What is the meaning of the Greek wordkairos?

165 The rest is, I believe, sufficiently noticed; but I would observe, as to the passage in Ephesians, I do not think πλήρωμα τῶν αἰώνων would have any just sense. Αἰῶνες form a series of which we can have a συντέλεια, but not as it seems to me, a πλήρωμα. Whereas, καιροί are seasons or opportunities, time in a moral character of suitableness according to God. There is a time of having all complete according to God, as to administration, and that will, I apprehend, be τὸ πλήρωμα τῶν καιρῶν. We have (Acts 1) the χρόνους and the καιρούς, the suited times which the Father has kept in His own power. If καιρός is taken in the more material meaning of period, the sense is evident, as the accomplishment of a date known to divine wisdom, not of systematic αἰώνων having each a specific character.

"The apostle continuing from the new revelation of the rapture, ch. 4, passes on to the Lord's appearing, 1 Thess. 5, in order to confirm both great dispensational truths in the minds of the young converts. He rules out the times and seasons (chronos = usually time in its course, and kairos, time, usually in detail or character, as time of figs," hence — more definite than chronos) because they accurately (akribos, i.e., they had diligently) investigated, and knew (oidate = inward conscious knowledge), therefore awaited His sudden personal coming with intelligence and eagerness.

The use of the word in Luke 1:57; Acts 1:7; Acts 3:21; Acts 7:17; Gal. 4:4; 1 Thess. 5:1, is too obviously different to require detailed argument. Nor can any words either sanction or disguise the confusion of it with καιρός, as if they could equally bear the same interpretation. Even the very few who contend for the interchange evidently feel the difficulty, which is in no way removed by their reasoning. For the contrast with the Apocalypse is evident in what follows: compare, Dan. 12:9 with Rev. 22:10. And the comparatively narrow compass of the oath in the Old Testament prophet is as noticeable as the breadth and depth of that in the New. The strict correspondence of the two oaths is therefore fallacy, so transparent that perhaps overzeal in controversy can alone account for the assertion. Nor again is it true that χρόνος and καιρός are so nearly allied in their meaning that the difference vanishes in a correct version. It is only to deceive oneself if one reasons from the four places in the New Testament where our translators have loosely given season for χρόνος, as in every one it should be while, or time, or space; equally so to infer from the sixty places where they translate κ. by time, that the distinction between them is evanescent. No scholar who has weighed this usage would deny their distinctive propriety in every instance, as the Christian ought to believe it, because he is certain of God's wisdom in every word He has written. It is only a lax rendering therefore which seems to assimilate the two words.

Most have been misled by the supposed analogy of Gal. 4:4. But the phraseology is as different as the time and circumstance and aim. "The fulness of time" now past, simply means the time fulfilled for God's sending His Son to redeem or buy out from under the law to the adoption of sons, and to impart the Holy Spirit. "The fulness of the seasons," still future, means the completion of those seasons when God instituted dealings of varied character: human government from Noah's day; call to separation and promise given to Abraham; law from Sinai with other supplements, in Israel; world-power, on Israel's failure, in the four great empires; to say nothing of the fall of man and creation long before, and the gospel, last of all, consequent on redemption.

The passage of the Epistle to the Galatians only means that the period had arrived, that the time that had to run was accomplished, or, if you will, that the time purposed and ordained in the wisdom of God was fully come. Martin translated "accomplishment of the time," which appears to me pretty exact. But in Ephesians 1:10 it is the dispensation of the fulness or of the accomplishment of the times, the dispensation which is characterised as the accomplishment of all the arrangements of God.

171 Now, it is not at all a dispensation which is in question, when it is said that a certain term is come, that a certain fact is accomplished; although that fact may be the foundation of the present dispensation. So far is it from being a description of that dispensation that the greater part of the description turns upon that which has preceded the dispensation, upon that which was to happen before the dispensation existed? Christ born under the law is not at all this dispensation, although His birth necessarily preceded it. Neither is it a question, in this passage of Galatians, of the gathering of Jews and Gentiles in one body, but of the relation of the redeemed with God. And if the union of Jews and Gentiles explains sufficiently the union of all things in Christ, I ask, which of the Jews or Gentiles represent the things which are in heaven? (Eph. 1:10). Besides, the Jews will be restored and blessed as a nation in the dispensation to come, which is quite another thing from their union with the Gentiles in one body. Here we are on a fundamental point, upon which the whole question hangs. I feel I ought to point out this distinctly. Our brother says, that the present dispensation is the dispensation of the fulness of times, that Galatians 4:4 refers to this also, and that it is always this dispensation of the fulness of times which subsists, although under different phases; in short, that on the return of the Jews this dispensation will subsist, as well as the dispensation of the gathering of Jews and Gentiles (pp. 29-49). This is evidently a capital point; because, if there be another dispensation, this one must necessarily terminate, instead of subsisting to the end.

For my part, I say, there is no connection between Ephesians 1:10 and Galatians 4:4; I say, that the author has confounded the birth and the first coming of Christ (Gal. 4:4) with the dispensation of the fulness of times; that this dispensation of the fulness of times does not yet exist, and that the present dispensation must terminate so as to give place to another. I doubt his finding amongst his brethren any man, well instructed in the word, who would agree with him in his assertions; and yet all his system depends upon their being well grounded. I ask every brother, capable of forming a judgment, if the explanation that our brother has given of Ephesians 1:10, and of Galatians 4:4, is right. Do they find also that the application of the expression "the dispensation of the fulness of times" to the present dispensation is correct? Let us pay great attention to the scope of this question. God has been pleased to reveal to the church the mystery of a future dispensation; the system of the author of the pamphlet hides the mystery and plunges the church back again into ignorance in this respect. It has not been God's will that the Christians from among the Gentiles should be ignorant that Israel was rejected, as a nation, but only during the period of the coming in of the fulness of the Gentiles. The author makes this mystery once more unknown, and would have the Jews, as a national body, take their place in the fulness of the Gentiles.

