Hannah’s Prayer, Part 6

The texts diverge subtly after the conclusion of Hannah’s prayer:

Masoretic Text

Septuagint
1 Samuel 2:11 (Tanakh) 1 Samuel 2:11 (NET) 1 Reigns 2:11 (NETS)

1 Kings 2:10e, 11 (Elpenor English)

And Elkanah went to Ramah to his house.  And the child did minister unto HaShem before Eli the priest. Then Elkanah went back home to Ramah.  The boy Samuel was serving the Lord with the favor of Eli the priest. And they left him there before the Lord and departed to Harmathaim, and the lad was ministering to the face of the Lord, before Eli the priest. And she left him there before the Lord, (11) and departed to Armathaim: and the child ministered in the presence of the Lord before Heli the priest.

The Greek word (Table2 below) translated they left in the NETS was κατέλιπον in the BLB version of the Septuagint, a form of καταλείπω.  Likewise the word translated departed was ἀπῆλθον, a form of ἀπέρχομαι.  Both are third person plural forms, but both are also first person singular forms.  In other words the BLB version of the Septuagint might have been translated: “And I left him there before the Lord and departed to Harmathaim.”

Was this Hannah’s first person narrative originally, dutifully copied by a loving son?

The thought causes the male religious mind to fizz and sputter.  But even a man considering the Koine Greek Lexicon’s definition of καταλείπω—“to leave (in a certain state after something has happened); to leave (neglected and uncared for); to leave (unharmed); to leave (something/someone) behind; to cause to remain behind; to forsake, abandon; to bequeath to (someone); to sever ties with (someone)”—can feel the pathos of “I left him there.”  When I mentioned this possibility to my own mother, she told her first born son that a mother would want her son to know why she abandoned him.

The Elpenor version of the Septuagint had κατέλιπεν, the third person singular form of καταλείπω, translated she left.  The word translated departed was ἀπῆλθεν, the third person singular form of ἀπέρχομαι.  These do the least damage to a first person narrative while allowing the male religious mind to purr contentedly again.  What becomes conspicuous by its absence from both versions of the Septuagint is any mention of Ελκανὰ.

From this perspective the insertion of Elkanah back into the Masoretic text is so patriarchal it feels like stormtroopers trampling on the narrative.  I think I can hear John William’s theme playing in the background.  But the point is well taken.  Hannah didn’t leave Samuel in Shiloh apart from Elkanah.

Masoretic Text

Septuagint
1 Samuel 1:1-5 (Tanakh) 1 Samuel 1:1-5 (NET) 1 Reigns 1:1-5 (NETS)

1 Kings 1:1-5 (Elpenor English)

NOW THERE was a certain man of Ramathaim-zophim, of the hill-country of Ephraim, and his name was Elkanah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephraimite. There was a man from Ramathaim Zophim, from the hill country of Ephraim.  His name was Elkanah.  He was the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephraimite. There was a man of Harmathaim Sipha from the hill country of Ephraim, and his name was Elkana son of Ieremeel son of Eliou son of Thoke, in Nasib Ephraim. There was a man of Armathaim Sipha, of mount Ephraim, and his name [was] Helkana, a son of Jeremeel the son of Elias the son of Thoke, in Nasib Ephraim.
And he had two wives: the name of the one was Hannah, and the name of the other Peninnah; and Peninnah had children, but Hannah had no children. He had two wives; the name of the first was Hannah and the name of the second was Peninnah.  Peninnah had children, but Hannah had no children. And he had two wives; the name of the one was Hannah, and the name of the second Phennana.  And Phennana had children, and Hanna had no child. And he [had] two wives; the name of the one [was] Anna, and the name of the second Phennana.  And Phennana had children, but Anna had no child.
And this man went up out of his city from year to year to worship and to sacrifice unto HaShem of hosts in Shiloh.  And the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, were there priests unto HaShem. This man would go up from his city year after year to worship and to sacrifice to the Lord of Heaven’s Armies at Shiloh.  (It was there that the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, served as the Lord’s priests.) And the man used to go up from days to days from his town, from Harmathaim, to do obeisance and to sacrifice to the Lord God Sabaoth at Selo, and there Eli and his two sons, Hophni and Phinees, were priests of the Lord. And the man went up from year to year from his city, from Armathaim, to worship and sacrifice to the Lord God of Sabaoth at Selom: and [there were] Heli and his two sons Ophni and Phinees, the priests of the Lord.
And it came to pass upon a day, when Elkanah sacrificed, that he gave to Peninnah his wife, and to all her sons and her daughters, portions; The day came, and Elkanah sacrificed.  (Now he used to give meat portions to his wife Peninnah and to all her sons and daughters. And it happened on a day and Elkana sacrificed and gave portions to his wife Phennana and to her sons, And the day came, and Helkana sacrificed, and gave portions to his wife Phennana and her children.
but unto Hannah he gave a double portion; for he loved Hannah, but HaShem had shut up her womb. But to Hannah he would give a double portion because he loved Hannah, although the Lord had not enabled her to have children. and to Hanna he gave one portion, because she did not have a child; however, Elkana loved Hanna more than this one, and the Lord had closed the area of her womb. And to Anna he gave a prime portion, because she had no child, only Helkana loved Anna more than the other; but the Lord [had] closed her womb.

It intrigues me that this authoritative assessment—inspired by God—of Elkanah’s love for Hannah might also be her firsthand account.  Be that as it may Samuel was Elkanah’s Joseph, the firstborn son (Genesis 30:22-24) of a beloved wife.  And Hannah had vowed to give Samuel to the Lord.

Masoretic Text

Septuagint
1 Samuel 1:11 (Tanakh) 1 Samuel 1:11 (NET) 1 Reigns 1:11 (NETS)

1 Kings 1:11 (Elpenor English)

And she vowed a vow, and said: ‘O HaShem of hosts, if Thou wilt indeed look on the affliction of Thy handmaid, and remember me, and not forget Thy handmaid, but wilt give unto Thy handmaid a man-child, then I will give him unto HaShem all the days of his life, and there shall no razor come upon his head.’ She made a vow saying, “O Lord of Heaven’s Armies, if you would truly look on the suffering of your servant, and would keep me in mind and not neglect your servant, and give your servant a male child, then I will dedicate him to the Lord all the days of his life.  His hair will never be cut.” and vowed a vow to the Lord, saying: “Adonai, Lord, Eloai, Sabaoth, if looking you will look on the humiliation of your slave and remember me and give to your slave an offspring of men, and I will give him as one devoted before you until the day of his death, and wine and strong drink he shall not drink, and no iron shall come upon his head.” And she vowed a vow to the Lord, saying, O Lord God of Sabaoth, if thou wilt indeed look upon the humiliation of thine handmaid, and remember me, and give to thine handmaid a man-child, then will I indeed dedicate him to thee till the day of his death; and he shall drink no wine nor strong drink, and no razor shall come upon his head.

The law was entirely in Elkanah’s favor if he chose to keep his son:

Masoretic Text

Septuagint
Numbers 30:11-14 (Tanakh) Numbers 30:10-13 (NET) Numbers 30:11-14 (NETS)

Numbers 30:11-14 (Elpenor English)

And if a woman vowed in her husband’s house, or bound her soul by a bond with an oath, If she made the vow in her husband’s house or put herself under obligation with an oath, And if her vow was in her husband’s house or her determination against her soul was with an oath And if her vow [be made] in the house of her husband, or the obligation upon her soul with an oath,
and her husband heard it, and held his peace at her, and disallowed her not, then all her vows shall stand, and every bond wherewith she bound her soul shall stand. and her husband heard about it, but remained silent about her, and did not overrule her, then all her vows will stand, and every obligation which she pledged for herself will stand. and if her husband hears and says nothing to her and does not withhold consent to her, then all her vows shall stand, and all her determinations which she determined for herself against her soul—they shall stand regarding her. and her husband should hear, and hold his peace at her, and not disallow her, then all her vows shall stand, and all the obligations which she contracted against her soul, shall stand against her.
But if her husband make them null and void in the day that he heareth them, then whatsoever proceeded out of her lips, whether it were her vows, or the bond of her soul, shall not stand: her husband hath made them void; and HaShem will forgive her. But if her husband clearly nullifies them when he hears them, then whatever she says by way of vows or obligations will not stand.  Her husband has made them void, and the Lord will release her from them. But if her husband in canceling cancels them on the day when he hears, all the things that proceed out of her lips regarding her vows and regarding her determination that are against her soul shall not remain for her.  Her husband canceled them, and the Lord will clear her. But if her husband should utterly cancel the vow in the day in which he shall hear it, none of the things which shall proceed out of her lips in her vows, and in the obligations [contracted] upon her soul, shall stand to her; her husband has canceled them, and the Lord shall hold her guiltless.
Every vow, and every binding oath to afflict the soul, her husband may let it stand, or her husband may make it void. “Any vow or sworn obligation that would bring affliction to her, her husband can confirm or nullify. Every vow and every oath for binding, to afflict the soul, her husband shall establish for her, and her husband shall cancel. Every vow, and every binding oath to afflict her soul, her husband shall confirm it to her, or her husband shall cancel it.

Apparently Elkanah had not made Hannah’s vow void.  In fact, after Samuel’s birth he seemed concerned when she didn’t go with him to a sacrifice:

Masoretic Text

Septuagint
1 Samuel 1:22 (Tanakh) 1 Samuel 1:22 (NET) 1 Reigns 1:22 (NETS)

1 Kings 1:22 (Elpenor English)

But Hannah went not up; for she said unto her husband: ‘Until the child be weaned, when I will bring him, that he may appear before HaShem, and there abide for ever.’ But Hannah did not go up with them, because she had told her husband, “Not until the boy is weaned.  Then I will bring him so that he may appear before the Lord.  And he will remain there from then on.” and Hanna did not go up with him, for she said to her husband, “Until the boy goes up if I shall wean it, and it will appear to the face of the Lord and stay there forever.” But Anna did not go up with him, for she said to her husband, [I will not go up] until the child goes up, when I have weaned him, and he shall be presented before the Lord, and he shall abide there continually.

So did Ekanah threaten his wife with a stern warning from the law?

Masoretic Text

Septuagint
Deuteronomy 23:22 (Tanakh) Deuteronomy 23:21 (NET) Deuteronomy 23:21 (NETS)

Deuteronomy 23:22 (Elpenor English)

When thou shalt vow a vow unto HaShem thy G-d, thou shalt not be slack to pay it; for HaShem thy G-d will surely require it of thee; and it will be sin in thee. When you make a vow to the Lord your God you must not delay in fulfilling it, for otherwise he will surely hold you accountable as a sinner. Now if you vow a vow to the Lord your God, you shall not delay to pay it.  For the Lord your God, when he requires, will require it of you, and it will be a sin with you. And if thou wilt vow a vow to the Lord thy God, thou shalt not delay to pay it; for the Lord thy God will surely require it of thee, and [otherwise] it shall be sin in thee.

