OSAS= House Built on Sand

[Sagart]

It looks like common sense skipped over you as well.

How can it be a parallel passage when it is talking of something entirely different??? Because you want to try and make eternal life mean temporary or even no life?

They have ears, but do not hear, and eyes but do not see....

It is a parallel passage because both passages explicitly teach that there is safety in the hand of God and that no one can take His people out of His hand—but if they themselves choose to sin, God will deliver them to utter destruction!

 

[Endoscopy]

This allegation is false! I quoted the New Testament verses verbatim as found in the NA28 (The 28th and current edition of the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece) and stated incontrovertible facts about the verbs used in the text. I also quoted verbatim a standard translation (The 1995 updated edition of the NASB) of the parallel passage found in the 43rd chapter of Isaiah.



This allegation is also false! The fourth gospel (“The Gospel According to John”) was written in Koine Greek—the common, everyday Greek dialect that first-century Jewish fishermen used in their daily lives. For unequivocal support for this assertion, please the commentaries on the Greek text of the fourth gospel by:

Beasley-Murray, George R.
Bernard, J. H. (two volumes)
Brown, Raymond E. (two volumes)
Bruce, F. F.
Dods, Marcus
Meyer, Heinrich August Wilhelm
Schnackenburg, Rudolf (three volumes)
Westcott, B. F.



All spoken and written languages are fluid and are constantly being modified by those who use them. This is why an extensive knowledge of the grammar and lexical choices used in the individual books of the New Testament is critical to an accurate understanding of them. However, my post is firmly based upon basic principles of Greek grammar that can be found in any intermediate grammar of Koine Greek being published today.

Furthermore, there are three plural forms of “cactus”—“cacti,” “cactuses,” and “cactus.” The English word “cactus” comes to us through the Latin from the very early Greek “kaktos.” Moreover, in Latin, most second declension masculine nouns ending in -us form their plural in –i, NOT in –ae!

I find it to be appalling when Christians make false statements—either on purpose or because of gross negligence.

Want to try again? Here is where I got the definition of the problem. Keep in mind that today's Yiddish is Judeo German.

There is a problem with the Greek language expressing Hebrew concepts. Paul and James struggled to do this. The Greek of the New Testament is really koine Judeo Greek not koine Greek.

https://weekly.israelbiblecenter.com/do-paul-and-james-disagree-about-faith/

Do Paul and James Disagree About “Faith”?
By Dr. Yeshaya Gruber
October 22, 2018

The question of “faith vs. works” has often baffled—and even enraged—biblical interpreters. Different Christian groups (Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, etc.) proclaim different views, sometimes fighting with each other over the correct interpretation. All of them contrast their own position with the “old” Jewish way of thinking. So where does all this conflict and confusion come from?

An apparent contradiction lies at the root of the controversy. Saul/Paul of Tarsus writes, “For we hold that one is justified by faith (πίστις; pistis) apart from works of the Law” (Romans 3:28, ESV; cf. Rom 5:1; Gal 2:16, 3:11, 3:24). But then Jacob/James of Jerusalem says, “You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith (πίστις; pistis) alone” (2:24, ESV). Some Christian theologians take one side or the other in this “debate,” while others try to show that the apparent contradiction is not really a contradiction.

Yet for all the argument and discussion, one of the most important factors is often neglected completely. Both Jacob/James and Saul/Paul were actually first-century Jews who lived in a hybrid Hebrew-Greek environment. Like others in this situation, they struggled to express and discuss Hebrew ideas in the Greek language. Just before Jacob/James states that becoming “just” involves “works” rather than merely “faith alone,” he exclaims, “You foolish fellow, can’t you see that ‘faith’ apart from works is useless?!” (2:20). This outburst reflects the fact – difficult to convey in Greek – that the Hebrew word for “faith” (אמונה; emunah) means a lifestyle of steadfast reliability.

Saul/Paul was no less frustrated with his audience when it came to understanding the Jewish idea of “faith” – he even calls the Galatians “mindless” (Gal 3:1) with regard to this topic. In context, he was arguing that the way to be considered “just” is to live a lifestyle of steadfast reliability in the way of truth, and that this doesn’t depend on whether one is Jewish and follows the Torah of Moses, or is a Gentile and therefore not obliged to keep all the same commandments.

Both authors found themselves limited by the language they had to use. Each chose a different angle or tack in employing Greek words to express Hebrew/Jewish ideas. This created the impression of a major contradiction, one that would even cause religious schisms! Thankfully, today we have many tools for understanding the original Jewish-Greek context and decoding the deep meanings of such ancient letters.

