SIT, TIP, Prophecy and Confession

[chockfull]

Phileo and agape can often be used interchangeably.......Amnon's relationship with his sister Tamar .... incestuous relationship. . . . is considered agape love. Guess we wouldn't want to encourage that operation of it.

Many scholars don't give the LXX - Septuagint Greek translation of the Old Testament the same kind of weight or nuance translation that they feel was given to New Testament Greek translations said to be done by Timothy and Paul.

Just pointing this out because the OT records of Amnon and Tamar and the agape word translation there would be from the LXX. It would be generally more accurate to work with the Hebrew in these records as that language in the OT was protected by the jot and tittle notation.

[geisha779]

Many scholars don't give the LXX - Septuagint Greek translation of the Old Testament the same kind of weight or nuance translation that they feel was given to New Testament Greek translations said to be done by Timothy and Paul.

Just pointing this out because the OT records of Amnon and Tamar and the agape word translation there would be from the LXX. It would be generally more accurate to work with the Hebrew in these records as that language in the OT was protected by the jot and tittle notation.

Well, if I used the Hebrew my lame attempt at irony would be lost wouldn't it? I was making a point about taking one word and assigning it a specific meaning.

It would be arrogant in the extreme for me to think I could work with the Greek or the Hebrew as I have very little training in either language. These languages are too nuanced for the novice. It took me five years to learn enough French to be considered fluent and still no one was going to hire me as a translator as I still had not mastered the language. One class a semester did not make me an expert.

Despite our practice and hubris in TWI, searching out single Greek words and trying to define scripture by dictionary definition is not the way to make scripture speak deep meaning to us.....that is why those literal according to usage were often infantile and narrow. Many of them were a defined by a theology, not the language IMO.

I leave the translating and the nuance to the experts.....I have figured out who to listen to in such cases. Thanks for the advice though.......

[chockfull]

Despite our practice and hubris in TWI, searching out single Greek words and trying to define scripture by dictionary definition is not the way to make scripture speak deep meaning to us.....that is why those literal according to usage were often infantile and narrow. Many of them were a defined by a theology, not the language IMO.

I leave the translating and the nuance to the experts.....I have figured out who to listen to in such cases. Thanks for the advice though.......

Studying scripture, involving looking at original languages, and utilizing tools such as lexicons which are like a dictionary for a dead language like Koine Greek, is not something that is anywhere near unique to TWI, as much as you would like to tie those two together.

Ignoring study, and trying to figure out which "expert" to follow, IMO is not a better recipe for "making scripture speak deep meaning to us". Following the wrong person is what got us into this mess in the first place.

[WordWolf]

Studying scripture, involving looking at original languages, and utilizing tools such as lexicons which are like a dictionary for a dead language like Koine Greek, is not something that is anywhere near unique to TWI, as much as you would like to tie those two together.

It isn't,

but twi and others who do that often decide they have "arrived" at a matter

by consulting a lexicon and/or an interlinear.

The results often include rudimentary mistakes like vpw making a big deal out

of "ekklesia" as "those called out" because of the construction of the word,

when it just means "ASSEMBLY." His own example of a crowd/mob should have

illustrated that. They were a bunch of people who assembled in one place-

they were NOT "called out" for anything. In fact, most didn't even know what

the commotion was about.

It's good to seek answers- but I've seen results of that method produce WORSE

error because of the hubris of the reader.

Ignoring study, and trying to figure out which "expert" to follow, IMO is not a better recipe for "making scripture speak deep meaning to us". Following the wrong person is what got us into this mess in the first place.

Who said anything about "FOLLOWING" an expert when he's a translator?

Translators are good for helping make the text readable and clear.

"Making Scripture speak deep meaning to us" is NOT the part of the translator-

that's the job of God Almighty.

Confusing the two is bad.

[chockfull]

It's good to seek answers- but I've seen results of that method produce WORSE

error because of the hubris of the reader.

Me too, but as the proverb says don't let the hypocrites keep you from church, and don't let the megalomaniac cult leaders shoddy research keep you from Bible study!!!

Who said anything about "FOLLOWING" an expert when he's a translator?

Translators are good for helping make the text readable and clear.

"Making Scripture speak deep meaning to us" is NOT the part of the translator-

that's the job of God Almighty.

