"Curse God and Die"

     Yahweh allowed the adversary, Satan, to afflict Job  with  severe  boils  or skin
inflammation from the soles of his feet to the crown of his head. It  was  so  severe
that  Job "took  a  piece  of  pottery  to  scrape  himself,  and   he  sat in the ashes."
(Job 2:7-8) Job's suffering was great!

     In   response  to  Job's  suffering,  his  wife  said, "Do  you  still  maintain  your
integrity? Curse  God  and  die." (Job 2:9)  The Hebrew  word translated "curse" or
"renounce"  (ASV)  is barak  used  in  the  Old Testament  in  the  sense  of  "bless."
"Bless" and "curse/renounce" are opposite in meaning, so why is it translated "bless"
in the KJV, ASV, RSV, NIV, NRSV, and the ESV?

     First, it is obvious that Job's wife was not "literally" saying "Bless God and die."
Job's response to her clearly indicates this. He said, "You speak as one of the foolish
women speaks. What? Shall we receive good from the hand of God, and shall we
not receive evil?" (Job 2:10) The word "foolish" translates  nabal. It is the strongest
Hebrew word for folly. It means more than merely the lack of discretion or wisdom.
It also means contemptible or impious. His wife's advice is utter foolishness! Her
suggestion was morally and religiously irresponsible!

     Second, based on Job's response to her, and the fact that his response was deemed
appropriate by Yahweh, shows that  she  was not using barak  in  the sense of bless.
After Job rebuked his wife, the text says, "In all this Job did not sin with his lips."
(Job 2:10, ASV)

     Job's wife uses barak euphemistically, therefore, it means to "curse or renounce"
in this context. It is important to think through the text, and to always pay careful
attention to the context in order to determine how words are used. Merely looking
in a Hebrew or Greek lexicon and assigning a definition to a word does not always
lead  to  accurate  interpretation. Most  words  have a range of meaning. The best
lexicons define words on the basis of how the words are used in the ancient literature.
Glossing is not necessarily defining.


                                                                                                               R. Daly
Copyright 2015





    
 

"Euthus" in Mark

     The adverb Euthus means "immediately, at once." It is translated "straightway"
in many of the older versions. It occurs 42 undisputed times in Mark's record of the
life of Jesus the Messiah. There is a textual variant in Mark 7:35. Most manuscripts
omit eutheos in 7:35, but due to Mark's fondness of the adverb it is highly probable
that it is original, and if it is the count becomes 43 occurrences of euthus. It is also
found      in      p45    (  a    3rd    century   manuscript ),    codex      Alexandrinus
(a 5th century manuscript), and codex Washingtonianus (a 5th century manuscript).
The New Revised Standard Version translates euthus in Mark 7:35).

     The frequency of euthus in Mark's account is apparently designed to "energize"
or add  "verve"  to  the  narrative. The  following  examples are notable: (1) When
Jesus  is  immersed  by  John  he  immediately  comes up out of the water. (1:10)
(2)  Immediately    the   Spirit   drives   Jesus   out   into    the   wilderness. (1:12)
(3) Jesus    calls   Simon    and    Andrew    to    become    fishers    of    people,
"and     immediately    they     left    their    nets     and     followed    him."  (1:18)
(4) A leper begs Jesus  to  make  him clean. Jesus touched him, and said " 'I will,
be     clean,'     and    immediately     the     leprosy          left    him."   (1:40-43)
(5) Jesus  said  to  the  man  who was paralyzed, " 'Get up, take up your mat and
go     home.'     And     he     got     up,     and     immediately     took     up     his
mat     and     walked     out      in     full    view    of     them     all."     (2:11-12)
(6) When     Jesus     entered      the      region      of       the     Gerasenes    and
got     out     of     the     boat,     "immediately     a     man     with    an    impure
spirit       came       from       the       tombs       to       meet       him."       (5:1-2)

     Euthus  in   used  inferentially  by  Mark  in  a  few  contexts  to  indicate  an
immediately following event in a  sequence; something  that  comes  next. (1:21)
It can mean right after that, then, so then. (1:23, 30)

     Mark's account  of  the  life  and times of Jesus the Messiah is exciting, vivid,
and keeps the readers on a fast track. Euthus is one of the key words employed
by the Holy Spirit through Mark to accomplish this literary feat.
                                                                                                           R. Daly

Copyright, 2014


   

Diakatelenchomai

     In  the  book  of  Acts  Luke  introduces  "a  certain  Jew  named  Apollos."

(Acts 18:24) The way that he "bursts" onto the scene virtually sets the stage for 

something spectacular. He  was  endowed  with  terrific  qualities  that  would 

distinguish him from other men who were not apostles. He was an  "erudite"
man (logios), (18:24)   "mighty  in  the  scriptures"  (18:24)  i.e. competent or 

well-versed   (dunatos  on  en  tais  graphais).    He    was    speaking   with  
"burning   enthusiasm"  (18:25)   (zeon  to  pneumati).    He   was  "teaching
accurately  the  things  concerning  Jesus" (18:25) (edidasken akribos ta peri 
tou Iesou),  but  he  was  "acquainted  only  with   the  immersion   of   John "
(18:25)   (epistamenos   monon   ta   baptisma   Ioannou ).   Aquila   and 

Priscilla taught him  the way  of  God  more  accurately, and  he  became  an
unstoppable force in the defense of the gospel. 

     Luke tells us that after he was taught the way of God more accurately, 

the disciples encouraged him  to go to Achaia. When he arrived he "greatly
helped those who had believed through the grace." (18:27)  But how did he help
the believers in Achaia? Luke answers the question. "For he was diakatelencheto
the Jews in public, showing through the scriptures that Jesus is the Messiah."
(18:28) What does diakatelencheto (grammatical form) of diakatelenchomai 
(lexical-dictionary form)  tell  us  about  the  work  of  Apollos  in  Achaia?

     The word only appears once in the New Testament. A less intense form
dielencho is found in classical Greek, particularly in Plato, Aristotle, Lucianus.
The meaning in classical Greek was to refute or expose. Dielencho appears
in the Septuagint in Job 9:33; Isaiah 1:18 and Micah 6:2. In those texts it means
to discuss, to argue a case. 

     The preposition dia-(katelenchomai) serves to intensify the word. Luke
paints a picture of  Apollos' work that is memorable and encouraging. Apollos
thoroughly refuted his Jewish opponents. He overwhelmed them in argument.
He demolished their arguments. He completely refuted the Jews in public
debate. He used a mighty spiritual jackhammer to crush pebbles! Luke tells us
what the jackhammer was: he "showed from the scriptures that Jesus is the
Messiah." Nothing works better, lasts longer, or is more formidable than the
word of the living God! (Jeremiah 23:29; Hebrews 4:12) 

                                                                                                     R. Daly

Copyright 2013   

Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon Of The New Testament

     Joseph  Henry  Thayer,  born  1828  and  died  1901, was professor of New
Testament criticism and interpretation at Harvard Divinity School from 1884-1901.
His main interest was in the Greek language of the New Testament. His most widely
known work was A  Greek-English  Lexicon  of  the  New Testament. He was a
member of the  revision  committee, and appointed Secretary of the New Testament
committee that  issued the American Standard Version in 1901. A person, therefore,
should not be amazed to discover that the vocabulary of the ASV, generally concurs
with  the  definitions  assigned   to  the  words  in  the  Wescott-Hort  Greek  New
Testament.

     What  is  commonly  known  as  Thayer's  Lexicon  is  not  Thayer's  lexicon.
It is Grimm's Wilke's Clovis Novi Testamenti.  Thayer translated, revised, and
enlarged the work. Grimm's work was completed in 1879. Thayer acknowledges in
the preface of the lexicon that "Both Professor Grimm and the publisher courteously
gave me permission to make such changes in his work as might in my judgment the
better adapt it to the needs of English speaking students." (Preface, page 6) So, it
should be kept in mind that by referring to this work as Thayer's Lexicon, it is his
role  in  translating,  revising,  and  enlarging  Grimm's  lexicon  that   is  primarily
in view.