 

[Sagart]

Want to try again? Here is where I got the definition of the problem. Keep in mind that today's Yiddish is Judeo German.

There is a problem with the Greek language expressing Hebrew concepts. Paul and James struggled to do this. The Greek of the New Testament is really koine Judeo Greek not koine Greek.

https://weekly.israelbiblecenter.com/do-paul-and-james-disagree-about-faith/

Do Paul and James Disagree About “Faith”?
By Dr. Yeshaya Gruber
October 22, 2018

The question of “faith vs. works” has often baffled—and even enraged—biblical interpreters. Different Christian groups (Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, etc.) proclaim different views, sometimes fighting with each other over the correct interpretation. All of them contrast their own position with the “old” Jewish way of thinking. So where does all this conflict and confusion come from?

An apparent contradiction lies at the root of the controversy. Saul/Paul of Tarsus writes, “For we hold that one is justified by faith (πίστις; pistis) apart from works of the Law” (Romans 3:28, ESV; cf. Rom 5:1; Gal 2:16, 3:11, 3:24). But then Jacob/James of Jerusalem says, “You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith (πίστις; pistis) alone” (2:24, ESV). Some Christian theologians take one side or the other in this “debate,” while others try to show that the apparent contradiction is not really a contradiction.

Yet for all the argument and discussion, one of the most important factors is often neglected completely. Both Jacob/James and Saul/Paul were actually first-century Jews who lived in a hybrid Hebrew-Greek environment. Like others in this situation, they struggled to express and discuss Hebrew ideas in the Greek language. Just before Jacob/James states that becoming “just” involves “works” rather than merely “faith alone,” he exclaims, “You foolish fellow, can’t you see that ‘faith’ apart from works is useless?!” (2:20). This outburst reflects the fact – difficult to convey in Greek – that the Hebrew word for “faith” (אמונה; emunah) means a lifestyle of steadfast reliability.

Saul/Paul was no less frustrated with his audience when it came to understanding the Jewish idea of “faith” – he even calls the Galatians “mindless” (Gal 3:1) with regard to this topic. In context, he was arguing that the way to be considered “just” is to live a lifestyle of steadfast reliability in the way of truth, and that this doesn’t depend on whether one is Jewish and follows the Torah of Moses, or is a Gentile and therefore not obliged to keep all the same commandments.

Both authors found themselves limited by the language they had to use. Each chose a different angle or tack in employing Greek words to express Hebrew/Jewish ideas. This created the impression of a major contradiction, one that would even cause religious schisms! Thankfully, today we have many tools for understanding the original Jewish-Greek context and decoding the deep meanings of such ancient letters.

I have in my personal library hundreds of volumes of studies on the Greek text of the New Testament by scholars representing an extremely wide spectrum of thought, including Roman Catholics, Protestants, and Jews—and NONE of these scholars hold to a view even remotely like that of Yeshaya Gruber that Paul and James “struggled to express and discuss Hebrew ideas in the Greek language.” Indeed, it is an incontrovertible fact is that both Paul and James were born and raised in the first century Hellenistic culture and that they had had more than 40 years of experience communicating in Koine Greek as Jews. Yeshaya Gruber appears to be writing from the Twilight Zone!

Moreover, Paul wrote of “works of the Law”—and circumcision in particular; and James wrote of humanitarian works. James was concerned about people being confused and believing that no works at all were necessary. Furthermore, the meaning of אֱמוּנָה depends upon the context in which it used; and so does the meaning of πίστις.

 

[Hevosmies]

I have in my personal library hundreds of volumes of studies on the Greek text of the New Testament by scholars representing an extremely wide spectrum of thought, including Roman Catholics, Protestants, and Jews—and NONE of these scholars hold to a view even remotely like that of Yeshaya Gruber that Paul and James “struggled to express and discuss Hebrew ideas in the Greek language.” Indeed, it is an incontrovertible fact is that both Paul and James were born and raised in the first century Hellenistic culture and that they had had more than 40 years of experience communicating in Koine Greek as Jews. Yeshaya Gruber appears to be writing from the Twilight Zone!

Moreover, Paul wrote of “works of the Law”—and circumcision in particular; and James wrote of humanitarian works. James was concerned about people being confused and believing that no works at all were necessary. Furthermore, the meaning of אֱמוּנָה depends upon the context in which it used; and so does the meaning of πίστις.

So you are ssaying its not by 'works of the law' but its by 'works'.

Its not by these kinds of works, but it is of these other kinds of works?

yeah ok.

