simple or complex?

[Alimantado]

I've got no idea what the definition it is; I've only just started reading the Bible. You have answered the question though, because you've opted for 'all of them at once'. So how did you decide this?

I wonder if perhaps what Jerry is trying to argue is that just because we can do a literature review and list every single meaning that a particular word was used to convey throughout history, it doesn't then mean that we can take all those meanings and apply all of them whenever the Bible uses the word.

[Colin Stolzer]

So how did you decide this?

By Context and comparing scripture to scripture, actually it has a few more meanings that I think apply even better in the other places this particular word is used in the NT. One of the reasons I chose to use this word as an example is because the Greek word is only used 3 times in the NT, once in Gal and twice in Revelations. And the Strongs basic definition doesn't work in the instances in Revelations nor does the abortion definition work in Revelations, to understand the meaning in Revelations of the passages it has to mean a different definition that I haven't given here. It's worth studying out though. You could have a look at Vines, Torrey's and Nave's concordances and lexicons for further definitions. Strongs is not the only biblical concordance and certainly not the end all and be all of definitions for biblical words. There is also Morris's or Scofield's or any number of other reference bibles that can be looked at for context references. Keep in mind though all of these books including Strong's are all written by men. That's why I believe relying on one persons definitions is not always the best idea, particularly were the context and comparison of scripture doesn't clearly define what the intent of the word is.

C

[Alimantado]

Thanks, CowboyPreacher.

[Kubel]

I completely agree.

Logically, if we HAVE to know the word's base language meanings, then what is the point of a translation? I thought that's what a translation is. :puzzled: It has long been a pet peeve of mine to hear someone say "Well in the Greek this word also means ______" and substitute that word in for the word the translators (who were linguistic experts) thought was the best.

While getting a better understanding of a word is a good thing, if we believe the KJV is the preserved Word of God do we not believe that he preserved it to say what he meant?

My pet peeve is the opposite of yours . English is not the language God chose to have his word written in. For people who believe the KJV is inerrant and/or is the new revelation, obviously the Greek and Hebrew would be irrelevant- perhaps even undesirable, so I can understand your thinking- it would make perfect sense to say "English is enough" if you believe this.

But I believe the KJV is a good translation, not an inspiration or revelation by God, so I believe the Hebrew and Greek is more close than the English could ever hope to be in any translation. It's not an issue of translation errors- it's an issue of language barrier. God did a good job confusing the tongues back in Genesis. It's not possible to deliver something in one language to another without losing at least a little bit (like when you hear someone say "it was lost in translation", that is the language barrier- it's something translation attempts to cross, but always stumbles upon). The KJV translators had to make a choice when translating, and they were required to choose what they felt was the best, most accurate method of delivering what is said in one language, one culture, one time-- and bring it to their own. They couldn't list every possible translation for every single word or phrase, and more often than not, the words in Hebrew and Greek carry a deeper meaning than our shallow English could convey.

So I believe there's really nothing wrong with going back to the source for study. In fact, I encourage it. Our church is KJVO, but our pastor still says "it says this in the KJV, and that's correct, but here's what it says in the Greek". You can get so much more from the source than you can from the destination when it comes to translations (and I'm not just talking about Bibles). I certainly do. If you just stick with what's there, there's a lot you are missing out on.

But as it was mentioned in this thread, I too dislike when people come to a conclusion and then try to find scripture to back it up (whether looking in the source languages, or looking at English). Come to conclusions on doctrine AFTER you have sought the truth in the word. Many will come to a conclusion and then try to find scripture to back what they feel is right in their mind. That's not the best way to do things. Catechism does this- they explain what the church has believed, and then they try to back it up with scripture for modern people who actually now care what the Bible really says. So instead of a doctrine being supported by scripture as a foundation, scripture is hanging from doctrine on strings, with tradition being the foundation instead.

[DaveW]

A case in point folks.

I once knew of someone who went to the incredible extent of exploring a particular passage to extract and anti abortion stance, when the plain reading of the passage speaks against murder, which of course is absolutely inclusive of the practice of abortion.

It was not however the word muder which was referred to but another entirely.

And in the process that person condemned anyone involved in the drug indistry - pharmacists, or chemists, thereby condemning anyone involved in .... well, really almost any kind of industry.

Ga 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
Ga 5:20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
Ga 5:21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

this is exactly my point - the plain reading of the text covers your extraction from it.

And a plain reading of my posts in this thread will show quite obviously that I am not one who is "anti-study" although I think you will find with a small amount of STUDY that the passage that speaks of study is speaking PRIMARILY of studying God's Word, not lexicons etc.
I fully acknowledge the usefulness of study helps of varying sorts, but to return to the basic premise of the question -


Do you really think that an uneducated man without the resources to study the Greek, and Hebrew, and Aramaic languages is not able to properly serve the Lord?
Or that that person is somehow less equipped to honour God?

Often times people use all this extra "Knowledge" to dazzle and bluff people into believing what they say must be right.

The helps can give a better DEPTH of understanding, but they WILL NOT CHANGE THE MEANING of the PLAIN
READING.

[Colin Stolzer]

A case in point folks.

I once knew of someone who went to the incredible extent of exploring a particular passage to extract and anti abortion stance, when the plain reading of the passage speaks against murder, which of course is absolutely inclusive of the practice of abortion.

It was not however the word muder which was referred to but another entirely.

