I think Eph.6:10f may be an adaptation of what was originally a Mithraic piece, recast for attracting soldiers comprising the majority of adherents in the rival religion of Mithraism.
Thanks to LCM's spin that "shield" should be "discus", I picture this peculiar scene in my mind of soldiers trying to toss their shields like frisbees.
I think most sports,or competition,has it's beginnings in some sort of military-type battling...We still have fencing,archery,sharp-shooting,boxing,wrestling etc. ...By referring to it as an 'athlete of the spirit' type of metaphor,it more lines up with the way's teachings about doing good works now to lay up heavenly treasures at the 'bema' ....While in Biblical times the vying may have been identical whether grappling in a war or for competition,the difference would be in a competition the winner gets some sort of prize,and in a war the winner survives to kill yet another faithless bastard...
i did an interesting study once on the Olympiads, and found it interesting how during the time of the writing of Paul's epistles, many of the cities the epistles were addressed to were also listed as having winners in the games (but mostly for things like flute playing). it kinda goes to show, how these societies must have been whipped up in the olympic frenzy, even more than a modern city during any play-offs or modern olympics. especially considering how their faiths and beliefs and spirituallities were mingled with the events. in their enthusiasm, they would even tear down a section of the city walls for the "obviously divine" victor to return home thru.
if Paul was universal-minded (rather than race-minded, or self-minded) it seems highly plausible to me that his pen was to the appealing to all jargons at once...the militant, athletic, religious, ritualistic, legalese, spiritual, the greek, the jew, the barbarian/pagan, the roman (just to name a few). he was finally willing and able to speak to humanity as one. and to the degree we see only one aspect (like seeing only war), it reveals to us how limited our own perspective is. (same with the book of rev, btw, or any other book on the planet for that matter)
the epistle itself is mostly a poem...of appeal. very general sweeping terms. and so, the rules of language were Paul's own - not jewish, not greek, not roman...but all of them at once. speaking in all these other tongues. cuz he was free from the corner of Babylon of his upbringing. he could appeal to anyone on the planet, without much preparation, cuz he was speaking in a meta-language, of sorts. and in this case, he was singing in this "new tongue" to the ephesians (worth comparing to the victory-minded ephesians of the book of rev...they do not like to lose)
but to know that we are in a war, and in a race, and in a marriage, and...
whether its good for us or not depends on the dynamics (pos vs neg, "good" vs "evil")
the will and intentionallity of the "players"
and the fruit, the fruit, the fruit
i mean, clashing patriarchies are large very destructive regressive violent homosexual orgies of the body and soul that leave large bloody smoking swathes across history and life and future...as compared to two gay pagan kids dueling with sticks in the woods for sport and play. i mean, there are many ways to express the same sexual frustrations and curiosities
one sends millions and millions of souls to hell for many generations, the other sends two kids to hell for eternity? which one should God warn against most harshly? -->
there is obviously a wide range of depth and degree to any relative dynamic of working out sin or salvation
its the symmetry of masc and fem body soul and spirit that makes love (not war, but play and healing). but perhaps more importantly, its the quality and character of that space between (without breaking it). and the awareness of the value of unfolding process over mere outcome (cuz good process will cause good outcome)
we can find the most creative thrill in the depth and degree and variety by which we can maintain tension without breaking the bond and causing enmity...call it marriage, zion, quantum, tantra, yoga, kundi....whatever. the adventure. the mystery. the divine romance
like the dancer on skates who tosses his partner in the air and catches her
or better yet....the safe man who can be trusted to touch and heal women and children without always trying to take something for himself (money, fame, sex, power, anything...)
the difference between a prince of peace and a prince of war is based primarily on sexuallity and desire. i mean, talk about a war worth winning – like “michael versus the devil within. saving her within from the red dragon within.” causation carries this process outwardly into the world (whether its one man, or a billion men makes a lot of difference)
otherwise, the men simply go to war, like fish whose heads have been thwacked against a rock.
no wonder Jesus could forgive them so easily. they're shark-eyed
this kind of open agape love is the universal creative process that we can always rely on
cuz it is an inferno. the burning bush. the lawless law. the anchorless anchor.
the very idea of it is a burning hell to some
a merciless God chasing us towards darkness
this is the war to be won. the marriage to be had. the wrestling match to win. the mountain to climb. the spiritual song to be sung.
maybe (like most of the rest of the bible) ephesians is also mostly an erotic tale
We fight wars to survive and have sex,we compete,to impress the chicks,and have sex,when we don't have sex,we want to fight,when we do have sex we have children,who grow up and fight,or compete,so that they can have sex...But I'm a little lost on the 'two gay pagan kids dueling...for sport and play'.....
When your Bible must fit like a hand in a glove and work with a mathematical exactness and a scientific precision...