No, he did not.  In fact, Elkanah’s words to Hannah were so full of grace they almost seem anachronistic.

Masoretic Text

Septuagint
1 Samuel 1:23 (Tanakh) 1 Samuel 1:23 (NET) 1 Reigns 1:23 (NETS)

1 Kings 1:23 (Elpenor English)

And Elkanah her husband said unto her: ‘Do what seemeth thee good; tarry until thou have weaned him; only HaShem establish His word.’  So the woman tarried and gave her son suck, until she weaned him. Then her husband Elkanah said to her, “Do what you think best.  Stay until you have weaned him.  Only may the Lord fulfill his promise.”  So the woman stayed and nursed her son until she had weaned him. And her husband Elkana said to her, “Do what is good in your sight; stay until you have weaned him; only may the Lord establish that which goes out of your mouth.”  And the woman remained and nursed her son until she weaned him. And Helkana her husband said to her, Do that which is good in thine eyes, abide still until thou shalt have weaned him; but may the Lord establish that which comes out of thy mouth: and the woman tarried, and suckled her son until she had weaned him.

In Elkanah’s mind Hannah’s vow had become God’s word (דְּבָר֑וֹ) or promise (dâbâr, דברו) in the English translations of the Masoretic text.  I ran both דְּבָר֑וֹ and דברו through Morfix since the Hebrew word was translated τὸ ἐξελθὸν ἐκ τοῦ στόματός σου (English Elpenor: that which comes out of thy mouth) in the Septuagint.

Morfix Translation

Hebrew Tanakh Homographs English Definitions
דְּבָר֑וֹ word דָּבָר object, thing, item; event, occurrence, happening; anything; דברים – belongings; דברים – what one has to say; writings; לדברי – in the words of…, in someone’s opinion, according to,
דֶּבֶר plague
דַּבָּר (flowery) leader
דִּבֵּר to speak, to talk; to discuss; מדבר – to be fluent in a language
דִּבֵּר commandment (ten commandments); faculty of speech, articulation
דֻּבַּר to be spoken of, to be referred to; to be agreed upon, to be decided, to come to a conclusion; to be spoken

Morfix Translation

Hebrew NET Homographs English Definitions
דברו promise דָּבָר object, thing, item; event, occurrence, happening; anything; דברים – belongings; דברים – what one has to say; writings; לדברי – in the words of…, in someone’s opinion, according to,
דִּבֵּר to speak, to talk; to discuss; מדבר – to be fluent in a language
דֻּבַּר to be spoken of, to be referred to; to be agreed upon, to be decided, to come to a conclusion; to be spoken
דַּבָּר (flowery) leader

Neither my Greek nor Hebrew is sufficient to guess whether the Septuagint was more original or a somewhat agnostic rendering of the original Hebrew.  In either case, Elkanah prayed to, and trusted, the Lord to establish what came out of Hannah’s mouth, perhaps, as His own word—and it was so.

Who are these people?  Most in Israel were caught up in a monotonous cycle.

Masoretic Text

Septuagint
Judges 21:25 (Tanakh) Judges 21:25 (NET) Judges 21:25 (NETS)

Judges 21:25 (Elpenor English)

In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes. In those days Israel had no king.  Each man did what he considered to be right. In those days there was no king in Israel; each man would do what was right in his own eyes. And in those days there was no king in Israel; every man did that which was right in his own sight.

Elkanah and Hannah seem like they were from another planet—or they were born from above.  It was clear that the king most in Israel had rejected was God.

Masoretic Text

Septuagint
1 Samuel 8:7, 8 (Tanakh) 1 Samuel 8:7, 8 (NET) 1 Reigns 8:7, 8 (NETS)

1 Kings 8:7, 8 (Elpenor English)

And HaShem said unto Samuel: ‘Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee; for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected Me, that I should not be king over them. The Lord said to Samuel, “Do everything the people request of you.  For it is not you that they have rejected, but it is me that they have rejected as their king. And the Lord said to Samouel, “Listen to the voice of the people in whatever they say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected me from being king over them. And the Lord said to Samuel, Hear the voice of the people, in whatever they shall say to thee; for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me from reigning over them.
According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt even unto this day, in that they have forsaken Me, and served other gods, so do they also unto thee. Just as they have done from the day that I brought them up from Egypt until this very day, they have rejected me and have served other gods.  This is what they are also doing to you. According to all the deeds that they did to me from the day I brought them up out of Egypt to this day, and they forsook me and were subject to other gods, so also they are doing to you. According to all their doings which they have done to me, from the day that I brought them out of Egypt until this day, even [as] they have deserted me, and served other gods, so they do also to thee.

I wonder if Elkanah and Hannah were on Jesus’ mind when He said, Enter[1] through the narrow gate, because the gate is wide and the way is spacious that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it.  How narrow is the gate and difficult the way that leads to life, and there are few who find it![2]  I’m thinking of this destruction (ἀπώλειαν, a form of ἀπώλεια) as a destruction of corruption—“completely severed – cut off (entirely) from what could or should have been”[3]—rather than “an eternal sojourn in a lake of fire.”[4]  All in Israel could or should have been like Elkanah and Hannah but for their rejection of God as their king.

Perhaps Hannah’s prayer was an ecstatic expression of the Holy Spirit.  But I would like to think that she along with the Holy Spirit uncovered and rehearsed these words as she nursed, bathed, dressed and dandled the infant Samuel.  I would like to think that the words she prayed were the very words that empowered her to leave him there before the Lord, that she has revealed to us the strength by which He established His word—that is to say, fulfilled her vow.  For I know whom I have believed, Paul wrote to Timothy, and am persuaded that He is able to keep that which I have committed unto Him against that Day.[5]

Tables comparing 1 Samuel 2:11; 1:1; 1:2; 1:3; 1:4; 1:5; 1:11; Numbers 30:10 (30:11); 30:11 (30:12); 30:12 (30:13); 30:13 (30:14); 1 Samuel 1:22; Deuteronomy 23:21 (23:22); 1 Samuel 1:23; Judges 21:25; 1 Samuel 8:7 and 8:8 in the Tanakh, KJV and NET, and comparing 1 Samuel (Kings, Reigns) 2:11; 1:1; 1:2; 1:3; 1:4; 1:5; 1:11; Numbers 30:10 (30:11); 30:11 (30:12); 30:12 (30:13); 30:13 (30:14); 1 Samuel (Kings, Reigns) 1:22; Deuteronomy 23:21 (23:22); 1 Samuel (Kings, Reigns) 1:23; Judges 21:25; 1 Samuel (Kings, Reigns) 8:7 and 8:8 in the Septuagint (BLB and Elpenor) follow.  Following these is a table comparing Matthew 7:13 in the NET and KJV.

1 Samuel 2:11 (Tanakh)

1 Samuel 2:11 (KJV)

1 Samuel 2:11 (NET)

And Elkanah went to Ramah to his house.  And the child did minister unto HaShem before Eli the priest. And Elkanah went to Ramah to his house. And the child did minister unto the LORD before Eli the priest. Then Elkanah went back home to Ramah.  The boy Samuel was serving the Lord with the favor of Eli the priest.

1 Samuel 2:11 (Septuagint BLB)

1 Kings 2:11 (Septuagint Elpenor)

καὶ κατέλιπον αὐτὸν ἐκεῗ ἐνώπιον κυρίου καὶ ἀπῆλθον εἰς Αρμαθαιμ καὶ τὸ παιδάριον ἦν λειτουργῶν τῷ προσώπῳ κυρίου ἐνώπιον Ηλι τοῦ ἱερέως Καὶ κατέλιπεν αὐτὸν ἐκεῖ ἐνώπιον Κυρίου καὶ ἀπῆλθεν εἰς ᾿Αρμαθαίμ, καὶ τὸ παιδάριον ἦν λειτουργῶν τῷ προσώπῳ Κυρίου ἐνώπιον ῾Ηλὶ τοῦ ἱερέως

1 Reigns 2:11 (NETS)

1 Kings 2:10e, 11 (English Elpenor)

And they left him there before the Lord and departed to Harmathaim, and the lad was ministering to the face of the Lord, before Eli the priest. And she left him there before the Lord, (11) and departed to Armathaim: and the child ministered in the presence of the Lord before Heli the priest.

1 Samuel 1:1 (Tanakh)

1 Samuel 1:1 (KJV)

1 Samuel 1:1 (NET)

NOW THERE was a certain man of Ramathaim-zophim, of the hill-country of Ephraim, and his name was Elkanah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephraimite. Now there was a certain man of Ramathaimzophim, of mount Ephraim, and his name was Elkanah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephrathite: There was a man from Ramathaim Zophim, from the hill country of Ephraim.  His name was Elkanah.  He was the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephraimite.

1 Samuel 1:1 (Septuagint BLB)

1 Kings 1:1 (Septuagint Elpenor)

ἄνθρωπος ἦν ἐξ Αρμαθαιμ Σιφα ἐξ ὄρους Εφραιμ καὶ ὄνομα αὐτῷ Ελκανα υἱὸς Ιερεμεηλ υἱοῦ Ηλιου υἱοῦ Θοκε ἐν Νασιβ Εφραιμ ΑΝΘΡΩΠΟΣ ἦν ἐξ ᾿Αρμαθαὶμ Σιφά, ἐξ ὄρους ᾿Εφραίμ, καὶ ὄνομα αὐτῷ ῾Ελκανὰ υἱὸς ῾Ιερεμεὴλ υἱοῦ ᾿Ηλιοὺ υἱοῦ Θοκὲ ἐν Νασὶβ ᾿Εφραίμ

1 Reigns 1:1 (NETS)

1 Kings 1:1 (English Elpenor)

There was a man of Harmathaim Sipha from the hill country of Ephraim, and his name was Elkana son of Ieremeel son of Eliou son of Thoke, in Nasib Ephraim. There was a man of Armathaim Sipha, of mount Ephraim, and his name [was] Helkana, a son of Jeremeel the son of Elias the son of Thoke, in Nasib Ephraim.

1 Samuel 1:2 (Tanakh)

1 Samuel 1:2 (KJV)

1 Samuel 1:2 (NET)

And he had two wives: the name of the one was Hannah, and the name of the other Peninnah; and Peninnah had children, but Hannah had no children. And he had two wives; the name of the one was Hannah, and the name of the other Peninnah: and Peninnah had children, but Hannah had no children. He had two wives; the name of the first was Hannah and the name of the second was Peninnah.  Peninnah had children, but Hannah had no children.