Confusing the two is bad.

I don't want to nitpick words here with you. I was responding to a comment that stated in so many words that Bible study isn't the way to make scriptures speak deep meaning to us. My point was that no Bible study certainly isn't a better way to accomplish that.

[socks]

Interesting part of this discussion, wordwolf, geish, chockful, and all....

For comparison, PFAL proposed that the "mathematic"al nature of the greek used in the Bible's translations allowed for a more exact determination of their meaning. I'm not so sure about that, at all anymore. I guess it's more exact than less exact languages but frankly I don't know how I'd weight that today.

IMO there's a limited amount of information and clarity into the meaning of that information that can be gained from studying the language of the bible, the words, the customs and times around them, etc. etc.

By limited I don't mean insignificant but rather that knowing the meaning of words doesn't help much if the usages of those words is as unique as they often are in the Bible.

PFAL notes things about prepositions and VPW was a big fan of Bullinger's work showing place, time, motion, etc. But that's what prepositions do. The usage(s) of the words is as important and that requires a lot of additional study to determine. Even still it simply can't reveal the meaning of words when they represent unique concepts as we see so often in the Bible.

So "Drink this glass of water" is pretty clear. There's no deeper meaning to what those words actually mean - we know what a glass is, what it means to drink and what water is. But if I'm in Ephesians 6 and read

For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Live as children of light (for the fruit of the light consists in all goodness, righteousness and truth) and find out what pleases the Lord. ...

the meaning of those words is going to require more effort, even just effort to know why another version would read

For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Walk as children of light (for the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness, righteousness, and truth), finding out what is acceptable to the Lord.

Words like spirit, soul, life, gifts, tongues, prophecy - they are just words and their meaning can be understood. But as others have noted here the descriptinve nuance into what they actually mean isn't something that research reveals. It gets part way but not all the way.

And it's kinda funny in an ironic way - VPW proposed that the Bible be given at least the same respect and effort as any other written work, to read what's written, read for context, where words used before, etc. etc. etc. Yet, like any written work the words will only communicate a certain kind of thing, a certain kind of message to the reader, limited by the format of the media itself. Funny....

The next time someone says "Picture this..." :biglaugh:/>.

[geisha779]

Interesting part of this discussion, wordwolf, geish, chockful, and all....

For comparison, PFAL proposed that the "mathematic"al nature of the greek used in the Bible's translations allowed for a more exact determination of their meaning. I'm not so sure about that, at all anymore. I guess it's more exact than less exact languages but frankly I don't know how I'd weight that today.

IMO there's a limited amount of information and clarity into the meaning of that information that can be gained from studying the language of the bible, the words, the customs and times around them, etc. etc.

By limited I don't mean insignificant but rather that knowing the meaning of words doesn't help much if the usages of those words is as unique as they often are in the Bible.

PFAL notes things about prepositions and VPW was a big fan of Bullinger's work showing place, time, motion, etc. But that's what prepositions do. The usage(s) of the words is as important and that requires a lot of additional study to determine. Even still it simply can't reveal the meaning of words when they represent unique concepts as we see so often in the Bible.

So "Drink this glass of water" is pretty clear. There's no deeper meaning to what those words actually mean - we know what a glass is, what it means to drink and what water is. But if I'm in Ephesians 6 and read

For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Live as children of light (for the fruit of the light consists in all goodness, righteousness and truth) and find out what pleases the Lord. ...

the meaning of those words is going to require more effort, even just effort to know why another version would read

For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Walk as children of light (for the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness, righteousness, and truth), finding out what is acceptable to the Lord.

Words like spirit, soul, life, gifts, tongues, prophecy - they are just words and their meaning can be understood. But as others have noted here the descriptinve nuance into what they actually mean isn't something that research reveals. It gets part way but not all the way.

And it's kinda funny in an ironic way - VPW proposed that the Bible be given at least the same respect and effort as any other written work, to read what's written, read for context, where words used before, etc. etc. etc. Yet, like any written work the words will only communicate a certain kind of thing, a certain kind of message to the reader, limited by the format of the media itself. Funny....

The next time someone says "Picture this..." />.

I hear ya....

