Uncategorized

John 10:10 The Evil Thief and kai

by

John Ch 10 gives us the text known as “The Good Shepherd“. Here we see Jesus as that sole Shepherd guarding, preserving the life of His sheep.

In this post, let us consider what the text tells us of The Lord’s antithesis: “The Evil Thief.”

10:1  “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a robber. 2 But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. 3 To him the gatekeeper opens. The sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. 4 When he has brought out all his own, he goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. 5 A stranger they will not follow, but they will flee from him, for they do not know the voice of strangers.” 6 This figure of speech Jesus used with them, but they did not understand what he was saying to them. 

7 So Jesus again said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. 8 All who came before me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not listen to them. 9 I am the door. If anyone enters by me, he will be saved and will go in and out and find pasture. 10 The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life and have it abundantly. 11 I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. 12 He who is a hired hand and not a shepherd, who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees, and the wolf snatches them and scatters them. 13 He flees because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep. 14 I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, 15 just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep.

John 10:1-15, ESV (highlights mine)

The Thief kai Robber

Three times, as highlight in bold above, the easily overlooked phrase “Thief and Robber” occurs. In each instance the word translated “and” is our Koine word “kai.” As discussed elsewhere such use of kai can, and often does, signify a flow from A to B, here Thief to Robber. The Koine kai is most-often translated as shown here by “and.” However, it is translated by multiple other connecting words in various context such as even, but, also, and sometimes left out, untranslated.

This frame of this website as to kai has two elements: First, at each occurrence of kai, we pause and consider it as a hinge word that conveys a meaningful relationship. Greek grammars locate kai in a category known as connectives, such as however, but, also. Here we consider kai as a particular sub-type of the category of connectives, here termed hinge, because it has a distinctive range of connective roles, as has been and continues to be discussed.

Often kai can be interpreted to convey the idea of unto. In older English expressions kai could be well translated as hereto, heretofore, or hereunto. Such translations give us something more than ‘plus,’ as and tends to do. Yet, kai is not freighted with the sense of cause and effect. Its use could be merely a simple additive connector between two independent concepts, like bacon and eggs, cream and sugar, peanut butter and jelly.

Let us in this Good Shepherd passage see if there is something more that we can apprehend than just such additive connection with respect to the anti-Shepherd, the Thief and Robber..

Koine Words for Thief, Robber

“Thief” translates the Koine word kléptēs (Strong’s G2812), which is the root of our English word kleptomaniac, a compulsive thief. Its verb form is kléptō, to steal, or we could say thieve. To kléptō is forbidden as one of the 10 Commandments, weighted in parallel with murder, adultery, lying, dishonoring one’s father and mother (Mark 10:19, Luke 18:20; see also Deut 5:19). So such doing is a serious matter, and such being (a thief) is being condemned by God.

“Robber” is the ESV translation of lēstḗs (Strong’s G3027). A robber, lēstḗs, is distinguished from kléptēs (thief) in an important way: the thief (kléptēs) steals by deception, concealment, subterfuge, cheating; the robber (lēstḗs) also steals but does so by force, compulsion, using even violence and murder.

So the presence of kai connecting kléptēs to lēstḗs can inform us as follows: deception (for the purpose of thievery) is succeeded by a forceful taking. Deception is not the cause of the forceful-taking effect; rather it is the strategy of The Anti-Shepherd to begin pretending that it is a rightful shepherd of the sheepfold. But his end purpose is not just to deceive the sheep, but to take control of the sheep.

Thus, the text in John 10 begins with such construction–kléptēs kai lēstḗs–twice: 10:1 and 10:8. The former is in the singular and the latter in the plural. So Jesus is here teaching that He has come to counter what has and continues to occur, namely vile enemies of the sheep, and of the Owner of the sheep, have come by deception unto to capture the sheep.

This leads then to the questions: who are the sheep, and who are (is) the Thief (Thieves) kai Robber(s)? We will return to these questions after consider the purposes of the Thief

John 10:10 What the Thief Seeks to Do

Before we come to the beautiful passage where Jesus describes Himself as the abundant life-giver and in particular The Good Shepherd, we begin with the third reference to Thief, namely: 10 The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy.