1 Samuel 1:2 (Septuagint BLB)

1 Kings 1:2 (Septuagint Elpenor)

καὶ τούτῳ δύο γυναῗκες ὄνομα τῇ μιᾷ Αννα καὶ ὄνομα τῇ δευτέρᾳ Φεννανα καὶ ἦν τῇ Φεννανα παιδία καὶ τῇ Αννα οὐκ ἦν παιδίον καὶ τούτῳ δύο γυναῖκες· ὄνομα τῇ μιᾷ ῎Αννα,καὶ ὄνομα τῇ δευτέρᾳ Φεννάνα· καὶ ἦν τῇ Φεννάνᾳ παιδία, καὶ τῇ ῎Αννᾳ οὐκ ἦν παιδίον

1 Reigns 1:2 (NETS)

1 Kings 1:2 (English Elpenor)

And he had two wives; the name of the one was Hannah, and the name of the second Phennana.  And Phennana had children, and Hanna had no child. And he [had] two wives; the name of the one [was] Anna, and the name of the second Phennana.  And Phennana had children, but Anna had no child.

1 Samuel 1:3 (Tanakh)

1 Samuel 1:3 (KJV)

1 Samuel 1:3 (NET)

And this man went up out of his city from year to year to worship and to sacrifice unto HaShem of hosts in Shiloh. And the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, were there priests unto HaShem. And this man went up out of his city yearly to worship and to sacrifice unto the LORD of hosts in Shiloh.  And the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, the priests of the LORD, were there. This man would go up from his city year after year to worship and to sacrifice to the Lord of Heaven’s Armies at Shiloh. (It was there that the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, served as the Lord’s priests.)

1 Samuel 1:3 (Septuagint BLB)

1 Kings 1:3 (Septuagint Elpenor)

καὶ ἀνέβαινεν ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἐξ ἡμερῶν εἰς ἡμέρας ἐκ πόλεως αὐτοῦ ἐξ Αρμαθαιμ προσκυνεῗν καὶ θύειν τῷ κυρίῳ θεῷ σαβαωθ εἰς Σηλω καὶ ἐκεῗ Ηλι καὶ οἱ δύο υἱοὶ αὐτοῦ Οφνι καὶ Φινεες ἱερεῗς τοῦ κυρίου καὶ ἀνέβαινεν ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἐξ ἡμερῶν εἰς ἡμέρας ἐκ πόλεως αὐτοῦ ἐξ ᾿Αρμαθαὶμ προσκυνεῖν καὶ θύειν Κυρίῳ τῷ Θεῷ Σαβαὼθ εἰς Σηλώ· καὶ ἐκεῖ ῾Ηλὶ καὶ οἱ δύο υἱοὶ αὐτοῦ ᾿Οφνὶ καὶ Φινεὲς ἱερεῖς τοῦ Κυρίου

1 Reigns 1:3 (NETS)

1 Kings 1:3 (English Elpenor)

And the man used to go up from days to days from his town, from Harmathaim, to do obeisance and to sacrifice to the Lord God Sabaoth at Selo, and there Eli and his two sons, Hophni and Phinees, were priests of the Lord. And the man went up from year to year from his city, from Armathaim, to worship and sacrifice to the Lord God of Sabaoth at Selom: and [there were] Heli and his two sons Ophni and Phinees, the priests of the Lord.

1 Samuel 1:4 (Tanakh)

1 Samuel 1:4 (KJV)

1 Samuel 1:4 (NET)

And it came to pass upon a day, when Elkanah sacrificed, that he gave to Peninnah his wife, and to all her sons and her daughters, portions; And when the time was that Elkanah offered, he gave to Peninnah his wife, and to all her sons and her daughters, portions: The day came, and Elkanah sacrificed.  (Now he used to give meat portions to his wife Peninnah and to all her sons and daughters.

1 Samuel 1:4 (Septuagint BLB)

1 Kings 1:4 (Septuagint Elpenor)

καὶ ἐγενήθη ἡμέρᾳ καὶ ἔθυσεν Ελκανα καὶ ἔδωκεν τῇ Φεννανα γυναικὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ τοῗς υἱοῗς αὐτῆς καὶ ταῗς θυγατράσιν αὐτῆς [and to her daughters] μερίδας καὶ ἐγενήθη ἡμέρα καὶ ἔθυσεν ῾Ελκανὰ καὶ ἔδωκε τῇ Φεννάνᾳ, γυναικὶ αὐτοῦ, καὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς αὐτῆς μερίδας

1 Reigns 1:4 (NETS)

1 Kings 1:4 (English Elpenor)

And it happened on a day and Elkana sacrificed and gave portions to his wife Phennana and to her sons, And the day came, and Helkana sacrificed, and gave portions to his wife Phennana and her children.

1 Samuel 1:5 (Tanakh)

1 Samuel 1:5 (KJV)

1 Samuel 1:5 (NET)

but unto Hannah he gave a double portion; for he loved Hannah, but HaShem had shut up her womb. But unto Hannah he gave a worthy portion; for he loved Hannah: but the LORD had shut up her womb. But to Hannah he would give a double portion because he loved Hannah, although the Lord had not enabled her to have children.

1 Samuel 1:5 (Septuagint BLB)

1 Kings 1:5 (Septuagint Elpenor)

καὶ τῇ Αννα ἔδωκεν μερίδα μίαν ὅτι οὐκ ἦν αὐτῇ παιδίον πλὴν ὅτι τὴν Ανναν ἠγάπα Ελκανα ὑπὲρ ταύτην καὶ κύριος ἀπέκλεισεν τὰ περὶ τὴν μήτραν αὐτῆς καὶ τῇ ῎Αννᾳ ἔδωκε μερίδα μίαν, ὅτι οὐκ ἦν αὐτῇ παιδίον, πλὴν ὅτι τὴν ῎Ανναν ἠγάπα ῾Ελκανὰ ὑπὲρ ταύτην. καὶ Κύριος ἀπέκλεισε τὰ περὶ τὴν μήτραν αὐτῆς

1 Reigns 1:5 (NETS)

1 Kings 1:5 (English Elpenor)

and to Hanna he gave one portion, because she did not have a child; however, Elkana loved Hanna more than this one, and the Lord had closed the area of her womb. And to Anna he gave a prime portion, because she had no child, only Helkana loved Anna more than the other; but the Lord [had] closed her womb.

1 Samuel 1:11 (Tanakh)

1 Samuel 1:11 (KJV)

1 Samuel 1:11 (NET)

And she vowed a vow, and said: ‘O HaShem of hosts, if Thou wilt indeed look on the affliction of Thy handmaid, and remember me, and not forget Thy handmaid, but wilt give unto Thy handmaid a man-child, then I will give him unto HaShem all the days of his life, and there shall no razor come upon his head.’ And she vowed a vow, and said, O LORD of hosts, if thou wilt indeed look on the affliction of thine handmaid, and remember me, and not forget thine handmaid, but wilt give unto thine handmaid a man child, then I will give him unto the LORD all the days of his life, and there shall no razor come upon his head. She made a vow saying, “O Lord of Heaven’s Armies, if you would truly look on the suffering of your servant, and would keep me in mind and not neglect your servant, and give your servant a male child, then I will dedicate him to the Lord all the days of his life.  His hair will never be cut.”

1 Samuel 1:11 (Septuagint BLB)

1 Kings 1:11 (Septuagint Elpenor)

καὶ ηὔξατο εὐχὴν κυρίῳ λέγουσα Αδωναι κύριε ελωαι σαβαωθ ἐὰν ἐπιβλέπων ἐπιβλέψῃς ἐπὶ τὴν ταπείνωσιν τῆς δούλης σου καὶ μνησθῇς μου καὶ δῷς τῇ δούλῃ σου σπέρμα ἀνδρῶν καὶ δώσω αὐτὸν ἐνώπιόν σου δοτὸν ἕως ἡμέρας θανάτου αὐτοῦ καὶ οἶνον καὶ μέθυσμα οὐ πίεται καὶ σίδηρος οὐκ ἀναβήσεται ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν αὐτοῦ καὶ ηὔξατο εὐχὴν Κυρίῳ λέγουσα· ᾿Αδωναΐ Κύριε ᾿Ελωὲ Σαβαώθ, ἐὰν ἐπιβλέπων ἐπιβλέψῃς ἐπὶ τὴν ταπείνωσιν τῆς δούλης σου καὶ μνησθῇς μου καὶ δῷς τῇ δούλῃ σου σπέρμα ἀνδρῶν, καὶ δώσω αὐτὸν ἐνώπιόν σου δοτὸν ἕως ἡμέρας θανάτου αὐτοῦ, καὶ οἶνον καὶ μέθυσμα οὐ πίεται, καὶ σίδηρος οὐκ ἀναβήσεται ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν αὐτοῦ

1 Reigns 1:11 (NETS)

1 Kings 1:11 (English Elpenor)

and vowed a vow to the Lord, saying: “Adonai, Lord, Eloai, Sabaoth, if looking you will look on the humiliation of your slave and remember me and give to your slave an offspring of men, and I will give him as one devoted before you until the day of his death, and wine and strong drink he shall not drink, and no iron shall come upon his head.” And she vowed a vow to the Lord, saying, O Lord God of Sabaoth, if thou wilt indeed look upon the humiliation of thine handmaid, and remember me, and give to thine handmaid a man-child, then will I indeed dedicate him to thee till the day of his death; and he shall drink no wine nor strong drink, and no razor shall come upon his head.

Numbers 30:11 (Tanakh)

Numbers 30:10 (KJV)

Numbers 30:10 (NET)

And if a woman vowed in her husband’s house, or bound her soul by a bond with an oath, And if she vowed in her husband’s house, or bound her soul by a bond with an oath; If she made the vow in her husband’s house or put herself under obligation with an oath,

Numbers 30:10 (Septuagint BLB)

Numbers 30:11 (Septuagint Elpenor)

ἐὰν δὲ ἐν τῷ οἴκῳ τοῦ ἀνδρὸς αὐτῆς ἡ εὐχὴ αὐτῆς ἢ ὁ ὁρισμὸς κατὰ τῆς ψυχῆς αὐτῆς μεθ᾽ ὅρκου ἐὰν δὲ ἐν τῷ οἴκῳ τοῦ ἀνδρὸς αὐτῆς ἡ εὐχὴ αὐτῆς ἢ ὁ ὁρισμὸς κατὰ τῆς ψυχῆς αὐτῆς μεθ’ ὅρκου

Numbers 30:11 (NETS)

Numbers 30:11 (English Elpenor)

And if her vow was in her husband’s house or her determination against her soul was with an oath And if her vow [be made] in the house of her husband, or the obligation upon her soul with an oath,

Numbers 30:12 (Tanakh)

Numbers 30:11 (KJV)

Numbers 30:11 (NET)

and her husband heard it, and held his peace at her, and disallowed her not, then all her vows shall stand, and every bond wherewith she bound her soul shall stand. And her husband heard it, and held his peace at her, and disallowed her not: then all her vows shall stand, and every bond wherewith she bound her soul shall stand. and her husband heard about it, but remained silent about her, and did not overrule her, then all her vows will stand, and every obligation which she pledged for herself will stand.