Scripture is full of concepts....and concepts convey meaning....and concepts are not usually found in single words. Most words themselves have no theological meaning assigned to them.....it is how they are used and in what context that conveys the meaning to us. Language often has more than one way to convey the same meaning, but subtle nuances can change the meaning within a certain context. Treating individual words as concepts can be limiting. Assigning individual words theological meaning can be misleading IMO.

What do I know? I need people trained in a language to translate it for me and I don't consider word studies as "working" with biblical languages.

[socks]

Phileo, eros, storge and agape are good examples.

Here's where the teacher part of it comes in for me - how many times have we heard that there's more than one word for love in greek and only one word for love in english?

That's not true - there are multiple words for love in the english language - love, like, affection, care, intimate, close - all of these words indicate different aspects of "love" - and they're often used to do just that.

What's happened is that in translation a single word was used to represent different nuances of meanings. A "good" translation has to extend that meaning as much as possible. The fact that someone at some point decided "love" works for every instance doesn't mean to me that I'm limited to that, or that word or that translation.

And therein lies the rubber on the road - someone has to determine and define the actual meanings, in translation. When we heard "the love of God in the renewed mind in manifestation", it reflected a theological premise, much more than a simple definition of a word. In VPW's case he was extending a doctrinal position in using that definition for occurrences of agapa/e/o.

I've used the example of the drink a glass of water before in teachings and some people respond "but what if you didn't know what a glass of water is? you'd need to be taught and that's why we need blah blah blah"....which goes directly to my point. I wouldn't say drink a glass of water without qualification to someone that I knew didn't understand what a glass was, or water was, or what it meant to drink. I'd use a different technique to communicate it to them using words, illustration, examples, many different methods......

"God's Word" uses words and lays them out as if the reader will know and understand the meanings and usages - so much of the N.T. scriptures that have been collected into the canon read just like that - there's no lexicon that comes with them, no Index of God's Words for a reference, no "Yahweh's Unabridged Dictionary".

So - if God is telling man about things that man doesn't already know and needs to know, things that are going to be new, like Jesus Christ, a resurrection, new life, spirit, worship, faith, etc. etc. - and we're faced with a book that only contains x amount of information in it - and equally intelligent, caring and honest people come to vastly different conclusions on things in it -

It doesn't lead me to assume that it's hopeless to expect I can come to reasonable conclusions or that everyone else is crazy or possessed - well, not right off the bat anyway.... It just tells me I need to clearly understand what God expects me to do with it, the correct methods to learn what ultimately He wants me to know.

[chockfull]

And therein lies the rubber on the road - someone has to determine and define the actual meanings, in translation. When we heard "the love of God in the renewed mind in manifestation", it reflected a theological premise, much more than a simple definition of a word. In VPW's case he was extending a doctrinal position in using that definition for occurrences of agapa/e/o.

I absolutely agree with you that the approach of TWI is to lay out a theology and mask it in "literal translations according to usage". However, the underlying encouragement to search the scriptures was a good thing. What they meant by search - not so much - God doesn't need us reading the blue book over and over again for hours trying to extract some deeper meaning from it.

In mainstream Christianity there is a wide variance to people's approach to and attitude on scripture study. And again, post-TWI people have to make a conscious decision on which way they want to go there. As far as "word studies", to me this is no different than what I do in reading - look up words unfamiliar to me in a dictionary. It expands my understanding and connection with the author. I don't really see a way in which this would be a harmful recommendation.

Edited November 28, 2012 by chockfull

[waysider]

"I don't really see a way in which this would be a harmful recommendation."

Really? How about dechomai/lambano?

(Pertains directly to the subject of the thread.)

[socks]

It was certainly a good thing, chockful. And things like word studies can only help us to learn what's in the Bible. Right now, I probably approach it as both you and geisha describe.

I always took word studies to be for topical reading, a method of reading the Bible in an organized way. It does help to understand the meaning of the words too of course. For me the primary benefits go to understanding context. There are limits to that though- just because a word is used to deal with say, rain and water and refreshing, may not be all that hugely significant, but as we saw over the years the Wayfer approach would attach all the uses into a string to make a definition - that will produce some convoluted definitions, to say the least and that don't necessarily add to the meaning - typically something like "water is a thing that can be rain and can also refresh when you drink it....and the sky is used as a figure for what "heaven" is, and heaven is God's domain.so water is Godly and from heaven and can refresh when it rains!! Isn't that wonderful??!!".....I'm exaggerating but not much. Martindale was the master at that, and it can only denigrate this discussion to go too far into that...so....anyhoo....