The Thief is again the Koine noun kléptēs. But the ESV translated phrase “to steal” begins with a Koine keyword that conveys purpose, namely what follows is the very purpose of the kléptēs, and the translated word “steal” is the verb form of kléptēs, namely kléptō. English loses something here because we have “thief…steal” whereas the Koine has it clearly “kléptēs…kléptō.” We might think that a thief arrives for some other purpose, even as a honorable one; after all even the most-hardened thieves among us do not steal everything. But the Koine makes the clear implication that kléptēs and kléptō are locked together: a thief steals because it is his very nature to do so, and stealing occurs because the cause of it emanates from the nature to do so. There is nothing opportunistic or inadvertent about the thieving in view in John 10:10. He is purposeful and opposite to that of The Good Shepherd.

The Thief Wants More than Thieving

After “to steal” in John 10:10 above, comes the phrase: and [kai] kill and [kai] destroy, where both occurrences of “and” is our Koine kai. This thief to whom the Lord refers is far more evil than a dishonest man stealing a solitary sheep from the fold and then running for the hills, perhaps out of desperation to feed his children. This thief seeks to obliterate the sheepfold, killing the sheep and destroying the structural framework of the sheepfold itself. Such thief wants the utter ruin of the work of the shepherd, here The Good Shepherd. The thief seeks the ownership and possession of the sheep.

One can further sense that the thief takes delight in dishonoring The Good Shepherd by devastating that of which The Good Shepherd loved and for which caring He was responsible. This thief is the ultimate vandal seeking complete vandalization. He is The Great Evil One.

Who Are The Sheep, and Who are the Thieves / Robbers?

The text of John 10 we have above is (of course) true, but not literal. This text is not about baa-baa, four legged sheep.

The language of sheep and robbers is a literary form known as an allegory. An allegory conveys a meaning by use of an abstract story, a surface story that contains another story hidden within it. (The English word “allegory” derives from the combination of two Greek words that together mean “other-speaking).

Instead of literal sheep and Thieves / Robbers, what is the other-speaking in this passage?

Herein lies the great divide as to the expectations of The Messiah. For the Jewish religion and many, perhaps, most of its adherents, the expectation was for Messiah being their Political / Military / Deliverer. From such frame, the “sheep” would be Israel itself, its religious system, and all true Jews. Who, then, would be the Thief and Robber? It would be, of course, the Roman Government, the then sovereign ruler and occupier force of Israel, its ultimate source of earthly authority, and the entity exacting tribute (taxes and honor) from Israel. Who, then, would correspond to The Good Shepherd? It would, by deduction, be personified by the Jewish Leadership–the priests, scribes and elders–undergirded by The Law, itself expanded by the writings and traditions of the Elders of old and present.

However, such interpretation cannot be supported from this text. The passage in John Ch 10 clearly states one of the seven great “I AM’s” of that Gospel, namely Jesus claiming that He is The Good Shepherd:

14 I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, 15 just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep.

John 10:14-15, ESV (highlights mine)

Given that unambiguous claim, who then is the Thief / Robber? Rome? In political terms, as an Empire of occupation, such would be a possible interpretation. As such Rome would be a Thief in the sense of occupier of a land not their own, and a Robber of the prosperity of the land through taxation and corruptive influence.

However, Jesus is not recorded as having castigated either Rome’s Caesar or Caesar’s local authorities. The Jewish Leaders tried to trap Jesus exactly on this point by asking whether it was lawful to pay taxes to Caesar.

13 And they sent to him some of the Pharisees and some of the Herodians, to trap him in his talk. 14 And they came and said to him, “Teacher, we know that you are true and do not care about anyone’s opinion. For you are not swayed by appearances, but truly teach the way of God. Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not? Should we pay them, or should we not?” 15 But, knowing their hypocrisy, he said to them, “Why put me to the test? Bring me a denarius and let me look at it.”16 And they brought one. And he said to them, “Whose likeness and inscription is this?” They said to him, “Caesar’s.” 17 Jesus said to them, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” And they marveled at him.