When the scripture is an object to be put under the microscope of "correct rules of interpretation"...
When the modernist enterprise of "bomb proof certainty" so pervades ones reading of scripture that the phrase "I think it says..." is the springboard to every kind of hideous sin...
Then,
every piece of imagery will have to be entirely consistent throughout the whole book...if it doesn't your system breaks down and your "whole Bible falls to pieces"
So, by God, if your imagery doesnt fit here and there we will, by God, make it fit...because the correct life...the life of "one right cutting" has no loose ends or mystery and by God, neither does the Bible.
I flipped open the back of my bible a minute ago and found my notes that I was required to have there before I could go to the Advanced Class, or the Advanced Class Special, or Mardi Gras or something :D--> It lists all the athletic terms in the "church" and "leadership" epistles, gives a brief definition and lsits the occurences.
It's interesting that NONE of the words that TWI listed as athletic terminology in the bible occur in Ephesians 6 except for pal?, translated "wrestle".
As I recall, the athletic imagery in Ephesians 6 was based on this word, everything else had to be athletic for it to "fit".
By the way, I don't believe that using an athletic analogy, or image invalidates the verse about the Devil coming to steal, kill, and destroy. Metaphors, analogies and other figures of speech serve to illustrate one aspect of a concept. After all, Christians are called douloses as well...are we literal slaves?
Nothing demonstrates TWI's dishonesty at research more than the athletes of the spirit.
Even in my most deluded believer daze I could never buy this whole teaching.
It just doesn't make any sense, no matter how you try to slice and dice it. In particular I remember a Bible handbook or some such with a passage describing the "shields" of biblical times and how they were made of leather and would be soaked down with water before a battle to quench the burning arrows shot by one's enemies. Made sense to me.
Then Martindale got ahold of that passage and made some big production in the bigtop one year at The Rock. He had lights projecting all over the tent supposed representing how a discus could quench all those firey darts. To which I could only think "Huh?"
Then if you study all the individual words - from any source you'd care to choose - the imagery is always military. So where the hell did this stupid idea come from anyway? Could it have been any dumber?
I suppose he could have, but where is the evidense that he did?
Let's suppose that some military equipment carried over to athletics: spear = javelin for one. The problem is that the context is military. What athletically is equivalent to quenching the firey darts of the wicked? Martinmdale claimed it was a discus -->. The word for sword is (surprse) SWORD, not spear or javelin; the word for helmet is HELMET. Et cetera :D-->
the evidence is in his cultural history and context and the nature of his mission to somehow integrate cultures in some sort of universal language and love and whatever
i mean, like i said, they used military equipment for the games
also, very very different than modern olympics, regarding everything from sexuallity, race, methods of practice...etc...
and this late in the olympic tradition, there was even less and less difference between sport and war (more and more violence became allowed and promoted in the arena)
he was as much a roman as he was jewish (and other things, most likely)
he was obviously an educated dude in many cultures and languages
he wrote letters to people all over the world with different worldviews
Recommended Posts
TheInvisibleDan
I think Eph.6:10f may be an adaptation of what was originally a Mithraic piece, recast for attracting soldiers comprising the majority of adherents in the rival religion of Mithraism.
So yes, it's "military".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheInvisibleDan
Thanks to LCM's spin that "shield" should be "discus", I picture this peculiar scene in my mind of soldiers trying to toss their shields like frisbees.
Damn.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
simonzelotes
What's a meadow for?
I think most sports,or competition,has it's beginnings in some sort of military-type battling...We still have fencing,archery,sharp-shooting,boxing,wrestling etc. ...By referring to it as an 'athlete of the spirit' type of metaphor,it more lines up with the way's teachings about doing good works now to lay up heavenly treasures at the 'bema' ....While in Biblical times the vying may have been identical whether grappling in a war or for competition,the difference would be in a competition the winner gets some sort of prize,and in a war the winner survives to kill yet another faithless bastard...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Wierwille originally taught this and Martindale ran with it and expanded it as a mistranslated athletic analogy.
The only problem is that there is no evidense that the words are mistranslated. All are clearly military.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
def59
Well, we are part of a great spiritual war.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
i did an interesting study once on the Olympiads, and found it interesting how during the time of the writing of Paul's epistles, many of the cities the epistles were addressed to were also listed as having winners in the games (but mostly for things like flute playing). it kinda goes to show, how these societies must have been whipped up in the olympic frenzy, even more than a modern city during any play-offs or modern olympics. especially considering how their faiths and beliefs and spirituallities were mingled with the events. in their enthusiasm, they would even tear down a section of the city walls for the "obviously divine" victor to return home thru.