     Even though Thayer's Lexicon is dated, it is still a valuable resource if it is used
with discretion, and if the user distinguishes Thayer's definitions from his comments.
There are instances when the definitions he assigns to words are unsubstantiated.

     For example, on  page  94  the  first  definition  given  to the word baptizo by
the lexicon in the classic period of the language is, "prop. to dip repeatedly..." No
literature is cited to support this definition, and the reason is the evidence does not
exist. In  classic  Greek  when  a  ship  sank  it  was  immersed. (Polybius 1,51,6;
8,8,4)  Did the ship sink repeatedly? On page 555 the word prototokos is defined
as "firstborn." Then he says "Christ is called prototokos pases ktiseos...who came
into being through God prior to the entire universe of created things..." This comment
reflects his Unitarian theology.

     On page 618 of the lexicon teleios is correctly defined as "brought to its end,
finished;  wanting   nothing  necessary  to  completeness;  perfect...to teleion,
substantively, that which is perfect...the perfect state of all things, to be ushered in
by the return of Christ from heaven, 1 Cor. xiii. 10." The latter reflects a misuse of the
context of 1 Cor. 13:10. To teleion refers to the state preceding the second coming
of the Messiah. It refers to the completion of God's revelation through those men who
were God's agents in revealing his written will.

     Thayer's Lexicon retains its usefulness, but  it  like all  other  religious  works of
human origin must be used with caution. Study the definitions, evaluate the comments.
Use such works like you eat fish; eat the meat and throw the bones away. It is wise
not to make the older pre-papyri lexicons your first court of appeal. A lot has been
learned about koine Greek grammar and lexicography since the 18th and 19th
centuries. If you are going to use the older lexicons, use them in conjunction with the
more modern scholarly lexicons.
                                                                                                           R. Daly

Copyright 2014


   


   
             

     

Gleukos: "Sweet Wine"

     According to Luke, on the day of Pentecost when the Jews heard the apostles
speaking  in  the  various dialects  of  the  Jews  from  every  nation under heaven
(Acts 2:5),   they   mocked   them  saying,  "They   are   filled   with   sweet wine."
(Acts 2:13)

     The phrase "sweet wine" translates gleukos. The question is, was gleukos only
used for unfermented wine, or can it also indicate fermented    wine?   If     it     is  
correct    that    gleukos  is only   unfermented wine, it  is  strange  that  they  used
an  idiom  for  drunkenness,  "They  are filled with gleukos." (Acts 2:13) So, it
seems that gleukos could have some degree of fermenting  properties, at  least  in
this  context. It was sweet immature wine, or partially fermented wine that had not
reached full strength. The context makes this clear. Otherwise how could they have
judged the apostles as acting like men who were intoxicated? Unless of course, one
can become intoxicated on unfermented grape juice. The NIV-2011 translates the
idiom in this way, "They have had too much wine." The Exegetical Dictionary  Of  
The  New  Testament,  volume  1, page  251,  interprets  the  phrase "full of sweet
wine" in this way; "incompletely fermented new wine." In view of the context I believe
this is correct.    

     If anyone is disposed to argue by saying, "Filled with sweet wine does not mean
drunkenness," then  look  at  Peter's  response,  "For these are not drunk as you
suppose; seeing it is the third hour of the day." (verse 15)

     The apostles were filled with something; they were "filled by the Holy Spirit."
(Acts 2:4)

                                                                                                             R. Daly
Copyright 2013

Categorizing Biblical Languages' Grammars

     Biblical    languages'   grammars,   like   biblical    languages'    lexicons   are
indispensable   research   tools   for  correctly   interpreting  the  word  of  truth.
(cf. 2 Timothy 2:15) Accurately teaching the truth is one  of  the most  important
responsibilities of the biblical exegete.  Therefore, the student of the text should
use the best available resources that assist with an indepth analysis of the text.

     As  noted  in  a  previous  post   titled  Categorizing  Biblical  Languages'
Lexicons, sacred scripture was originally written  in  three  languages. The Old
Testament was  primarily  written  in  Hebrew  with relatively small  portions in
Aramaic, and the New Testament was written in Greek.  

     The  grammars  of  biblical  Hebrew  and  Aramaic  fall  into  three  general
categories and  they are elementary, intermediate, and  advanced. The elementary
Hebrew grammars introduce the student to the alphabet and vowels, and they
delineate some of the basic "rules" of the language. A person must be extremely
careful not to build doctrinal theories  on  the  "rules"  listed  in  the  elementary
grammars  because  there  are  notable  exceptions  to  some  of  their   "rules."
   
     Examples of  elementary  Hebrew  and  Aramaic  grammars  are: A Practical 
Grammar For Classical Hebrew by J. Weingreen; Biblical Hebrew A Text
and Workbook by Bonnie Pedrotti Kittel, Vicki Hoffer, and Rebecca Abts
Wright; A Modern Hebrew Grammar For Classical Hebrew by Duane A.
Garrett; Basics of Biblical Aramaic by Miles V. Van Pelt; and An Introduction
To Aramaic, Second Edition, by Frederick E. Greenspahn. Examples of
Intermediate Hebrew grammars are: Linguistics And Biblical Hebrew edited
by Walter R. Bodine; A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar by Christo
H. J. van der Merwe, Jackie A. Naude and Jan H. Kroeze; and Introduction
To Biblical Hebrew Syntax by Bruce Waltke and Michael Patrick O'Connor. 
An example of an Advanced Hebrew grammar is: Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar,
Second English Edition, edited and enlarged by E. Kautzsch and A. E. Cowley   

     The grammars of biblical Greek are also categorized as elementary, intermediate,
and advanced. Th elementary Greek grammars introduce the student to the
alphabet, vowels, and some of the basic "rules" of the language. The student must
be be careful not to build a doctrinal system on the basic "rules" found in elementary
grammars because there are exceptions to the rules that are not explained in these
grammars. They are introductory and sometimes misguided in their approach to
the language. 

     Examples of elementary Greek grammars are: Beginner's Grammar of the
Greek New Testament by William Davis; An Introduction To The Study
Of New testament Greek by J. H. Moulton; Essentials Of New Testament
Greek by  Ray  Summers;  New  Testament  Greek,  and  A  Beginning and 
Intermediate Grammar by James Allen Hewett.  Hewett's grammar is probably
the most practical of those I have listed. Examples of intermediate Greek grammars
are: A Manual Grammar Of The Greek New Testament by H. E. Dana and
Julius R. Mantey; Basics Of Biblical Greek by William D. Mounce; and  
Handbook To The Grammar Of The Greek Testament by Samuel G. Green. 
Examples of advanced grammars of New Testament Greek are: A Treatise On 
The Grammar Of New Testament Greek by G. B. Winer; Greek Grammar 
Beyond The Basics by Daniel B. Wallace; A Grammar Of The Greek New 
Testament In The Light Of Historical Research by A. T. Robertson; A 
Grammar Of The New Testament And Other Early Christian Literature,
by F. Blass and A. Debrunner, translated  and  edited  by  Robert  Funk;  and   
Grammar  Of  New Testament Greek, 4 vols., by James Moulton and Nigel
Turner. Though it is not strictly a grammar of New Testament Greek, Greek 
Grammar by Hebert Weir Smyth, revised by Gordon M. Messing must be
mentioned because of its detail and it contains information that is relevant to the
study of New Testament Greek. It is an important reference grammar of ancient
Greek.

     Hebrew, Aramaic,  and  Greek  grammars  are  generally  well  researched,
but they like lexicons were written by human beings and must be used with caution.
The "rules" they postulate are sometimes  formulated  by  theological  prejudices
instead of being substantiated by the facts. The truth-seeker will follow the road
where the facts lead because he doesn't have to hope for light at the end of the
tunnel. There is light in the path all along the way!
                                                                                                       R. Daly

Copyright 2013

Paradise

     The word paradise occurs 3 times in most English translations of the
New Testament. (Luke 23:43; 2 Corinthians 12:4; Revelation 2:7) Paradeisos
is a Persian (Iranian) loanword. The Old Persian word  pairidaeza originally
meant "enclosure," then "park" or "garden." It occurs in Biblical Hebrew as
pardes. (Nehemiah 2:8; Song of Solomon 4:13, and Ecclesiastes 2:5) In
Jewish Aramaic the word is pardes(a) meaning "garden." In the Septuagint
(LXX) paradeisos denotes God's garden. (Genesis 2:8-10,16)  In  the  New
Covenant  the  word paradeisos is used to describe the realm of the blessed.
The word appeared  in  French as paradis, and  eventually  into  English
as paradise.

