Revelation 2:9-10: Poor, Yet Rich

Greek (SBLGNT): Οἶδά σου τὴν θλῖψιν καὶ τὴν πτωχείαν, ἀλλὰ πλούσιος εἶ, καὶ τὴν βλασφημίαν ἐκ τῶν λεγόντων Ἰουδαίους εἶναι ἑαυτούς, καὶ οὐκ εἰσίν, ἀλλὰ συναγωγὴ τοῦ Σατανᾶ. μηδὲν φοβοῦ ἃ μέλλεις πάσχειν. ἰδοὺ μέλλει βάλλειν ὁ διάβολος ἐξ ὑμῶν εἰς φυλακὴν ἵνα πειρασθῆτε, καὶ ἕξετε θλῖψιν ἡμερῶν δέκα. γίνου πιστὸς ἄχρι θανάτου, καὶ δώσω σοι τὸν στέφανον τῆς ζωῆς.

See https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+2%3A9-10&version=SBLGNT

Revelation 2:9-10 constitutes part of the resurrected Christ's direction to the seven congregations: the ecclesia and "angel" he now addresses is Smyrna. The city was in Asia Minor (now Izmir, Turkey), "about forty miles north of Ephesus." See the extended note in C. Koester, Revelation,  271-273.

Strabo writes: "the distance from Ephesus to Smyrna is a journey, in a straight line, of three hundred and twenty stadia, for the distance to Metropolis is one hundred and twenty stadia and the remainder to Smyrna, whereas the coasting voyage is but slightly short of two thousand two hundred" (Geography XIV.1.2).

One source defines stadia (plural of stadium) as "an ancient Greek and Roman unit of length," with a stadium equaling approximately 607 feet (185 meters). See https://www.wordreference.com/definition/stadia

With some of the historical context in mind, I will now provide a translation and analysis of 2:9-10, drawing on numerous NT sources (books, journal articles, and lexica).

Οἶδά σου τὴν θλῖψιν καὶ τὴν πτωχείαν, ἀλλὰ πλούσιος εἶ-"I know your tribulation and poverty, but you are rich"

Beckwith, Apocalypse, page 453: θλῖψιν, tribulation : the context shows that persecution of some kind is meant ; the meaning cannot be restricted to the sufferings of poverty. That the poverty of the Smyrnaean Christians was due to the confiscation of their property and so was a part of their persecution (the view of some com.) is without intimation here, though it is conceivable. —πλούσιος, rich: i.e. in spiritual possessions, cf. [Rev] 3:18, 2 Co. 6:10, Mt. 6:20. For the writer's habit of inserting a parenthesis see p. 243.

τὴν πτωχείαν conveys the idea of extreme poverty and destitution--being completely impoverished (Stefanovic, Revelation of Jesus Christ).

David Aune (Revelation 1-5, WBC) says the Smyrnaean poverty is literal, " but it is used in opposition to πλουσίος, 'rich,' understood figuratively, probably in terms of eschatological wealth (Luke 6:20 = Matt 5:3; Matt 6:19–21 = Luke 12:33–34; Luke 12:21; 2 Cor 6:10; Jas 2:5). The Stoics also used the Greek and Latin terms for 'wealth' figuratively (Seneca Ep. 62.3). Philo was dependent on the Stoic paradox that only the wise and virtuous person was really 'rich' (Philo, Praem. 104; Som. 1.179; Plant. 69 [here he uses παραδοξολογεῖν, 'paradox']; Sob. 56; Fuga. 17; Quod Omn. Prob. 8, 'You call those rich [πλουσίους] who are utterly destitute'; Arnim, SVF 1, § 220; 3, § 589–603). The term πτωχοὶ, 'poor,' is used literally in 13:16 (in opposition to πλουσίοι, 'rich') but figuratively in 3:17. The fact that no mention is made of the economic poverty of the other six Christian communities suggests that the situation of this congregation is unusual."

καὶ τὴν βλασφημίαν ἐκ τῶν λεγόντων Ἰουδαίους εἶναι ἑαυτούς-"and the blasphemy by those saying they are Jews" (claiming themselves to be Jews)

Beckwith (Apocalypse) has "reviling, calumny" for βλασφημίαν. He adds these observations:

ἑαυτούς: for this use of the reflex. pron. in the acc. with an infin., especially εἶναι, whose subject is the same as that of the governing word (λεγόντων), cf. 3:9 Ac. 5:36, 8:9; see Blass § 72,2. Usually a certain emphasis is given to the pron., but that is not the case here.