Mark 12:13-17 ESV (Highlights mine; note particularly vs. 17)

What was “the trap,” and who was the “they” who set it? The trap was to get Jesus on the record speaking against Rome, and thus appealing to the Jewish people including His followers, or to condescend to Rome, and thus offend all Jews. It was giving Jesus two bad options.

More importantly, who was the “they?” If it was the representatives of Rome, such as the tax collectors (aka “publicans”) or its appointed ruler (Herod, or later Pontus Pilate), then the trap was to put Jesus on record that the Jews should rightly be paying their taxes, in full, to Rome, or to being declared a rebel against Rome, a serious offense, even to His being considered a Thief and Robber in the eyes of Rome.

But, the “they” were not from Rome. To find the answer we need to look back to the chapter preceding the above taxes passage, specifically to Mark Ch 11:1 and 11:27-29. In vs 27 we see clearly that it was the trio of chief priests, scribes, and elders of the Jewish religion leadership in Jerusalem who were gravely offended at Jesus having cleansed the Temple of its commercialization of worship.

And, so, shockingly we are led to conclude that Thieves / Robbers were the very leadership of the Jews, including, especially, those directly associated with worship of Yahweh and were (supposedly) the defenders of God’s OT revelation. It was, in our parlance, The Religion Industry (TRI) that had come into history deceiving as a Thief until capturing as a Robber The Lord’s sheep These sheep we come to know in the Gospels and Acts as those who came to faith in the Resurrection and the Gospel of Christ’s which had redeemed them from the curse of the Law, and most-significantly TRI.

Coherence with Scripture

Always, always, the test of any study of a particular–a word, a verse, a paragraph–of the Scriptures must be that it coheres (fits together) with all of the Scriptures, the Bible. God is not a the Source of “confusion / disorder.” Neither are you and I sources of a “private interpretation.”

  • “For where envy and self-seeking [selfish ambition, ESV] exist, 
    confusion [disorder, ESV] and every evil thing [vile practice, ESV]
    are there.”
    (James 3:16; NKJV [ESV])
  • “knowing this first, that no prophecy* of Scripture is of
    any private [someone’s own, ESV] interpretation”
    (2 Peter 1:20; NKJV [ESV])
    • *Where “prophecy” (Strong’s G4394, prophēteía), in this context, can reference “something that any believer may exercise as telling forth God’s Word. This, however, does not make him a prophet (prophḗtēs [4396]) which is used in the NT in a very restrictive sense.” Zodhiates, S. (2000), The Complete Word Study Dictionary, AMG Publishers.
    • Thus, we stand in a very particular place in God’s unfolded Revelation. God used “Prophets” to proclaim His Word perfectively and authoritatively into space-time, which reality He confirmed with the signs of the prophet and by conformance to the whole of Scriptures as then revealed. Upon the completion of Scripture, the Books we have of the NT, there are no such “Prophets” who speak on God’s Authority as to create additional Scripture. None. No not one.
    • And, so, what we do, and what only we can do rightly, is expound from such Scripture that which is contained within, and we do so provisionally, subject to confirmation by the entirely of the completed Revelation of the Scriptures guided in all such matters by the preserving Work of The Holy Spirit. All hearers / readers of any such proclamation (“prophecy” in such specific sense as bounded in the above text) are to be, as the Berean’s were, “examining** the Scriptures…to see if such is these things were so,” that is, true. (Acts 17:11; ESV) ** “Examining” (G350 anakrínō), the emphatic form of accurately, carefully studying a matter to reach a right judgment).

Where, then, can we find such coherence with regard to the above discussion of John 10:10? In many places; below are some exemplars.

Matthew Ch 23

Matt Ch 23, the Lord repeatedly refers to the scribes and Pharisees as “hypocrites,” a clear reference to their deceptions consistent with the root idea behind Thief. Further he accuses them as the sons of murderers (Mt 23:31, 34, 35), a connection to the forceful taking of Robbers. Then in the closing verses of Mt 23:37-39 He embodies such abhorrent hearts and deeds by making reference to “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem the city” (Mt 23:37) and “your house” (23:38), extending the reference to TRI itself.