     Each  of  the  three  occurrences  of  the  word  paradeisos in the New
Testament sheds important light about paradise, its nature, and inhabitants.
Let us briefly examine the contexts and resultantly overflow with exuberance
as we anticipate life beyond the grave.

     Luke 23:43. This passage is set in the context of Jesus' conversation
with the repentant criminal while they hang on their crosses. Two criminals
were crucified with Jesus. One of them railed at the Lord," 'but the other
rebuked him saying, "Do you not fear God, since you are under the same
sentence of condemnation? And we indeed justly, for we are receiving the
due reward of our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong.' And he said,
'Jesus remember me when you come into your kingdom.' And he said to him,
'Truly,  I   say   to   you,   today   you   will   be   with   me   in   Paradise.' "
(Luke 23:39-43; ESV) Interestingly, the Greek phrase is en to paradeiso
("in the paradise"). This is likely the par excellence use of the article. This
paradise is incomparable. It is the ultimate "paradise" unlike any other place
of happiness, pleasure, and blessedness. That  very  day  the  man would be
"with Jesus" in the Paradise. He would enjoy fellowship with Jesus! While the
criminal was crucified on the cross, he crucified his old self and took up his
cross to follow Jesus from death to life eternal! The suffering the criminal
would endure on his cross would pale in comparison to what awaited him
immediately after death!

     2 Corinthians 12:3. In  this  context, Paul  writes  about  "visions  and
revelations of the Lord." (v. 1) Then he speaks of himself as a "man in Christ
who fourteen years ago was caught up into the third heaven...caught up into
the paradise." The phrase "third heaven" (tritou ouranou) refers to the very
home of God. The highest of the heavens. "The paradise" (ton paradeison)
is used to identify the "third heaven" as a place of blessedness and release
from  earthly  struggles. (cf. 2 Corinthians 11:23-27)   Paul   needed   the
encouragement that resulted from this transcendent experience. He also
learned two great lessons: (1) A "thorn in the flesh" can be used as a positive
inducement to humility. (2) Divine grace is sufficient to give power to endure
weaknesses. Paul   said,   "For   when   I am  weak,  then  am I  strong."
(2 Corinthians 12:10)

     Revelation 2:7. The congregation of Christ in Ephesus was told, " 'To
the one who conquers I will grant to eat of the tree of life, which is in the
paradise of God.' " The tree of life was in the garden of Eden. (Genesis 2:8-9)
Yahweh planted the garden in Eden. (Genesis 2:8) The tree of life is in the
paradise of God (to paradeiso tou theou). This is God's "garden" and the
most important "tree" (source of life) ever known is there. Those who conquer
are granted permission to eat from the tree of life. They have conquered sin
through Jesus the Messiah .  The "paradise of God" in this context is the
place for conquerors and the place of life. It is the place where the righteous
will  experience full  communion  with  God, the  author of  life, the  giver
of  blessedness, and the guarantor of immortality. It is in God himself that
these things become reality. (cf. Isaiah 51:3) The congregation had
abandoned the love it had at first. She had fallen and needed to undergo a
radical change. By doing so her fellowship with God would be restored.
Then she would be at home with God and have a place in his courts to rest!
                                                                                             
                                                                                                  R. Daly
Copyright 2013
 
   

    







     

    

Categorizing Biblical Languages' Lexicons

     The Old Testament was primarily written in Hebrew with small sections of
Aramaic. The New Testament was written in Greek. It is called koine Greek.
Koine  was  the  common  dialect  as  it  was  spoken  when  the Mediterranean
world was Hellenized.

     Most mature students  of  the  sacred  writings  know  the value of biblical
languages' lexicons. They are indispensable tools for an in-depth study of God's
word. But  not  all  Hebrew  and  Greek  lexicons  are  of  equal  value in their
approach   to   word   usage   and   meaning.  Which  factors  are  worthy  of
consideration in determining the most useful lexicons?

     There  are  three  main   kinds  of    lexicons;   elementary,   intermediate,
and advanced. The elementary lexicons generally list the Hebrew, Aramaic, or
Greek words in alphabetical order with brief meanings or more often "glosses."
A gloss is a word that requires explanation. Elementary lexicons are generally
limited in usefulness and can lead to misleading interpretation. Examples of
elementary Hebrew and Aramaic lexicons are: The Analytical Hebrew and 
Chaldee Lexicon by Benjamin Davidson, and the Hebrew and Aramaic 
Dictionary of the Old Testament edited by George Fohrer. Examples of
intermediate Hebrew and Aramaic lexicons are: Theological Wordbook 
of the Old Testament, edited  by  Harris,  Archer,  and  Waltke;  Student's  
Hebrew Lexicon    by   Davies-Mitchell;  Theological Lexicon of the Old
Testament by Ernst Jenni and Claus Westermann; and  Student's  Hebrew  
and  Chaldee Dictionary by Alexander Harkavy.  Examples  of  advanced
Hebrew  and Aramaic  lexicons  are:   Hebrew-English Lexicon  by  William
Gesenuis;  Hebrew   and   English   Lexicon   of   the   Old   Testament,
by Brown-Driver and Briggs; The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the 
Old Testament by Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner; The Dictionary 
of Classical Hebrew edited by David J. A. Clines; and the Theological 
Dictionary of The Old Testament, edited by Botterweck, Ringgren, and Fabry.

     Examples of elementary Greek-English lexicons  or   wordbooks   are:  Vine's   
Expository  Dictionary  of   New Testament Words; A Pocket Lexicon to 
the Greek New Testament by Alexander Souter; A Greek-English Lexicon 
to the New Testament by Thomas Sheldon Green; and A Concise Dictionary 
of New Testament Greek by Warren C. Trenchard. Examples of intermediate
lexicons are: An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon based on the seventh
edition  of  Liddell  and  Scott's  work;  Manual  Greek Lexicon of the New
Testament  by  G. Abbott-Smith;  Greek-English  Lexicon   of   the   New
Testament by  J.H.  Thayer;  Theological Lexicon of the New Testament,
by     Ceslas    Spicq;    and    most   of    the    Analytical    Greek-English 
Lexicons of the New Testament. Examples of advanced Greek-English lexicons
are: Greek-Lexicon, ninth edition with revised supplement, by Liddell-Scott,
Jones and McKenzie; A Patristic Greek Lexicon by G.W.H. Lampe; Greek
Lexicon   of   the   Roman   and   Byzantine   Periods  by   E. A. Sophocles;  
and A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Christian
Literature, by Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.  

     What qualities should a person look for in lexicons of the biblical languages?
(1) Objectivity. The purpose of a lexicon is to cite the facts without an axe to 
grind or a heretical theological slant to promote. (2) Thoroughness. A lexicon
should cite the full range of meanings for its entries. Conjecture should be avoided.
(3) Voluminous original source material. A lexicon should cite as many of
the original sources as possible to illustrate word usage within ancient literature.
(4) Modernity. Some of the older lexicons are still useful, but they must be studied
with caution. A lot has been learned about the biblical languages within the last
200 years. The Dead Sea Scrolls, comparative literature, and languages (such as
Ugaritic, Hittite, Akkadian, Sanskrit, and Sumerian) have added immensely to our
understanding of linguistics and the vocabulary of biblical Hebrew. The discovery
of ancient  Greek  papyri   has   increased   our   knowledge  of   biblical   Greek.
(5) Accurate scholarship. The mere fact that a lexicon cites source material and
appears to be objective, thorough, and  modern  should   not   necessarily   lead
one to conclude that it accurately accesses the data, and thereby posits unflawed
information. We   appreciate  the  massive  amount  of   research   that undergirds
lexicographical work, but  we  must  remember  that  the  scholars  who compile
lexicons are human beings. They  are  not  guided  into all the truth by  the  Holy
Spirit of God, as the apostles were (John 16:13), therefore though we admire their
toil, we want to be sure the things said are true (Acts 17:11). It is incumbent on us
to think through the text. Safeguards must be in place to ensure accuracy.
                                                             
                                                                                                           R. Daly
Copyright 2013   

Does Baptizo mean to Baptize??