I dig word studies, and using reference materials though. Absolutely. />

[chockfull]

Really? How about dechomai/lambano?

(Pertains directly to the subject of the thread.)

How about it?

[TrustAndObey]

How about it?

Since it could become an entire subject of it's own and more doctrine than anything.. Can I refer you to this page: http://www.empirenet.com/~messiah7/rsr_lambano.htm

To quote a portion...

Actually, Wierwille is wrong on these counts-- there aren't just two words for "receive," and there isn't a single hard and fast meaning for each. This is typical of language. For example, if you look in an English dictionary, you'll notice that most words have more than one meaning listed-- not just one, narrow meaning. This is especially true of common words like "receive." (My medium-length Webster's lists 13 meanings for the English word "receive.")

...

So the bottom line is, lambano and dechomai have multiple meanings depending on who used them, the tense and the context. This is why any translation of the Bible uses (and has to use) more than one English word to translate lambano and more than one word to translate dechomai-- and why it often uses the same English word for more than one Greek word.

[waysider]

How about it?

You said you didn't see how it could be harmful. I gave an example. Now, bear in mind, I didn't say that it's always harmful. This example, however, shows how this practice can be misused and generate harm. This whole thread wouldn't even be necessary if Wierwille hadn't made such a big deal out of inventing meanings for dechomai and lambano to suit his own agenda.

Lambano..Laballo...Ballo...Throw....Throw the whole thing out.

Edited November 29, 2012 by waysider

[geisha779]

I am not sure how this little side topic became controversial .....but, it is probably in the same way my post was translated into bible study is wrong and leaning on experts is akin to blindly following a leader. I would hope that we have had some personal growth since TWI and are able to use sound judgement and discernment in our association to teachers. I assume most of us know that there is more to bible study than word studies.

Lexicon's, an interlinear, concordance and most bible dictionaries are great tools when used correctly,(for many, Kittle is to be avoided) but there are several exegetical fallacies commonly committed in word studies. I guess we would have to actually listen to an expert to learn about them and avoid them.....but, when done correctly word studies are fine. Our practice and hubris in TWI was problematic and word studies can be limiting, narrow, and can produce an infantile exegesis. It can end up being eisegesis. I am sure we can all think of a few examples...... especially from our waydaze.

How is expanding an approach to scripture and understanding personal limitations in dealing with languages considered a reason for argument?

Edited November 29, 2012 by geisha779

[OldSkool]

How is expanding an approach to scripture and understanding personal limitations in dealing with languages considered a reason for argument?

IMO - there have been so many arguments in this thread, and they have been so emotional, that most anything discussed at this point has the potential to turn argumentative. No fingers pointed at anyone either. Just an observation.

[chockfull]

You said you didn't see how it could be harmful. I gave an example. Now, bear in mind, I didn't say that it's always harmful. This example, however, shows how this practice can be misused and generate harm. This whole thread wouldn't even be necessary if Wierwille hadn't made such a big deal out of inventing meanings for dechomai and lambano to suit his own agenda.

Lambano..Laballo...Ballo...Throw....Throw the whole thing out.

There is nothing harmful about looking up the Greek words dechomai and lambano in lexicons and concordances. I can do that without subscribing to anyone's theology.

[chockfull]

I am not sure how this little side topic became controversial .....but, it is probably in the same way my post was translated into bible study is wrong and leaning on experts is akin to blindly following a leader. I would hope that we have had some personal growth since TWI and are able to use sound judgement and discernment in our association to teachers. I assume most of us know that there is more to bible study than word studies.

Your post carried a side tone insinuating that word studies such as the ones we did in TWI were wrong, and that you "rely on the experts" to do your language study for you instead of doing word studies. I simply have and expressed a different opinion. And I also pointed out that to us, Wierwille was an expert at one time, so at least to me that merits caution as to which expert I want to rely on, and a preference for checking experts work myself.

