1 Corinthians 15:51 (WH): ἰδοὺ μυστήριον ὑμῖν λέγω· πάντες οὐ κοιμηθησόμεθα πάντες δὲ ἀλλαγησόμεθα,
Abbott-Smith Lexicon: ἰδού, [in LXX chiefly for הִנֵּה,] prop. imperat. 2 aor. mid. of ὁράω, used as a demonstrative particle, with frequency much greater in LXX and NT than in cl. (v. M, Pr., 11)
Paul D. Gardner (1 Corinthians, ZECNT Series):
Paul normally uses the word “mystery” (μυστήριον) of things pertaining to God’s wisdom and his plan of salvation in Christ (2:7; 4:1; cf. Rom 11:25; 16:25; Eph 1:9; 3:3, 4, 9). In fact, generally speaking, the “mystery” is something that has now been revealed in Christ. As was noted in the last verse, Paul saw Christ in his resurrected glory. The mystery revealed is therefore that all who are to inherit the kingdom of God will be changed to be like Christ. What this will be like has been revealed in Christ, who has been seen in this changed condition by all the witnesses established at the start of this chapter. In this specific instance, Paul speaks now of those who will be alive at his coming and of the radical change that will occur for all.EF: μυστήριον is accusative singular neuter: it refers to data that only God can reveal. Only then is it manifested, revealed or known.
Marcin Kowalski (pages 56-57): The announced μυστήριον, in NT can denote the unmanifested or private counsel of God, his secret thoughts, plans, or that which transcends normal understanding, transcendent/ultimate reality45. Recurring 21 times in Pauline letters, the expression refers to the secret truth, hidden and inaccessible in the past, but now revealed to and through Paul46. Like in 1 Cor 2:7 it refers to the ultimate reality, the lot of the living and carries the argument in the prophetic authority of Apostle initiated in the mysteries of God47. Altogether, the expression resounds as a powerful, hope-giving breakout in the present situation experienced by believers.
C.K. Barrett (The First Epistle to the Corinthians):
Sources Cited in This Blog Entry:
Barrett, C.K. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. London: A & C Black, 1968.
Gardner, Paul. 1 Corinthians. Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2018.
Kolwalski, Marcin. " 'We Shall All Be Changed' (1 Cor 15:51c): Transformation of the Living at the Parousia of Christ. An Exegetico-Rhetorical Study of 1 Cor 15:50-57." a w 2011 pracę doktorską.
8 comments:
"Flesh and blood" represents the current mortal body, which cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven, because corruption cannot be incorruptibility at the same time. The "flesh and blood" is the image of the earthly Adam. From this, we can learn that eternal happiness does not consist in sensory pleasures, and that we must die according to the sensory, animalistic life and live according to the spirit of Christ if we want to gain eternal life.
Those who are alive at Christ's coming must also undergo some transformation. They shed the mortal body and put on the new one. Since we cannot enter heaven with our mortal and perishable bodies, which God has intended for us according to our body, it is necessary for the perishable body to rise. However, all this happens suddenly, so they do not partake in the decay of death. The sound of the trumpet and the voice of the angel are traditional apocalyptic expressions for describing the approach of the judging God.
All of us: both the blessed inhabitants of heaven and the damned. Not all of us will change: only the bodies of the saved will be glorified; the body of the damned will be detestable. Precisely because not everyone bears the image of the heavenly, but that of the human Adam, therefore all will rise, but not all will be clothed in a glorious body. The wicked also rise, but not in glory, for this is only promised to the good (v. 48). The wicked rise incorruptibly, but tormented by the pains of punishment (see John 5:29. Mark 9:48.).
Immediately the judge of the world will appear. The trumpet symbolizes the call to all to appear before the judge. The concept of the last trumpet is perhaps taken by Paul from Ex. 19:16 and Matt. 24:31. (See also 1 Thess. 4:15; Rev. 11:15.) Those who are still alive at Christ's second coming, their bodies will change to eternal life without death. (See 1 Thess. 4:16.) The resurrection (or the transformation of those still alive) will take place in an instant. The thought must be completed: so that we can enter God's kingdom in body as well. (v. 50.) All the dead rise in an immortal body, and those who are still alive at that time suddenly transform gloriously (if they are found to be true Christians). The moral resurrection of the righteous after the defeat of paganism is improperly called the first resurrection (Rev. 20:1–6).