Did you know that these "humanitarian works" you speak of actually ARE in the law? (The torah)? Plenty about that in there, even the second greatest commandment to love your neighbor would speak of that.

 

[carl11]

Want to try again? Here is where I got the definition of the problem. Keep in mind that today's Yiddish is Judeo German.

There is a problem with the Greek language expressing Hebrew concepts. Paul and James struggled to do this. Both Jacob/James and Saul/Paul were actually first-century Jews who lived in a hybrid Hebrew-Greek environment. Like others in this situation, they struggled to express and discuss Hebrew ideas in the Greek language. Just before Jacob/James states that becoming “just” involves “works” rather than merely “faith alone,” he exclaims, “You foolish fellow, can’t you see that ‘faith’ apart from works is useless?!” (2:20). This outburst reflects the fact – difficult to convey in Greek
Both authors found themselves limited by the language they had to use. Each chose a different angle or tack in employing Greek words to express Hebrew/Jewish ideas. This created the impression of a major contradiction, one that would even cause religious schisms! Thankfully, today we have many tools for understanding the original Jewish-Greek context and decoding the deep meanings of such ancient letters.

Here in lies the problem in that you are implying the apostles used their own words to express their ideas, that they put in the Bible. This idea is completely wrong according to 2Pt. 1:21.

 

[Endoscopy]

I have in my personal library hundreds of volumes of studies on the Greek text of the New Testament by scholars representing an extremely wide spectrum of thought, including Roman Catholics, Protestants, and Jews—and NONE of these scholars hold to a view even remotely like that of Yeshaya Gruber that Paul and James “struggled to express and discuss Hebrew ideas in the Greek language.” Indeed, it is an incontrovertible fact is that both Paul and James were born and raised in the first century Hellenistic culture and that they had had more than 40 years of experience communicating in Koine Greek as Jews. Yeshaya Gruber appears to be writing from the Twilight Zone!

Moreover, Paul wrote of “works of the Law”—and circumcision in particular; and James wrote of humanitarian works. James was concerned about people being confused and believing that no works at all were necessary. Furthermore, the meaning of אֱמוּנָה depends upon the context in which it used; and so does the meaning of πίστις.

Well now you learned something new!! Consider the source of the article.
Weekly.Israelbiblecenter.com
It is located in Israel and one of the instructors there is Eli Lizorkin-Eyzenberg who has several degrees in Biblical languages and history as well as seminary. He has multiple doctorates as well. He lives in Israel and works closely with the author of the document. For some reason I think those people just might know and understand more about the language issues than you do.

Here in lies the problem in that you are implying the apostles used their own words to express their ideas, that they put in the Bible. This idea is completely wrong according to 2Pt. 1:21.

You are ignoring the basic problem. Words in Hebrew don't translate well into Greek. The Hebrew word for faith does not have an equivalent word in Greek. That is the struggle.

 

[carl11]

You are ignoring the basic problem. Words in Hebrew don't translate well into Greek. The Hebrew word for faith does not have an equivalent word in Greek. That is the struggle.

That can be said for any language. But to say that the apostles had a hard time is not accurate especially knowing that these are God’s words, God gave these words for them to write down not of themselves.

 

[Endoscopy]

That can be said for any language. But to say that the apostles had a hard time is not accurate especially knowing that these are God’s words, God gave these words for them to write down not of themselves.

Why do you diminish the problem? The Hebrew word for faith for example requires a sentence in Greek.

 

[carl11]

Why do you diminish the problem? The Hebrew word for faith for example requires a sentence in Greek.

I am not diminishing the problem I clearly said that is the problem with many languages. For example in Spanish you have the word antiyer which when translated into English and how it is used is a long phrase in the English language. What I was pointing out was the fact that God chose that word or words to put down in the Bible not mankind.

 

[Ignorun]

This outburst reflects the fact – difficult to convey in Greek – that the Hebrew word for “faith” (אמונה; emunah) means a lifestyle of steadfast reliability.

That definition of faith harmonizes with Scripture. (From Genesis and all the way through to the end of Revelation.)

 

[preston39]

There are all kinds of things we must do to meet Gods Requirements for Salvation.

But we can't do any of them.

Our Only Hope is Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

That makes no sense.
It is G-d's desire that no one be lost. With that as His intent...why would he demand things of us that we cannot do?

The things G-d expects from us are common sense things and His help is readily available to assist us in doing them.

 

[preston39]

I guess you didn't apply "common sense".

John 10:27-28
27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

That is right.....He gives eternal life....after which they shall never perish.