See Jan Lambrecht. "Jewish Slander: A Note On Revelation 2,9-10." Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses, vol. 75.4, 1999, pp. 421-429.

καὶ οὐκ εἰσίν, ἀλλὰ συναγωγὴ τοῦ Σατανᾶ-"and they are not, but [they are] a synagogue of Satan"

Robert H. Mounce (The Book of Revelation): The hostile Jews of Smyrna were, in fact, “a synagogue of Satan” (the latter term is Hebrew and means “adversary”; its Greek equivalent means “slanderer” or “false accuser”). Regardless of their national descent, they had become, by their bitter opposition to the church and its message, a synagogue carrying out the activities of God’s supreme adversary, Satan.

William Mounce defines Σατανᾶς as "an adversary, opponent, enemy"; it has special reference to Satan the Devil in the GNT. Compare Revelation 12:9-10; 20:2.

According to Ranko Stefanovic, emperor worship was mandatory and persecution from the local Jewish population was at fever pitch in the late first century: he also points to the slander that early Christians reportedly endured (Revelation of Jesus Christ, page 118).

μηδὲν φοβοῦ ἃ μέλλεις πάσχειν-"Do not fear the things you are about to suffer"

μηδὲν is accusative singular neuter of μηδείς ("no one, not anyone").

Grant R. Osborne (Revelation): They are not to fear ἃ μέλλεις πάσχειν (ha melleis paschein, what you are about to suffer). Their “suffering” is imminent and unavoidable. Radl (EDNT 2:404) points out that in this book the two categories of μέλλω in the NT epistles are combined: imminent persecution and the anticipation of the eschaton, as “martyrdom is connected with the end” (2:10; 3:10; 6:10–11; cf. 1:9; 8:13; 10:7; 12:4–5; 17:8). Their lot was not a pleasant one, but God assures them that he will be with them.

G.K. Beale (The Book of Revelation) notes that the μηδὲν φοβοῦ formulation comes from Isaiah. See Judges 6:23; Isaiah 41:10, 13; 43:1, 5; 44:2; 54:4; Lamentations 3:57; Daniel 10:12, 19.

ἰδοὺ μέλλει βάλλειν ὁ διάβολος ἐξ ὑμῶν εἰς φυλακὴν ἵνα πειρασθῆτε-"Look, the Devil will throw (cast) some of you into prison that you might be tested"

Osborne on ἰδοὺ: The imminent persecution is now further clarified by imminent imprisonment. John introduces this segment with his characteristic ἰδού (idou, behold), a term found twenty-six times in the Apocalypse, six times in the seven letters, where its purpose is to draw attention to a particularly crucial point, here the extent of the suffering awaiting them.

Moses Stuart points out that ἵνα could be telic ("in order that") or ecbatic ("so that"): he prefers the telic sense here, which might signify Satan's reason for tempting the Smyrnaean Christians. See A Commentary on the Apocalypse, page 472.

καὶ ἕξετε θλῖψιν ἡμερῶν δέκα-"and you will have tribulation ten days"

Beale: That they “will have ten days of tribulation” is an allusion to Dan. 1:12–15, where the “testing” of Daniel and his three friends “for ten days” is repeated twice. Most commentators seem to concur that ἡμερῶν δέκα represents a short period of time. See Stuart, page 472; Jurgen Roloff, Revelation, pages 48-49.

γίνου πιστὸς ἄχρι θανάτου, καὶ δώσω σοι τὸν στέφανον τῆς ζωῆς-"be faithful to death, and I will give you the crown of life"

γίνου is present middle imperative second singular of γίνομαι (see 1 Timothy 4:12; Revelation 3:2): the verb form occurs 5x in the GNT. It has the sense here of "prove to be, be found, show yourself to be" (BDAG 199).

Trench (Commentary on the Epistles to the Seven Churches in Asia, pages 146-147) argues that ἄχρι θανάτου "is an intensive, not an extensive, term." In other words, he believes the focus of Christ's utterance is not temporal, but it focuses on the quality or degree of suffering imposed on the Smyrnaeans (i.e., be faithful even unto death).

θανάτου likely signifies a "violent death" (Stuart) or the death penalty (ultimum supplicium).

"He who died and lived again will bestow upon them the crown of life, the crown of the kingdom, incorruptible, undefiled, and unfading. He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death."

See Milligan, William. The Expositor's Bible: The Book of Revelation (Kindle Locations 742-743). Kindle Edition. 