Numbers 30:11 (Septuagint BLB)

Numbers 30:12 (Septuagint Elpenor)

καὶ ἀκούσῃ ὁ ἀνὴρ αὐτῆς καὶ παρασιωπήσῃ αὐτῇ καὶ μὴ ἀνανεύσῃ αὐτῇ καὶ στήσονται πᾶσαι αἱ εὐχαὶ αὐτῆς καὶ πάντες οἱ ὁρισμοὶ αὐτῆς οὓς ὡρίσατο κατὰ τῆς ψυχῆς αὐτῆς στήσονται κατ᾽ αὐτῆς καὶ ἀκούσῃ ὁ ἀνὴρ αὐτῆς καὶ παρασιωπήσῃ αὐτῇ καὶ μὴ ἀνανεύσῃ αὐτῇ, καὶ στήσονται πᾶσαι αἱ εὐχαὶ αὐτῆς, καὶ πάντες οἱ ὁρισμοὶ αὐτῆς, οὓς ὡρίσατο κατὰ τῆς ψυχῆς αὐτῆς, στήσονται κατ’ αὐτῆς

Numbers 30:12 (NETS)

Numbers 30:12 (English Elpenor)

and if her husband hears and says nothing to her and does not withhold consent to her, then all her vows shall stand, and all her determinations which she determined for herself against her soul—they shall stand regarding her. and her husband should hear, and hold his peace at her, and not disallow her, then all her vows shall stand, and all the obligations which she contracted against her soul, shall stand against her.

Numbers 30:13 (Tanakh)

Numbers 30:12 (KJV)

Numbers 30:12 (NET)

But if her husband make them null and void in the day that he heareth them, then whatsoever proceeded out of her lips, whether it were her vows, or the bond of her soul, shall not stand: her husband hath made them void; and HaShem will forgive her. But if her husband hath utterly made them void on the day he heard them; then whatsoever proceeded out of her lips concerning her vows, or concerning the bond of her soul, shall not stand: her husband hath made them void; and the LORD shall forgive her. But if her husband clearly nullifies them when he hears them, then whatever she says by way of vows or obligations will not stand. Her husband has made them void, and the Lord will release her from them.

Numbers 30:12 (Septuagint BLB)

Numbers 30:13 (Septuagint Elpenor)

ἐὰν δὲ περιελὼν περιέλῃ ὁ ἀνὴρ αὐτῆς ᾗ ἂν ἡμέρᾳ ἀκούσῃ πάντα ὅσα ἐὰν ἐξέλθῃ ἐκ τῶν χειλέων αὐτῆς κατὰ τὰς εὐχὰς αὐτῆς καὶ κατὰ τοὺς ὁρισμοὺς τοὺς κατὰ τῆς ψυχῆς αὐτῆς οὐ μενεῗ αὐτῇ ὁ ἀνὴρ αὐτῆς περιεῗλεν καὶ κύριος καθαρίσει αὐτήν ἐὰν δὲ περιελὼν περιέλῃ ὁ ἀνὴρ αὐτῆς, ᾗ ἂν ἡμέρᾳ ἀκούσῃ, πάντα ὅσα ἐὰν ἐξέλθῃ ἐκ τῶν χειλέων αὐτῆς κατὰ τὰς εὐχὰς αὐτῆς καὶ κατὰ τοὺς ὁρισμοὺς τοὺς κατὰ τῆς ψυχῆς αὐτῆς, οὐ μενεῖ αὐτῇ· ὁ ἀνὴρ αὐτῆς περιεῖλε, καὶ Κύριος καθαριεῖ αὐτήν

Numbers 30:13 (NETS)

Numbers 30:13 (English Elpenor)

But if her husband in canceling cancels them on the day when he hears, all the things that proceed out of her lips regarding her vows and regarding her determination that are against her soul shall not remain for her.  Her husband canceled them, and the Lord will clear her. But if her husband should utterly cancel the vow in the day in which he shall hear it, none of the things which shall proceed out of her lips in her vows, and in the obligations [contracted] upon her soul, shall stand to her; her husband has canceled them, and the Lord shall hold her guiltless.

Numbers 30:14 (Tanakh)

Numbers 30:13 (KJV)

Numbers 30:13 (NET)

Every vow, and every binding oath to afflict the soul, her husband may let it stand, or her husband may make it void. Every vow, and every binding oath to afflict the soul, her husband may establish it, or her husband may make it void. “Any vow or sworn obligation that would bring affliction to her, her husband can confirm or nullify.

Numbers 30:13 (Septuagint BLB)

Numbers 30:14 (Septuagint Elpenor)

πᾶσα εὐχὴ καὶ πᾶς ὅρκος δεσμοῦ κακῶσαι ψυχήν ὁ ἀνὴρ αὐτῆς στήσει αὐτῇ καὶ ὁ ἀνὴρ αὐτῆς περιελεῗ πᾶσα εὐχὴ καὶ πᾶς ὅρκος δεσμοῦ κακῶσαι ψυχήν, ὁ ἀνὴρ αὐτῆς στήσει αὐτῇ καὶ ὁ ἀνὴρ αὐτῆς περιελεῖ

Numbers 30:14 (NETS)

Numbers 30:14 (English Elpenor)

Every vow and every oath for binding, to afflict the soul, her husband shall establish for her, and her husband shall cancel. Every vow, and every binding oath to afflict her soul, her husband shall confirm it to her, or her husband shall cancel it.

1 Samuel 1:22 (Tanakh)

1 Samuel 1:22 (KJV)

1 Samuel 1:22 (NET)

But Hannah went not up; for she said unto her husband: ‘Until the child be weaned, when I will bring him, that he may appear before HaShem, and there abide for ever.’ But Hannah went not up; for she said unto her husband, I will not go up until the child be weaned, and then I will bring him, that he may appear before the LORD, and there abide for ever. But Hannah did not go up with them, because she had told her husband, “Not until the boy is weaned. Then I will bring him so that he may appear before the Lord.  And he will remain there from then on.”

1 Samuel 1:22 (Septuagint BLB)

1 Kings 1:22 (Septuagint Elpenor)

καὶ Αννα οὐκ ἀνέβη μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ ὅτι εἶπεν τῷ ἀνδρὶ αὐτῆς ἕως τοῦ ἀναβῆναι τὸ παιδάριον ἐὰν ἀπογαλακτίσω αὐτό καὶ ὀφθήσεται τῷ προσώπῳ κυρίου καὶ καθήσεται ἐκεῗ ἕως αἰῶνος καὶ ῎Αννα οὐκ ἀνέβη μετ᾿ αὐτοῦ, ὅτι εἶπε τῷ ἀνδρὶ αὐτῆς· ἕως τοῦ ἀναβῆναι τὸ παιδάριον, ἐὰν ἀπογαλακτίσω αὐτό, καὶ ὀφθήσεται τῷ προσώπῳ Κυρίου καὶ καθήσεται ἕως αἰῶνος ἐκεῖ

1 Reigns 1:22 (NETS)

1 Kings 1:22 (English Elpenor)

and Hanna did not go up with him, for she said to her husband, “Until the boy goes up if I shall wean it, and it will appear to the face of the Lord and stay there forever.” But Anna did not go up with him, for she said to her husband, [I will not go up] until the child goes up, when I have weaned him, and he shall be presented before the Lord, and he shall abide there continually.

Deuteronomy 23:22 (Tanakh)

Deuteronomy 23:21 (KJV)

Deuteronomy 23:21 (NET)

When thou shalt vow a vow unto HaShem thy G-d, thou shalt not be slack to pay it; for HaShem thy G-d will surely require it of thee; and it will be sin in thee. When thou shalt vow a vow unto the LORD thy God, thou shalt not slack to pay it: for the LORD thy God will surely require it of thee; and it would be sin in thee. When you make a vow to the Lord your God you must not delay in fulfilling it, for otherwise he will surely hold you accountable as a sinner.

Deuteronomy 23:21 (Septuagint BLB)

Deuteronomy 23:22 (Septuagint Elpenor)

ἐὰν δὲ εὔξῃ εὐχὴν κυρίῳ τῷ θεῷ σου οὐ χρονιεῗς ἀποδοῦναι αὐτήν ὅτι ἐκζητῶν ἐκζητήσει κύριος ὁ θεός σου παρὰ σοῦ καὶ ἔσται ἐν σοὶ ἁμαρία Εὰν δὲ εὔξῃ εὐχὴν Κυρίῳ τῷ Θεῷ σου, οὐ χρονιεῖς ἀποδοῦναι αὐτήν, ὅτι ἐκζητῶν ἐκζητήσει Κύριος ὁ Θεός σου παρὰ σοῦ, καὶ ἔσται ἐν σοὶ ἁμαρτία

Deuteronomy 23:21 (NETS)

Deuteronomy 23:22 (English Elpenor)

Now if you vow a vow to the Lord your God, you shall not delay to pay it.  For the Lord your God, when he requires, will require it of you, and it will be a sin with you. And if thou wilt vow a vow to the Lord thy God, thou shalt not delay to pay it; for the Lord thy God will surely require it of thee, and [otherwise] it shall be sin in thee.

1 Samuel 1:23 (Tanakh)

1 Samuel 1:23 (KJV)

1 Samuel 1:23 (NET)

And Elkanah her husband said unto her: ‘Do what seemeth thee good; tarry until thou have weaned him; only HaShem establish His word.’  So the woman tarried and gave her son suck, until she weaned him. And Elkanah her husband said unto her, Do what seemeth thee good; tarry until thou have weaned him; only the LORD establish his word.  So the woman abode, and gave her son suck until she weaned him. Then her husband Elkanah said to her, “Do what you think best. Stay until you have weaned him. Only may the Lord fulfill his promise.”  So the woman stayed and nursed her son until she had weaned him.

1 Samuel 1:23 (Septuagint BLB)

1 Kings 1:23 (Septuagint Elpenor)

καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῇ Ελκανα ὁ ἀνὴρ αὐτῆς ποίει τὸ ἀγαθὸν ἐν ὀφθαλμοῗς σου κάθου ἕως ἂν ἀπογαλακτίσῃς αὐτό ἀλλὰ στήσαι κύριος τὸ ἐξελθὸν ἐκ τοῦ στόματός σου καὶ ἐκάθισεν ἡ γυνὴ καὶ ἐθήλασεν τὸν υἱὸν αὐτῆς ἕως ἂν ἀπογαλακτίσῃ αὐτόν καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῇ ῾Ελκανὰ ὁ ἀνὴρ αὐτῆς· ποίει τὸ ἀγαθὸν ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς σου, κάθου ἕως ἂν ἀπογαλακτίσῃς αὐτό· ἀλλὰ στήσαι Κύριος τὸ ἐξελθὸν ἐκ τοῦ στόματός σου. καὶ ἐκάθισεν ἡ γυνὴ καὶ ἐθήλασε τὸν υἱὸν αὐτῆς, ἕως ἂν ἀπογαλακτίσῃ αὐτόν

1 Reigns 1:23 (NETS)

1 Kings 1:23 (English Elpenor)

And her husband Elkana said to her, “Do what is good in your sight; stay until you have weaned him; only may the Lord establish that which goes out of your mouth.”  And the woman remained and nursed her son until she weaned him. And Helkana her husband said to her, Do that which is good in thine eyes, abide still until thou shalt have weaned him; but may the Lord establish that which comes out of thy mouth: and the woman tarried, and suckled her son until she had weaned him.

Judges 21:25 (Tanakh)

Judges 21:25 (KJV)

Judges 21:25 (NET)

In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes. In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes. In those days Israel had no king.  Each man did what he considered to be right.

Judges 21:25 (Septuagint BLB)

Judges 21:25 (Septuagint Elpenor)

ἐν ταῗς ἡμέραις ἐκείναις οὐκ ἦν βασιλεὺς ἐν Ισραηλ ἀνὴρ ἕκαστος τὸ εὐθὲς ἐν ὀφθαλμοῗς αὐτοῦ ἐποίει ἐν δὲ ταῖς ἡμέραις ἐκείναις οὐκ ἦν βασιλεὺς ἐν ᾿Ισραήλ· ἀνὴρ τὸ εὐθὲς ἐνώπιον αὐτοῦ ἐποίει

Judges 21:25 (NETS)

Judges 21:25 (English Elpenor)

In those days there was no king in Israel; each man would do what was right in his own eyes. And in those days there was no king in Israel; every man did that which was right in his own sight.

1 Samuel 8:7 (Tanakh)

1 Samuel 8:7 (KJV)

1 Samuel 8:7 (NET)

And HaShem said unto Samuel: ‘Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee; for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected Me, that I should not be king over them. And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them. The Lord said to Samuel, “Do everything the people request of you.  For it is not you that they have rejected, but it is me that they have rejected as their king.

1 Samuel 8:7 (Septuagint BLB)

1 Kings 8:7 (Septuagint Elpenor)

καὶ εἶπεν κύριος πρὸς Σαμουηλ ἄκουε τῆς φωνῆς τοῦ λαοῦ καθὰ ἂν λαλήσωσίν σοι ὅτι οὐ σὲ ἐξουθενήκασιν ἀλλ᾽ ἢ ἐμὲ ἐξουδενώκασιν τοῦ μὴ βασιλεύειν ἐπ᾽ αὐτῶν καὶ εἶπε Κύριος πρὸς Σαμουήλ· ἄκουε τῆς φωνῆς τοῦ λαοῦ, καθὰ ἂν λαλῶσί σοι· ὅτι οὐ σὲ ἐξουθενήκασιν, ἀλλ᾿ ἢ ἐμὲ ἐξουθενήκασι τοῦ μὴ βασιλεύειν ἐπ᾿ αὐτῶν

1 Reigns 8:7 (NETS)

1 Kings 8:7 (English Elpenor)

And the Lord said to Samouel, “Listen to the voice of the people in whatever they say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected me from being king over them. And the Lord said to Samuel, Hear the voice of the people, in whatever they shall say to thee; for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me from reigning over them.

1 Samuel 8:8 (Tanakh)

1 Samuel 8:8 (KJV)

1 Samuel 8:8 (NET)

According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt even unto this day, in that they have forsaken Me, and served other gods, so do they also unto thee. According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt even unto this day, wherewith they have forsaken me, and served other gods, so do they also unto thee. Just as they have done from the day that I brought them up from Egypt until this very day, they have rejected me and have served other gods.  This is what they are also doing to you.

1 Samuel 8:8 (Septuagint BLB)

1 Kings 8:8 (Septuagint Elpenor)

κατὰ πάντα τὰ ποιήματα ἃ ἐποίησάν μοι ἀφ᾽ ἧς ἡμέρας ἀνήγαγον αὐτοὺς ἐξ Αἰγύπτου ἕως τῆς ἡμέρας ταύτης καὶ ἐγκατέλιπόν με καὶ ἐδούλευον θεοῗς ἑτέροις οὕτως αὐτοὶ ποιοῦσιν καὶ σοί κατὰ πάντα τὰ ποιήματα, ἃ ἐποίησάν μοι ἀφ᾿ ἧς ἡμέρας ἀνήγαγον αὐτοὺς ἐξ Αἰγύπτου ἕως τῆς ἡμέρας ταύτης καὶ ἐγκατέλιπόν με καὶ ἐδούλευον θεοῖς ἑτέροις, οὕτως αὐτοὶ ποιοῦσι καὶ σοί

1 Reigns 8:8 (NETS)

1 Kings 8:8 (English Elpenor)

According to all the deeds that they did to me from the day I brought them up out of Egypt to this day, and they forsook me and were subject to other gods, so also they are doing to you. According to all their doings which they have done to me, from the day that I brought them out of Egypt until this day, even [as] they have deserted me, and served other gods, so they do also to thee.

Matthew 7:13 (NET)

Matthew 7:13 (KJV)

“Enter through the narrow gate, because the gate is wide and the way is spacious that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:

NET Parallel Greek

Stephanus Textus Receptus

Byzantine Majority Text

Εἰσέλθατε διὰ τῆς στενῆς πύλης· ὅτι πλατεῖα |ἡ πύλη| καὶ εὐρύχωρος ἡ ὁδὸς ἡ ἀπάγουσα εἰς τὴν ἀπώλειαν καὶ πολλοί εἰσιν οἱ εἰσερχόμενοι δι᾿ αὐτῆς εισελθετε δια της στενης πυλης οτι πλατεια η πυλη και ευρυχωρος η οδος η απαγουσα εις την απωλειαν και πολλοι εισιν οι εισερχομενοι δι αυτης εισελθετε δια της στενης πυλης οτι πλατεια η πυλη και ευρυχωρος η οδος η απαγουσα εις την απωλειαν και πολλοι εισιν οι εισερχομενοι δι αυτης

[1] The NET parallel Greek text and NA28 had Εἰσέλθατε here, where the Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had εισελθετε (KJV: Enter ye).

[2] Matthew 7:13, 14 (NET) Table

[3] A quotation from the definition of ἀπώλεια on BibleHub.

[4] For this is the way God loved the world: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish (ἀπόληται, a form of ἀπόλλυμι) but have eternal life.  For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn (κρίνῃ, a form of κρίνω) the world, but that the world should be saved through him (John 3:16, 17 NET Table).  To interpret destruction (ἀπώλειαν, a form of ἀπώλεια) so as to force Jesus to condemn most people seems wrong to me now.  Who is the one who will condemn (κατακρινῶν, a form of κατακρίνω)?  Christ is the one who died (and more than that, he was raised), who is at the right hand of God, and who also is interceding for us (Romans 8:34 NET Table).

[5] 2 Timothy 1:12 (KJV)

Sowing to the Flesh, Part 2

We religious folk of a Christian persuasion are fixated on life and death, heaven and hell.  Jesus was fixated on fulfilling the Scriptures.  How then would the scriptures that say it must happen this way be fulfilled?[1] (πληρωθῶσιν, a form of πληρόω) He asked rhetorically when Peter took up arms to defend Him.  Up to that moment Jesus’ disciples were willing to follow Him, even to death.  But upon his insistence to submit quietly to death to fulfill the Scriptures they fled.

I do not know the man![2] Peter declared.

Jesus was not the Messiah his religion taught him to expect.  Even after his resurrection Jesus’ disciples wanted Him to conform to their religious image: Lord, is this the time when you are restoring the kingdom to Israel?[3] they asked.  Tracey R. Rich expressed both a modern and an ancient understanding of this in two very succinct paragraphs.[4]

Jews do not believe that Jesus was the mashiach. Assuming that he existed, and assuming that the Christian scriptures are accurate in describing him (both matters that are debatable), he simply did not fulfill the mission of the mashiach as it is described in the biblical passages cited above [Isaiah 2:2-4; 11:2-5, 10, 11-12; 42:1; Jeremiah 23:5, 8; 30:3; 33:15, 18; Hosea 3:4-5; Micah 4:2-3; Zephaniah 3:13; Zechariah 14:9]. Jesus did not do any of the things that the scriptures said the messiah would do.

On the contrary, another Jew born about a century later came far closer to fulfilling the messianic ideal than Jesus did. His name was Shimeon ben Kosiba, known as Bar Kokhba (son of a star), and he was a charismatic, brilliant, but brutal warlord. Rabbi Akiba, one of the greatest scholars in Jewish history, believed that Bar Kokhba was the mashiach. Bar Kokhba fought a war against the Roman Empire, catching the Tenth Legion by surprise and retaking Jerusalem. He resumed sacrifices at the site of the Temple and made plans to rebuild the Temple. He established a provisional government and began to issue coins in its name. This is what the Jewish people were looking for in a mashiach; Jesus clearly does not fit into this mold. Ultimately, however, the Roman Empire crushed his revolt and killed Bar Kokhba. After his death, all acknowledged that he was not the mashiach.

Rather than frustration with his disciples’ failure to know Him Jesus exhibited supreme confidence in his own Holy Spirit (John 16:12-14): You are not permitted to know the times or periods that the Father has set by his own authority, He said.  But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the farthest parts of the earth.[5]

Enter through the narrow gate, Jesus said, because the gate is wide and the way is spacious that leads to destruction (ἀπώλειαν, a form of ἀπώλεια), and there are many who enter through it.  But the gate is narrow and the way is difficult that leads to life, and there are few who find it.[6]  What happens if I approach this with Jesus’ fixation rather than my ownDo not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets, He said.  I have not come to abolish these things but to fulfill (πληρῶσαι, another form of πληρόω) them.[7]  What if ἀπώλειαν meant a destruction of corruption—being completely severed from the righteousness Jesus has provided us here and now through his death and resurrection and the power of his Holy Spirit—rather than an eternal sojourn in a lake of fire?

Instead of an immutable prophecy of his relative failure to accomplish his Father’s mission—For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world should be saved through him[8]—we have Jesus’ warning that the church will do a less than stellar job of imparting the Gospel of his grace.  But this understanding is only evident back in context (Matthew 7:11-16a NET):

If you then, although you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him!  [Luke was explicit that these good gifts are the Holy Spirit.]  In everything, treat others as you would want them to treat you, for this fulfills (ἐστιν, a form of ἐστί; literally, is) the law and the prophets.  Enter through the narrow gate, because the gate is wide and the way is spacious that leads to [corruption] (ἀπώλειαν, a form of ἀπώλεια), and there are many who enter through it.  But the gate is narrow and the way is difficult that leads to life, and there are few who find it.  Watch out for false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are voracious wolves.  You will recognize them by their fruit.

None of this is to wag my finger at pastors, priests and Bible teachers, but to appreciate Jesus’ saying: Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God![9]  I feel terribly inept at explaining what it’s like to live by the Spirit.  I stumbled over progressive sanctification.  The knowledge enshrined in churches as doctrine, however, was not the issue.  A table of quotes from Presbyterian, Baptist and Christian & Missionary Alliance perspectives on progressive sanctification follows.

Progressive Sanctification

Presbyterian Baptist

C&MA

“Sanctification is the work of God’s free grace, whereby we are renewed in the whole man after the image of God, and are enabled more and more to die unto sin, and live unto righteousness.” What God has begun in regeneration He will work to continue without interruption throughout the believer’s life. All Christians understand first the first reality: that Christ’s blood has atoned for their sins and they no longer need to fear eternal separation from God. But most Christians do not understand or experience the second reality—the fullness of the Holy Spirit in their lives.
“The Lord Jesus has undertaken everything that His people’s souls require; not only to deliver them from the guilt of their sins by His atoning death, but from the dominion of their sins by placing in their hearts the Holy Spirit; not only to justify them, but to sanctify them.” It involves our availability to the Holy Spirit, our separation from sin, and our growth in the likeness of Christ. Every Christian is a sanctified person, belonging to Christ, and therefore should keep from immorality (1 Cor. 6:13-14; 2 Cor. 7:1). We are involved in a lifetime struggle against sin and a moment-by-moment submission to the Holy Spirit for victory. The New Testament clearly teaches that there are two kinds of Christians. In 1 Corinthians 3:1-4, Paul talks about Christians who are “spiritual” and contrasts them with those who are “worldly,” or “carnal.” In Romans 7 and 8, the comparison is between those believers who are self-propelled and those who are Spirit driven. In Ephesians 5:18, he implies that some are “filled” and some are “not filled.”
The Lord has given to us His Spirit, and by Him communicates His own life to the justified believer. Holiness is divinely wrought within Christians. Christ enables us to walk in holiness. It [to “present your bodies a living sacrifice”] is a choice we make as believers. No one else can make that choice for us. It is self-determined and is repeated often. The opportunity to experience the two realities of sanctification is available to every believer. The path to the Spirit-filled life requires taking faith-filled risks, which always involves change.
As we look at Christ we are changed into the image of Christ, by the work of the Spirit of God. The Holy Spirit indwells the believer for the purpose of enabling us to overcome sin and conform us to the likeness of Christ. When we “walk by the Spirit” we do not carry out the deeds of the flesh, but produce “the fruit of the Spirit” (Gal. 5:16, 22). Surrender We can’t make ourselves holy any more than we can make ourselves saved—we become holy only by realizing that we haven’t got what it takes to be holy (Romans 6:11; Romans 12:1-2).

Accept Christ is our Sanctifier in the same way that He is our Savior (Colossians 2:6; Galatians 2:20).

Abide We maintain a continuous relationship with Jesus through obedience to His Word (John 15:1-11).

Our dependence upon the Holy Spirit is not something that is attained once for all, but is the result of a daily struggle and a constantly renewed commitment.

God will not give up on His goal of making you become like Christ. He will not give up on you until the day He presents you complete, perfect, and mature to the Father in heaven.

These were my religious influences growing up.  I have nothing but minor quibbles over words (obedience, for instance) with any of these statements individually and appreciate all of them together.  I even checked the Catholic catechism.  Sanctification was a subcategory of justification there rather than a separate topic but still I have no serious objection to anything in it.  Oddly enough, I found words closer to my own misunderstanding in the Catholic catechism under the heading III. MERIT, line 2010:

Since the initiative belongs to God in the order of grace, no one can merit the initial grace of forgiveness and justification, at the beginning of conversion. Moved by the Holy Spirit and by charity, we can then merit for ourselves and for others the graces needed for our sanctification, for the increase of grace and charity, and for the attainment of eternal life. Even temporal goods like health and friendship can be merited in accordance with God’s wisdom. These graces and goods are the object of Christian prayer. Prayer attends to the grace we need for meritorious actions.

In my misunderstanding I thought positional sanctification was God’s work in Christ and progressive sanctification[10] was up to me to accomplish.  I grew up in a Catholic neighborhood but I never read the catechism.  Besides, line 2011 is fairly clear on this:

The charity of Christ is the source in us of all our merits before God. Grace, by uniting us to Christ in active love, ensures the supernatural quality of our acts and consequently their merit before God and before men. The saints have always had a lively awareness that their merits were pure grace.

The charity of Christ is ἀγάπη in the New Testament, the love that is an aspect of the fruit of the Spirit, the love that is the fulfillment of the law.  The relative failure of the church to impart the Gospel of grace was not a lack of knowledge.  So is it in the execution, the way that knowledge is imparted?  Here I’m reminded of an observation that made little sense to me until this very moment: Churchmen liked me better when I was striving on my own to keep rules than when I began to try to live by the Spirit.

My use of churchmen requires some explanation.  I don’t necessarily mean clergy.  And I don’t mean men exclusively.  The best explanation I can imagine is a profile.  Churchmen aren’t believers in the sense that they have any awareness of a crisis moment that marks a difference in their lives between unbelief and belief.  They are probably the children or grandchildren of believers.  Christianity seems natural to them and they have never strayed far from it.  But fitting a profile doesn’t necessarily mean that one did the “crime.”  The “crime” in this case is too facile an identification with the local church in which one takes a leading role: “My church is the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through my church.”  But the real crime was that I idolized churchmen and coveted their status.

Churches as institutions have their own agendas.  I fit into those agendas better when I obey their rules.  In other words, churchmen are institutionally biased to favor compliant hypocrites, actors.  This is not to say that they are necessarily hypocrites themselves.  It is to say that they have little experience with any struggle to live by the Spirit.  Their instruction to those of us who do have trouble takes the form of platitudes—”sin is just bad habits which can be overcome by good habits“—techniques for inculcating said good habits and rules to prohibit bad ones, as opposed to faith in Jesus by his Holy Spirit.

Rules are neat and orderly.  Living by the Spirit is messy: When you come together, each one has a song, has a lesson, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation.[11]  Churchmen (I will say for the sake of argument) decided long ago that we should sit silently in neat rows, stand when we were told to stand, sing what we were told to sing and listen to the lesson the church wanted us to hear.  My church allowed revelations, I suppose, during testimony time.  (I thought testimonies were about all the good things God did for people who were good and “obedient,” you know, churchmen.)  Tongues and interpretations?  Forget about it!

And, frankly, I intend all of this more as a metaphor for imparting the Gospel of grace.  I don’t really care how a church service is organized as much as I care whether someone who doesn’t know how to be led by the Spirit of God can learn that there.  And here I return to Martin Luther.

He lived in a created cosmos where it is hard to enter the kingdom of God.  He grew up in a religious system partially corrupted by false teachers and false prophets.  (The alternative—Jesus killed all the false teachers and false prophets and sent them to hell before they had any influence on anyone else—is untenable to me.)  Martin Luther, by the Holy Spirit, recognized some of the corrupting influences that plagued him and wrote to correct them.  But was Martin Luther perfect and totally free of error himself?

The Luther/Graebner commentary on the fruit of the Spirit[12] follows:

The Apostle does not speak of the works of the Spirit as he spoke of the works of the flesh, but he attaches to these Christian virtues a better name. He calls them the fruits of the Spirit.

LOVE

It would have been enough to mention only the single fruit of love, for love embraces all the fruits of the Spirit. In I Corinthians 13, Paul attributes to love all the fruits of the Spirit: “Charity suffereth long, and is kind,” etc. Here he lets love stand by itself among other fruits of the Spirit to remind the Christians to love one another, “in honor preferring one another,” to esteem others more than themselves because they have Christ and the Holy Ghost within them.

JOY

Joy means sweet thoughts of Christ, melodious hymns and psalms, praises and thanksgiving, with which Christians instruct, inspire, and refresh themselves. God does not like doubt and dejection. He hates dreary doctrine, gloomy and melancholy thought. God likes cheerful hearts. He did not send His Son to fill us with sadness, but to gladden our hearts. For this reason the prophets, apostles, and Christ Himself urge, yes, command us to rejoice and be glad. “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem; behold, thy king cometh unto thee.” (Zech. 9:9.) In the Psalms we are repeatedly told to be “joyful in the Lord.” Paul says: “Rejoice in the Lord always.” Christ says: “Rejoice, for your names are written in heaven.”

PEACE

Peace towards God and men. Christians are to be peaceful and quiet. Not argumentative, not hateful, but thoughtful and patient. There can be no peace without longsuffering, and therefore Paul lists this virtue next.

LONGSUFFERING

Longsuffering is that quality which enables a person to bear adversity, injury, reproach, and makes them patient to wait for the improvement of those who have done him wrong. When the devil finds that he cannot overcome certain persons by force he tries to overcome them in the long run. He knows that we are weak and cannot stand anything long. Therefore he repeats his temptation time and again until he succeeds. To withstand his continued assaults we must be longsuffering and patiently wait for the devil to get tired of his game.

GENTLENESS

Gentleness in conduct and life. True followers of the Gospel must not be sharp and bitter, but gentle, mild, courteous, and soft-spoken, which should encourage others to seek their company. Gentleness can overlook other people’s faults and cover them up. Gentleness is always glad to give in to others. Gentleness can get along with forward and difficult persons, according to the old pagan saying: “You must know the manners of your friends, but you must not hate them.” Such a gentle person was our Savior Jesus Christ, as the Gospel portrays Him. Of Peter it is recorded that he wept whenever he remembered the sweet gentleness of Christ in His daily contact with people. Gentleness is an excellent virtue and very useful in every walk of life.

GOODNESS

A person is good when he is willing to help others in their need.

FAITH

In listing faith among the fruits of the Spirit, Paul obviously does not mean faith in Christ, but faith in men. Such faith is not suspicious of people but believes the best. Naturally the possessor of such faith will be deceived, but he lets it pass. He is ready to believe all men, but he will not trust all men. Where this virtue is lacking men are suspicious, forward, and wayward and will believe nothing nor yield to anybody. No matter how well a person says or does anything, they will find fault with it, and if you do not humor them you can never please them. It is quite impossible to get along with them. Such faith in people therefore, is quite necessary. What kind of life would this be if one person could not believe another person?

MEEKNESS

A person is meek when he is not quick to get angry. Many things occur in daily life to provoke a person’s anger, but the Christian gets over his anger by meekness.

TEMPERANCE

Christians are to lead sober and chaste lives. They should not be adulterers, fornicators, or sensualists. They should not be quarrelers or drunkards. In the first and second chapters of the Epistle to Titus, the Apostle admonishes bishops, young women, and married folks to be chaste and pure.

Is there anything here that indicated that the Holy Spirit produces this fruit in us, or does it read like a list of ideals to pursue or rules to obey?  I see two things that may hint at the Holy Spirit’s involvement: 1) “There can be no peace without longsuffering” and, 2) “the Christian gets over his anger by meekness.”  While I appreciate the connection of the fruit of the Spirit and the definition of love in 1 Corinthians 13, nothing here would have turned me from viewing that definition as a list of rules to obey to prove I was a Christian.  In fact, the explanation given for “a walk in the Spirit”[13] seems both mystical and works oriented to me:

They crucify the flesh with its evil desires and lusts by fasting and exercise and, above all, by a walk in the Spirit. To resist the flesh in this manner is to nail it to the Cross. Although the flesh is still alive it cannot very well act upon its desires because it is bound and nailed to the Cross.

Granted, failing at the effort to love like Jesus by turning Paul’s definition of love into rules, prompted me to look for something else—something like the fruit of the Spirit.  But I wonder about Martin Luther.

If Theodore Graebner’s translation carries anything of Luther’s own thinking on the fruit of the Spirit, this alone could account for the pridefulness on which Joe Heschmeyer commented.  If Luther let go of the rule-based righteousness of the monastery yet didn’t fully embrace the righteousness of God in the fruit of the Spirit as he fought for his life to believe in justification by “faith alone” against a stronger adversary than any of us know as the Roman Catholic Church—both pridefulness and a general lack of love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control make sense to me.

Every boy growing up in my church knew that “sowing to the flesh” meant viewing pornography.  While that may well be an example of “sowing to the flesh” in one area of human life, rejecting the righteousness of God (Romans 3:21, 22) that is given new every morning—the love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control that flows from his Holy Spirit—to do it somehow on one’s own is sowing to the flesh in every area of human life (Galatians 6:7-8 NET).

Do not be deceived.  God will not be made a fool.  For a person will reap what he sows, because the person who sows to his own flesh will reap corruption (φθοράν, a form of φθορά) from the flesh, but the one who sows to the Spirit will reap eternal life from the Spirit.

Luther/Graebner commented[14] literally if superficially[15] on this:

This simile of sowing and reaping also refers to the proper support of ministers. “He that soweth to the Spirit,” i.e., he that honors the ministers of God is doing a spiritual thing and will reap everlasting life. “He that soweth to the flesh,” i.e., he that has nothing left for the ministers of God, but only thinks of himself, that person will reap of the flesh corruption, not only in this life but also in the life to come. The Apostle wants to stir up his readers to be generous to their pastors.

While sharing all good things with the one who teaches[16] the word is a good thing (Galatins 6:9, 10) that flows from the goodness (ἀγαθωσύνη) of the fruit of the Holy Spirit, bribing one’s teacher will not help anyone live righteously here and now—unless one is also led by the Spirit of God.  Here I’ll turn to Peter to explain Paul (Acts 8:17-20 NET):

Then Peter and John placed their hands on the Samaritans, and they received the Holy Spirit.

Now Simon, when he saw that the Spirit was given through the laying on of the apostles’ hands, offered them money, saying, “Give me this power too, so that everyone I place my hands on may receive the Holy Spirit.”  But Peter said to him, “May your silver perish (ἀπώλειαν, a form of ἀπώλεια) with you, because you thought you could acquire God’s gift with money!”

If your teacher is not even trying to teach you how to be led by the Spirit of God, find another to share all good things with the one who teaches.  Better yet, cry out to Jesus and study the Scriptures with Him.  He loves the Scriptures.  He died, rose from the dead, ascended into heaven and will return again to make them so.


[1] Matthew 26:54 (NET)

[2] Matthew 26:72b (NET) Table

[3] Acts 1:6b (NET) Table

[4] Tracey R. Rich, Mashiach: The Messiah, Judaism 101

[5] Acts 1:7, 8 (NET) Table

[6] Matthew 7:13, 14 (NET)

[7] Matthew 5:17 (NET)

[8] John 3:17 (NET)

[9] Mark 10:24b (NET)

[10] Some think that progressive sanctification is so tainted with self-righteousness that it is heresy. I’m sensitive to this criticism, having lived and breathed that heresy, but will wait to consider it in another essay.

[11] 1 Corinthians 14:26b (NET)

[12] Commentary on Galatians 5:22, 23

[13] Commentary on Galatians 5:24

[14] Commentary on Galatians 6:8

[15] Therefore they will eat from the fruit of their way, and they will be stuffed full of their own counsel (Proverbs 1:31 NET).  The one who sows iniquity will reap trouble (Proverbs 22:8a NET)…  But you have plowed wickedness; you have reaped injustice; you have eaten the fruit of deception.  Because you have depended on your chariots; you have relied on your many warriors (Hosea 10:13 NET).  See: Is “you reap what you sow” biblical?

[16] Galatians 6:6 (NET)

Condemnation or Judgment? – Part 16

Paul wrote believers in Colossae (Colossians 3:1-6 NET):

Therefore, if you have been raised with Christ, keep seeking the things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God.  Keep thinking about things above, not things on the earth, for you have died and your life is hidden with Christ in God.  When Christ (who is your life) appears, then you too will be revealed in glory with him.  So put to death whatever in your nature belongs to the earth: sexual immorality, impurity, shameful passion, evil desire, and greed which is idolatry.  Because of these things the wrath of God is coming on the sons of disobedience.

A note (4) at the end of this passage in the NET reads:

The words ἐπὶ τοὺς υἱοὺς τῆς ἀπειθείας (…“on the sons of disobedience”) are lacking in Ì46 [correct symbol won’t display] B b sa, but are found in א A C D F G H I Ψ 075 0278 33 1739 1881 Ï lat sy bo. The words are omitted by several English translations (NASB, NIV, ESV, TNIV). This textual problem is quite difficult to resolve. On the one hand, the parallel account in Eph 5:6 has these words, thus providing scribes a motive for adding them here. On the other hand, the reading without the words may be too hard: The ἐν οἷς (en hois) of v. 7 seems to have no antecedent without υἱούς already in the text, although it could possibly be construed as neuter referring to the vice list in v. 5. Further, although the witness of B is especially important, there are other places in which B and Ì46 [ditto above] share errant readings of omission. Nevertheless, the strength of the internal evidence against the longer reading is at least sufficient to cause doubt here. The decision to retain the words in the text is less than certain.

Whether the words sons of disobedience were original or not is immaterial to me.  I’m more concerned with δι᾿ ἃ ἔρχεται ἡ ὀργὴ τοῦ θεοῦ (“Because of these things the wrath of God is coming”).  First, ἔρχεται (a form of ἔρχομαι) is present tense; appears or shows itself might be a better translation.  Though because is a possible translation of δι᾿[1] (a form of διά), through would be more common (verse 17) and more in line with Paul’s teaching in the opening of Romans, the wrath of Godrevealed from heaven.  So I would translate it, “through these (e.g., sexual immorality, impurity, shameful passion, evil desire, and greed which is idolatry) the wrath of God appears” or “shows itself.”  In other words, these are the evidence or symptoms of the depraved, unapproved, reprobate or debased mind to which God gave those over who did not like to retain God in their knowledge.[2]

God’s wrath was to give them over to a depraved mind, to do what should not be done.[3]  Paul enumerated what should not be done for believers in Rome (Romans 1:29-32 NET):

They are filled with every kind of unrighteousness, wickedness, covetousness, malice.  They are rife with envy, murder, strife, deceit, hostility.  They are gossips [Table], slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, contrivers of all sorts of evil, disobedient to parents, senseless, covenant-breakers, heartless, ruthless [Table].  Although they fully know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but also approve of those who practice them.

A young mother put it this way on Facebook:

Parent shaming.  Judging.  Close mindedness.  Mass murders.  Hate on Nationalities.  Hate on skin colors.  Hate on LGBT’s.  Hate on parenting.  Hate.  I can honestly say I’m worried to bring my children up in the type of society we’ve become.  What will it take to change?  Will it get better before it gets worse?  I have to believe there’s more love in this world than hate.  Incredibly saddening that my happy, loving boys will one day learn the world is so ugly and destructive.

Even if sons of disobedience wasn’t original I don’t see why ἐν οἷς or ἐν τούτοις are “too hard” of a reading.  Paul’s contrast was to the lives the Colossians lived before they died and [their] life [was] hidden with Christ in God, not to some mysterious others called the sons of disobedience.  Even Ephesians reads διὰ ταῦτα γὰρ ἔρχεται ἡ ὀργὴ τοῦ θεοῦ ἐπὶ τοὺς υἱοὺς τῆς ἀπειθείας (for because of these things God’s wrath comes on the sons of disobedience[4]).  But again διὰ could be through, ταῦτα refers back to the person who is immoral, impure, or greedy[5] (probably immorality, impurity or greed) and ἔρχεται is present tense, appears or shows itself.

So I would understand it more like, “For through these [immoral, impure or greedy persons, or immorality, impurity or greed] the wrath of God shows itself upon the sons of disobedience.”  The sons of disobedience are no longer a mystery.  The Greek word translated disobedience is ἀπειθείας (a form of ἀπείθεια).  God has consigned all people to disobedience (ἀπείθειαν, another form of ἀπείθεια) so that he may show mercy to them all.  The sons of disobedience are old humans, they have not been born from above: Therefore do not be partakers with them, for you were at one time darkness, but now you are light in the Lord.  Walk as children of the light[6]  Paul made this same contrast between the old human (παλαιὸν ἄνθρωπον) and the new (νέον, a form of νέος) for the Colossians (3:7-11 NET):

You also lived your lives in this way at one time, when you used to live among them (ἐν τούτοις; literally “in these”).  But now, put off all such things as anger, rage, malice, slander, abusive language from your mouth.  Do not lie to one another since you have put off the old (παλαιὸν, a form of παλαιός) man (ἄνθρωπον, a form of ἄνθρωπος) with its practices and have been clothed with the new man that is being renewed in knowledge according to the image of the one who created it.  Here there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all and in all.

I think the Bible has been translated by those who expect most people to spend eternity in the lake of fire.  I don’t intend to dispute that view.  On the contrary, the idea I’m experimenting with here is that all old humans are condemned to spend eternity in the lake of fire.  How many new humans spend eternity with Jesus and his Father?  That depends on God’s mercy—I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion[7]—up to and including all—For God has consigned all people to disobedience so that he may show mercy to them all.[8]

I’m a long way, however, from accepting Universalism, demanding that He save all.  Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners,[9] was a perfect opportunity to specify few, many or all.  Neither Paul nor the Holy Spirit chose to do so.  Enter through the narrow gate, Jesus said, because the gate is wide and the way is spacious that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it.  But the gate is narrow and the way is difficult (τεθλιμμένη, a form of θλίβω) that leads to life, and there are few who find it.[10]  In the past I took this to mean that ultimately relatively few will be saved.  Now I think differently.

Since yehôvâh informed Cain, you must subdue [sin],[11] and Moses commanded Israel to choose life,[12] salvation was determined by the desire, or willingness, of human beings, whosoever will.  The result, there are few who find it, is what Jesus became human to change.  Someone asked Him directly, “Lord, will only a few be saved?”  Speaking in real time before his crucifixion and resurrection, He said, “Exert every effort to enter through the narrow door, because many, I tell you, will try to enter and will not be able (ἰσχύσουσιν, a form of ἰσχύω) to.  Once the head of the house gets up and shuts the door, then you will stand outside and start to knock on the door and beg him, ‘Lord, let us in!’  But he will answer you, ‘I don’t know where you come from.’” [13]  I tell you the solemn truth, Jesus also said, I am the door for the sheep.[14]  As I considered both of these together I wondered what door the head of the house gets up and shuts.

Surely, it was not Jesus but whosoever will.  The most immediate reason why the many could not enter was the shut door, but a survey of the word ἰσχύω suggests they were not good enough,[15] not strong enough,[16] not healthy enough,[17] not vigilant enough[18] and they would not endure long enough[19] in their own strength.  And so Jesus became the door.  No one can come to me, He said, unless the Father who sent me draws him[20]  And I, Jesus promised, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.[21]

I’ve written elsewhere what I think about the Greek words translated draws and draw relative to “Softly and tenderly Jesus is calling.”  And I don’t think much of the old human’s free will in any sense beyond contingent choices.   I certainly don’t think it is sacrosanct to God.  It wasn’t sacrosanct when He gave old humans over in the desires of their hearts to impurity,[22] to dishonorable passions,[23] and to a depraved mind.[24]  Why should it be sacrosanct when one is born from above, not born by human parents or by human desire or a husband’s decision, but by God?[25]

Nor can I embrace patristic universalism.  I can’t believe in a purgatorial hell.  In fact, I think the Old Testament narrates how God has gone out of his way to demonstrate over and over again that the best that is ever achieved by punishment, or by the fear of punishment, is hypocrisy.  Jesus said (John 3:5-7, 10 NET):

I tell you the solemn truth, unless a person is born of water and spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.  What is born of the flesh is flesh, and what is born of the Spirit is spirit.  Do not be amazed that I said to you, ‘You must all be born from above.’…Are you the teacher of Israel and yet you don’t understand these things?

J.W. Hanson painted the early universalist church fathers as elitists in his book Universalism, the Prevailing Doctrine of the Christian Church During Its First Five Hundred Years (p. 56):

Some of the fathers who had achieved a faith in Universalism, were influenced by the mischievous notion that it was to be held esoterically, cherished in secret, or only communicated to the chosen few,–withheld from the multitude, who would not appreciate it, and even that the opposite error would, with some sinners, be more beneficial than the truth….Origen said that “all that might be said on this theme is not expedient to explain now, or to all.  For the mass need no further teaching on account of those who hardly through the fear of aeonian punishment restrain their recklessness.”

I’m not oblivious to Origen’s concern, though it seems to me that someone who would return to sin because God is merciful really hasn’t finished with sin yet.  And I consider myself the rankest of the rank and file.  On the other hand Mr. Hanson characterized many of the patristic fathers as liars whenever they taught endless punishment (p. 59):

There can be no doubt that many of the fathers threatened severer penalties than they believed would be visited on sinners, impelled to utter them because they considered them to be more salutary with the masses than the truth itself. So that we may believe that some of the patristic writers who seem to teach endless punishment did not believe it. Others, we know, who accepted universal restoration employed, for the sake of deterring sinners, threats that are inconsistent, literally interpreted, with that doctrine.

I began this second round considering condemnation or judgment after I read John F. Walvoord’s commentary on Revelation 20 online (Revelation 20:11, 12 NET).

Then I saw a large white throne and the one who was seated on it; the earth and the heaven fled from his presence, and no place was found for them.  And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne.  Then books were opened, and another book was opened – the book of life.  So the dead were judged (ἐκρίθησαν, a form of κρίνω) by what was written in the books, according to their deeds.

I’m not aware of ἐκρίθησαν translated condemned in any English Bible, but that is what Mr. Walvoord took it to mean: “Their standing posture means that they are now about to be sentenced.”  John’s vision continued (Revelation 20:13-15 NET):

The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and Death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each one was judged (ἐκρίθησαν, a form of κρίνω) according to his deeds.  Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire.  This is the second death – the lake of fire.  If anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, that person was thrown into the lake of fire.

Mr. Walvoord wrote, “The summary judgment is pronounced in verse 14 that ‘death and hell were cast into the lake of fire.’  In a word, this means that all who died physically and were in Hades, the intermediate state, are here found unworthy and cast into the lake of fire.”

I was shocked that the doctrine I’ve heard my whole life was based on a rationalist assumption that death and hell, or Death and Hades, were not entities that might be thrown into the lake of fire but merely euphemisms for “all who died physically and were in Hades.”  And this in an essay where literal was used 35 times, literally 12 times and literalness twice, mostly relative to the thousand years, but it was a consistent theme of Mr. Walvoord’s argument.  He wrote for example:

[Barnes] further holds that Revelation 20 should not be taken literally, and interposes the words “as if” before the judgment and resurrection of 20:4 as well as with the binding of Satan. This would seem to be adding to the book, so strongly forbidden in 22:18.

But Mr. Walvoord’s understanding of Revelation 20:13-15 presents us with the following rewrite:

Revelation 20:14, 15 NET

Revelation 20:14, 15 John F. Walvoord

Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire.  This is the second death – the lake of fire.  If anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, that person was thrown into the lake of fire. Then the dead that were in Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire.  This is the second death – the lake of fire.  No one’s name was found written in the book of life, so they were all thrown into the lake of fire.

Mr Walvoord concluded, without a Scripture quotation or any fear of contradiction:

If the point of view be adopted that the book of life was originally the book of all living from which have been expunged the names of those who departed from life on earth without salvation, it presents a sad picture of a blank space where their names could have been written for all eternity as the objects of divine grace. Though they are judged by their works, it is evident that their destiny is determined primarily by their lack of spiritual life. When the fact is contemplated that Jesus Christ in His death reconciled the world to Himself (2 Cor. 5:19) and that He died for the reprobate as well as for the elect, it is all the more poignant that these now raised from the dead are cast into the lake of fire. Their ultimate destiny of eternal punishment is not, in the last analysis, because God wished it but because they would not come to God for the grace which He freely offered.

What about the dead in the sea?  I think we can accept that the sea is not an entity that might be thrown into the lake of fire.  I would assume that the names of some, up to and including all, were written in the book of life.  Mr. Walvoord changed the subject:

A special problem is introduced by the resurrection of those who were cast into the sea with the presumption that their bodies have disintegrated and have been scattered over a wide area geographically. The special mention of the sea is occasioned by the fact that resurrection usually implies resurrection from the grave. The resurrection of the dead from the sea merely reaffirms that all the dead will be raised regardless of the condition of their bodies.

I would assume though Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire, the names of some of their dead, up to and including all, were written in the book of life.  The idea I’m experimenting with is that the new humans born of God are spared while the old humans, in a one for one correspondence, are judged according to their deeds and thrown into the lake of fire.  And this, because the names in the book of life are not written there by some who came “to God for the grace which He freely offered” but by the mercy of God (Romans 9:15, 16 NET):

I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.  So then, it does not depend on human desire or exertion [e.g., “whosoever will”], but on God who shows mercy.

 


[1] Enter through (διὰ) the narrow gate, because the gate is wide and the way is spacious that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through (δι᾿, another form of διὰ) it  (Matthew 7:13 NET).

[2] Romans 1:28 (NKJV)

[3] Romans 1:28b (NET)

[4] Ephesians 5:6b (NET)

[5] Ephesians 5:5b (NET)

[6] Ephesians 5:7, 8 (NET)

[7] Romans 9:15 (NET)

[8] Romans 11:32 (NET)

[9] 1 Timothy 1:15b (NET)

[10] Matthew 7:13, 14 (NET)

[11] Genesis 4:7b (NET)

[12] Deuteronomy 30:19 (NET)

[13] Luke 13:23-25 (NET)

[14] John 10:7 (NET)

[15] It is no longer good (ἰσχύει, another form of ἰσχύω) for anything except to be thrown out and trampled on by people (Matthew 5:13b NET).

[16] No one was strong enough (ἴσχυεν, another form of ἰσχύω) to subdue him (Mark 5:4b NET).

[17] Those who are healthy (ἰσχύοντες, another form of ἰσχύω) don’t need a physician… (Matthew 9:12b NET)

[18] Couldn’t (ἴσχυσας, another form of ἰσχύω) you stay awake for one hour? (Mark 14:37b NET)

[19] I am able (ἰσχύω) to do all things through the one who strengthens me (Philippians 4:13 NET).

[20] John 6:44a (NET)

[21] John 12:32 (NET)

[22] Romans 1:24 (NET) Table

[23] Romans 1:26 (NET)

[24] Romans 1:28 (NET)

[25] John 1:13 (NET)