You may wish to concentrate on continuity of thought process. I can see it may help you to be right...and not distort G-d's word.

 

[Sagart]

Well now you learned something new!! Consider the source of the article.
Weekly.Israelbiblecenter.com
It is located in Israel and one of the instructors there is Eli Lizorkin-Eyzenberg who has several degrees in Biblical languages and history as well as seminary. He has multiple doctorates as well. He lives in Israel and works closely with the author of the document. For some reason I think those people just might know and understand more about the language issues than you do.
You are ignoring the basic problem. Words in Hebrew don't translate well into Greek. The Hebrew word for faith does not have an equivalent word in Greek. That is the struggle.

First century Jews of the Christian sect living in the Hellenistic culture—as did all of the writers of the New Testament—were more familiar with Aramaic than they were with Hebrew, and they were much more familiar with Koine Greek than they were with Aramaic. Moreover, they read, studied, and quoted the Scriptures from the Septuagint (a Greek text) rather than from a Hebrew text. Therefore, rather than trying to figure out how to express רָקִיעַ in Greek, they would have been trying to figure out how to express στερέωμα in Hebrew!

My background is in translation theory and New Testament exegesis. Therefore, I am keenly aware that translating into a recipient language a concept expressed in a donor language can be difficult and frustrating. However, the writers of the New Testament were not, as I posted above, novices in doing so—and should they have come upon a difficult Hebrew word such as רָקִיעַ, they had the Septuagint as their guide. In John 10:27-28—the verses that launched this discussion, there are no concepts expressed that are not common to both the Hebrew and the Greek languages, and for John to express them in Greek would have come perfectly natural to him. Indeed, the translation difficulty is in translating John 10:27-28 from Greek to English! The difficulty is in translating the Greek present tense verbs into English. This is difficult because we do not have in English a tense that is even closely equivalent to the Greek present tense that emphasizes the aspect of the action (which is continuous) rather than the time of the action. Readers of the English text who are not familiar with the Greek present tense tend to misinterpret the text. This is even more true of 1 John 3:9!

 

[Endoscopy]

That definition of faith harmonizes with Scripture. (From Genesis and all the way through to the end of Revelation.)

The problem is Hebrew translated to Greek then for us translated into English. Keeping in mind that word for word translations many times don't convey the meaning well. I use the AMPC to help with that. Here is a good example. Notice the words in parentheses giving additional meanings of the word being translated. Especially notice believes in. More than a simple belief. With most translations you have to glean the meaning from other scriptures.

John 3 AMPC
16 For God so greatly loved and dearly prized the world that He [even] gave up His only begotten (unique) Son, so that whoever believes in (trusts in, clings to, relies on) Him shall not perish (come to destruction, be lost) but have eternal (everlasting) life.

 

[Endoscopy]

First century Jews of the Christian sect living in the Hellenistic culture—as did all of the writers of the New Testament—were more familiar with Aramaic than they were with Hebrew, and they were much more familiar with Koine Greek than they were with Aramaic. Moreover, they read, studied, and quoted the Scriptures from the Septuagint (a Greek text) rather than from a Hebrew text. Therefore, rather than trying to figure out how to express רָקִיעַ in Greek, they would have been trying to figure out how to express στερέωμα in Hebrew!

My background is in translation theory and New Testament exegesis. Therefore, I am keenly aware that translating into a recipient language a concept expressed in a donor language can be difficult and frustrating. However, the writers of the New Testament were not, as I posted above, novices in doing so—and should they have come upon a difficult Hebrew word such as רָקִיעַ, they had the Septuagint as their guide. In John 10:27-28—the verses that launched this discussion, there are no concepts expressed that are not common to both the Hebrew and the Greek languages, and for John to express them in Greek would have come perfectly natural to him. Indeed, the translation difficulty is in translating John 10:27-28 from Greek to English! The difficulty is in translating the Greek present tense verbs into English. This is difficult because we do not have in English a tense that is even closely equivalent to the Greek present tense that emphasizes the aspect of the action (which is continuous) rather than the time of the action. Readers of the English text who are not familiar with the Greek present tense tend to misinterpret the text. This is even more true of 1 John 3:9!

ROFL
Aramaic is a close relative of Hebrew. It was the common language of people in upper Israel and areas north and northeast like Tyre.

 

[GodsGrace101]

First century Jews of the Christian sect living in the Hellenistic culture—as did all of the writers of the New Testament—were more familiar with Aramaic than they were with Hebrew, and they were much more familiar with Koine Greek than they were with Aramaic. Moreover, they read, studied, and quoted the Scriptures from the Septuagint (a Greek text) rather than from a Hebrew text. Therefore, rather than trying to figure out how to express רָקִיעַ in Greek, they would have been trying to figure out how to express στερέωμα in Hebrew!