if Paul was universal-minded (rather than race-minded, or self-minded) it seems highly plausible to me that his pen was to the appealing to all jargons at once...the militant, athletic, religious, ritualistic, legalese, spiritual, the greek, the jew, the barbarian/pagan, the roman (just to name a few). he was finally willing and able to speak to humanity as one. and to the degree we see only one aspect (like seeing only war), it reveals to us how limited our own perspective is. (same with the book of rev, btw, or any other book on the planet for that matter)
the epistle itself is mostly a poem...of appeal. very general sweeping terms. and so, the rules of language were Paul's own - not jewish, not greek, not roman...but all of them at once. speaking in all these other tongues. cuz he was free from the corner of Babylon of his upbringing. he could appeal to anyone on the planet, without much preparation, cuz he was speaking in a meta-language, of sorts. and in this case, he was singing in this "new tongue" to the ephesians (worth comparing to the victory-minded ephesians of the book of rev...they do not like to lose)
but to know that we are in a war, and in a race, and in a marriage, and...
Christ is all inclusive
Link to comment
Share on other sites
simonzelotes
Well,isn't a marriage kinda like a war?..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
lol, Simon. sex too.
whether its good for us or not depends on the dynamics (pos vs neg, "good" vs "evil")
the will and intentionallity of the "players"
and the fruit, the fruit, the fruit
i mean, clashing patriarchies are large very destructive regressive violent homosexual orgies of the body and soul that leave large bloody smoking swathes across history and life and future...as compared to two gay pagan kids dueling with sticks in the woods for sport and play. i mean, there are many ways to express the same sexual frustrations and curiosities
one sends millions and millions of souls to hell for many generations, the other sends two kids to hell for eternity? which one should God warn against most harshly?
-->
there is obviously a wide range of depth and degree to any relative dynamic of working out sin or salvation
its the symmetry of masc and fem body soul and spirit that makes love (not war, but play and healing). but perhaps more importantly, its the quality and character of that space between (without breaking it). and the awareness of the value of unfolding process over mere outcome (cuz good process will cause good outcome)
we can find the most creative thrill in the depth and degree and variety by which we can maintain tension without breaking the bond and causing enmity...call it marriage, zion, quantum, tantra, yoga, kundi....whatever. the adventure. the mystery. the divine romance
like the dancer on skates who tosses his partner in the air and catches her
or better yet....the safe man who can be trusted to touch and heal women and children without always trying to take something for himself (money, fame, sex, power, anything...)
the difference between a prince of peace and a prince of war is based primarily on sexuallity and desire. i mean, talk about a war worth winning – like “michael versus the devil within. saving her within from the red dragon within.” causation carries this process outwardly into the world (whether its one man, or a billion men makes a lot of difference)
otherwise, the men simply go to war, like fish whose heads have been thwacked against a rock.
no wonder Jesus could forgive them so easily. they're shark-eyed
this kind of open agape love is the universal creative process that we can always rely on
cuz it is an inferno. the burning bush. the lawless law. the anchorless anchor.
the very idea of it is a burning hell to some
a merciless God chasing us towards darkness
this is the war to be won. the marriage to be had. the wrestling match to win. the mountain to climb. the spiritual song to be sung.
maybe (like most of the rest of the bible) ephesians is also mostly an erotic tale
Link to comment
Share on other sites
simonzelotes
Pretty deep,SirG. ...
We fight wars to survive and have sex,we compete,to impress the chicks,and have sex,when we don't have sex,we want to fight,when we do have sex we have children,who grow up and fight,or compete,so that they can have sex...But I'm a little lost on the 'two gay pagan kids dueling...for sport and play'.....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
sorry, simon.
both examples were meant to represent forms of homosexuality.
one at war, one at play.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
The -- Adversary -- Did --- Not --- Come --- To ---Compete!!
He came to steal, kill, and destroy.
Edited by dmillerLink to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
So make love not war wouldn't fit in here right?
:)-->
dmiller, that's why I thought he came.
So why can't it be a mental spiritual competition?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Well, because it ISN'T, that's why.
Each item mentioned in Ephesians 6:10-17 was an item
worn in warfare, either as a weapon, or as armour.
=====
lcm ran with it ad nauseum because he had 2 skill-sets.
The one he learned from twi was how to shout orders.
The one he learned before twi was athletics.
So, his mindset was athletics no matter WHAT happened.
(Having learned to read on comic books, an early mindset of
mine was "superhero", but you don't see ME forcing everything
to conform to that...)
vpw actually started that.
Of course, this being vpw, he got it from somewhere else,
and pretended it was his own.
The Fellowship of Christian Athletes originated the term
"Athletes of the Spirit".
I imagine lcm introduced it to vpw. I heard something about
lcm being in that group in college. Exactly what lcm picked
up from them, and what lcm passed to vpw, I have no idea.
Somewhere in there, or in vpw's imagination, the whole
of Ephesians 6 went into athletics-
the "sword" became a javelin, the "shield" became a discus,
and so on.
twi's own Aramaic Interlinear rendered them as weapons.