And in the process that person condemned anyone involved in the drug indistry - pharmacists, or chemists, thereby condemning anyone involved in .... well, really almost any kind of industry.

Ga 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
Ga 5:20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
Ga 5:21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

this is exactly my point - the plain reading of the text covers your extraction from it.

And a plain reading of my posts in this thread will show quite obviously that I am not one who is "anti-study" although I think you will find with a small amount of STUDY that the passage that speaks of study is speaking PRIMARILY of studying God's Word, not lexicons etc.
I fully acknowledge the usefulness of study helps of varying sorts, but to return to the basic premise of the question -


Do you really think that an uneducated man without the resources to study the Greek, and Hebrew, and Aramaic languages is not able to properly serve the Lord?
Or that that person is somehow less equipped to honour God?

Often times people use all this extra "Knowledge" to dazzle and bluff people into believing what they say must be right.

The helps can give a better DEPTH of understanding, but they WILL NOT CHANGE THE MEANING of the PLAIN
READING.

The abortion definition wasn't actually the point it was just a rabbit trail, but since your sure that the plain reading will always suffice let's add one more verse and then I'll get your answer.

Ga 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,

There are 5 different words in the greek that are used for love and there are 21 definitions in the modern english for love, can you tell me from the plain reading of the passage in context (with or without cross references) which definition(s) of love this refers to?

I think anyone can serve God in the capacity they are called because he will provide you with the skills you need to perform what he has for you to do. He can even use dry bones or the jaw bone of an ass because my God doesn't have any limitations.

C

[Jerry]

There are 5 different words in the greek that are used for love and there are 21 definitions in the modern english for love' date=' can you tell me from the plain reading of the passage in context (with or without cross references) which definition(s) of love this refers to?[/quote']

Not in the Greek New Testament, there aren't.

[Colin Stolzer]

There's 3 in the Greek NT but that still doesn't clarify the plain reading.

C

[Jerry]

The original languages might be like watching a show in colour that you have previously only seen in black and white - it is not a different show, but you can see clearer and perhaps more detail. The Greek and Hebrew will not give a different picture than we see in English, it is just like seeing our Bible in colour rather than black and white. Love in Greek still means love - just as it does in English - however, the Greek word used may show us what kind of love is in view - though most of that will be seen by examining the context anyway.

[Colin Stolzer]

That was a nice way of not answering the question.

C

[Jerry]

Your last post didn't contain a question. I used an illlustration to show where I believe the original languages (and sound tools based on them) fit in with Bible study - not to give a different meaning, but to open up the Word a bit more.

[Colin Stolzer]

The abortion definition wasn't actually the point it was just a rabbit trail, but since your sure that the plain reading will always suffice let's add one more verse and then I'll get your answer.

Ga 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,

There are 5 different words in the greek that are used for love and there are 21 definitions in the modern english for love, can you tell me from the plain reading of the passage in context (with or without cross references) which definition(s) of love this refers to?

I think anyone can serve God in the capacity they are called because he will provide you with the skills you need to perform what he has for you to do. He can even use dry bones or the jaw bone of an ass because my God doesn't have any limitations.

C

The question was a few posts back.

C

[DaveW]

For starters, I have never said that there is NO value in language study.

However to answer your question - what does it matter exactly which form of Love is referred to in this passage - I would suggest that in this context you could easily suggest it is the highest, God given form of love that is referred to.
After all we are talking about the "fruit of the Spirit" - I would assume it is "Agape" that is referred to.
From the context I would think that more than Phileo is referred to, and of course since the bible never condones "Eros" I think it is safe to assume it is not that one!

Buthow would it change the essential meaning of the passage if it is Phileo?

If I were preaching about this passage I would in fact study that out, but that doesn't mean I would present all that information.

Why don't you tell everyone which Greek word the word Love is translated from?
It wouldn't happen to be "Agape" would it - I think I was quite able to figure that out from the context, with just a little bit of thought.

By the way, I have had a gentleman somewhat learned in Greek explain to me from a language study that through the usage of the Greek words for love, the Bible indicates that they are almost entirely interchangeable. And as such to make a difference in the restoration of Peter (Agape,Agape, Phileo) is of no real use as the words are used interchangeably in the New Testament.

I can't remember the details because I reckon it is junk.

So whilst I do not deny the value of study you are now two strikes down on Greek verses plain reading in context.

Remember three strikes and you're out!

There IS value in language studies, but they do not change the understanding of a passage, they merely deepen it.

[Colin Stolzer]

I'm not down two strikes you proved my point exactly you had to go to the greek to decided which you thought was appropriate you didn't give the definition you thought was right from the plain english definitions. That is my point exactly you couldn't get the meaning from context and the greek words do convey very different meanings.

C

[John81]

For the most part, I'd say the simple reading and studying of the Word of God, in all prayer, will suffice.

I don't think there is anything wrong with referring back to the Greek or checking some reference like Strongs or Vines; but I don't think it's necessary and I am against it in the case of those who do so and then try to add or change what the actual Scripture says.

If we truly spend time in prayer and reading the Word of God, studying the Word with the help of the Holy Ghost, then the Lord will open our understanding.

Of course, for those who rarely open their Bibles, or those who just read some just to be reading it, they won't come away with the same understanding. This is why so many professing Christians don't understand the Bible and get led astray following those they think understand it.