     The verb "baptize" in its various forms (baptized, baptizes, and baptizing) occurs
more than 70 times in English translations of the New Testament. Those words are
placed in the text as "translations" of the grammatical forms of the Greek verb baptizo
which is used 77 times  in  the  Greek  New  Testament. It  is  appropriate  to ask,
"Does baptizo mean  to   baptize?"  This  may  surprise  you, but  the answer is no.
Baptize is the Greek word itself with a slightly different spelling. Look at the word  
baptizo. Now look at the word baptize. Notice that they are almost identical except
the "o" (omega) in baptizo has been dropped and an "e" replaces it so we have the
word "baptize." What we have is almost a transliteration, that is, the  writing  or
spelling  of  a  word in corresponding characters of another language. The receptor
language in this case is English. So, when Greek-English lexicons  say  baptizo 
means  to  baptize,  they  are  not  only  inaccurate, but  they  are perpetuating a
grave linguistic inconsistency, and are partly responsible for the confusion that exists
as to the New Testament use of  the Greek word. When they list baptize as one of the
meanings of baptizo, they are saying, "baptizo means baptizo," or that the word itself
is the meaning of the word.  This kind of lexical methodology would be laughable if it
were   applied   to   other   words   in   the   Greek  New Testament, but it is tragic!
How would the scholarly community react if lexicons were to say, theos means theos,
pascha means pascha, ekklesia means ekklesia, parthenos means parthenos, etc.?
In that case we would have no need for lexicons. The words in the Greek New
Testament would be their own lexicographers.

     Is something else at play in this scenario? Actually there is. There is a theological
and polemical value to be gained by saying baptizo means to baptize. (Cf. Louw&
Nida's Greek-English lexicon, vol. 1, pages 537-538 as proof of this fact.) The word
"baptize" is defined by English dictionaries to mean, "to dip a person into, or sprinkle
with, water as a symbol of admission into Christianity or a specific Christian church."
(Webster's New World Dictionary, second college edition, page 111) So some
Greek lexicographers and translators who choose the word baptize to represent  
baptizo contradict  its  own  use  and  meaning.  To  "dip...or sprinkle?" The   fact
is, the verb baptize is used to "translate" baptizo because it is not a specifically
exclusive word, and it allows a person or religious group to choose the "mode" 
of "baptizing" that harmonizes with their practice, whether right or wrong. The use
of "baptize,"  in English translations is based on ecumenical grounds, not accurate
lexical grounds. The translators want to give a person or religious community the
right to decide the "kind" of "baptism" they prefer to practice. The New Covenant
gives no such right of choice.

     The use of the word baptizo in the New Testament in texts that relate to
salvation from sin, and  entering  into  a  state  in  which  one  partakes of the
blessings in Christ shows that  it  means  to  immerse,  plunge,  sink,  and submerge.
(cf. Acts 8:38-39; Philip and the eunuch "went down into the water" and when
the act was performed, "they came up out of the water;" Romans 6:4; "We were
buried therefore with him through the baptismatos;"  Colossians 2:12; "having
been buried with him in the baptismo." In passages where it is used  metaphorically
the connotation is to overwhelm, drench, cover, etc. (Mark 10:38-39)

     See the following resources for further research about baptizo: BAGD, pages
131-132; BDAG, pages 164-165; Liddell and Scott, pages 305-306; Sophocles,
vol. 1, page 297; Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, vol. 1, pages
529-546; Dictionary of New Testament Theology, vol. 1, pages 144-153;  
Thayer, pages 94-95; Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament, page 102;  
Abbott-Smith, pages 74-75
                                                                                                                      R. Daly
Copyright 2013
     

(KATAKAIO) "Burned Up" or (HEURISKO) "Discovered" ?

     One of the most intriguing questions facing students of the sacred writings is
whether katakaio  ("burned up/down")  or  heurisko  ("discovered/laid bare")  is
the  correct reading in 2 Peter 3:10?

     English translations generally fall into two categories as to which reading they
accept as the original reading. The KJV, ASV, RSV,  NASB, and the  NKJV accept
katakaesetai  (will  be  burned  up")  as  the  more  probable  reading, while the
NIV-84,   NRSV,  ESV,  TNIV,  and   the   NIV-2011   accept   heurethesetai
(will be discovered/laid bare) as the correct reading. It is noteworthy that the
the ASV has "will be burned up" in the text, yet the translators have a footnote
that says, "The most ancient manuscripts read discovered." The footnotes of
the ASV are often a treasure-trove of exegetical information.


                                               Manuscript Testimony

      Codices Sinaiticus ( dated about 350-375 A.D.) and Vaticanus (dated about
350 A.D.) have "heurethesetai." Codex Alexandrinus (dated about the early fifth
century; 425-450 A.D.) reads katakaesetai. Papyrus 72, a small but important
codex that dates from the early fourth century (about 300 A.D.) has the reading  
heurethesetai, but adds the participle luomena "will be found dissolved." At  this
point in the manuscript tradition, the reading heurethesetai is the oldest of the
existing readings. 


                             The Reading of  Various Greek Text Editions

     Desiderius  Erasmus'  Greek  New  Testament,  Novum  Instrumentu  Omne,
has katakaesetai. The Textus Receptus, the Greek text underlying the King James
Version of 1611 has katakaesetai. Hermann Freiherr Von Soden's edition of the
Greek Testament, Die Schriften Des Neuen Testaments, contains the reading  
heurethesetai.  The Greek New Testament compiled by Constantinus Tischendorf,
Novum Testamentum Graece, reads katakaesetai. B. F. Wescott and F. J. A.
Hort's edition of the Greek New Testament contains the reading heurethesetai.   
The Greek New Testament According To The Majority Text has katakaesetai.
The Nestle-Aland/UBS Greek Testaments have heurethesetai in the text. In some
editions  the  editors   give  this  reading  a  "D" rating, meaning there was/is a very
high degree of doubt concerning the reading selected for the text.

     There are a variety of readings among the existing witnesses to this portion of
the Greek New Testament among the manuscripts and ancient writers. As stated
earlier, heurethesetai is the oldest reading, and probably explains the origin of the
others, and especially why some scribes, ancient versions  and  writers "expanded"
or modified the reading.

     So, in context, Peter affirms the coming day of judgment, and that the wicked
will have no place to hide from the wrath of God. Human wickedness will be laid 
bare or exposed to God's "all-seeing eyes."  

     The NIV,  NRSV,  ESV,  and  NIV-2011 seem  to  have it right. The New Living 
Translation paraphrases in this way, "exposed  to  judgment."  The  Message says,
"exposed to the scrutiny of Judgment."

     Based  on  the  evidence  currently  available   I  believe  the  correct reading is
heurethesetai. Contrary  to  what  some  Bible  students  have  said,  accepting  
heurethesetai does not  lend support to the advocates of the false theory that says
the earth will exist forever. The context of 2 Peter  3:10 is decisive. The heavens
including the earth will be destroyed and cease to exist. The text explicitly says,
"the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire...the heavens will pass
away with a roar... all these things will be dissolved...the heavenly bodies will melt
as they burn!" (2 Peter 3:7,10-12; ESV)

                                                                                                                  R. Daly

Copyright 2012
     

Life In Abundance

     Jesus affirms "I have come that they may have life and have it in abundance."
(Jno. 10:10, Daly's New Testament Translation) Contextually, Jesus draws a
contrast between himself and "thieves, robbers, and hired hands" who do not
have the best interests of the sheep in their hearts. (verses 7-13) Jesus does. He
laid down his life for the sheep. (v. 15) The "hired hand" abandons the sheep and
runs away when the wolf attacks because he cares nothing for the sheep. (v. 13)

     Jesus did not merely come that the sheep may have life, but that they may
"have it in abundance." The English phrase "have it in abundance" translates the
Greek phrase "perisson echosin." Grammatically, perisson is an accusative
neuter adjective form of perissos. It is used in such passages as (Mat. 5:47)
with the connotation of "extraordinary, in surplus;" (2 Cor. 9:1) where it means
"superfluous, not  necessary;"  (Mk. 6:51)  with   the   meaning   "extremely,
exceedingly."