Genesis Ch 3

Genesis Ch 3, thematically occurring immediately after Creation, we see the Serpent (snake) enter the narrative with the deceitful purpose of causing death itself to enter God’s Creation. We can see also the link between the Serpent (snake) of Gen 3 with the Lord’s referring to TRI representatives in the above Mt 23 passage where he calls them “you serpents, you brood of vipers” (Mt 23:33).

Exodus Ch 32

Exodus Ch 32, begins with Moses delayed on the mountain in direct communication with Yahweh, where such “delay” was the impatience of the people of the Exodus. And, so, we read:

1 When the people saw that Moses delayed to come down from the mountain, the people gathered themselves together to Aaron and said to him, “Up, make us gods who shall go before us. As for this Moses, the man who brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we do not know what has become of him.” 2 So Aaron said to them, “Take off the rings of gold that are in the ears of your wives, your sons, and your daughters, and bring them to me.” 3 So all the people took off the rings of gold that were in their ears and brought them to Aaron. 4 And he received the gold from their hand and fashioned it with a graving tool and made a golden calf. And they said, “These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt!”5 When Aaron saw this, he built an altar before it. And Aaron made a proclamation and said, “Tomorrow shall be a feast to the Lord.” 6 And they rose up early the next day and offered burnt offerings and brought peace offerings. And the people sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play.

Exodus 32:1-6, ESV (highlights mine)

God shows us in this text a hidden story within an outer story. At the very time Moses is receiving directly from God, the Will of God as to worship and behavior, the people are concocting their own form of worship, here emulating what they knew in Egypt but blending it with reference to “the Lord” Whom they knew had by great signs and wonders liberated them from Egypt. When Moses returns from the mountain with the tablets, what he saw violated the very thing he held in his hands. (One can argue that the above text shows the direct violation of each of the first four Commandments, a topic outside our present scope). What is unambiguous is that the people’s hearts lies in the creation of their own religion industry, TRI, and such is diametrically opposed to the true worship of God.

Epistle of Jude

The entirely of Jude’s brief epistle is a warning against the infiltration of the enemy–Thieves and Robbers in our present parallel context–into the true fellowship of believers. Consider this extended passage from Jude:

4 For certain people have crept in unnoticed who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into sensuality and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ….8 these people also, relying on their dreams, defile the flesh, reject authority, and blaspheme the glorious ones… 10 But these people blaspheme all that they do not understand, and they are destroyed by all that they, like unreasoning animals, understand instinctively. …12  shepherds feeding themselves; waterless clouds, swept along by winds; fruitless trees in late autumn, twice dead, uprooted; 13 wild waves of the sea, casting up the foam of their own shame; wandering stars, for whom the gloom of utter darkness has been reserved forever.

Jude 4-13, excerpted, ESV (highlight mine)

Note the reference to “shepherds,” namely that those “certain people” who “have crept in unnoticed” (the deceitfulness of the Thief) claim a position of authority rejecting the rightful authority of “our only Master and lord, Jesus Christ” (vs 7). And such shepherds are “feeding themselves,” action which is antithetical to a rightful shepherd concerned with feeding the sheep. And such is their perversion of the grace of God (vs. 4).

Epistle of Galatians

The Galatian epistle is concerned with what is known as “the Galatian error.” Such error it the syncretism, the blending together, the alloying, of TRI and The Gospel, the religion of self-salvation and the Good News of Christ’s having redeemed us from the curse of the Law.

Note again, as above, such error occurs by invasion of the sheepfold by deceiving false authorities, as false shepherds seeking after the true sheep. Consider the below text from the Galatian Epistle:

1:6 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— 7 not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.

3:1 O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified. 2 Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law or by hearing with faith? 3 Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh? 4 Did you suffer so many things in vain—if indeed it was in vain? 5 Does he who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you …10 For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them.” 11 Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for “The righteous shall live by faith.” 12 But the law is not of faith, rather “The one who does them shall live by them.” 13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree”— 14 so that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith.

