was the context of the inability to stay awake for the Lord’s disciples? It was that they were not, and had not been, watchful, so they did not perceive their impending mortal danger by the advance of their most powerful and relentless enemy, TRI, soon to be followed by the in-concert partnership of TRI and TPI leading to the crucifixion of their Lord, a horrible and frightful scene.

The phrase “watch kai pray” in its context guides us to understand that it is the doing of “watching” with its attendant discovery and realization that flows toward, leads to, the doing of “praying.” The Lord’s command is not here that they, and hence us, should as a pattern of life being doing two things: thing one–watching–and the other thing–praying–end of story.

Praying wisely, passionately, and well flows from grasping–the watching–the context of our circumstance (and in the literal etymological sense of “circumstance,” standing, ‘stance,’ circumscribed, here by the force of oppression of TRI).

Flow Has a ‘Bow Wave’

As we have been considering kai as a flow, that is A → B (A is watching, B is praying, in the context of our phrase of study), there can be, and I believe here is, a two-way nature to the flow. Specifically, kai admits to the flow nature that as A → B so also A ⇠ B.

We can draw on a water flow analogy of experience. (Such analogy is even more-clear with the motion of air / wind as a breeze or an aircraft in flight, but is not readily discernible by sight). From the perspective of a boat being propelled through water, by the power of sails, rowing, or a motor, the boat is stationary and the water is flowing past the boat.

(We do not automatically conceive it this way because we innately understand that it is the boat moving through the water not the other way around; but if one stands at the bow of the boat, fixed to it, it really is the proper perception that the water is moving past the boat. This was a key perspective used by Einstein in formulating the great insights and equations of Special and General Relativity).

Taking such perspective on the boat, and looking ahead of the bow, we can observe that the flowing water actually begins moving because of the boat before it reaches even the bow of the boat. And if we look to the quarter beam on either side of the bow we can see the surface waves of the water that is the hydrodynamic influence of the boat even ahead of the particular water molecules that strike the hull of the boat. This is the “bow wave,” the upstream influence of a downstream object.

We can see the same thing, perhaps more clearly, by observing a fixed pillar in moving water. Ahead of the pillar, one can observe the effect of the pillar upon the water even before it reaches the pillar. Exactly the same effect occurs with winds flowing against a wall, building, or mountain, or again to an observer in the cockpit of an airplane. Such flows have upstream influence based upon wonderful mathematical formulations of physics (known as elliptical boundary conditions on equations of motion). Other physical examples include “feedback loops,” where “effects” can, in turn, connect to the “causes” which inaugurated the initial “effect.”

How might such digression help us with understanding kai in general and specifically in our present phrase of study? It is this: being watchful does flow into one’s being prayerful, and wisely / intimately so; but being prayerful also leads / flows toward being watchful, at the very least sensitized to one circumstance (standing surrounded), but even more so to understanding better from the heart of God the nature of that which is to be the object of watching.

Two Other Phrases and ‘Hinge’ Connector Types

Not our primary focus in this post, or this site in general, let us briefly note two other phrases that immediately follow “watch kai pray” that illustrate other kinds of ‘hinge’ connections (as I have been using the term here).

Purpose Clause / Clause

We have been examining the first third of Mark 14:38 , namely: ” Watch and pray that you may not enter into temptation. The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.”

My highlight of “that” by italics is only to indicate a particular ‘hinge’ connector, in transliterated Koine “hina.” It is the common introduction of a purpose statement. So here it tells us why we are commanded (“watch,” “pray” are imperative verbs) in the “kai” hinge phrase.

The question here, based on this context, is what is the “temptation” to be avoided. The Koine word the ESV translates as “temptation” is also translated in various contexts by “trial(s)” and by “test(-ing).” So “temptation” is freighted with the idea of wavering under some trial / test. The context of our passage (Mark 14) has nothing to do with the kind of circumstances we might ordinarily think of as “temptations,” such as the impulses / inclinations of the carnal, lower nature of the flesh. Here the temptation (test) is about faithfulness to the foundational claim of Jesus Christ, namely that the ‘observance’ of “The Law” by TRI was a false self-righteousness kind of worship, which can never please God or lead to Eternal Life.

As the troops of TRI were marching up the Mount of Olives with the threat, and realization, of death, exclusion, persecution–as we see in the Book of Acts which follows the Gospels upon the emergence of the NT church. The temptation would be strong to cave in to TRI both for reasons of avoiding persecution but also because many in one’s family, friends, associates would be clinging to the doctrines of TRI, claiming that Jesus had been not only a blasphemer but a false claimant on such “New Covenant,” exactly as the context of the Epistle to the Hebrews unveils.

Explanatory Phrase / Clause

The third phrase in our Mark 14:38 text illustrates another kind of ‘hinge’ connector known by the Koine “men / day (or de)” structure. In the ESV text, I’ve highlight “but” by italics as that is how it expressed such structure. The “men / de” framework means, in English, “on the one hand THIS and on the other hand THAT,” namely a way of contrasting two opposites.

Here in Mark 14:38 the opposites are: “the (our) spirit” and its natural inclination (to be “willing” to follow the Gospel teaching, contrasted with “the (our) flesh” and its natural inclination (to follow the prevailing winds of opinion, avoiding conflict or becoming the object of derision, or worse).