     Perissos is used in (Jno. 10:10) with the meaning "extraordinary, in surplus,
in abundance." Jesus did not come to bring gold, silver, houses and precious
jewels to his followers. In a sense he himself did not have those things on the
earth. (Lk. 9:58) He  came  to  provide  something  that  transcends  all  this
world has to offer. He came that humanity might have life (zoe), that is, an
experience transcending normal physical life. This sublime quality of "life"
that the Master came to provide exceeds earthly necessity! The NIV-2011
translates the sentence in (Jno. 10:10) in this way, "I have come that they may
have life, and have it to the full." 

     As the grand old song says, "Earthly wealth and fame may never come to me
and a palace fair here mine  may never be, but let come what may, if Christ my
Lord does care, anywhere is home if he is only there!"

     Let us seek "life in abundance." It is in Christ and in order to have it we must
be  in  Christ. We  get  into him by faith (Gal. 3:26-27), repentance (Acts 3:19),
confession (1 Tim. 6:12), and immersion (Rom. 6:3-4). Our sins will be forgiven
and we will "rise to walk in newness of life" on earth and have life "to the full."

                                                                                                             R. Daly

Copyright 2012

"Yom" in Genesis Chapter 1

     Yom occurs  about  2302  times  in Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, the scholarly
critical text of the Hebrew scriptures. It is used 11 times by Moses in Genesis chapter 1
as he was guided to write under the influence of the Holy Spirit of God. (2 Pet. 1:20-21)

     Yom has a range of meaning in various contexts throughout the holy scriptures. It
can mean day or daylight (Gen. 8:22; Jer. 33:25); a day of twenty-four hours (Josh.
10:13; 1 Sam. 18:10); special days (Prov. 25:20; Ezek. 1:18); the day of Yahweh,
that is, a time of judgment (Isa. 2:12; Mal. 3:2); lifetime (Gen. 47:8; Job 38:12); a
period of time (Gen. 24:55; Judges. 19:2), etc.

     There  is  divergence  of   judgment   among   Hebrew   scholars,   exegetes,   and
commentators as to the meaning of yom in Genesis 1. Some scholars conclude that the
word indicates epochs, or long periods of time that includes millions or billions of years.
It is my studied conviction that yom means a day of 24 hours in Genesis 1. I  believe
the  contextual and lexical evidence decisively proves that Moses used the term to
indicate a day of 24 hours.

     The latter part of the Hebrew text of Genesis 1:5 reads, "wayahi ereb wayahi 
boker yom ehad." (and there was evening and there was morning day one.) The  
Septuaginta edited  by Alfred  Rahlfs  reads, "kai egeneto hespera kai egeneto proi 
hemera mia." (and  there  came  evening  and there came morning day one.) With the
exception of the numeral the phrase is repeated in verses 8, 13, 19, 23, and 31.  

     First, the phrase  "evening and morning"  not  only precedes the days of creation,
but  the expression  shows  that  in the mind of Moses parameters are set for the
days of the creation week. In  other  words,  the days were constituted  of  a
period  identified  as  "evening and morning." (...ereb...boker) Moses uses the same
order of terms elsewhere in the Pentateuch. In  Exodus 27:21  we  read,  "In  the  tent
of  meeting,  outside the veil  that  is  before the testimony, Aaron and his sons shall
tend it from  evening to morning before Yahweh. It shall be a statute forever
throughout your generations by the people of Israel." In Leviticus 24:3 Moses  wrote,
"Outside the veil of the testimony, in the tent of meeting, Aaron shall arrange it from
evening to morning before Yahweh regularly. It shall be a statute forever throughout
your generations." The phrase is used in the text to indicate the daily tasks of the
priests. In Numbers 9:21, "from evening until morning" refers to the time of Yahweh's
presence covering the tabernacle all night. The  phrase is not used merely  as  a  poetic
device  to  describe an indefinite period of time, but  it  is  descriptive  of a definite
period of time.

     Second, elsewhere in the Pentateuch Moses compares the days of the creation
week to the days of the Jewish work week. By doing so, he indicates  that  since
God ceased labor on the seventh day, the Israelites are to do the same. He says,
"Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six  days  you  shall  labor,  and  do
all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to Yahweh your God...For in six days
Yahweh made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the
seventh day. Therefore Yahweh blessed the Sabbath day  and   made   it  holy."
(Exodus 20:8-11)   The  same  information  is   repeated   in  Exodus 31:15-17.
Notice the points of comparison: Yahweh worked six days, the Israelites are to work
six days; Yahweh "rested" (ceased labor) on the seventh day, the people are to cease
labor on the seventh day. If  the   days   of   the creation week were aeons, periods
consisting of thousands, millions, or  billions  of  years,  it  would be a non sequitur
when compared to the days of the Israelite work week! None of the Israelites would
have lived through the first "day" of their work week! The  Israelites  days  of work
were the same as God's days of creation, otherwise the comparison that Moses made
would make no sense, and it would set the Israelites into a state of confusion.

     Third,  Moses  makes  a  clear  distinction  between  "days  and  years" (uleyomim 
weshonim)in Genesis 1:14. If, as some allege, the days in verses 5,8,13,19, 23, 31
and  2:1 are aeons consisting of billions of years, please tell us the length of the "years"
found within the same chapter! If the term "years" is to be understood in the literal
sense, why isn't the word "day" to be understood the same way?

     Fourth, the  scholarly  Hebrew  and  Aramaic lexicons that are sensitive to word
usage, acknowledge that yom is used in Genesis 1 to refer to a day of 24 hours. (Cf.
Lexicon In  Veteris  Testimenti  Libros,  A  Dictionary  of  The Hebrew Old 
Testament  in  English  and  German,  page  372;   A   Concise   Hebrew  and  
Aramaic  Lexicon  of  the  Old Testament, page 130;  Theological  Lexicon  of  
the  Old Testament, volume 2, page 528; The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of 
the Old Testament, The New Koehler-Baumgartner in English, Volume 2, page
399; The Dictionary of Classical Hebrew, volume 4, page 166. Brown-Driver-Briggs
Hebrew English Lexicon makes the following observation about yom, "day as defined
by evening and morning Gen. 1:5,8,13,19,23,31." Hebrew and English Lexicon of 
the Old Testament, page 398).

     It seems that some professors, preachers, and commentators are trying to adapt
the Bible's account of creation to pseudo-science  and  the  theories  of  theistic  and
atheistic evolution. We must remember that God is the author of all true science, and
all efforts to make God fit a human mold are futile!
                                                                                                                    R. Daly

Copyright 2011



    

Not All Greek-English Lexicons Are Equal

     Greek lexicons are indispensable for New Testament research. Nevertheless the
student must use lexicons with the same discretion as he would use commentaries,
grammars and other uninspired resources. Some lexicons contain doctrinal and
technical errors. These errors are often due to sectarian prejudices and lack of
thoroughness in examining and reporting the facts contained in the source materials
that are cited. A person must be very cautious in citing definitions from a lexicon in
an effort to determine word meaning.

     Alexander Souter's Pocket Lexicon To The Greek New Testament was
published in 1916. It was republished by Hendrickson Publishers, and revised and
edited by Mark A. House in 2008, under the title Compact Greek-English Lexicon 
of The New Testament. It contains some inexcusable errors that affect the
interpretation of the New Testament. It remains a useful reference work if  it is used
in conjunction with more recent scholarly lexicons. Let us note a couple of fundamental
examples where the lexicon misses the mark.