If the physical body and blood of Jesus is the price of our redemption how could he properly retrieve them after putting them on the altar as a sin offering?
Was the body of the first Adam corruptible in the sense of leading to wrong desire?
You say the wicked receive immortality can you please furnish a scripture to that effect?
Romans ch.2:7,8NIV"To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. 8BUT for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger."
Why this "BUT" if righteous and wicked alike are guaranteed immortality?
In connection with 1 Corinthians 15:35-54, I uploaded a text here for you, please feel free read it: https://justpaste.it/avwxj
In fact, Jesus' LIFE was the ransom sacrifice, which was fulfilled with his death, for which his earthly body did not have to be destroyed:
"Father, into your hands I commit my spirit." Luke 23:46
When Jesus therefore had received the sour wine, He said, "It is finished!" And He bowed His head, and gave up His spirit. (John 19:30)
The Greek word translated "It is finished" is 'tetelestai' (τετέλεσται). The verse has also been translated as "It is consummated." On business documents or receipts it has been used to denote "The debt is paid in full".
Even in the apostolic letters, where the ransom sacrifice of Jesus is discussed, there is not a single mention of the fact that this would mean the destruction of Jesus' body and the cessation of being a human. So the sacrifice of Jesus is not the destruction and vaporization of his body, but the offering of his LIFE, which was fulfilled when he died on the cross.
1Timothy 2:6 in the original text there is no "corresponding", this is also one of the infamous Bible forgery inserts in the NWT. Check this: https://wit.irr.org/jesus-death-corresponding-ransom
While in the WTS theology the ramsom is of equal value, Jesus gives more than the restoration of Adam's perfect condition to those who believe in Him (Romans 5:15-16).
You can read about the Adam-Jesus parallel used by the apostle Paul and its WTS reinterpretation here:
* https://oodegr.com/english/swthria/antil1.htm
* https://oodegr.com/english/ag_grafi/pd/genesis/adam1.htm
The NWT Committee did not just make up "corresponding ransom" for the Greek antilytron. You may disagree with that translation but there was a basis for it, from a lexicon. See https://archive.org/details/g00reekenglishlexiparkrich/page/62/mode/2up
I read Bowman's piece. He confuses the issue of translation with what one extracts from the translation. I agree that lexicology has changed since the 18th century, especially since James Barr critiqued etymology and synchrony began to take precedence over diachrony in lexical studies. The NWT wasn't the only translation that had to make adjustments in the light of these advances, and the organization is not above making further revisions where they're needed.
Yes, I know this method, but you can't deny that even if they can present a lexicon/s doesn't change the fact that they looked for sources for an 'a priori' idea. Although it should have been the other way around, especially in the case of an allegedly literal translation, based on the primary meaning of the words. It's not the appropriate method of Bible translation is that you have an 'a priori' idea, then you visit the libraries until you find a dictionary where you can choose the one you like from the multiple given meanings of the given term.
They want to justify the critical details of the NWT with obscure, flawed translations by individuals, well-known "blunders" of well-known translations, selective quotations from professionally accepted Greek textbooks, a deceptive series of "examples" that prove nothing, and works by liberal authors who do not consider the Bible to be God's reliable word. The large number and extensive "evidence" of course looks very convincing to the non-professional, and the WTS remains silent about the fact that the authors of the referenced language books have already voiced their protest in open letters not to distort the Bible by citing their works.
A classic example of this is the case of George Howard, who stated that he only assumed the possible existence of the Tetragrammaton in the NT, and intended it as a hypothesis, which does not justify placing it in Bible translations without manuscript evidence, let alone basing doctrines on this. Nevertheless, WTS presented George Howard's hypothesis as a proven fact to its readers, creating the false belief that there was a "scholarly consensus" behind this view. You can look for interesting Watchtower quotes here:
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200270810
On the one hand, they emphasize here that the text of the Holy Scriptures has survived authentically, without falsification, we can trust the surviving manuscripts, but at the same time they spread the conspiracy theory that ALL the manuscripts regarding the alleged "Jehovah" in the New Testament have been falsified. So they emphasize that God's word is intact, the available copies and manuscripts are authentic and reliable. This is what they assert, then, when it comes to the alleged "erasing" of "Jehovah" from the New Testament, are these very same manuscripts no longer reliable? Since there is no evidence for this theory (only speculation), this is both a conspiracy theory and undermines the credibility of the New Testament: if the text was falsified in this respect, how do we know that it was only in this respect?
The WTS quotes Kurt Aland, obviously agreeing with it: "the possibility that manuscripts might yet be found that would change its text decisively is zero".
Otherwise, the Tetragrammaton does not appear in the Ecclesiastes, the Book of Esther, and the Song of Songs either. Couldn't it have been there as well, only the "apostate" copyists removed it, and should it be "restored" in the NWT? After all, with their logic, it's impossible that if it's in one book, it can't not be in the other.
"the organization is not above making further revisions where they're needed."
If you compare the 2013 NWT with the 1984, they only dug deeper in their insertions, because while in the previous edition their own insertions were at least in brackets, nowadays they are not, so the unsuspecting reader cannot know what is God's word and what is the Society's.
So, the tendency is not that "adjustments" would improve the situation, but the opposite, especially when it comes to insertions on which their theology is based. For example Romans 13:1 "in their relative positions" etc.
But there is another example that I discovered myself that I haven't seen on any NWT critical pages. Durink a debate with a JW, I was referred to Jesus allegedly saying that his disciples could not be "part" of the world. I found it strange, because I had already read the Bible several times, I did not remember that Jesus had ever said such a thing. Then I realized that Jesus' words "not OF the world" etc. in the NWT are rendered is "not _PART_ of the world". So the attitude towards society is based on such insertions, which have no trace in the original text. The Greek simply has the phrase "ek tou kosmou" (εκ του κοσμου) which simply means "of the world" and not "_PART_ of world".
According to this, the Bible does not expect Christians to have any sort of anti-social, sectarian spirituality, attitude that runs away from the world, separates itself from it, but only to recognize (and act in its awareness) that the kingship of Jesus Christ is not like that of the earthly kings, but it is of supernatural origin, hence is not immanent. Nothing more, nothing less.
In summary, our task as Christians is to live not according to this world, but in this world, and to influence our environment (Mt 5:13-14, Jn 17:15, Phil 2:15).
As for our attitude towards power, all power is from God (Rom 13:1-7, 1Pt 2:13-14), and - in an ideal case - those carrying out administrative tasks are fulfilling a God-given function with God-given talent. In subordination to God, for the common good, the people thank God for good governance. (This is not naive wishful thinking, there were times when kings were "by the grace of God" those who they were, and whom simple preachers could rebuke if they forgot about the King of Kings.) Nowadays, many leaders serve themselves with their talents and positions, not God or their country.
Although we are also citizens of heaven (Phil 3:20, Eph 2:19), it is our duty to pray for social order and justice, and to strive for it with our lifestyle (1Tim 2:1-2, Tit 3:1-2). If the apostle demanded this attitude during the time of the pagan Roman Empire, then our attitude cannot be different in today's democracies. If our earthly task, our talent, calls us into administration, and the existing system is not an anti-Christian dictatorship, then in the name of God and sticking to the purity of our conscience (Acts 5:29), we can do our job, we can have a beneficial effect on our world (Rom 16:23).
Indeed, there is a difference between systems, and Jehovah's Witnesses should know this best, as they were discriminated against in dictatorial countries - but not always and everywhere.
The history of modern and most recent great evangelical awakenings is all about Jesus' society-transforming power, who can liberate whole regions from the power of the Devil and can cleanse from all defilement. However, only those who consider Jesus Christ himself the Lord God (1Cor 12:3.13, Phil 2:11, Mt 28:18) have ever received and can receive authorization for such a thing.
Post a Comment