For δώσω σοι τὸν στέφανον τῆς ζωῆς, see also 1 Corinthians 9:24, 25; Philippians 3:14; 2 Timothy 4:8; James 1:12; 1 Peter 5:4; Revelation 3:10; 4:4. Robert L. Thomas explains τῆς ζωῆς in this verse and others: "A genitive of apposition, 'the crown which is life,' renders a more satisfactory sense for the expression" (Revelation 1-7, page 173). See how the NET Bible renders Revelation 2:10.

In the scholarly literature, there has been some discussion about the "crown of life." Margaret Barker offers this information (Revelation of Jesus Christ, page 105): "Peter exhorted the church elders to tend their flocks: 'And when the chief Shepherd is manifested you will obtain the unfading crown of glory' (1 Pet. 5.4), and the Community Rule at Qumran promised to the faithful 'healing, great peace in a long life and fruitfulness together with everlasting blessing and eternal joy in life without end, a crown of glory and a garment of majesty in unending light' (1QS IV). It has been suggested that this image derived from the victor's crown at the games, but it is more likely to be a reference to the high priest's golden diadem which was worn around his turban (Ben Sira 45.12; 1 Macc. 10.20)."

BDAG:  award or prize for exceptional service or conduct, prize, reward fig. (LXX; ApcEsdr 6:17, 21 p. 31, 26 and 31 Tdf.; as symbol of victory ANock, ClR 38, 1924, 108 n. 11). In 1 Cor 9:25 (ref. to incorruptibility) and 2 Cl 7:3 (s. 1 above) the ref. to crown or wreath is strongly felt, but in the pass. that follow the imagery of the wreath becomes less and less distinct, yet without loss of its primary significance as a symbol of exceptional merit (Ael. Aristid. 27, 36 K.=16 p. 397 D.: τῶν ἀθανάτων στ.; PSI 405, 3 [III b.c.]; Danker, Benefactor 468–71). Obj. gen. τ. δικαιοσύνης for righteousness (recognition of uprightness is a common topic in Gr-Rom. decrees; s. δικαιοσύνη 3a; on the implied exceptional character of the wearer of a crown s. LDeubner, De incubatione capitula duo, 1899, 26) 2 Ti 4:8 (on posthumous award s. New Docs 2, 50; cp. Soph., Phil. 1421f of glory after suffering). W. epexegetical gen. (this is the sense of στ. δικαιοσύνης EpArist 280; TestLevi 8:2) ὁ στέφ. τῆς ζωῆς (s. ζωή 2bβ) Js 1:12; Rv 2:10; cp. 3:11; ὁ τῆς ἀφθαρσίας στ. MPol 17:1; 19:2; ὁ ἀμαράντινος τῆς δόξης στ. 1 Pt 5:4 (cp. Jer 13:18 στ. δόξης; La 2:15; cp. 1QS 4:7; 1QH 9:25; τῆς βασιλείας στ. Hippol., Ref. 9, 17, 4).—ἐλευθέριος στ. AcPl Ha 2, 31.—MBlech, Studien zum Kranz bei den Griechen 1982 (lit.).—Schürer III/1 103f, n. 60 (lit). Pauly-W. XI 1588–1607; Kl. Pauly III 324f; BHHW II 999f.—New Docs 2, 50. DELG s.v. στέφω. M-M. EDNT. TW. Sv.

See Ralph Earle, Word Meanings, page 459; Trench, Commentary on the Epistles to the Seven Churches in Asia, pages 146-150; Roloff, Revelation, page 49.

"Power" in 2 Corinthians

 All References Are From SBLGNT

2 Corinthians 1:8-Οὐ γὰρ θέλομεν ὑμᾶς ἀγνοεῖν, ἀδελφοί, ^[a]ὑπὲρ τῆς θλίψεως ἡμῶν τῆς ^[b]γενομένης ἐν τῇ Ἀσίᾳ, ὅτι καθ’ ὑπερβολὴν ^[c]ὑπὲρ δύναμιν ἐβαρήθημεν, ὥστε ἐξαπορηθῆναι ἡμᾶς καὶ τοῦ ζῆν·

2 Corinthians 4:7-Ἔχομεν δὲ τὸν θησαυρὸν τοῦτον ἐν ὀστρακίνοις σκεύεσιν, ἵνα ἡ ὑπερβολὴ τῆς δυνάμεως ᾖ τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ μὴ ἐξ ἡμῶν·