     On page 46 of the original lexicon and page 37 of the revision, baptizo is defined
as, "lit. I dip, submerge, but specifically of ceremonial dipping (whether immersion
or affusion)..." The revision says parenthetically (whether immersion or pouring). First,
no original source material is cited that indicates baptizo is used of a ceremonial
dipping (whether by immersion or pouring). Second, no biblical text is cited that
illustrates such meaning. Third, his explanation of baptizo (whether immersion or
pouring) is self contradictory. Baptizo cannot be by immersion or pouring! As he
stated, the verb baptizo means "I dip, submerge." Actually, it is more than a mere
contradiction; he is wrong. (Romans 6:3-4; Colossians 2:12)

     On page 286 of his original lexicon and 189 of the revision, psallo is defined as,
"I play on the harp (or other stringed instrument). The problem is the same. No
original source material is cited to sustain the definition, and no biblical evidence is
cited that illustrates the alleged meaning. He is relying on the connotation of psallo
as it is sometimes used in the Septuagint. But, his work is titled A Pocket Lexicon 
To The New Testament. Therefore, he should have given evidence from the literature
contemporary with the New Testament. He failed to do this and renders his lexicon
unsatisfactory at this place.

     Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek lexicons are are not inerrant. Their authors and
compilers are not guided by the Holy Spirit, therefore they must be used with caution.
The student of the sacred scriptures should always use more than one lexicon, and
he should be as familiar as possible with original sources. Most of all he should be
intimately familiar with the word of God! Study God's word lexically and contextually.

                                                                                                                      R. Daly

Copyright 2011

    

"Into The Name"

     The phrase "into the name" (eis to onoma) occurs several times in the
New Testament. It occurs at least four times in connection with immersion.
Jesus told his apostles to immerse believers "into the name of the Father
and   of   the    Son    and    of    the    Holy    Spirit." (Matthew 28:19)
Luke tells us the people of Samaria "had been immersed into the name of
the Lord Jesus." (Acts 8:16) The same writer says about twelve men in
Ephesus "were immersed into the name of the Lord Jesus." (Acts 19:5)
A variation is found in 1 Cor. 1:15. Paul asked the Corinthians if they had
been immersed into his name? (eis to emon onoma). The American Standard
Version-1901 consistently translates the phrase as "into the name" in all of its
occurrences in 1 Corinthians and the book of Acts. Other English versions
translate the phrase literally sometimes, and at other times they translate it with
the words "in the name." In the texts where they do not translate it literally, they
generally place the literal rendering in the margin or the footnotes. (RSV; NASB;
NIV; NRSV; NET; ESV; TNIV; NIV-2011) 

     What does it mean to be immersed "into the name" of someone? Adolf
Deissmann, in his book Bible Studies, in which he notes the contributions of
the papyri and inscriptions to the study of the New Testament, says, "Just as,
in the Inscription, to buy into the name of God means to buy so that the
article bought belongs to God, so also the idea underlying, e.g., the
expressions to baptise into the name of the Lord, or to believe into the
name of the Son of God, is that baptism or faith constitutes the belonging
to God or to the Son of God ." (page 146)

     J.H. Moulton and George Milligan state in their Vocabulary of the Greek 
Testament, page 451, that "The phrase eis to onoma tinos is frequent in the
papyri with reference to payments made "to the account of any one...The usage
is of interest in connexion with Mt. 28:19, where the meaning would seem to
be "baptized into the possession of the Father, etc." Bauer-Danker-Arndt-
Gingrich's Greek-English Lexicon Of The New Testament and Other
Early Christian Literature concurs. The lexicon says on page 713, "Through
baptism eis to onoma tinos those who are baptized become the possession
of and come under the dedicated protection of the one whose name they bear."

     This is certainly true when we consider Paul's use of a similar phrase in the
Corinthian letter. The Corinthians were claiming to be "of Paul; of Apollos;
of Cephas; and of Christ." Paul asks them, "Is Christ divided? Was Paul
crucified for you? Or were you immersed into the name of Paul? I thank God
that I immersed none of you, except Crispus and Gaius; lest any one should
say that you were immersed into my name." (1 Cor. 1:13-14)  Paul's point
is this: you cannot rightly claim to be "of" Paul because you were not immersed
"into" my name. And since you were not immersed "into" my name, you do
not owe your allegiance to me, for I do not possess you. You do not belong
to me, you belong to Christ! Therefore, to be immersed "into the name of
the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" is to become their "property,"
having entered into relationship with them. Christians belong to the Father,
Son, and the Holy Spirit.
                                                                                                   RD

Copyright 2011

Did Yahweh Remove Their Chariot Wheels?

     The story of the children of Israel going into the midst of the Red Sea is one
of the great narratives in the Old Testament. It demonstrates God's love for and
protection of his people. It also demonstrates God's utter hatred of sin and the
destruction that awaits those who oppose God.

     There is a key difference among English versions within the context of
Exodus chapter 14. We learn that the Egyptians pursued the Israelites and
went in after them into the midst of the sea. "And in the morning watch Yahweh
in the pillar of cloud looked down on the Egyptian forces and threw them into
confusion." (Ex. 14:24)

     In verse 25, some translations say Yahweh "jammed the wheels of their
chariots. " (NET; TNIV; NIV-2011) Others read similarly by saying he
"clogged their chariot wheels." (RSV; ESV) The TANAKH (Jewish Publication's
Society's translation, 1985) says Yahweh "locked the wheels of their chariots."
Those translations follow the reading of the Septuagint, Samaritan Pentateuch,
and the Syriac instead of the Hebrew text. The translators believe the Hebrew
root is 'asar, meaning to bind, and could contextually carry the connotative
meaning, "to clog," perhaps by sinking into the wet sand of the Red Sea.

     The ASV reads, "And he took off their chariot wheels," followed by the
NIV which says, "He made the wheels of their chariots come off." The KJV
like the ASV says "And took off their chariot wheels." The KJV, ASV, and
NIV translate the Hebrew text as it stands. The Hebrew word in the traditional
text is wayyasar, meaning "to turn aside," (The NASB-71 and NASB-95
say "He caused their chariot wheels to swerve.") Wayyasar is likely used in
the sense of removing the wheels. The question is, which rendering is to be
preferred---'asar, jammed in the sense of clogging or locking their chariot
wheels, or wayyasar, removed their chariot wheels?

     Many of the translators and commentators who work with this portion of the
Hebrew text reason, "Would a wheelless chariot drive 'with heaviness,' or would
it just grind to a halt?' " (Exodus 1-18, page 500, W.H.C. Propp, Anchor Bible 
Commentary) Others see the phrase "removed their chariot wheels" as an
"interpretive translation of the Hebrew." (Exodus, page 343, Douglas K. Stuart,
The New American  Commentary)

     In response to the first statement, "Would a wheelless chariot drive 'with
heaviness?', the answer is a definite yes. A horse can  pull  a "wheelless" chariot
just as surely as he can pull a sled, wagon, and cart without wheels. And they
are driven with "heaviness." As to whether translating wayyasar as "removed"
or "took off" is an interpretive translation of the Hebrew. The Hebrew word
has a range of meanings, one of which is "to remove." (The Hebrew and
Aramaic Lexicon of the old Testament, volume 2, page 748)

     Translators need compelling reasons before they depart from the traditional
Hebrew text of the Old Testament. Amending the Hebrew text may be necessary
when there are legitimate grounds to do so, but in my judgment, such is not
necessary in Ex. 14:25. No insurmountable difficulties arise when wayyasar
remains in the text and is translated as "removed" or "took off."
                                                                                                       RD

Copyright 2011
   

Orthotomeo

     One of the key texts in which the Greek verb orthotomeo appears is
2 Tim. 2:15. The KJV translates orthotomeo with the phrase "rightly dividing."
The ASV says "handling aright." The RSV says "rightly handling."

     Many expositors of the scriptures have assumed that Paul is informing
Timothy to make a proper division of the Old and New Testaments. We can be
certain that such is not what the apostle is telling Timothy to do in this text.

     In ancient Greek orthotomeo literally meant to "cut a path in a straight
direction, or to cut a road across country in a straight direction." (BDAG, p.722)
Paul is using  orthotomeo figuratively. This figurative use means, to guide along a
straight path, that is, do not deviate to the left or right by quarreling about words;
it is of no value, and only ruins those who listen. The context of 2 Tim. 2, especially
verses 14 and 16, seems to lead to this conclusion. Many of the modern translations
make this clear. The NRSV says, "rightly explaining." The NIV 2011 says, "correctly
handles." The HCSB says, "correctly teaching." Each of the aforementioned
translations recognize the figurative use Paul is making of the Greek verb.

     Timothy, the "man of God" (1 Tim. 6:11; 2 Tim. 3:17) has the responsibility to
be certain that he deals honestly with the sacred writings. (2 Cor. 2:17; 4:2) He
must be careful not to believe, teach, or practice anything that is not in harmony
with God's will. He must boldly and unashamedly present God's message, handling
it accurately and explaining it correctly.

     We live at a time, as was true in Timothy's day, when many spurious doctrines
and practices abound among the Lord's people and in the religious world at large.
The issues should be addressed, but we must be careful not to be led into a
discussion of foolish and insignificant matters. We should also avoid endless
controversies that are not substantive in nature.

     We must do as Paul instructed Timothy, orthotomounta ton logon tes aletheias;
hold a straight course (as you correctly explain) the word of truth, and do not be
detoured by unfounded opinions that result from godless chatter.
                                                                                                          RD

Copyright 2011
                         

Monogenes

     The adjective monogenes is used in the Septuagint (Judges 11:34; Psa. 21:21;
24:16; 34:17), and in the Greek N.T. (Lk. 7:12; 8:42; 9:38; Jno. 1:14, 18; 3:16,
18; Heb. 11:17; 1 Jno. 4:9)

     The older English versions of the N.T. translate monogenes with the phrase
"only begotten," though that is not what the word means. Monogenes means
that which is the only one of its kind within a specific relationship, one and only,
only, unique; single of its kind. The comprehensive Greek lexicons and word
books of N.T. Greek indicate that such is the case. (cf. BDAG, p. 658; Thayer,
pages 417-418; Moulton-Milligan, pages 416-417, etc.)

     In Lk. 7:12 monogenes is used of "an only son of his mother." In Lk. 8:42 it
is used of  Jairus' "only daughter." In Lk. 9:38 it is used of a man's "only child."
There is a sense of strong personal attachment in each of these passages. The
"only son," "only daughter," and "only child" were obviously beloved, or dearly
loved.

     In Jno. 1:14 monogenes is used to describe Jesus as "the only  Son from
the Father." (ESV) The NIV 2011 uses the phrase "one and only Son" in order
to convey both the Son's uniqueness and the Father's personal attachment to
him. In Jno. 1:18 monogenes conveys the Son's uniqueness in that he is in
closest relationship with the Father and he makes the Father known in a way
that no one else does. In Jno. 3:16 monogenes  implies that the Son is unique
and precious to the Father, and as a demonstration of his love for humanity,
God gave him to be sacrificed for the whole sinful world. The distinctiveness
and uniqueness of God's Son are also seen in Jno. 3:18, for it is through him
and in his name that salvation is granted.

     In Heb. 11:17 Isaac is called the monogenes son of Abraham. He was
Abraham's unique son in that he was the one through whom Yahweh promised
descendants too numerous to count. "It is through Isaac that descendants shall
be named for you." (Heb. 11:18; NRSV)

     In 1 Jno. 4:9 monogenes is used of Jesus as the unique Son of God who
was sent into the world, "so that we might live through him." (ESV) God sent
his beloved, one of a kind Son to be the means through which those who believe
in and obey him might have life!

     Monogenes is used in the N.T. to convey the idea of uniqueness, one and
only, the only one of its kind, and by extension it includes a strong personal
attachment to that which is "one and only."
                                                                                                     Ron Daly

Copyright 2011

 

Adelphoi

     The  noun  Adelphos  in  its  various forms occurs approximately 343
times in the Greek N.T. It is sometimes used in its literal sense to mean a
"brother;" one from the same womb. (John 1:41) It can also mean "one who
shares   a  common  ethnic  heritage.  (Acts 22:13).  It  sometimes   means
"neighbor." (Mat. 7:3-5) It can also refer to "one who shares the same faith
in Christ; a fellow-believer." (Col. 4:7)

      Adelphoi, the  plural  form of  adelphos  is  used  frequently  in the
Greek N.T. of spiritual siblings in the family of God. Males and females
who have believed, repented, confessed, and were immersed into Christ
(Gal. 3:26-29) They were "born again," (Jno. 3:3-5; Tit. 3:5-7), and are
therefore adopted into the family of God. (Eph. 1:5; 1 Tim. 3:15) Adelphoi 
identifies those who are in this spiritual relationship as "brothers and sisters."

     The older English versions (KJV, RV, ASV) and some relatively recent
versions (NASB, RSV, NKJV) translate adelphoi with the word "brethren."
This word is generally used only in religious circles. Other versions such as
the original NIV, ESV, and HCSB use the word  "brothers." One of the
problems with using "brethren" is the fact that it is a somewhat archaic
word. Many times "brothers" is too  gender specific. The  modern reader
may be misled into thinking only males are being addressed in certain
contexts, when in reality they are not. So, modern English versions, in an
effort to be accurate, especially when a congregation is addressed translate 
adelphoi with the phrase "brothers and sisters." (cf. New Living Translation;
New Revised Standard  Version; NET;  Today's  New  International
Version; and the NIV 2011)

     Some people object to translating adelphoi with the phrase "brothers
and sisters," because in their view it is an effort to be "gender inclusive,"
and to give women equal roles and authority with men in religion. This is
an unfair judgment. The N.T. itself teaches that God does not give a woman
the right to "have authority over the man." (1 Cor. 14:34-35;1 Tim. 2:11-15)
The  phrase "brothers and sisters" (adelphoi) is not designed to blur the
distinctive  roles that God has assigned to men and women, but it seeks to
accurately  convey  the  meaning  of  adelphoi  by  indicating the familial
relationship shared by those of the same faith.

     It has long been proven by Greek lexicons that adelphos/adelphoi are
used in this manner in secular Greek literature and in the N.T. (Thayer's 
Greek-English Lexicon, pages 10-11; Alexander Souter's Pocket 
Lexicon, p. 6; A Greek-English Lexicon Of The New Testament And 
Other Early Christian Literature, Introduction, p. 24 and pages 15-16
of the lexicon,1952 edition.)

     It is accurate to translate adelphoi with the phrase "brothers and sisters"
when  a  congregation  is  addressed, when  the  universal  group of Jesus'
followers is under discussion, and when it can be shown from the context
that  a  religious  group  consisting  of  both  males  and  females  is  under
consideration. Translators have not accurately translated God's word, until
they   have  selected    the   word  or   phrase  in    the   target   language,
that means the same as the word or phrase in the source language. They
must also convey the meaning in an understandable manner. "Brothers and
sisters"  for   adelphoi   in   English   translations   is   both  accurate  and
understandable. A gentleman who objected to the rendering "brothers and
sisters"  was  asked  which  translation  of adelphoi  he believed to be the
correct one, and he responded, "Brethren." He was then asked "What does
'brethren' mean, and he replied, "Brothers and sisters."

                                                                                                 R. Daly

Copyright 2011

     
        

Do Not Rebuke an Elder

     The American Standard Version translates the first part of
1 Timothy 5:1 in this way, "Rebuke not an elder." This reflects
the policy of the ASV translators to be as literal as possible, and
to use one English word for one Hebrew word in the O.T., and
one English word for one Greek word in the N.T. when possible.
This policy has inherent problems of its own, though one scholar
wrote the following about the ASV, "So far as English versions
are concerned, the reader who wants an accurate word for word
translation has in the Revised Version or American Standard
Version the best of its kind that is ever likely to be provided."
(Bruce, F.F.,  The Books and the Parchments, page 235) I
wholeheartedly concur with Bruce's assessment of the ASV. The
ASV has no equal as  far as the modified  literal  approach  to
translation is concerned.

     What does the word "elder" mean in 1 Tim. 5:1? It translates
the Greek presbutero, dative masculine singular of presbuteros.
Presbuteros is used in a number of ways in the New Testament.
It  may  refer  to  members of  the Sanhedrin (presbuterous ton 
Ioudaion, elders of the Jews) Luke 7:3; the 24 members of the
heavenly court (hoi eikosi tessares presbuteroi) Revelation 5:8;
men  who were appointed  to  preside over and   shepherd  local
assemblies  of  Christians  (tous presbuterous tes ekklesias, the
elders  of  the congregation) Acts 20:17 ;1 Timothy 5:17-19; and
those  who  are   advanced  in  life  (hoi  presbuteroi, old  men)
Acts 2:17.

     The meaning of "elder" in verse 1 is "old man." We can be
certain that this is correct because of the "contextual indicators."
There is an antithesis which exists between "an elder" who is to be
exhorted "as a father," and "younger men" who are to be exhorted
"as brothers" (neoteras hos adelphous). So, "elder" (presbuteros)
is used in contrast to "younger" (neos). Whatever "elder" means,
"younger" is the opposite, and whatever "younger" means, "elder"
is the opposite. Furthermore, Paul continues by contrasting "elder
women as mothers" (presbuteras hos meteras), and exhorting
"younger women as sisters" (neoteras hos adelphas). The "elder"
of verse 1 denotes the same thing as "elder women" of verse 2,
except for the distinction in gender. "Younger men" likewise
denotes the same thing as "younger women" excepting the gender
distinction. Also, there is a parallelism which exists between "elder"
of 1 Timothy 5:1, and the language of the same apostle elsewhere.
In Titus 2:2, Paul exhorts Titus that he, in speaking sound teaching,
inform "aged men" (presbutas) of their duties, and "aged women"
(presbutidas) of their duty to teach the "young women"
(tas neas, vv. 3,4).

     We find the same use of "elder" by the apostle Peter. "Likewise,
you who are younger (neoteroi), be subject to older ones
(presbuterois)" (1 Pet. 5:5). Note again the antithesis between
"younger" and "elder."

     What is the significance of the injunction "do not rebuke an
elder" expressed by the negative imperative (me epiplexes)?
May we not "rebuke" all who are in error, and who persist in sin
or rebellion against God, whether young or old? According to
other texts we may (Matt. 18:15-18; Lk. 17:3-4; 1 Tim. 5:20;
2 Tim. 4:2). So, why does the Holy Spirit through Paul, so
emphatically  say  to  Timothy  "do not  to  rebuke  an  elder"?
The key is in the word "rebuke." It is not the same word used in
2 Timothy 4:2.

     The word used in 2 Timothy is epitimao. Contextually, epitimao 
means "to censure  and  render a sharp rebuke" by the teaching of
the word. "Rebuke" in 1 Timothy 5 is from the Greek epiplesso
which means to reprimand, to strike (verbally), to assault with
abusive speech, to chastise with words, to reproach or denounce.
In the context, Paul informed Timothy about proper conduct
among believers, which he as an evangelist must practice. One
of the orders given to Timothy was, "Don't let anyone look down
on you because you are young..." (1 Tim. 4:12; NIV2011). This
entailed  treating  old men and old women with respect. An Old
Testament text contains the concept, "You shall stand up in the
presence of  the  elderly, and  show  respect for the elderly and
revere your God; I  am  Yahweh." (Lev. 19:32) Timothy was to
show respect for  the elderly, and not lash out with harsh words,
but have a tongue tempered by love and gentleness.

     Instead of the phrase "Rebuke not an elder," as in the ASV,
the recent versions say, "Don't criticize an older man" (Simple
English Bible), "Never be harsh with an elder" (New English Bible),
"Never censure an older man harshly" (James Moffatt Translation),
"Do not sharply rebuke an older man" (NASV), "Do not speak
harshly to an older man" (NRSV), "Do not reprimand an older
man" (McCord's New Testament Translation), "Do not rebuke
an older man harshly" NIV. This shows why it is important to
study from more than one translation. Comparative translation
study opens up vast opportunities for spiritual growth!

     The expression "Do not rebuke an elder" does not restrict or
forbid the younger from correcting the older brothers in the Lord
who err, but it does teach that there is a proper way to do it. And,
the way  is  not  by  ridicule and  harshness,  but  "as fathers and
mothers," that is, with genuine concern and kindness, attempting to
win them by snatching them out of the devil's grasp!
                                                                                                RD

Copyright 2011                                   

Son of Man

     The phrase "son of man" (ben adam) is an idiom. It is used approximately
107 times in the Hebrew Bible. It is found 93 times in Ezekiel 2:1-47:6. In
each instance ben adam is literally translated in the Septuagint with the Greek
phrase huios anthropou.

     Yahweh called the prophet Ezekiel "son of man" in order to focus on the
prophet's humanity. It is equivalent to saying "O man," or "mortal" (NRSV)
Ezekiel is a human being in contrast to the Sovereign, eternal God, the creator
of all. Yahweh is not "a son of man" (ben adam) that he should change his
mind." (Num. 23:19) God is not a mortal or a human being. Yahweh spoke to
the nation of Israel, the people of God,  through Ezekiel, a human being, a man
of the same class as those to whom he prophesied.

     In one of the Aramaic portions of the Old Testament, the prophet Daniel
spoke of one like "a son of man" (kebar enas) who came "with the clouds
of heaven...to the Ancient of Days and was presented before him. And to him
was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and
languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which
shall  not  pass  away, and  his  kingdom one that  shall not be destroyed."
(Dan. 7:13-14; ESV) Bar enas emphasizes the humanity of the person
described  by  Daniel. He  is  like a "son of man", that is, a member of the
genus human being.

     The idiom  "Son of Man" (huios anthropou) occurs more than 80 times
in the Greek N.T. It  is found 14 times in Mark, 30 in Matthew, 25 in Luke,
12 in John, 1 in Acts, and  it  is used  with homois in Rev. 1:13 and 14:14.
Jesus is the "Son of Man" in that he was "made like his brothers in every
respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the
service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people." (Heb. 2:17;
ESV) But, there is more.

     As the "Son of Man" the Father has given him authority to execute judgment.
(Jno. 5:27) The Son of Man is identified with Yahweh. He is the "I Am." (Jno.
8:58; Ex. 3:14; Isa. 43:25) The Son of Man came down from heaven to be the
atoning sacrifice for the sins of the whole world. (Jno. 3:13; 6:62) He is "the Lamb
of God;" the perfect sacrifice for the sins of humanity. (Jno. 1:29) The suffering
of the Son of Man is connected with the figure of the righteous servant of Yahweh
in Isa. 52:13-53:12. "He committed no sin, neither was deceit found in his mouth."
(1 Pet. 2:22) He was conceived in and born of a virgin (Mat. 1:23; Lk. 1:27,34)
Acknowledging the Son of Man will lead to being acknowledged in the presence
of the Father. (Mat. 10:32) "The Son of Man came to seek and save the lost."
(Lk. 19:10) The angel reminded the disciples at the empty tomb, "that the Son of
Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men and be crucified and rise on
the third day." (Lk. 24:7) He who was the Word in eternity "became flesh" and
died for the sins of the human race. (Jno. 1:14) He has received his kingdom,
glory, and honor, and he sits at the right hand of God. (Dan. 7:13-14; Heb. 1:3;
1 Pet. 3:22)

     Jesus is the "Son of Man" in that he was the perfect human being, truly human,
the ideal human being, the par excellent  human  being;  a  descendant  of  David
according to the flesh. (Mat. 22:42; Rom. 1:3) The "Son of Man" is the Messiah!
                                                                                                               RD

Copyright 2011