This conclusion is refuted by the words themselves. It is well known that the Authorized Version of the clause is untenable, suggesting an unfounded contrast of "time" with eternity as if instantly to follow, whereas a whole millennium and more must intervene. Besides, χρόνος is not used in this abstract way, but for a long or short space, a lapse or interval, and hence delay; and this as pointedly is contrasted with καιρός in Daniel, which means not mere duration of time, but a set time and hence "a year." It is in evident allusion to Rev. 6:11, where it was told the earlier martyr-band that they must rest ἔτι χρόνον [μικρὸν], a while, or space "longer"; whereas the oath now runs that χρόνος οὐκέτι ἔσται, "there should be no longer delay." It is strange that Dean Alford, who agreed in this correction, should nevertheless have given, even in the third edition of his Greek Testament (1866), the same erroneous version as the Authorized; but he sets it right in his small Testament, compared with the Greek (1870), "there shall be delay no longer." It has been objected indeed, that this does not convey the full meaning of the oath, and for two reasons: first, that the narrative in the following chapter implies some measure of delay, even after this announcement; and, secondly, that the analogy with the oath in Daniel is almost entirely destroyed. But the answer is, first, that the terminus a quo of no delay is the days of the voice of the seventh angel when he should sound the trumpet, as he was about to do, whereas the main part of the following chapter precedes the third woe, as any one can see by inspection; and thereon, when the second is past, follows quickly the seventh trumpet, which does introduce the closing scene forthwith; secondly, general scope and minute phraseology stand here in marked contrast, not analogy, with the oath in Daniel, as already noticed. A more correct and consistent version therefore cannot be looked for.

In Rev. 10:6 they rightly prefer the marg. alternative "delay" to the textual "time," as in the Authorised and Revised Versions. "Time" in fact only misleads; as, according to the book itself, more than a thousand years elapse from the seventh angel's beginning to sound, before eternity is come; whereas every one would infer from these versions that eternity must at once follow the sounding of that trumpet. But χρόνος in the Apocalypse as elsewhere is regularly used for "a while or space," a "lapse of time that intervenes" i.e. a delay:* see Rev. 2:21, Rev. 6:11, Rev. 20:3. So it is for example in Acts 14:3, 28, 15:23, 18:20, 23, 19:22, etc. There is really no excuse for the mistake of the Revisers. It is a mere perpetuation of traditional ignorance. Indeed it would be hard for any one to produce a single instance in the New Testament of the abstract force of "time," in contrast with "eternity," which is so arbitrarily conceived to occur here. Mr. E. B. Elliott's addition of it "prolonged" or "extended" is quite uncalled for.

"The word referred to, is employed only once in the New Testament, to denominate a distinct period of the world's history; but an examination of the passage in which it occurs will enable us, without much difficulty, to ascertain the idea there attached to it, and the characteristic features of the period which it designates … The Greek word, here rendered dispensation, literally signifies stewardship, and in that signification it is repeatedly used in scripture — most frequently to denote the ministerial charge, etc. … In this its proper and more common scriptural acceptation, the word involves the ideas of delegated authority and responsible trust. These ideas are not excluded from the meaning of the word as it is employed in the passage before us. Indeed they constitute the essential and generic portion of its meaning, wheresoever it is used in the New Testament. 'The dispensation of the fulness of the times' is just, in other words, the delegated administration, or government, of the fulness of times; or, by an obvious and common transition, the period during which that administration, or government, exists. To determine the peculiar nature of the economy, or administration, referred to, we must consult the statement made by the apostle regarding it. Ἀνακεφαλαιώσασθαι τὰ πάντα ἐν τῶ Χριστῶ is the explanatory language which he uses. It means, according to the English version, 'that he might gather together in one (i.e., concentrate under the rule or government of one head) all things in Christ.'" Then, after a quotation from Owen (Exp. Ep. Heb. cap. 1) to the same effect, the writer sums up: "Christ's government, then, or his headship over creation, is the grand characteristic feature which marks the dispensation of the fulness of times or, it may be termed, the Messianic economy." (Pages 412-414.)}

"The times of the Gentiles" is the time during which, from the capture of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar till the beast is destroyed, Jerusalem, and the throne of God in it, has been set aside and the Gentiles have been in power. The "fulness of time" in Galatians is when the responsibility of man having been fully tried the due time has arrived for Christ to come and accomplish redemption. The "dispensation of the fulness of times," is when all ages having rolled round, and all being ready, all things in heaven and in earth are put under the authority of the second Man as Head.

The times and seasons have to do with the earth and not heaven, as Genesis 1:14 shows us. The term is used in Thessalonians to indicate not the various divisions of earth's history as regulated by the heavenly bodies but those larger divisions, each characterized by its own special features as regulated by God's moral government of the earth. In the past fresh seasons have been introduced by such events as the flood, the redemption of Israel from Egypt and the giving of the law, the overthrow of David's line of kings and the passing of dominion into Gentile hands. Another season yet to come is to be introduced by the Lord Jesus assuming His great power that He may reign. That will be "the day of the Lord."