4:28 Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. 29 But just as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so also it is now. 30 But what does the Scripture say? “Cast out the slave woman and her son, for the son of the slave woman shall not inherit with the son of the free woman.” 31 So, brothers, we are not children of the slave but of the free woman.

5:1 For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. 2 Look: I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you. 3 I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law. 4 You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace. 5 For through the Spirit, by faith, we ourselves eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness. 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love. 7 You were running well. Who hindered you from obeying the truth? 8 This persuasion is not from him who calls you. 9 A little leaven leavens the whole lump.

6:12 It is those who want to make a good showing in the flesh who would force you to be circumcised, and only in order that they may not be persecuted for the cross of Christ. 13 For even those who are circumcised do not themselves keep the law, but they desire to have you circumcised that they may boast in your flesh. 14 But far be it from me to boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world. 15 For neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation. 16 And as for all who walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God.

Galatians 1:6-9; 3:1-5, 10-14; 4:28-31; 5:1-9 ; 6:12-16, ESV (highlights mine)

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.“

Tax Collectors kai Sinners

by

Consider this passage from Mark Ch 2, beginning in vs 15:

13 He went out again beside the sea, and all the crowd was coming to him, and he was teaching them. 14 And as he passed by, he saw Levi the son of Alphaeus sitting at the tax booth, and he said to him, “Follow me.” And he rose and followed him. 15 And as he reclined at table in his house, many tax collectors and sinners were reclining with Jesus and his disciples, for there were many who followed him. 16 And the scribes of the Pharisees, when they saw that he was eating with sinners and tax collectors, said to his disciples, “Why does he eat with tax collectors and sinners?” 17 And when Jesus heard it, he said to them, “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. I came not to call the righteous, but sinners.”

Mark 2:13-17 (ESV) [highlights mine]

Some Essential Background

As throughout this site our purpose is to focus on KAI Study tools, approaches, and methods rather than studying in depth any of our exemplary passages. However, here as elsewhere, we need to settle common ground on certain contextual essentials to proceed on our main purpose.

In this early chapter in Mark’s gospel narrative we see Jesus assembling His most inner circles of those we know as ‘capital A’ Apostles, the Twelve. These men became His disciples, which means primarily students, learners. They were “followers” as well, but that was because Jesus was a teacher who moved about, journeyed, a form of teaching known as peripatetic instruction (“Peripatetic” comes from the ancient Greek word that became widespread in use by Aristotle and the teachers who derived from that form; our closest example would be a team of students who would follow a senior scholar on an archeological dig or a field biology study).

Galileans

As a teacher is known in part by His students, the people Jesus chose for this special relationship would be closely scrutinized. The Pharisees and their religious systems of that day (TRI) would have scorned the lot of them because they were Galileans–except for Judas the betrayer who was a Judean, the home territory of TRI. (Galileans were broadly considered as inferior in sophistication and intellect, perhaps similar how the Ivy League college communities view the rural southern states, or actually anybody but themselves). The Roman TPI who scorned all Jews, and the TRI of the Jews, would have especially seen the Galileans as backward; TRI centered in Judea had the magnificent Temple and Temple Mount, and the Governor Herod, later Pilate, maintained a palace there.

Tax Collectors

All the territory and people of Israel were in essential matters a slave state of Rome. The Jewish people were taxed heavily with much of such revenues used by the Roman Empire to support the expenses of its magnificent capital city of Rome, and the armies and governors who maintained the Empire.

Beyond the dislike of paying such taxes there was the means of by which collections were made. The Romans created tax collection offices and appointed positions from which an established quota of payments would be required. The individuals so appointed were Jews themselves, but who had, in the view of the people, sold themselves (‘whored’ themselves) to serve Rome by taking monies from their kinsman. Further such individuals had certain power over the people which they used to over collect what Rome required gaining economic benefit beyond what was just.