The Stephens and Nestle Texts (Greek) render them as weapons.
In fact the "whole armour" is "panoplian" in the Greek.
Specifically, that's the complete gear a Roman soldier
carried. I had no difficulty understanding this. I was a
fencer, and ALL my gear-swords, mask, uniform-all fit in one
bag slung over the shoulder.
(It also can double as a light luggage bag, but I wouldn't
recommend it.)
Ephesians 6:10-17 was a war-equipment metaphor.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
Thanks.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yanagisawa
When your hermeneutics must be air tight...
When your Bible must fit like a hand in a glove and work with a mathematical exactness and a scientific precision...
When the scripture is an object to be put under the microscope of "correct rules of interpretation"...
When the modernist enterprise of "bomb proof certainty" so pervades ones reading of scripture that the phrase "I think it says..." is the springboard to every kind of hideous sin...
Then,
every piece of imagery will have to be entirely consistent throughout the whole book...if it doesn't your system breaks down and your "whole Bible falls to pieces"
So, by God, if your imagery doesnt fit here and there we will, by God, make it fit...because the correct life...the life of "one right cutting" has no loose ends or mystery and by God, neither does the Bible.
So, by God, it's athletic.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
Hi Yana, long time no see. I'm not up to snuff so I'll have to talk to you and the WordWolf when I am.
I've missed you though.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jardinero
Simon:
Is that more derech benai adam?????
J.
;)-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
AWESOME!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
I flipped open the back of my bible a minute ago and found my notes that I was required to have there before I could go to the Advanced Class, or the Advanced Class Special, or Mardi Gras or something
:D--> It lists all the athletic terms in the "church" and "leadership" epistles, gives a brief definition and lsits the occurences.
It's interesting that NONE of the words that TWI listed as athletic terminology in the bible occur in Ephesians 6 except for pal?, translated "wrestle".
As I recall, the athletic imagery in Ephesians 6 was based on this word, everything else had to be athletic for it to "fit".
By the way, I don't believe that using an athletic analogy, or image invalidates the verse about the Devil coming to steal, kill, and destroy. Metaphors, analogies and other figures of speech serve to illustrate one aspect of a concept. After all, Christians are called douloses as well...are we literal slaves?
Nothing demonstrates TWI's dishonesty at research more than the athletes of the spirit.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
keep in mind, that to the ephesians and ilk, there was little to no distinction between what equipment was used for games and what was used for war
i mean, they carried shields and helms and swords in the games, for god's sake. threw spears and rode chariots and such. played warrish music.
even the awards for battle we hard to distinguish from the awards for games
their rituals and pantheons of birth and marriage and dying were also mingled with both war and games
sometimes i wonder how two (or more) apparently opposing truths can't be allowed sit in the same "chair" without trying to eliminate one?
can't Paul express both (and more) aspects in the same passages or words?
pretty basic stuff
Link to comment
Share on other sites
George Aar
Even in my most deluded believer daze I could never buy this whole teaching.
It just doesn't make any sense, no matter how you try to slice and dice it. In particular I remember a Bible handbook or some such with a passage describing the "shields" of biblical times and how they were made of leather and would be soaked down with water before a battle to quench the burning arrows shot by one's enemies. Made sense to me.
Then Martindale got ahold of that passage and made some big production in the bigtop one year at The Rock. He had lights projecting all over the tent supposed representing how a discus could quench all those firey darts. To which I could only think "Huh?"
Then if you study all the individual words - from any source you'd care to choose - the imagery is always military. So where the hell did this stupid idea come from anyway? Could it have been any dumber?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Sirguess:
I suppose he could have, but where is the evidense that he did?
Let's suppose that some military equipment carried over to athletics: spear = javelin for one. The problem is that the context is military. What athletically is equivalent to quenching the firey darts of the wicked? Martinmdale claimed it was a discus
-->. The word for sword is (surprse) SWORD, not spear or javelin; the word for helmet is HELMET. Et cetera 
:D-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
the evidence is in his cultural history and context and the nature of his mission to somehow integrate cultures in some sort of universal language and love and whatever
i mean, like i said, they used military equipment for the games
also, very very different than modern olympics, regarding everything from sexuallity, race, methods of practice...etc...
and this late in the olympic tradition, there was even less and less difference between sport and war (more and more violence became allowed and promoted in the arena)
he was as much a roman as he was jewish (and other things, most likely)
he was obviously an educated dude in many cultures and languages
he wrote letters to people all over the world with different worldviews
ummm...
why wouldn't he?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
You can demonstrate why Paul would do something, why it would make sense for him to do it, but not that he actually did it.
I guess it's a valid opinion as anything else, but you can't get the bible to back it up.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.