As far as controversial or argument, at this point on this thread, if I express an opinion there are at least 3 people (you, waysider, wordwolf) who will take it the wrong way, immediately contradict it and try to draw me into an argument. Raf has refrained from this lately. I'm not arguing with you guys.

I tend to go beyond simple sound judgement and discernment in association to teachers - in my experience, the teacher's position is one of power and there are many teachers, not just TWI ones, that succumb to this and make poor judgements which creep into their teachings. So I prefer to listen to experts, yet check their work myself.

If you have a different opinion, great, but my expectations are a lack of personal attack or snide comments, and behavior commensurate with a Christian person in discussion. If that's too much of a problem for you, I don't really have to post on this thread ongoing.

IMO - there have been so many arguments in this thread, and they have been so emotional, that most anything discussed at this point has the potential to turn argumentative. No fingers pointed at anyone either. Just an observation.

Valid observation.

[geisha779]

Your post carried a side tone insinuating that word studies such as the ones we did in TWI were wrong, and that you "rely on the experts" to do your language study for you instead of doing word studies. I simply have and expressed a different opinion. And I also pointed out that to us, Wierwille was an expert at one time, so at least to me that merits caution as to which expert I want to rely on, and a preference for checking experts work myself.

As far as controversial or argument, at this point on this thread, if I express an opinion there are at least 3 people (you, waysider, wordwolf) who will take it the wrong way, immediately contradict it and try to draw me into an argument. Raf has refrained from this lately. I'm not arguing with you guys.

I tend to go beyond simple sound judgement and discernment in association to teachers - in my experience, the teacher's position is one of power and there are many teachers, not just TWI ones, that succumb to this and make poor judgements which creep into their teachings. So I prefer to listen to experts, yet check their work myself.

If you have a different opinion, great, but my expectations are a lack of personal attack or snide comments, and behavior commensurate with a Christian person in discussion. If that's too much of a problem for you, I don't really have to post on this thread ongoing.

Valid observation.

I am sorry you feel jumped on, but I don't believe that is anyone's intent or anyone here wants to make you feel bad......if I have....I am truly sorry.

It is great that you can check an experts work, especially in things like Greek translations of scripture as it is a very nuanced and difficult language.....but I do not have that kind of training. I can't claim that. All I can do is learn as I go while being aware of my limitations. I think you would agree that there is nothing wrong with learning and then applying that knowledge to study. Being aware of common exegetical mistakes made in word studies is only helpful IMO. I had to learn about them from someone who has mastered the language and was willing to teach me. Several someones. Without learning them I would keep making the same mistakes and keep getting the same flawed results. I also wouldn't be able to tell when others make those same mistakes. Now I can.

I didn't know it got better than sound judgement, but......good for you. The truth is.... I don't actually always apply sound judgement......that is an over statement. That I try to use sound judgement is probably more accurate. I am sure I miss the mark sometimes. I am very aware of the temptations that come with authority, but I also believe that there are people genuinely serving the Lord ...what that really means. I love the precious things that come along with that and I am not ashamed to say that. Most of the good teachers around also teach or are retired from teaching in University, but we get the benefit too......we are very blessed to have access to all that we do. What do they get for their trouble? More strict judgment.

I got burned in a cult but I hope I learned from that.....just because I once gave over authority and power to someone who claimed to be an expert doesn't mean I will keep making the same mistake. Learning something from someone doesn't equal blind obedience and Christians are....admitted sinners. We are the first ones to raise our hands. If I wait for the perfect teacher I am going to have a long wait. There is only one of those and He set it up as He saw fit.

None of how I approach things is meant to be an insult to you. I don't get any kind of payoff in arguing with you. I hope you continue to contribute....you have much to offer but please consider that I try to share what I think is important. . . .

Edited November 30, 2012 by geisha779

[waysider]

Problems with cross language translations:

HERE

[chockfull]

It's all fine. With all the arguing on this thread I don't fault people for not dropping that mindset for a bit while we adjust.

Really, either way with the approach should be just fine. The most important thing we did to make it so was to get out from under the abusive authority of a cult.

[excathedra]

i'll give a little post for you (sung like i'll say a little prayer for you)

so maybe we can get 100 pages

[JavaJane]

Just wanted to get the last word in. ;-)

[waysider]

Cool!

[OldSkool]

Word.