So, the Romans tolerated the tax collectors, and no doubt suspicious of them as to whether they were ‘holding back’ what would otherwise be due the Empire, and the Jews absolutely hated the tax collectors who were seen quislings (traitors) to their own people and the worst kind of opportunists. Likely TRI viewed lepers more favorably: though they were seen as judged by God because of their affection in disease they were not turncoats against the Jewish people of the Temple, living as they did in isolation in recognition of their condemnation.

Some translations use the term “publican” for “tax collector” as in the ESV. They mean the same thing. Additional information on the Koine terms are given at the end of this post.

Jesus Chooses a Tax Collector Named Levi

In our above passage from Mark 2 we see Jesus choosing as his disciple / Apostle a particular tax collector by name of Levi.

This would have been a dramatic, and deeply distressing, selection. A tax collector! Even worse, the man’s name was “Levi,” a very significant name of Jewish heritage, as one of the 12 Tribes descending from Patriarch Jacob, the grandson of Abraham himself, and then set apart by Yahweh-God during the period of Moses to be dedicated tribe for all the religious activities including the family line of the priests and the High Priest.

As a final note we observe here that the joining of Levi was not by Levi’s choice, or by some ‘conversion’ / repentance recorded for us. Rather, Jesus by the power of presence, chose Levi and further demanded of Levi a major forsaking of his special powers and income as a tax collector.

Reclined at Table

We see the brief but important phrases “reclined at table” and “reclining with Jesus” in Mark 2:15 above. Further it appears that the venue was Levi’s own home, that which was supported by those tax revenues and collection process hated by the Jewish people, especially TRI of the Pharisees. This would have struck many as Jesus dining with the Devil’s people. (Later they will conclude that He was either the Devil personified or the Devils Vicar / Prophet sent to deceive the people).

The references to “reclining” and “table” are to an important cultural event of an evening’s intimate dining. It would have been something akin to a special “dinner party” as someone might arrange today by planning, special invitation and by preparation. In certain of such events, especially in the house of wealthy people with large dining spaces there would be areas surrounding the central dining place where visitors could gather to observe the interactions and hear the discussion. This seems awkward to our Western construct. But in the context of that time it would be very approximately like what occurs in formal invitational public meeting where on the stage there is a dais for the important guests and who will then speak so that the audience can hear.

So the setting is much more dramatic than just Jesus connecting in some general way with Levi the Tax Collector: Levi is chosen to be one of 12, they will have a dinner conveying a special relationship, and in the very house paid for (in some way) by the hated tax collections.

And it gets worse: Levi apparently and understandably invited a certain number of his fellow tax collectors, perhaps all of them from that region. Tax Collectors no doubt banded together for comfort and support as they were hated outcasts by everyone around them. So after Levi’s encounter with Jesus, some time later Levi hosted this dinner ‘party’ and included these guests, notorious in the eyes of the people, and Jesus fellowshipped with them all.

It’s challenging for us to feel fully how repellant this would have been at the time and place.

“Tax Collectors and Sinners”

Three times in these brief five verses, Mark 2:13-17 we have the phrase “tax collectors and sinners.” Now we are ready to deep dive on our word “kai” which is here translated in the ESV by the simple default word “and.” Here, “and” does not convey the power of this text or passage.

Mark’s narration and capture of the words of the Pharisees using “kai” to connect “tax collectors” to “sinners” is something much more notable than “and” in the sense of “plus,” as discussed elsewhere on this site. When we say “cream and sugar,” “peanut butter and jelly,” “ham and eggs” we are only doing addition: we want both ‘sides’ of the word “and.”

In our Mark 2 passage, such an understanding of “kai” / “and” misses the entire point.

What the text is communicating, if we will pause to listen for it, is that “tax collectors” are in their most basic identity of being “sinners!” Yes they have positions in the economic system of life, and titles that go with it, but that’s not reality of who they are. They are from bottom to top, inside to outside, in part and whole, fully, completely, stained permanently as “sinners.” They are not “repentant” (although that would never move them in the eyes of TRI, or the people, into any positive category of being).

How, Then, to Translate “kai” Instead of by “And?”