My background is in translation theory and New Testament exegesis. Therefore, I am keenly aware that translating into a recipient language a concept expressed in a donor language can be difficult and frustrating. However, the writers of the New Testament were not, as I posted above, novices in doing so—and should they have come upon a difficult Hebrew word such as רָקִיעַ, they had the Septuagint as their guide. In John 10:27-28—the verses that launched this discussion, there are no concepts expressed that are not common to both the Hebrew and the Greek languages, and for John to express them in Greek would have come perfectly natural to him. Indeed, the translation difficulty is in translating John 10:27-28 from Greek to English! The difficulty is in translating the Greek present tense verbs into English. This is difficult because we do not have in English a tense that is even closely equivalent to the Greek present tense that emphasizes the aspect of the action (which is continuous) rather than the time of the action. Readers of the English text who are not familiar with the Greek present tense tend to misinterpret the text. This is even more true of 1 John 3:9!

I'm very sorry I missed this whole conversation.
I don't know any of the biblical languages, but I do speak 3 or 4 languages (if you count a dialect as a language) and I'm familiar with what is being spoken of.

Very often I'm told by someone that they understand the aorist tense. This by persons that do not know Koine Greek. I know someone that reads the N..T. in Koine Greek and when I asked him about it, he told me to forget it because it was too difficult to understand unless one speaks the language.

I must say, however, that I find no problem with understanding the N.T. because it has to be read as a complete unit and not verse by verse. Some I know hang on to every word as if their life depended on it. I do believe this is wrong. The N.T. conveys a message...it's that message we should be paying attention to.

 

[GodsGrace101]

The problem is Hebrew translated to Greek then for us translated into English. Keeping in mind that word for word translations many times don't convey the meaning well. I use the AMPC to help with that. Here is a good example. Notice the words in parentheses giving additional meanings of the word being translated. Especially notice believes in. More than a simple belief. With most translations you have to glean the meaning from other scriptures.

John 3 AMPC
16 For God so greatly loved and dearly prized the world that He [even] gave up His only begotten (unique) Son, so that whoever believes in (trusts in, clings to, relies on) Him shall not perish (come to destruction, be lost) but have eternal (everlasting) life.

How does one EVER do a word for word translation?
What are you talking about??

We don't need any additional meaning to understand the N.T.
The problem, as I see it, is that many don't WANT to understand it.

Could you tell me ONE WORD that, if translated incorrectly, would change the entire meaning of the N.T.??

You won't be able to.

 

[dokimos]

Wow, it's pretty split up, the difference in doctrine. About half believes it is by faith with no change and the other half believes the saved will demonstrate change.

I mean, the message of repentance is throughout the entire Bible. Of course, it is by faith, but your salvation that you received by faith and not of works, will always bear fruit of the Holy Spirit, cause if you are saved he is in you. I think there are Christians who need deliverance from the influence of evil spirits and demons, of course. Those can always mess you up.

Hey, God bless everyone reading this. Even if you don't agree

 

[Endoscopy]

How does one EVER do a word for word translation?
What are you talking about??

We don't need any additional meaning to understand the N.T.
The problem, as I see it, is that many don't WANT to understand it.

Could you tell me ONE WORD that, if translated incorrectly, would change the entire meaning of the N.T.??

You won't be able to.

Going back to Hebrew the root of the word for faith means an continuous firm action.

 

[Endoscopy]

Wow, it's pretty split up, the difference in doctrine. About half believes it is by faith with no change and the other half believes the saved will demonstrate change.

I mean, the message of repentance is throughout the entire Bible. Of course, it is by faith, but your salvation that you received by faith and not of works, will always bear fruit of the Holy Spirit, cause if you are saved he is in you. I think there are Christians who need deliverance from the influence of evil spirits and demons, of course. Those can always mess you up.

Hey, God bless everyone reading this. Even if you don't agree

Here are some concepts:
1. We are all sinners.
2. The wages of sin is dearh.
3. We need to repent of our sins.
4. We are saved from our sins by grace through faith in Jesus.
5. Grace is a free unearned gift of God.
6. True faith produces works.
7. Works doesn't save.
8. Faith without works is dead

Each of these has scripture(s) to back it up.
What confuses too many is the fact we can do no works for salvation. It It is grace through faith in Jesus. Grace is a free unearned gift from God. However too many want to believe that salvation must be earned.