earth were finished, and the whole world of them', and puts in a footnote

'Or, order.  See John 1:10'.  The translators evidently did not limit the

word 'world' to Adam.  Whether we agree with them or not, it is evident that

the LXX translators had no reserve about the word kosmos.  While it naturally

included the world placed under Adam's rule, it included much more, 'all the

host of them', by its use of the Hebrew tsaba.  This word is used in

Deuteronomy 4:19: 'The sun, and the moon, and the stars, even all the host of

heaven' (kosmos and tsaba).  These two words kosmos and tsaba include

spiritual powers, parallel in their sphere to kings of the earth.

'The Lord shall punish the host (kosmos) of the high ones that are on

high, and the kings of the earth upon the earth' (Isa. 24:21).

Here is positive proof that 'angels, principalities and powers' are a

part of the kosmos, and so sets aside as unscriptural the effort to limit the

word to Adam's world.  The objection, moreover, is not valid, that 'the

earth' which was without form and void of Genesis 1:2, cannot be the 'world'

of Ephesians 1:4.  The ground was cursed for man's sake (Gen. 3:17; 8:21),

and if the ground could be cursed for the sake of one fallen creature, the

earth could be so treated should there have been a fall among the angels

before the creation of man.  The case also of Korah and of Uzziah already

referred to confirms this.

Kataballo is used of an earthen vessel 'cast down', but by preserving

grace not destroyed (2 Cor. 4:7,9), and of the great dragon in Revelation

12:9,10.  In neither place can the idea of being 'founded' be allowed.

Confounded yes, but placed on a foundation no!  The addition of the word

'foundation' to the translation of pro kataboles kosmou in Ephesians 1:4, is

an intrusion.  It is not a translation but a private interpretation.  The

Scriptures, Old or New, never use the word katabole for the word foundation.

Hebrews 6:1 is not comparable for there the actual Greek word themelion is

added, and it is up to the translator to decide whether Paul meant 'not

laying again' the foundation or 'not overthrowing again' the foundation, and

there is considerable diversity of opinion over this.  Whichever should prove

to be correct this passage stands alone and cannot alter the unambiguous

passages already cited.  The word katabole is used once, in Hebrews 11:11

where we read:

'Through faith also Sara herself received strength to conceive seed,

and was delivered of a child when she was past age, because she judged

Him faithful Who had promised'.

Here the word katabole is translated 'to conceive'.  The words used in

the LXX for 'conceive' are gennao, echo, koiten and sullambano, never in one

single passage does it use katabole.  Not one instance can be found where

katabole is ever translated 'conceive' except the passage in question.  The

case of Sarah is evidently exceptional, she needed to receive 'strength' to

do whatever katabole means.  She was as good as dead and past age, and it is

far more likely that she received strength to bring a child to birth, rather

than for the initial conception, where strength is not so obviously needed.

Again, like the passage in Hebrews 6 we have an exceptional occurrence, about

which commentators have argued from early times, and which by no accepted

canon of interpretation can be employed by either party in controversy.

Where the Greek word katabole has been adopted in modern times by the medical

faculty, we find that it is 100 per cent in favour of the translation

'overthrow'.  The shorter Oxford Dictionary defines katabolism thus: