Keep Yourselves From Idols, Part 1

Posted on February 5, 2024 by admin

I don’t worship statues, I thought, when I first encountered the end of John’s letter: Little children, keep yourselves¹ from idols.² It might be easier if I did, not necessarily the keeping part: Prostrating myself before some statue in some temple on a cold stone floor, naked, sounds kinky. I like it. But it would be easier to recognize when I was doing it.

I’ve been home a lot recently, able to attend church and Bible study. The Pastor’s sermon series was on Genesis and the Bible study was an in depth look and discussion. I became increasingly uncomfortable with where my mind was going, especially in the 3^rd chapter of Genesis. I had stopped treating it like the word of God and had begun to treat it like a Delphic Oracle that I could or should outsmart somehow.

Masoretic Text		Septuagint
Genesis 2:16, 17 (Tanakh)	Genesis 2:16, 17 (NET)	Genesis 2:16, 17 (NETS)	Genesis 2:16, 17 (English Elpenor)
And HaShem G-d commanded the man (הָֽאָדָ֖ם), saying: ‘Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat; [Table]	Then the Lord God commanded the man (‘āḏām, האדם), “You may freely eat fruit from every tree of the orchard,	And the Lord God commanded Adam (τῷ Αδαμ), saying, “You shall eat for food of every tree that is in the orchard, [Table]	And the Lord God gave a charge to Adam (τῷ ᾿Αδὰμ), saying, Of every tree which is in the garden thou mayest freely eat,
but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it; for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die’ [Table].	but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will surely die.”	but of the tree for knowing good and evil, of it you shall not eat; on the day that you eat of it, you shall die by death” [Table].	but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil– of it ye shall not eat, but in whatsoever day ye eat of it, ye shall surely die.
Genesis 3:6 (Tanakh)	Genesis 3:6 (NET)	Genesis 3:6 (NETS)	Genesis 3:6 (English Elpenor)
And when the woman (הָֽאִשָּׁ֡ה) saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight (תַֽאֲוָה) to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired (וְנֶחְמָ֤ד) to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat; and she gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat [Table].	When the woman (‘iššâ, האשה) saw that the tree produced fruit that was good for food, was attractive (ta’ăvâ, תאוה) to the eye, and was desirable (ḥāmaḏ, ונחמד) for making one wise, she took some of its fruit and ate it. She also gave some of it to her husband who was with her, and he ate it.	And the woman (ἡ γυνὴ) saw that the tree was good for food and that it was pleasing (ἀρεστὸν) for the eyes to look at and it was beautiful (ὡραῗόν) to contemplate, and when she had taken of its fruit she ate, and she also gave some to her husband with her, and they ate [Table].	And the woman (ἡ γυνή) saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant (ἀρεστὸν) to the eyes to look upon and beautiful (ὡραῖόν) to contemplate, and having taken of its fruit she ate, and she gave to her husband also with her, and they ate.

I focused on the woman because that was where the text gives the most hope for understanding why this happened. The man’s motivations were more inscrutable or inanely mundane: “This is the food my wife gave me, so I ate it.”³ There are two different words for desire in the Masoretic text leading to the moment the woman took of its fruit and ate.⁴ A note (18) in the NET translated the Hebrew: “that good was the tree for food, and that desirable it was to the eyes, and desirable was the tree to make one wise.”

The rabbis who translated the Septuagint didn’t choose any forms of θέλω or θέλημα for these words. Rather, they chose ἀρεστὸν (a form of ἀρεστός) for תַֽאֲוָה (ta’ăvâ), and ὡραῖόν (a form of ὡραῖος) for וְנֶחְמָ֤ד (ḥāmaḏ). But who cares about the Septuagint? Let’s just go with it. This happened because the woman exercised her free will, even if the man just followed her lead.

Let me get naked and prostrate myself before free will to see if I can recognize that I am naked and prostrate before a man-made idol: The first thing that occurs to me is that free will must be evil, since it caused the woman to disobey God’s command. Well, I don’t like being naked and prostrate before something evil, so the first thing I’ll do is add free will to God’s word.

Masoretic Text		Septuagint
Genesis 1:27, 28 (Tanakh)	Genesis 1:27, 28 (NET)	Genesis 1:27, 28 (NETS)	Genesis 1:27, 28 (English Elpenor)
And G-d created man (הָֽאָדָם֙) in His own image, in the image of G-d created He him; male (זָכָ֥ר) and female (וּנְקֵבָ֖ה) created He them [Table].	God created humankind (‘āḏām, האדם) in his own image, in the image of God he created them, male (zāḵār, זכר) and female (nᵊqēḇâ, ונקבה) he created them.	And God made humankind (τὸν ἄνθρωπον); according to divine image he made it; male (ἄρσεν) and female (καὶ θῆλυ) he made them [Table].	And God made man (τὸν ἄνθρωπον), according to the image of God he made him, male (ἄρσεν) and female (καὶ θῆλυ) he made them.
And G-d blessed them; [and gave them free will] and G-d said unto them: ‘Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that creepeth upon the earth’ [Table].	God blessed them [and gave them free will] and said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply! Fill the earth and subdue it! Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and every creature that moves on the ground.”	And God blessed them [and gave them free will], saying, “Increase, and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it, and rule the fish of the sea and the birds of the sky and all the cattle and all the earth and all the creeping things that creep upon the earth” [Table].	And God blessed them [and gave them free will], saying, Increase and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the seas and flying creatures of heaven, and all the cattle and all the earth, and all the reptiles that creep on the earth.

Now that free will has been given by God, it needs some power and purpose. Otherwise, why would I prostrate myself naked before it? Just kinky fun? No, it was not just that free will prompted the woman to disobey God, she might have obeyed God of her own free will. There’s no evidence for that in the text, but what good is free will if it is incapable of obedience?

So now, I can use my idol to judge God: If the woman’s God-given free will lacked the power, authority, whatever, to make it possible for her to have obeyed God, then God was unfair, vindictive, evil in a word. God is not evil. Therefore by free will human beings may choose righteousness and obedience. The woman might have rewritten the whole story if she had directed her free will toward righteousness and obedience rather than sin and disobedience.

About this time I recognized that I’d been here before.⁵

God promised Solomon a wise and discerning mind superior to that of anyone who has preceded or will succeed you¹—in the dream. But Solomon broke every law God gave the kings of Israel while wide-awake. Surely Solomon’s alleged wisdom was grossly overstated!

Okay, enough of this self-righteous snit. You notice what just happened. I’m all up in arms because the wise and discerning mind God allegedly gave Solomon was neither wise enough nor discerning enough to protect Solomon from falling afoul of the laws God gave the kings of Israel. I reasoned that God-given discernment at a minimum should have made the king wise enough to follow God’s rules for kings, or God-given discernment can’t be discernment given by God. It must have been only a dream.

There is a significant difference between the wise and discerning mind God gave to Solomon and the woman’s free will. The wise and discerning mind is stated explicitly:

Masoretic Text		Septuagint
1 Kings 3:11, 12 (Tanakh)	1 Kings 3:11, 12 (NET)	3 Reigns 3:11, 12 (NETS)	3 Kings 3:11, 12 (English Elpenor)
And God said unto [Solomon], Because thou hast asked this thing, and hast not asked for thyself long life; neither hast asked riches for thyself, nor hast asked the life of thine enemies; but hast asked for thyself understanding to discern judgment; [Table]	God said to him, “Because you asked for the ability to make wise judicial decisions, and not for long life, or riches, or vengeance on your enemies,	And the Lord said to him, “Because you requested this thing from me and did not request for yourself many days and did not request riches and did not request lives of your enemies but requested for yourself understanding to listen to judgment, [Table]	And the Lord said to him, Because thou hast asked this thing of me, and hast not asked for thyself long life, and hast not asked wealth, nor hast asked the lives of thine enemies, but hast asked for thyself understanding to hear judgment;
Behold, I have done according to thy words: lo, I have given thee a wise (חָכָ֣ם) and an understanding (וְנָב֔וֹן) heart (לֵב); so that there was none like thee before thee, neither after thee shall any arise like unto thee [Table].	I grant your request and give you a wise (ḥāḵām, חכם) and discerning (bîn, ונבון) mind (lēḇ, לב) superior to that of anyone who has preceded or will succeed you.	behold, I have done according to your word; behold, I have given you a prudent (φρονίμην) and wise (καὶ σοφήν) heart (καρδίαν); like you there has not been before you, and after you there shall not arise similar to you [Table].	behold, I have done according to thy word: behold, I have given thee an understanding (φρονίμην) and wise (καὶ σοφήν) heart (καρδίαν): there has not been [any one] like thee before thee, and after thee there shall not arise one like thee.

On the other hand, the woman’s free will was an inference derived from two Hebrew words that can mean desire. Eventually, I had to come to terms with Solomon’s wealth and his God-given wise and discerning mind.⁶

[Solomon’s wealth] which is at least possible to measure, has been coupled in a promise with a wise and discerning mind¹ which is difficult to measure. Solomon’s wealth is hard to deny (whether I argue with the superlative degree of it or not)…

Is it possible that a wise and discerning mind given by God, would not be wise or discerning enough to prevent Solomon’s disobedience to God’s laws? That’s what the Bible seems to be saying here. And Solomon’s wealth is sort of the kicker to make that point.

God judged his creation very good.

Masoretic Text		Septuagint
Genesis 1:31a (Tanakh)	Genesis 1:31a (NET)	Genesis 1:31a (NETS)	Genesis 1:31a (English Elpenor)
And G-d saw every thing that He had made, and, behold, it was very (מְאֹ֑ד) good (ט֖וֹב) [Table].	God saw all that he had made—and it was very (mᵊ’ōḏ, מאד) good (ṭôḇ, טוב)!	And God saw all the things that he had made, and see, they were exceedingly good (καλὰ λίαν) [Table].	And God saw all the things that he had made, and, behold, they were very good (καλὰ λίαν).

Is it possible that a creation (including the woman, the man and the serpent) judged very good (Tanakh, KJV, NET, English Elpenor) or exceedingly good (NETS) by God would not be good enough to prevent the woman’s, the man’s or the serpent’s disobedience to God’s one commandment? That’s what the Bible seems to be saying here.

We imagine that the woman, the man and the serpent knew God better than we do, that they saw Him as they conversed with Him. The Hebrew word מִפְּנֵי֙ (pānîm) does occur in the text, translated ἀπὸ προσώπου (Septuagint), from the presence (Tanakh, KJV, NETS), from (NET) and from the face (English Elpenor).

Masoretic Text		Septuagint
Genesis 3:8, 10 (Tanakh)	Genesis 3:8, 10 (NET)	Genesis 3:8, 10 (NETS)	Genesis 3:8, 10 (English Elpenor)
And they heard (וַיִּשְׁמְע֞וּ) the voice (ק֨וֹל) of HaShem G-d walking (מִתְהַלֵּ֥ךְ) in the garden (בַּגָּ֖ן) toward the cool (לְר֣וּחַ) of the day (הַיּ֑וֹם); and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence (מִפְּנֵי֙) of HaShem G-d amongst the trees of the garden [Table].	Then the man and his wife heard (šāmaʿ, וישמעו) the sound (qôl, קול) of the Lord God moving about (hālaḵ, מתהלך) in the orchard (gan, בגן) at the breezy time (rûaḥ, לרוח) of the day (yôm, היום), and they hid from (pānîm, מפני) the Lord God among the trees of the orchard.	And they heard (καὶ ἤκουσαν) the sound (τὴν φωνὴν) of the Lord God walking about (περιπατοῦντος) in the orchard (ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ) in the evening (τὸ δειλινόν), and both Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence (ἀπὸ προσώπου) of the Lord God in the midst of the timber of the orchard [Table].	And they heard (Καὶ ἤκουσαν) the voice (τῆς φωνῆς) of the Lord God walking (περιπατοῦντος) in the garden (ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ) in the afternoon (τὸ δειλινόν); and both Adam and his wife hid themselves from the face (ἀπὸ προσώπου) of the Lord God in the midst of the trees of the garden.
And [Adam] said: ‘I heard (שָׁמַ֖עְתִּי) Thy voice (קֹֽלְךָ֥) in the garden (בַּגָּ֑ן), and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself’ [Table].	The man replied, “I heard (šāmaʿ, שמעתי) you moving about (qôl, קלך) in the orchard (gan, בגן), and I was afraid because I was naked, so I hid.”	And he said to him, “I heard (ἤκουσα) the sound of you (τὴν φωνήν σου) walking about (περιπατοῦντος) in the orchard (ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ), and I was afraid, because I am naked, and I hid myself” [Table].	And he said to him, I heard (ἤκουσα) thy voice (τῆς φωνῆς σου) as thou walkedst (περιπατοῦντος) in the garden (ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ), and I feared because I was naked and I hid myself.

A quick survey of the occurrences of מפני (pānîm) in the early chapters of Genesis, which I won’t undertake here, makes it difficult to believe that it was meant to imply that the woman, the man or the serpent literally saw God’s face. No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known.⁷ So, we imagine that they saw Jesus. Nude? The woman doesn’t strike me as one who would need to eat forbidden fruit to realize she was naked if she had already seen Jesus in shiny white clothes. All the text says is that they heard his words and knew that He responded to their words.

The Lord God’s voice…walking in the garden (Tanakh/KJV/English Elpenor) is a curious turn of phrase. I suppose it could be understood as “the voice of the Lord God, walking in the garden.” But it seems to explain the alternative translations: the sound of the Lord God moving about in the orchard (NET) and the sound of the Lord God walking about in the orchard (NETS).

The Hebrew words לְר֣וּחַ (rûaḥ) הַיּ֑וֹם (yôm), which I suppose would literally translate, “in” or “toward the spirit of the day,” were translated various ways: toward the cool of the day (Tanakh), in the cool of the day (KJV), at the breezy time of the day (NET), in the evening (NETS) and in the afternoon (English Elpenor). In the Tanakh on chabad.org it was understood as the direction the Lord’s voice walked: to the direction of the sun.⁸ And despite the fact that the rabbis who translated the Septuagint chose no form of πνεῦμα for לְר֣וּחַ (rûaḥ) here, I’m reminded of Jesus’ words to Nicodemus (John 3:5-8 ESV):

“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit (πνεύματος), he cannot enter the kingdom of God [Table]. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit (πνεύματος) is spirit (πνεῦμα). Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind (πνεῦμα) blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound (τὴν φωνὴν αὐτοῦ), but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit (πνεύματος).”

Jesus’ comfort level with the interplay of spirit and wind calms me and encourages me to think that the woman, the man and the serpent communed with a voice in the wind or a voice in the Spirit. I assume then that the face or presence of the Lord was their perception of proximity to that voice. But the NET translation of לְר֣וּחַ (rûaḥ), at the breezy time, seems to be more of a hedge translation, taking no sides as it were whether God came to them calmly or furiously:

The expression is traditionally rendered “cool of the day,” because the Hebrew word רוּחַ (ruakh) can mean “wind.” U. Cassuto (Genesis: From Adam to Noah, 152-54) concludes after lengthy discussion that the expression refers to afternoon when it became hot and the sun was beginning to decline. J. J. Niehaus (God at Sinai [SOTBT], 155-57) offers a different interpretation of the phrase, relating יוֹם (yom, usually understood as “day”) to an Akkadian cognate umu (“storm”) and translates the phrase “in the wind of the storm.” If Niehaus is correct, then God is not pictured as taking an afternoon stroll through the orchard, but as coming in a powerful windstorm to confront the man and woman with their rebellion. In this case קוֹל יְהוָה (qol y^ehvah, “sound of the Lord”) may refer to God’s thunderous roar, which typically accompanies his appearance in the storm to do battle or render judgment (e.g., see Ps 29).

Though they knew Him in some sense, knowing God means more than hearing his voice and disobeying Him.

Masoretic Text		Septuagint
Psalm 9:10 (Tanakh/KJV)	Psalm 9:10 (NET)	Psalm 9:11 (NETS)	Psalm 9:11 (English Elpenor)
And they that know (יֽוֹדְעֵ֣י) thy name (שְׁמֶ֑ךָ) will put their trust (וְיִבְטְח֣וּ) in thee: for thou, LORD, hast not forsaken them that seek thee.	Your loyal followers trust in you, [NET note 21: Heb “and the ones who know (yāḏaʿ, יודעי) your name (šēm, שמך) trust (bāṭaḥ, ויבטחו) in you”] for you, Lord, do not abandon those who seek your help.	And let those who know (γινώσκοντες) your name (τὸ ὄνομά σου) hope (ἐλπισάτωσαν) in you, because you did not forsake those who seek you, O Lord.	And let them that know (γινώσκοντες) thy name (τὸ ὄνομά σου) hope (ἐλπισάτωσαν) in thee: for thou, O Lord, hast not failed them that diligently seek thee.

The Hebrew word שְׁמֶ֑ךָ (šēm), translated thy name (Tanakh, KJV) and your name (NET), might have been translated your reputation, your fame or your glory. The Greek translation of שְׁמֶ֑ךָ (šēm) τὸ ὄνομά σου—your name (NETS) and thy name (English Elpenor)—might have been translated your reputation, your fame or news of you. The Hebrew word וְיִבְטְח֣וּ (bāṭaḥ), will put their trust (Tanakh, KJV) and trust (NET), was translated ἐλπισάτωσαν in the Septuagint, hope (BLB, Elpenor). But ἐλπισάτωσαν might have been translated have confident assurance, be confident or put trust.

A note on the root word ἐλπίζω in the Koine Greek Lexicon online reads:

Does not mean “to hope” in the sense of “longing for” or “wishing”; but of “confident assurance.”

The serpent trusted (Genesis 3:4, 5) his own partially true knowledge rather than God’s command. The woman trusted (Genesis 3:6) the serpent’s knowledge and her own desires rather than God’s command. The man trusted (Genesis 3:6) his wife rather than God’s command. Though I hadn’t seen it before, Paul may have written the best summation of what transpired in the garden (Romans 1:18-21 NET).

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of people who suppress the truth by their unrighteousness, because what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world his invisible attributes—his eternal⁹ power and divine nature—have been clearly seen because they are understood through what has been made (Genesis 1-2). So people are without excuse. For although they knew (γνόντες, a form of γινώσκω) God, they did not glorify him as God or give him thanks, but they became futile in their thoughts, and their senseless hearts were darkened [Table].

Paul also wrote (1 Corinthians 8:2, 3 NET):

If¹⁰ someone thinks he knows¹¹ something, he does not yet¹² know¹³ to the degree that he needs to know (γνῶναι, another form of γινώσκω). But if someone loves (ἀγαπᾷ, a form of ἀγαπάω) God, he is known (ἔγνωσται, another form of γινώσκω) by God.

Rather than inventing a category free will along with a lot of convoluted arguments, it seems to make more sense to stick with desire: the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit.¹⁴ The Greek word translated the desires was ἐπιθυμεῖ, an indicative form of the verb ἐπιθυμέω in the active voice and present tense. In other words, “the flesh desires against the Spirit.” Accepting the truth of this statement, even in the garden where everything was very good, cuts through a lot of unnecessary intellectual clutter.

So, the flesh desiring against the Spirit of God was the cause of sin, rather than its result, as James wrote (James 1:13-15 ESV):

Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am being tempted by God,”¹⁵ for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one. But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire (τῆς ἰδίας ἐπιθυμίας). Then desire (ἡ ἐπιθυμία) when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death.

God cannot be tempted with evil. I take that to heart, for I can imagine an argument that God didn’t need to give free will to human beings in any explicit way, it was simply bequeathed as a part of his image. But if God cannot be tempted by evil, He doesn’t possess free will in any sense that is most meaningful to human beings. Apart from the ability to be tempted with evil, free will loses all its explanatory power, and most of its appeal, for human beings.

It is written in the prophets, Jesus said, ‘And they will all be taught (διδακτοὶ, a form of διδακτός) by God.’ Everyone who hears and learns from the Father comes to me.¹⁶ And that’s what God continued to do for the woman and the man in their time, and continues to do for any who read his words in the Bible any time. Paradise may be lost, but the Garden of Eden was only a shadow of the good things to come.¹⁷

Tables comparing Psalm 9:10 in the Tanakh, KJV and NET, and the Greek of Psalm 9:10 (9:11) in the Septuagint (BLB and Elpenor), and tables comparing 1 John 5:21; Romans 1:20; 1 Corinthians 8:2 and James 1:13 in the NET and KJV follow.

Psalm 9:10 (Tanakh)	Psalm 9:10 (KJV)	Psalm 9:10 (NET)
And they that know thy name will put their trust in thee: for thou, LORD, hast not forsaken them that seek thee.	And they that know thy name will put their trust in thee: for thou, LORD, hast not forsaken them that seek thee.	Your loyal followers trust in you, for you, Lord, do not abandon those who seek your help.

Psalm 9:10 (Septuagint BLB)	Psalm 9:11 (Septuagint Elpenor)
καὶ ἐλπισάτωσαν ἐπὶ σὲ οἱ γινώσκοντες τὸ ὄνομά σου ὅτι οὐκ ἐγκατέλιπες τοὺς ἐκζητοῦντάς σε κύριε	καὶ ἐλπισάτωσαν ἐπὶ σοὶ οἱ γινώσκοντες τὸ ὄνομά σου, ὅτι οὐκ ἐγκατέλιπες τοὺς ἐκζητοῦντάς σε, Κύριε
Psalm 9:11 (NETS)	Psalm 9:11 (English Elpenor)
And let those who know your name hope in you, because you did not forsake those who seek you, O Lord.	And let them that know thy name hope in thee: for thou, O Lord, hast not failed them that diligently seek thee.

1 John 5:21 (NET)	1 John 5:21 (KJV)
Little children, guard yourselves from idols.	Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen.

1 John 5:21 (NET Parallel Greek)	1 John 5:21 (Stephanus Textus Receptus)	1 John 5:21 (Byzantine Majority Text)
Τεκνία, φυλάξατε ἑαυτὰ ἀπὸ τῶν εἰδώλων	τεκνια φυλαξατε εαυτους απο των ειδωλων αμην	τεκνια φυλαξατε εαυτα απο των ειδωλων αμην

Romans 1:20 (NET)	Romans 1:20 (KJV)
For since the creation of the world his invisible attributes—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen because they are understood through what has been made. So people are without excuse.	For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Romans 1:20 (NET Parallel Greek)	Romans 1:20 (Stephanus Textus Receptus)	Romans 1:20 (Byzantine Majority Text)
τὰ γὰρ ἀόρατα αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ κτίσεως κόσμου τοῖς ποιήμασιν νοούμενα καθορᾶται, ἥ τε αἴ_διος αὐτοῦ δύναμις καὶ θειότης, εἰς τὸ εἶναι αὐτοὺς ἀναπολογήτους	τα γαρ αορατα αυτου απο κτισεως κοσμου τοις ποιημασιν νοουμενα καθοραται η τε αιδιος αυτου δυναμις και θειοτης εις το ειναι αυτους αναπολογητους	τα γαρ αορατα αυτου απο κτισεως κοσμου τοις ποιημασιν νοουμενα καθοραται η τε αιδιος αυτου δυναμις και θειοτης εις το ειναι αυτους αναπολογητους

1 Corinthians 8:2 (NET)	1 Corinthians 8:2 (KJV)
If someone thinks he knows something, he does not yet know to the degree that he needs to know.	And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know.

1 Corinthians 8:2 (NET Parallel Greek)	1 Corinthians 8:2 (Stephanus Textus Receptus)	1 Corinthians 8:2 (Byzantine Majority Text)
εἴ τις δοκεῖ ἐγνωκέναι τι, οὔπω ἔγνω καθὼς δεῖ γνῶναι	ει δε τις δοκει ειδεναι τι ουδεπω ουδεν εγνωκεν καθως δει γνωναι	ει δε τις δοκει ειδεναι τι ουδεπω ουδεν εγνωκεν καθως δει γνωναι

James 1:13 (NET)	James 1:13 (KJV)
Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am tempted by God,” for God cannot be tempted by evil, and he himself tempts no one.	Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:

James 1:13 (NET Parallel Greek)	James 1:13 (Stephanus Textus Receptus)	James 1:13 (Byzantine Majority Text)
Μηδεὶς πειραζόμενος λεγέτω ὅτι ἀπο θεοῦ πειράζομαι· ὁ γὰρ θεὸς ἀπείραστος ἐστιν κακῶν, πειράζει δὲ αὐτὸς οὐδένα	μηδεις πειραζομενος λεγετω οτι απο του θεου πειραζομαι ο γαρ θεος απειραστος εστιν κακων πειραζει δε αυτος ουδενα	μηδεις πειραζομενος λεγετω οτι απο θεου πειραζομαι ο γαρ θεος απειραστος εστιν κακων πειραζει δε αυτος ουδενα

Back to Father, Son and Holy Spirit – Part 11

¹ The NET parallel Greek text, NA²⁸ and Byzantine Majority Text had the neuter reflexive pronoun ἑαυτὰ here, where the Stephanus Textus Receptus had the masculine εαυτους. A note in the Koine Greek Lexicon explained: “Although it is technically used of the 3rd person, it is also used for the 1st and 2nd person…”

² 1 John 5:21 (ESV) The Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had αμην (KJV: Amen) here. The NET parallel Greek text and NA²⁸ did not.

³ Genesis 3:12 Table

⁴ Genesis 3:6b (ESV) Table

⁵ From Solomon’s Wealth, Part 4

⁶ From Solomon’s Wealth, Part 5

⁷ John 1:18 (ESV) Table

⁸ Rashi’s commentary reads: “to the direction of the sun: To that direction in which the sun sets, and this is the west, for toward evening, the sun is in the west, and they sinned in the tenth [hour]. — [from Gen. Rabbah 19:8, Sanh. 38B].”

⁹ In the NET parallel Greek text eternal was spelled αἴ_διος, and ἀΐδιος in the NA²⁸, Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text.

¹⁰ The Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had δε (KJV: And) here. The NET parallel Greek text and NA²⁸ did not.

¹¹ The NET parallel Greek text and NA²⁸ had ἐγνωκέναι here, where the Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had ειδεναι (KJV: that he knoweth).

¹² The NET parallel Greek text and NA²⁸ had οὔπω here, where the Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had ουδεπω ουδεν (KJV: nothing yet).

¹³ The NET parallel Greek text and NA²⁸ had ἔγνω here, where the Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had εγνωκεν (KJV: he knoweth).

¹⁴ Galatians 5:17a (ESV) Table

¹⁵ The Stephanus Textus Receptus had the article του preceding God. The NET parallel Greek text, NA²⁸ and Byzantine Majority Text did not.

¹⁶ John 6:45 (NET) Table

¹⁷ Hebrews 10:1a (NET)

Atonement, Part 6

Posted on September 13, 2018 by admin

This is a continuation of the previous essay which was a continuation of a consideration of y^ehôvâh’s (יהוה) instruction to Moses: They^[1] are to eat those things by which atonement (kâphar, כפר; Septuagint: ἡγιάσθησαν, a form of ἁγιάζω) was made to consecrate and to set them apart, but no one else may eat them, for they are holy.^[2] I’ll begin with a review:

Atonement, Part 2

Now this is what you are to do for them to consecrate (qâdash, לקדש; Septuagint: ἁγιάσαι, another form of ἁγιάζω) them so that they may minister as my priests.^[3] This same word לקדש (qâdash) was translated to set them apart in Exodus 29:33 (NET) above, and ἁγιάσαι in the Septuagint. In 1 Thessalonians 5:23 ἁγιάσαι was translated make…holy (NET) or sanctify (KJV). There is an overview of what was required for this consecration, to set Aaron and his sons apart (Exodus 29:1b-3).

Atonement, Part 3

The Hebrew word translated to consecrate in Exodus 29:33 above was למלא (mâlêʼ). In the Septuagint למלא (mâlêʼ) was translated τελειῶσαι τὰς χεῖρας, “validate their hands” in an English translation of the Septuagint (NETS). And τελειῶσαι (a form of τελειόω) was translated to perfect in: For the law possesses a shadow of the good things to come but not the reality itself, and is therefore completely unable, by the same sacrifices offered continually, year after year, to perfect those who come to worship.^[4] Thus you are to consecrate (mâlêʼ, ומלאת; Septuagint: τελειώσεις τὰς χεῖρας; NETS: “validate their hands”) Aaron and his sons,^[5] y^ehôvâh told Moses. The ritual is recounted in a table of Exodus 29:4-9 and Leviticus 8:6-13.

Atonement, Part 4

The ritual of the sin offering (chaṭṭâʼâh, החטאת; Septuagint: ἁμαρτίας, a form of ἁμαρτία) bull is recounted in a table of Exodus 29:10-14 and Leviticus 8:14-17. The sin offering bull was eaten by no one. The Hebrew word translated holy in for they are holy in Exodus 29:33 above was קדש (qôdesh). In the Septuagint קדש (qôdesh) was translated ἅγια (a form of ἅγιος). Tracking ἅγια into the New Testament led to the sin offering accomplished in heaven by Jesus the Christ, the high priest of the new covenant: Hebrews 9:11, 12, 24-28.

Atonement, Part 5

The ritual of the burnt offering (ʽôlâh, העלה; Septuagint: ὁλοκαύτωμα) ram is recounted in a table of Exodus 29:15-18 and Leviticus 8:18-21. The burnt offering ram was eaten by no one. This led to a discussion between Jesus and one of the experts in the law (γραμματέων, a form of γραμματεύς) on the relative merits of burnt offerings (ὁλοκαυτωμάτων, a form of ὁλοκαύτωμα), recounted in a table of Mark 12:28-34a.

The other occurrences of a form of ὁλοκαύτωμα in the New Testament are found in Hebrews 10:4-9 (NET):

For the blood of bulls and goats cannot take away sins. So when he came into the world, he said,

“Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me.

“Whole burnt offerings (ὁλοκαυτώματα, another form of ὁλοκαύτωμα) and sin-offerings you took no delight in.

“Then I said, ‘Here I am: I have come – it is written of me in the scroll of the book – to do your will, O God.’”

When he says above, “Sacrifices^[6] and offerings^[7] and whole burnt offerings (ὁλοκαυτώματα, another form of ὁλοκαύτωμα) and sin-offerings you did not desire nor did you take delight in them” (which are offered according to the law), then he says, “Here I am: I have come to do your will.”^[8] He does away with the first to establish the second.

The words highlighted in boldface were a quotation from, or an allusion to, Psalm 40:6-8. Below are three examples of Psalm 40:6-8 translated from contemporary Hebrew.

Psalm 40:6-8 (Tanakh)	Psalm 40:6-8 (KJV)	Psalm 40:6-8 (NET)
Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened (kârâh, כרית): burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required.	Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required.	Receiving sacrifices and offerings are not your primary concern. You make that quite clear to me! You do not ask for burnt sacrifices and sin offerings.
Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me,	Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me,	Then I say, “Look! I come! What is written in the scroll pertains to me.
I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart.	I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart.	I want to do what pleases you, my God. Your law dominates my thoughts.”

Since the oldest extant Hebrew manuscript of the Old Testament dates from 920 – 930 and the oldest extant manuscript of the book of Hebrews in Greek dates from 175 – 225, it seems obvious that the Masoretes^[9] transformed a prophecy about a body prepared for Christ into a clever insult about digging wax out of David’s ears. The problem with that, however, is the Septuagint. Well, it doesn’t have to be a problem, I suppose, not if I switch versions.

Hebrews 10:5b-7 (NET Parallel Greek)	Psalm 39:7-9a (Septuagint Elpenor)
θυσίαν καὶ προσφορὰν οὐκ ἠθέλησας, σῶμα δὲ κατηρτίσω μοι	θυσίαν καὶ προσφορὰν οὐκ ἠθέλησας, σῶμα δὲ κατηρτίσω μοι· ὁλοκαυτώματα καὶ περὶ ἁμαρτίας οὐκ ἐζήτησας
ὁλοκαυτώματα καὶ περὶ ἁμαρτίας οὐκ εὐδόκησας
τότε εἶπον ἰδοὺ ἥκω, ἐν κεφαλίδι βιβλίου γέγραπται περὶ ἐμοῦ, τοῦ ποιῆσαι ὁ θεὸς τὸ θέλημα σου	τότε εἶπον· ἰδοὺ ἥκω, ἐν κεφαλίδι βιβλίου γέγραπται περὶ ἐμοῦ
	τοῦ ποιῆσαι τὸ θέλημά σου, ὁ Θεός μου

Here, both the NET parallel Greek and the Septuagint agree on the word σῶμα (body). But the oldest extant manuscripts of the Septuagint date from 350 – 450. So, did the rabbis read a Hebrew word and translate it σῶμα or did believers prefer σῶμα and substitute it? In one sense I have no objection to preferring the book of Hebrews and by faith, as it were, assuming σῶμα. But that is exactly what I’ve accused the Masoretes of doing to the Hebrew text:^[10]

…raised from infancy with the belief that Jesus was not, could not possibly be, the promised Messiah, and with no knowledge of deliberate textual corruptions, the Masoretes could have done this^[11] [i.e., added vowel points] in good conscience.

The Blue Letter Bible version of the Septuagint I have been using (which agrees here with the Academic Bible [See Table1 below]) compares to the NET parallel Greek as follows:

Hebrews 10:5b-7 (NET Parallel Greek)	Psalm 40:6, 7, 8a (Septuagint BLB)
θυσίαν καὶ προσφορὰν οὐκ ἠθέλησας, σῶμα δὲ κατηρτίσω μοι	θυσίαν καὶ προσφορὰν οὐκ ἠθέλησας ὠτία δὲ κατηρτίσω μοι ὁλοκαύτωμα καὶ περὶ ἁμαρτίας οὐκ ᾔτησας
ὁλοκαυτώματα καὶ περὶ ἁμαρτίας οὐκ εὐδόκησας
τότε εἶπον ἰδοὺ ἥκω, ἐν κεφαλίδι βιβλίου γέγραπται περὶ ἐμοῦ, τοῦ ποιῆσαι ὁ θεὸς τὸ θέλημα σου	τότε εἶπον ἰδοὺ ἥκω ἐν κεφαλίδι βιβλίου γέγραπται περὶ ἐμοῦ
	τοῦ ποιῆσαι τὸ θέλημά σου ὁ θεός μου

In this version the ears (ὠτία) were there already but the “digging” (kârâh, כרית) had become κατηρτίσω (you prepared). I found an alternative explanation online at Michael S. Heiser.com in an article titled “The Function of Paronomasia in Hebrews 10:5–7” by Karen H. Jobes.

At first the philosophical bent of my mind clashed with her poetic soul. Her idea that some anonymous author changed ὠτία (ears) to σῶμα (body) because it sounded better to first century ears was appalling. But I softened some as she explained the meaning of this rhetorical technique in this particular context.

The most striking feature of this quotation from Psalm 40 is that it is attributed (improperly some would say) to the incarnate Jesus Christ: “Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said … ” It is as if Psalm 40 had never previously existed; as if these words originated in Christ’s mouth and not in the psalmist’s, some thousand years before.

The belief that all scripture is unified by divine inspiration could be used to explain this attribution. For whatever David said in Psalms was really being said by God. And because of the triune relationship of the God-head, whatever God says, Christ says.^[12]

My own working hypothesis is that y^ehôvâh became Jesus: Now [y^ehôvâh] became flesh and took up residence among us. We saw his glory – the glory of the one and only, full of grace and truth, who came from the Father.^[13] No one has ever seen God (e.g., the Father).^[14] And HaShem (y^ehôvâh, יהוה) came down in a pillar of cloud, and stood at the door of the Tent, and called Aaron and Miriam; and they both came forth (Numbers 12:5-8 Tanakh).

And He said: ‘Hear now My words: if there be a prophet among you, I HaShem (y^ehôvâh, יהוה) do make Myself known unto him in a vision (marʼâh, במראה; Septuagint: ὁράματι, a form of ὅραμα), I do speak with him in a dream (chălôm, בחלום; Septuagint: ὕπνῳ, a form of ὕπνος). My servant Moses is not so; he is trusted in all My house; with him do I speak mouth to mouth, even manifestly (marʼeh, ומראה; Septuagint: εἴδει, a form of εἶδος), and not in dark speeches; and the similitude (t^emûnâh, ותמנת; Septuagint: δόξαν, a form of δόξα) of HaShem (y^ehôvâh, יהוה) doth he behold; wherefore then were ye not afraid to speak against My servant, against Moses?’

The only one,^[15] himself God,^[16] who is in closest fellowship with the Father, has made God known^[17] (e.g., in both Old and New Testaments). He [y^ehôvâh] came to what was his own, but his own people did not receive him.^[18] For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance^[19] be but life from the dead? If the first portion of the dough offered is holy (ἁγία, a form of ἅγιος), then the whole batch is holy, and if the root is holy (ἁγία, a form of ἅγιος), so too are the branches.^[20] Ms. Jobes continued:

In Hebrews 10, then, the author’s lexical choice in substituting εὐδόκησας for ᾔτησας not only achieves phonetic assonance, but also fits well with the argument made in that chapter. Sacrifice and offering were not God’s will, burnt offering and sin offering were not God’s good pleasure. Though God had commanded them when in the past he “spoke to our forefathers through the prophets,” these were not the means through which God would redeem his people from sin. The past-speaking of the old sacrificial system is superseded when God’s redemptive plan is revealed in Christ.

The clause containing substitutions of σω̂μα for ὠτία and the plural ὁλοκαυτώματα for the singular form is sandwiched between the inclusio formed by ἠθέλησας and εὐδόκησας in an a-b-b’-a’ pattern…

What is the point of these contrasted clauses? According to the MT, David had “ears” to hear the word of the Lord. The midrash of Ps 40:7 understands this verse in light of 1 Sam 15:22, “Hath the Lord as great delight in burnt-offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the Lord?” (the verb is שׁמע, “hearing”). The reference to David’s ears, which heard the voice of the Lord, is therefore to be understood as referring to David’s obedience to God.

W. C. Kaiser follows this midrashic understanding and also construes this idiom as referring to David’s—somewhat faltering—obedience. Kaiser sees the substitution of σω̂μα for ὠτία as simply the whole being substituted for the part by the Greek translator in order to produce a culturally dynamic equivalent. This would then mean that David and Christ were saying essentially the same thing. But Christ’s obedience to God that abolished the old cultic sacrifices was not the same as David’s obedience to God as theocratic king. It was not that Jesus lived his life in perfect obedience to God, but more specifically, it was the obedient sacrifice of his body in death that brought an end to animal sacrifice. As the king of Israel, David could only imperfectly obey God, and his body could never be the once-for-all sacrifice for sin. Therefore, it was uniquely appropriate for the author of Hebrews to substitute σω̂μα for ὠτία when he also put the words of Ps 40:6–8 in Christ’s mouth.

So when he came into the world, he said… may not be mystic poetry but straightforward reportage. My own working hypothesis is that Hebrews was Jesus’ teaching between his resurrection and ascension, the teaching that caused Cleopas and his companion to exclaim, “Didn’t our hearts burn within us^[21] while he was speaking with us on the road,^[22] while he was explaining the scriptures to us?”^[23] I think it is entirely possible that the writer’s informants heard the resurrected Jesus explain this prophecy in exactly this way, and that his teaching was written down some time before Stephen was killed. Ms. Jobes continued:

The displeasure of God with cultic offerings is contrasted with, “But a body you prepared for me.” The argument of Hebrews 10 is that it was Jesus Christ’s body which was the sacrifice well-pleasing to God, not the many animal sacrifices endlessly repeated. The lexical choice of σω̂μα δέ concurrently with the substitution of the plural form of ὁλοκαυτώματα achieves phonetic assonance and by this marked prominence the one body of Christ is contrasted with the many burnt offerings with which God was not pleased. The rhetorical construction of paronomasia therefore reinforces the point of the argument made in Hebrews 10.

Regarding Hebrews as the teaching of the resurrected Christ, it matters less to me whether He quoted a lost manuscript of Psalm 40 or changed ὠτία (ears) to σῶμα (body) for his own teaching purposes. Either way He has my attention focused on σῶμα. Paul equated our old [human] (ὁ παλαιὸς ἡμῶν ἄνθρωπος) with the body of sin (τὸ σῶμα τῆς ἁμαρτίας): We know that our old man was crucified with him so that the body of sin would no longer dominate us, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin.^[24]

And you were at one time strangers and enemies in your minds as expressed through your evil deeds, Paul wrote believers in Colossae, but now he has reconciled you by his physical body (ἐν τῷ σώματι τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ; literally, “in the body of his flesh”) through death to present you holy, without blemish, and blameless before him – if indeed you remain in the faith, established and firm, without shifting from the hope of the gospel that you heard.^[25]

But if Christ is in you, your body is dead because of^[26] sin, but the Spirit is your life because of righteousness. Moreover if the Spirit of the one who raised Jesus^[27] from the dead lives in you, the one who raised Christ^[28] from the dead will also make your mortal bodies alive through his Spirit^[29] who lives^[30] in you.^[31]

The body of the old human does not exhaust the meaning of the body God the Father prepared for Jesus the Christ (Philippians 3:20, 21; 1 Corinthians 15:50-53; Ephesians 1:23 NET):

But our citizenship (πολίτευμα) is in heaven – and we also await a savior from there, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will transform these humble (ταπεινώσεως, a form of ταπείνωσις) bodies (σῶμα) of ours^[32] into the likeness of his glorious body (σώματι, a form of σῶμα) by means of that power by which he is able to subject all things to himself.^[33]

Now this is what I am saying, brothers and sisters: Flesh and blood cannot^{^[34]} inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Listen, I will tell you a mystery: We^{^[35]} will not all sleep, but we will all be changed – in a moment, in the blinking of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality.

Now the church^[36] is his body (σῶμα), the fullness of him who fills all^[37] in all.

This mystery (Ephesians 5:31, 32), though well worth exploring, must wait for another essay. A table comparing Psalm 40:6-8 in the Blue Letter Bible version and Academic Bible version of the Septuagint follows. That is followed by tables of John 1:18; Romans 11:15; Luke 24:32; Romans 8:10, 11; Philippians 3:21; 1 Corinthians 15:50, 51 and Ephesians 1:23.

Psalm 40:6, 7, 8a (Septuagint BLB)	Psalm 39:7-9a (Septuagint Academic)
θυσίαν καὶ προσφορὰν οὐκ ἠθέλησας ὠτία δὲ κατηρτίσω μοι ὁλοκαύτωμα καὶ περὶ ἁμαρτίας οὐκ ᾔτησας	θυσίαν καὶ προσφορὰν οὐκ ἠθέλησας, ὠτία δὲ κατηρτίσω μοι· ὁλοκαύτωμα καὶ περὶ ἁμαρτίας οὐκ ᾔτησας
τότε εἶπον ἰδοὺ ἥκω ἐν κεφαλίδι βιβλίου γέγραπται περὶ ἐμοῦ	τότε εἶπον ᾿Ιδοὺ ἥκω, ἐν κεφαλίδι βιβλίου γέγραπται περὶ ἐμοῦ·
τοῦ ποιῆσαι τὸ θέλημά σου ὁ θεός μου	τοῦ ποιῆσαι τὸ θέλημά σου, ὁ θεός μου

John 1:18 (NET)	John 1:18 (KJV)
No one has ever seen God. The only one, himself God, who is in closest fellowship with the Father, has made God known.	No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

NET Parallel Greek	Stephanus Textus Receptus	Byzantine Majority Text
Θεὸν οὐδεὶς ἑώρακεν πώποτε· μονογενὴς θεὸς^[38] ὁ ὢν εἰς τὸν κόλπον τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκεῖνος ἐξηγήσατο	θεον ουδεις εωρακεν πωποτε ο μονογενης υιος ο ων εις τον κολπον του πατρος εκεινος εξηγησατο	θεον ουδεις εωρακεν πωποτε ο μονογενης υιος ο ων εις τον κολπον του πατρος εκεινος εξηγησατο

Romans 11:15 (NET)	Romans 11:15 (KJV)
For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?	For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?

NET Parallel Greek	Stephanus Textus Receptus	Byzantine Majority Text
εἰ γὰρ ἡ ἀποβολὴ αὐτῶν καταλλαγὴ κόσμου, τίς ἡ πρόσλημψις εἰ μὴ ζωὴ ἐκ νεκρῶν	ει γαρ η αποβολη αυτων καταλλαγη κοσμου τις η προσληψις ει μη ζωη εκ νεκρων	ει γαρ η αποβολη αυτων καταλλαγη κοσμου τις η προσληψις ει μη ζωη εκ νεκρων

Luke 24:32 (NET)	Luke 24:32 (KJV)
They said to each other, “Didn’t our hearts burn within us while he was speaking with us on the road, while he was explaining the scriptures to us?”	And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?

NET Parallel Greek	Stephanus Textus Receptus	Byzantine Majority Text
καὶ εἶπαν πρὸς ἀλλήλους· οὐχὶ ἡ καρδία ἡμῶν καιομένη ἦν ὡς ἐλάλει ἡμῖν ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ, ὡς διήνοιγεν ἡμῖν τὰς γραφάς	και ειπον προς αλληλους ουχι η καρδια ημων καιομενη ην εν ημιν ως ελαλει ημιν εν τη οδω και ως διηνοιγεν ημιν τας γραφας	και ειπον προς αλληλους ουχι η καρδια ημων καιομενη ην εν ημιν ως ελαλει ημιν εν τη οδω και ως διηνοιγεν ημιν τας γραφας

Romans 8:10, 11 (NET)	Romans 8:10, 11 (KJV)
But if Christ is in you, your body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is your life because of righteousness.	And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

NET Parallel Greek	Stephanus Textus Receptus	Byzantine Majority Text
εἰ δὲ Χριστὸς ἐν ὑμῖν, τὸ μὲν σῶμα νεκρὸν διὰ ἁμαρτίαν τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα ζωὴ διὰ δικαιοσύνην	ει δε χριστος εν υμιν το μεν σωμα νεκρον δι αμαρτιαν το δε πνευμα ζωη δια δικαιοσυνην	ει δε χριστος εν υμιν το μεν σωμα νεκρον δια αμαρτιαν το δε πνευμα ζωη δια δικαιοσυνην

Moreover if the Spirit of the one who raised Jesus from the dead lives in you, the one who raised Christ from the dead will also make your mortal bodies alive through his Spirit who lives in you.

But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

NET Parallel Greek	Stephanus Textus Receptus	Byzantine Majority Text
εἰ δὲ τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ ἐγείραντος τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐκ νεκρῶν οἰκεῖ ἐν ὑμῖν, ὁ ἐγείρας \|Χριστὸν\| ἐκ νεκρῶν ζῳοποιήσει \|καὶ\| τὰ θνητὰ σώματα ὑμῶν διὰ τοῦ ἐνοικοῦντος αὐτοῦ πνεύματος ἐν ὑμῖν	ει δε το πνευμα του εγειραντος ιησουν εκ νεκρων οικει εν υμιν ο εγειρας τον χριστον εκ νεκρων ζωοποιησει και τα θνητα σωματα υμων δια το ενοικουν αυτου πνευμα εν υμιν	ει δε το πνευμα του εγειραντος ιησουν εκ νεκρων οικει εν υμιν ο εγειρας τον χριστον εκ νεκρων ζωοποιησει και τα θνητα σωματα υμων δια το ενοικουν αυτου πνευμα εν υμιν

Philippians 3:21 (NET)	Philippians 3:21 (KJV)
who will transform these humble bodies of ours into the likeness of his glorious body by means of that power by which he is able to subject all things to himself.	Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.

NET Parallel Greek	Stephanus Textus Receptus	Byzantine Majority Text
ὃς μετασχηματίσει τὸ σῶμα τῆς ταπεινώσεως ἡμῶν σύμμορφον τῷ σώματι τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ κατὰ τὴν ἐνέργειαν τοῦ δύνασθαι αὐτὸν καὶ ὑποτάξαι αὐτῷ τὰ πάντα.	ος μετασχηματισει το σωμα της ταπεινωσεως ημων εις το γενεσθαι αυτο συμμορφον τω σωματι της δοξης αυτου κατα την ενεργειαν του δυνασθαι αυτον και υποταξαι εαυτω τα παντα	ος μετασχηματισει το σωμα της ταπεινωσεως ημων εις το γενεσθαι αυτο συμμορφον τω σωματι της δοξης αυτου κατα την ενεργειαν του δυνασθαι αυτον και υποταξαι εαυτω τα παντα

1 Corinthians 15:50, 51 (NET)	1 Corinthians 15:50, 51 (KJV)
Now this is what I am saying, brothers and sisters: Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable.	Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

NET Parallel Greek	Stephanus Textus Receptus	Byzantine Majority Text
Τοῦτο δέ φημι, ἀδελφοί, ὅτι σὰρξ καὶ αἷμα βασιλείαν θεοῦ κληρονομῆσαι οὐ δύναται οὐδὲ ἡ φθορὰ τὴν ἀφθαρσίαν κληρονομεῖ	τουτο δε φημι αδελφοι οτι σαρξ και αιμα βασιλειαν θεου κληρονομησαι ου δυνανται ουδε η φθορα την αφθαρσιαν κληρονομει	τουτο δε φημι αδελφοι οτι σαρξ και αιμα βασιλειαν θεου κληρονομησαι ου δυνανται ουδε η φθορα την αφθαρσιαν κληρονομει

Listen, I will tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed –

Behold, I show you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,

NET Parallel Greek	Stephanus Textus Receptus	Byzantine Majority Text
ἰδοὺ μυστήριον ὑμῖν λέγω· πάντες οὐ κοιμηθησόμεθα, πάντες δὲ ἀλλαγησόμεθα	ιδου μυστηριον υμιν λεγω παντες μεν ου κοιμηθησομεθα παντες δε αλλαγησομεθα	ιδου μυστηριον υμιν λεγω παντες μεν ου κοιμηθησομεθα παντες δε αλλαγησομεθα

Ephesians 1:23 (NET)	Ephesians 1:23 (KJV)
Now the church is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all.	Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.

NET Parallel Greek	Stephanus Textus Receptus	Byzantine Majority Text
ἥτις ἐστὶν τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ, τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν πληρουμένου	ητις εστιν το σωμα αυτου το πληρωμα του παντα εν πασιν πληρουμενου	ητις εστιν το σωμα αυτου το πληρωμα του τα παντα εν πασιν πληρουμενου

Atonement, Part 7

Back to Atonement, Part 8

Back to Atonement, Part 9

Back to A Monotonous Cycle Revisited, Part 1

Back to A Monotonous Cycle Revisited, Part 2

Back to Hannah’s Prayer, Part 4

Back to He Takes Away, Part 2

Back to A Monotonous Cycle Revisited, Part 4

Back to The Lost Son of Perdition, Part 4

Back to A Monotonous Cycle Revisited, Part 6

Back to Peter’s Second Gospel Proclamation, Part 3

Back to The Book of Life, Part 3

Back to Christianity, Part 7

Back to Who Am I? Part 14

Back to The Day of the Lord, Part 7

Back to Keep Yourselves from Idols, Part 1

Back to Who Am I? Part 16

^[1] Aaron and his sons (Exodus 28:43 NET)

^[2] Exodus 29:33 (NET)

^[3] Exodus 29:1 a (NET)

^[4] Hebrews 10:1 (NET)

^[5] Exodus 29:9 (NET)

^[6] The NET parallel Greek text had θυσίας, the plural form, where the Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had θυσιαν, the singular form of θυσία.

^[7] The NET parallel Greek text had προσφορὰς, the plural form, where the Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had προσφοραν, the singular form of προσφορά.

^[8] The Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had ο θεος (KJV: O God) here. The NET parallel Greek text did not.

^[9] Study: Luke 4:18-19; Condemnation or Judgment? – Part 14; Forgiven or Passed Over? – Part 4

^[10] Study: Luke 4:18-19

^[11] Joseph Gleason, “Masoretic Text vs. Original Hebrew,” The Orthodox Life. Here is an alternative Orthodox opinion to Mr. Gleason’s view of Russia since his 2017 emigration there from Illinois.

^[12] Karen H. Jobes, “The Function of Paronomasia in Hebrews 10:5–7”

^[13] John 1:14 (NET)

^[14] John 1:18a (NET)

^[15] The Stephanas Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had ο preceding this, the NET parallel Greek text and NA²⁸ did not.

^[16] The Stephanas Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had υιος here, where the NET parallel Greek text and NA²⁸ had θεὸς. See NET note 45.

^[17] John 1:18b (NET)

^[18] John 1:11 (NET)

^[19] The NET parallel Greek text and NA²⁸ had πρόσλημψις here, where the Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had προσληψις. Both are nominative singular feminine forms of πρόσληψις.

^[20] Romans 11:15, 16 (NET)

^[21] The NET parallel Greek text did not include εν ημιν (within us) here but added the English words “for clarity” anyway, as explained in note 88: “NA²⁷ [Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece] includes the words in brackets, indicating doubts as to their authenticity.” NA²⁸ still contains the words εν ημιν in brackets.

^[22] The Stephanas Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had the conjunction και here. The NET parallel Greek text and NA²⁸ did not.

^[23] Luke 24:32 (NET)

^[24] Romans 6:6 (NET)

^[25] Colossians 1:21-23a (NET)

^[26] The Stephanus Textus Receptus had δι here, where the NET parallel Greek text, Byzantine Majority Text and NA²⁸ had διὰ.

^[27] The NET parallel Greek text and NA²⁸ had the article τὸν preceding Jesus. The Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text did not.

^[28] The Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had the article τὸν preceding Christ. The NET parallel Greek text and NA²⁸ did not.

^[29] The NET parallel Greek text and NA²⁸ had πνεύματος, a genitive singular neuter form of πνεῦμα here, where the Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had πνευμα, the nominative / accusative singular neuter form.

^[30] The NET parallel Greek text and NA²⁸ had ἐνοικοῦντος, a present active participle genitive active singular neuter form of ἐνοικέω here, where the Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had ενοικουν, the present active participle accusative singular neuter form.

^[31] Romans 8:10, 11 (NET)

^[32] The Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had εις το γενεσθαι αυτο συμμορφον (KJV: that it may be fashioned like unto) here, where the NET parallel Greek text and NA²⁸ had simply σύμμορφον (a form of συμμορφός).

^[33] The NET parallel Greek text and NA²⁸ had αὐτῷ here, where the Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had εαυτω.

^[34] The NET parallel Greek text and NA²⁸ had οὐ δύναται here, a present middle / passive indicative 3rd person singular form of δύναμαι. The Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had ου δυνανται, the present middle / passive indicative 3rd person plural form.

^[35] The Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had μεν at the beginning of this clause. The NET parallel Greek text and NA²⁸ did not.

^[36] This is ἐκκλησίᾳ in Greek, found actually at the end of verse 22.

^[37] The NET parallel Greek text, NA²⁸ and Byzantine Majority Text had the article τὰ preceding the first all. The Stephanas Textus Receptus did not.

^[38] See NET note 45.

My Reasons and My Reason, Part 5

Posted on October 18, 2014 by admin

Late that summer before we began our senior years of high school, I asked B if she wanted to have sex for real. “I think you already know the answer to that,” she said. Actually, I didn’t. That’s why I asked. But I took her evasion for a negative answer. When I asked C to the first football game of the season, I imagine that B felt rejected for her refusal. But I had been biding my time all summer, waiting for the seniors who buzzed around C to leave for college. I didn’t have the connection with B, that sense of loyalty and commitment, I had experienced with A.

A week or so after that football game C and I had sex for real for the first time, for both of us. Everything began to change for me. I didn’t think so concretely at the time, but if someone had tried to communicate the fruit of the Spirit to me then, I would have argued that sex with C was my source of love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness and, after I failed to inaugurate my water brothers scheme, faithfulness and self-control. I had my parents’ example.

They could barely tolerate one another. I might have suspected, since I existed, that sex lacked the staying power I thought, and hoped for, at the time. I reasoned instead that my parents didn’t do it right, and suspected that their religion inhibited and prohibited them from doing it right. Now, I believe that the forbidden fruit was a forbidden fruit, that Adam enjoyed a blessed wedding night and a wonderful afterglow that first Sabbath with his beautiful naked wife (Proverbs 5:18, 19 NET).

May your fountain be blessed, and may you rejoice in your young wife –a loving doe, a graceful deer; may her breasts satisfy you at all times, may you be captivated by her love always.

But at seventeen it was all too easy to assume that forbidden fruit was a religious euphemism for sex. I didn’t recognize that new-found faithfulness and self-control as something alien to me, as something quite contrary to my own will in fact. I assumed that I had changed my mind. It was My love for C, after all, that filled me with joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness, even faithfulness and self-control. Isn’t that what we mean and expect of someone who loves us? He/She is filled with joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness, faithfulness and even self-control (as it pertains to another) in our presence? And aches for the want of these things in our absence?

It wasn’t long before C and I discovered a mutual attraction for spanking and whipping (though I had more affinity for dominant-submissive role-play than she did). It became a routine part of our foreplay. Yes, I was spanked as a child. No, she was not. But I’m not interested in psychological explanations. What interests me is the wrath of God…revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of people who suppress the truth by their unrighteousness.^[1]

Clearly, I did not glorify him as God or give him thanks, but [I] became futile in [my] thoughts and [my] senseless [heart was] darkened. Although [I] claimed to be wise, [I] became [a fool] and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for an image resembling mortal human beings…^[2]

I didn’t know that Jesus was with God in the beginning. All things were created by him, and apart from him not one thing was created that has been created.^[3] I didn’t know that Jesus was fully God.^[4] I had wondered about John’s mysterious Word, thrilled to the sound of the words that sang its praises, but hadn’t connected that Word with Jesus.

Jesus was the Son of God, less than God by definition, I thought. I believed in Jesus as a child but later (about twelve or thirteen) I put childish things away and prayed to God the Father, the true God, instead. Jesus was the bait; God the Father was the switch.^[5] For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life,^[6] sounded wonderful in the sales pitch. When I learned that faith wasn’t enough, that I had to live as a child of God, the deal changed dramatically: For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.^[7] And Jesus being found in fashion as a man, was the image of the good son: he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.^[8] But at the critical moment when Jesus was most obedient to God the Father’s will, God the Father abandoned Him because, Thou art of purer eyes than to behold evil, and canst not look on iniquity…^{^[9]} Or, as another story goes, rather than abandoning Jesus on the cross God the Father hurled even more secret punishments at Him, because his death alone was not sufficient to atone for sins.

I feel bad about the previous paragraph, and can’t continue without correcting it. Though the Scriptures are true, my tone was all off. The surprise when Jesus appeared on earth as a man born of a virgin was not that Yahweh had a Son, but that He had a Father: Jesus said to them, “I tell you the solemn truth, before Abraham came into existence, I am!”^[10] For this is the way God [the Father] loved the world: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.^[11] He gave Him in the garden of Eden, and in the burning bush, and on Mount Sinai, and at Bethlehem and on Golgotha. No one [not Adam, not Eve, not Moses] has ever seen God [the Father]. The only one, himself God, who is in closest fellowship with the Father, has made God [the Father] known.^[12]

When Philip said to Jesus, Lord, show us the Father, and we will be content,^[13] Jesus said: Have I been with you for so long, and you have not known me, Philip? The person who has seen me has seen the Father! How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you, I do not speak on my own initiative, but the Father residing in me performs his miraculous deeds.^[14] To imagine secret punishments (and one must imagine them since they are not revealed in Scripture) which God the Father hurled at Jesus on the cross, is to misunderstand his salvation (Colossians 1:13-20 NET):

He [God the Father] delivered us from the power of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of the Son he loves, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins. He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation, for all things in heaven and on earth were created by him – all things, whether visible or invisible, whether thrones or dominions, whether principalities or powers – all things were created through him and for him. He himself is before all things and all things are held together in him. He is the head of the body, the church, as well as the beginning, the firstborn from among the dead, so that he himself may become first in all things. For God [the Father] was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in the Son and through him to reconcile all things to himself by making peace through the blood of his cross – through him, whether things on earth or things in heaven.

The reason Jesus’ death on a cross makes any peace or atonement is that God the Father is pleased to accept it as such. Human attempts to rationalize his salvation are rationalizations by definition. And in context Habakkuk had whined that Yahweh/Son/Jesus was too longsuffering (Habakkuk 1:13 NET):

You are too just to tolerate evil; you are unable to condone wrongdoing. So why do you put up with such treacherous people? Why do you say nothing when the wicked devour those more righteous than they are?

The point here is that He was putting up with such treacherous people. It is not particularly prudent then to turn it around and use poetic language—Thou art of purer eyes than to behold evil, and canst not look on iniquity—to make a rule forbidding God the Father from drawing near to, or compelling Him to turn away from, God the Son at the moment He made the one who did not know sin to be sin for us, so that in him we would become the righteousness of God,^[15] when Scripture states otherwise (Psalm 22:21b-24 NET):

You have answered me! I will declare your name to my countrymen! In the middle of the assembly I will praise you! You loyal followers of the Lord, praise him! All you descendants of Jacob, honor him! All you descendants of Israel, stand in awe of him! For he did not despise or detest the suffering of the oppressed; he did not ignore him; when he cried out to him, he responded.

This is the very Psalm Jesus quoted from the cross, when he cried out in Aramaic, “Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?” which means, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”^[16] Psalm 22 is a heartrendingly accurate prophecy of the death of Yahweh the Son of God from his own point of view. Whether one believes that it was a psalm of David or not, it was clearly part of the Scripture translated into Greek in the Septuagint a couple of centuries before Jesus died in Jerusalem. It is fitting that He, who lived by every word that comes from the mouth of God,^[17] died with that word in his heart and mind as well.

But even years later after I returned to faith, I strove with every Zen particle of my being to let patience have her perfect work, that [I] may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing.^[18] When I read my sister’s annotated Shakespeare and realized for the first time that, “Wherefore art thou Romeo,” means, “why is your name Montague,” I got my first Bible translated in my own tongue. I was shocked to learn that wanting nothing meant lacking in nothing (James 1:4 NASB):

And let endurance have its perfect result, so that you may be perfect and complete, lacking in nothing.

The King James translation had made sense to me. Nothing angered my father more than my wanting something from him. I assumed that God the Father was the same. Wanting nothing was difficult but possible to achieve, I thought. But lacking in nothing? How could I achieve that through some form of meditation or patience or endurance? It was crazy stuff.

I will not carry out my fierce anger, nor will I devastate Ephraim again. For I am God, and not a man—the Holy One among you.^[19] I didn’t believe it at first. I thought it was some evil introduced into a modern translation. So I checked the Bible, you know, the King James version: I will not execute the fierceness of mine anger, I will not return to destroy Ephraim: for I am God, and not man; the Holy One in the midst of thee:^[20]

In my mind to carry out fierce anger was the essence of God the Father, the Lord Jehovah. How could He turn it around and blame it on man? How did He dare try to distinguish God, the Holy One among you, from man with a statement like, I will not carry out my fierce anger, nor will I devastate Ephraim again? It was nuts.

So, I was guilty. I had a man-made image of God in my mind, one much more like a man—my father^[21]—than like God revealed in Scripture. And I endeavored to worship that image, even after I prayed, if You are there I want to know You. Therefore God gave them over in the desires of their hearts to impurity, to dishonor their bodies among themselves.^[22] I have connected this to, Flee sexual immorality! “Every sin a person commits is outside of the body” – but the immoral person sins against his own body.^[23] So, I have considered unfaithfulness to a spouse to be the impurity to which God gave them over in the desires of their hearts to dishonor their bodies among themselves.

In an absolute sense taking up with C may have been a matter of infidelity to B or A, but in dynamic terms I was returning to a belief in faithfulness to one woman. Now, I credit that to the Holy Spirit trying mightily to get through to me. At the time I thought it was my doing. After C and before my first wife (or, second, depending on your willingness to receive the law) there were other women, not enough to brag about, just enough to be ashamed of. Two of those women were married. The first was separated from her husband. The second was living with her husband, but I was beyond caring. If this was God’s wrath revealed from heaven I can easily attest to its justice, for I recall it as a time of profound loneliness, a loneliness I have not experienced since though I have mostly been alone (without a wife).

I’ll pick this up again in the next essay.

My Reasons and My Reason, Part 6

Back to Sexual Immorality Revisited, Part 3

Back to Who Am I? Part 7

Back to Romans, Part 90

Back to Father, Son and Holy Spirit, Part 1

Back to Who Am I? Part 10

Back to Psalm 22, Part 3

Back to Christianity, Part 13

^[1] Romans 1:18 (NET)

^[2] Romans 1:21-23 (NET)

^[3] John 1:2, 3 (NET)

^[4] John 1:1 (NET)

^[5] bait-and-switch

^[6] John 3:16 (KJV)

^[7] Hebrews 12:6 (KJV)

^[8] Philippians 2:8 (KJV)

^[9] Habakkuk 1:13a (KJV)

^[10] John 8:58 (NET)

^[11] John 3:16 (NET)

^[12] John 1:18 (NET)

^[13] John 14:8 (NET)

^[14] John 14:9, 10 (NET)

^[15] 2 Corinthians 5:21 (NET)

^[16] Mark 15:34; Psalm 22:1 (NET)

^[17] Matthew 4:4; Deuteronomy 8:3 (NET)

^[18] James 1:4 (KJV)

^[19] Hosea 11:9 (NIV)

^[20] Hosea 11:9 (KJV)

^[21] Though to be fair, my father had serious reservations about, and had stopped attending, the church where I became an atheist, and to which I returned after I returned to faith.

^[22] Romans 1:24 (NET) Table

^[23] 1 Corinthians 6:18 (NET)

Romans, Part 29

Posted on October 19, 2012 by admin

There is therefore now no condemnation (κατάκριμα)^[1] for those who are in Christ Jesus (ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ),^[2] Paul continued. I want to list some of the things that are true for those in Christ Jesus:

In Christ Jesus…
1) …born of water and spirit…What is born of the flesh is flesh, and what is born of the Spirit is spirit.	John 3:5, 6 (NET)
2) …the flesh has desires that are opposed to the Spirit, and the Spirit has desires that are opposed to the flesh, for these are in opposition to each other, so that you cannot do what you want.	Galatians 5:17 (NET)
3) I delight in the law of God in my inner being.	Romans 7:22 (NET)
4) I know that nothing good lives…in my flesh.	Romans 7:18a (NET)
5) I want to do the good, but I cannot do it.	Romans 7:18b (NET)
6) I do not do the good I want, but I do the very evil I do not want!	Romans 7:19 (NET)
7) Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer me doing it but sin that lives in me.	Romans 7:20 (NET)
8) So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.	Romans 7:25b (NKJV)
9) There is therefore now no condemnation…	Romans 8:1a (NET)

For the law of the life-giving Spirit in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and death.^[3] All of this was achieved by God. For God achieved what the law could not do because it was weakened through the flesh. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and concerning sin, he condemned (κατέκρινεν, a form of κατακρίνω)^[4] sin in the flesh…^[5]

Only God knows how much sin is condemned in my flesh. I have a general sense that while I’m preoccupied (and frustrated) with the opposition of the flesh that keeps me from the perfection I want (and think I should demonstrate by the righteousness of God through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ)^[6] less and less of the sin (that is the desire of the flesh) sees the light of day. It is not expressed in the world. It is confined, trapped, condemned in dead and dying flesh.

I am the resurrection and the life, Jesus said. The one who believes in me will live even if he dies, and the one who lives and believes in me will never die.^[7] This was a difficult saying for Martha to believe, many years before Paul wrote to the Romans. Jesus asked her, Do you believe this?^[8] Martha’s answer was a model of tactful diplomacy, Yes, Lord, I believe that you are the Christ, the Son of God who comes into the world.^[9]

Jesus knew Martha’s brother was sick, but deliberately waited two more days until he died.^[10] Our friend, He told his disciples, has fallen asleep. But I am going there to awaken him.^[11] His disciples were not eager to return to Judea. Rabbi, they said, the Jewish leaders were just now trying to stone you to death! [Jesus had claimed to be Yahweh, John 8:58, 59 NET] Are you going there again?^[12] Lord, if he has fallen asleep, he will recover.^[13] So Jesus told them plainly that he was dead, and said, I am glad for your sake that I was not there, so that you may believe.^[14]

Jesus had deliberately contrived this situation as an object lesson for his disciples, but then Mary, Martha’s sister, came and fell at his feet and said to him, “Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died:”^[15]

When Jesus saw her weeping, and the people who had come with her weeping, he was intensely moved in spirit and greatly distressed. He asked, “Where have you laid him?” They replied, “Lord, come and see.” Jesus wept.^[16]

It was a profound moment. Only He knows how many people He killed as Yahweh, sinners, yes, but people. He planned the death of Martha’s and Mary’s brother. He knew what He intended to do in the next few moments. And yet He wept. To say that Yahweh was not empathetic with human death would be false. I’m particularly affected by the implications of Genesis 18, that before the omniscient, omnipresent Yahweh decided to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah he took physical form and walked its streets. But there is something even more affecting about Yahweh, born of the flesh of Adam as Jesus, standing before the tomb of a friend weeping human tears from human eyes.

Take away the stone,^[17] Jesus said. Martha, ever the proper hostess, protested, Lord, by this time the body will have a bad smell, because he has been buried four days.^[18] Jesus responded (John 11:40-44 NET):

“Didn’t I tell you that if you believe, you would see the glory of God?” So they took away the stone. Jesus looked upward and said, “Father, I thank you that you have listened to me. I knew that you always listen to me, but I said this for the sake of the crowd standing around here, that they may believe that you sent me.” When he had said this, he shouted in a loud voice, “Lazarus, come out!” The one who had died came out, his feet and hands tied up with strips of cloth, and a cloth wrapped around his face. Jesus said to them, “Unwrap him and let him go.”

Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord^[19]…who will rescue me from this body of death.^[20] The ultimate condemnation of sin in the flesh is the death of the body. The one who believes in me will live even if he dies,^[21] Jesus promised everyone born of the flesh and of the Spirit. To those who already consider themselves dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus,^[22] who accept their new identities, with the mind [they themselves] serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin,^[23] Jesus promised, the one who lives and believes in me will never die.^[24] To them the well-deserved demise of the body of death is a welcome relief, not a cause of apprehension.

Therefore, since the children share in flesh and blood, [Jesus] likewise shared in their humanity, so that through death he could destroy the one who holds the power of death (that is, the devil), and set free those who were held in slavery all their lives by their fear of death,^[25] is the way the writer of Hebrews put it. Paul concluded, so that the righteous requirement of the law may be fulfilled (πληρωθῇ, a form of πληρόω)^[26] in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.^[27] The righteous requirement of the law is fulfilled by the righteousness of God [apart from the law^[28]] through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ for all who believe,^[29] the love that is the fulfillment (πλήρωμα)^[30] of the law,^[31] the fruit of the Spirit^[32] of God, in other words, to walk according…to the Spirit. As Jesus said, Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have not come to abolish these things but to fulfill (πληρῶσαι, another form of πληρόω) them.^[33]

Paul continued (Romans 8:5-11 NET):

For those who live according to the flesh have their outlook shaped by the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit have their outlook shaped by the things of the Spirit. For the outlook of the flesh is death, but the outlook of the Spirit is life and peace, because the outlook of the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to the law of God, nor is it able to do so. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God. You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, this person does not belong to him. But if Christ is in you, your body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is your life because of righteousness. Moreover if the Spirit of the one who raised Jesus from the dead lives in you, the one who raised Christ from the dead will also make your mortal bodies alive through his Spirit who lives in you.

Peter’s Way?

Romans, Part 30

Back to Romans, Part 31

Back to Romans, Part 32

Back to Romans, Part 35

Back to Son of God – John, Part 5

Back to Saving Demons, Part 1

Back to Romans, Part 45

^[2] Romans 8:1 (NET)

^[3] Romans 8:2 (NET)

^[5] Romans 8:3 (NET)

^[6] Romans 3:22 (NET)