In my perfect world, the translators would have best served us readers by leaving “kai” where and as it is in the mss, so we can see it for ourselves, and go through the progression of possible import of the word in the context. Translators already do exactly that with the Koine word “baptize” in all of its forms. Why do they leave “baptize” untranslated? Fear? Impossibility of finding any reasonable English word or word combination?

The power of “kai” here is to drive our eyes and thinking to subsequent word “sinners” as to emphasize the fundamental reality of who these men really were. So one possible translation would be “even;” but that still does not ‘get it.’ A more expansive translation, interpretation really, would be “thoroughly / completely” sinners.

And, So…?

The context of this entire site is how can non-Seminarians, non-Ecclesiaticals, get closer to the mss as written by reasonable accessible means. It doesn’t get easier than “kai” as discussed elsewhere. The word occurs some 9,000 times in the NT alone, always uninflected, always unaccented, always spelled by three Greek letters each which looks almost like our Latinized alphabet counterpart, and pronounced (if that matters) exactly as it looks in a single syllable.

Knowing where “kai” occurs gives all of us a very simple opportunity and impulse to ask what God’s Holy Spirit intends us to grasp in any given text. Here in Mark 2 we see even more clearly, emphatically, that Jesus came, as He says in vs 17 (Mark 2:17)–He came to save “sinners”–and demonstrates it by choosing Levi and dining with other tax collectors as well all who were not “the righteous” Pharisees and their followers (who were of course not truly “righteous” but perceived themselves as such, and hence not in need of any moral / spiritual Teacher or Savior).

And, so it is today.

End Notes

Strong’s G5057. τελώνης telṓnēs; gen. telṓnou, masc. noun from télos (5056), tax, and ōnéomai (5608), to buy. A reaper of the taxes or customs, tax–collector, one who pays to the government a certain sum for the privilege of collecting the taxes and customs of a district.

The public revenues of the Greeks and Romans were usually farmed out. Among the latter, the purchasers were chiefly of the equestrian order and were distinguished as being of a higher class because they rode horses, or they were at least persons of wealth and rank like Zacchaeus who is called the chief tax collector (architelṓnēs [754] in Luke 19:2). These farmers also had subcontractors or employed agents who collected the taxes and customs at the gates of cities, in seaports, on public ways and bridges. These, too, were called telṓnai (pl.), publicans, or eklégontes (n.f.), (from ek [1537], out of, and légō [3004], in its original sense meaning to collect), those who collected out of the people. Such publicans in countries subject to the Roman Empire were the objects of hatred and detestation so that none but persons of worthless character were likely to be found in this employment. They were called hárpages (n.f.), extortioners, from harpagḗ (724), extortion. Chrysostom calls them kapḗlous (n.f.), hucksters, from kapēleúō (2585), to retail, adulterate, take advantage of, corrupt, and pornoboskoús (n.f.), shepherds of fornication. They were also called kólakes (n.f.), flatterers, from kolakeía (2850), flattery.

In the NT, they were toll–gatherers, collectors of customs or public dues and were the objects of bitter hatred and scorn by the Jews. They often associated with the most depraved classes of society (Matt. 5:46, 47; 9:9–11; 10:3, Mathew being a publican; Luke 3:12; 5:27, 29; 7:29; 18:10, 11, 13) such as publicans and sinners (Matt. 9:10, 11; 11:19; Mark 2:15, 16; Luke 5:30; 7:34; 15:1), Gentile and publican (Matt. 18:17), publicans and harlots (Matt. 21:31, 32).

Deriv.: architelṓnēs (754), a principal tax–collector; telṓnion (5058), a custom house, collector’s office.

Strong’s G5058. τελώνιον telṓnion; gen. telōníou, neut. noun from telṓnēs (5057), a tax–collector. A toll–house, custom house, collector’s office (Matt. 9:9; Mark 2:14; Luke 5:27), a place where the publican sat. In the Class. Gr. used in the pl., tá telṓnia, indicating the places where the publicans sat.

 Zodhiates, S. (2000). In The complete word study dictionary: New Testament (electronic ed.). AMG Publishers.