2 Corinthians 6:7-ἐν λόγῳ ἀληθείας, ἐν δυνάμει θεοῦ· διὰ τῶν ὅπλων τῆς δικαιοσύνης τῶν δεξιῶν καὶ ἀριστερῶν,

2 Corinthians 8:3-ὅτι κατὰ δύναμιν, μαρτυρῶ, καὶ ^[a]παρὰ δύναμιν, αὐθαίρετοι

2 Corinthians 12:9-10-καὶ εἴρηκέν μοι· Ἀρκεῖ σοι ἡ χάρις μου· ἡ γὰρ ^[a]δύναμις ἐν ἀσθενείᾳ ^[b]τελεῖται. ἥδιστα οὖν μᾶλλον καυχήσομαι ἐν ταῖς ἀσθενείαις ^[c]μου, ἵνα ἐπισκηνώσῃ ἐπ’ ἐμὲ ἡ δύναμις τοῦ Χριστοῦ. διὸ εὐδοκῶ ἐν ἀσθενείαις, ἐν ὕβρεσιν, ἐν ἀνάγκαις, ἐν διωγμοῖς ^[d]καὶ στενοχωρίαις, ὑπὲρ Χριστοῦ· ὅταν γὰρ ἀσθενῶ, τότε δυνατός εἰμι.

2 Corinthians 12:12-τὰ μὲν σημεῖα τοῦ ἀποστόλου κατειργάσθη ἐν ὑμῖν ἐν πάσῃ ^[a]ὑπομονῇ, σημείοις ^[b]τε καὶ τέρασιν καὶ δυνάμεσιν.

2 Corinthians 13:4-καὶ ^[a]γὰρ ἐσταυρώθη ἐξ ἀσθενείας, ἀλλὰ ζῇ ἐκ δυνάμεως θεοῦ. καὶ γὰρ ἡμεῖς ἀσθενοῦμεν ἐν αὐτῷ, ἀλλὰ ^[b]ζήσομεν σὺν αὐτῷ ἐκ δυνάμεως θεοῦ εἰς ὑμᾶς.

See 2 Corinthians 1:9

Excerpt from Kingdom Through Covenant: Remarks About Bara (Screenshot)

Gentry, Peter John, and Stephen J. Wellum. Kingdom Through Covenant: A Biblical-Theological Understanding of the Covenants. Wheaton, Ill: Crossway, 2012.

Why Give to Jehovah? (A Modified Talk)

                                  What are our reasons for giving to Jehovah?

1) Just as a young child might give a small present to his parent in order to show love and respect for the parent, so we give to Jehovah out of love and appreciation for him. Jehovah's actions cause us to feel deep gratitude. Notice how King David acknowledged that all we receive from Jehovah makes us give to him in return. Let's read 1 Chronicles 29:11-14.

David pointed out that when we give to Jehovah, we're merely returning what he has already bestowed on us. He is the giver of every good gift and perfect present (James 1:17).

2) Secondly, giving is an expression of our worship. Revelation 4:11 exclaims: “You are worthy, Jehovah our God, to receive the glory and the honor and the power, because you created all things, and because of your will they came into existence and were created.”

Do you not agree that Jehovah is worthy to receive our best? Today, we have the same privilege that ancient Israel did, to give our best to Jehovah and in support of his organization. As he told Israel when they attended their yearly festivals, we don't want to appear empty-handed before Jehovah (Deuteronomy 16:16). He is worthy of our valuable things (Proverbs 3:9-10).

3) Lastly, giving is good for us: it is healthy to be a generous giver, and not just a receiver. Notice what Proverbs 29:21 tells us. Read.

This scripture reminds us of the child who gives a small gift to a parent, from the allowance that the child's parents gave to him. How does a parent feel when a child offers this kind of gift? Do their hearts not become filled with spontaneous joy? Just as a child's giving allows him or her to show love for parents, so giving to Jehovah expresses our love for him. As we continue to give, we imitate Jehovah's goodness and generosity. Giving benefits us and we draw closer to Jehovah.

Zechariah 4:6 (By Spirit, Not by Might)

Zechariah 4:6

The purpose of this entry is to understand the potential meaning of Zechariah 4:6 and its contextual setting.

ESV: Then he said to me, 'This is the word of the Lord to Zerubbabel: Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, says the Lord of hosts."

NET: Therefore he told me, "This is the Lord’s message to Zerubbabel: ‘Not by strength and not by power, but by my Spirit,'" says the Lord of Heaven’s Armies.

NWT 2013: He then said to me: “This is the word of Jehovah to Ze·rubʹba·bel: ‘“Not by a military force, nor by power, but by my spirit,” says Jehovah of armies.

Robert Alter (The Hebrew Bible): And he answered and said to me, saying, “This is the word of the LORD to Zerubbabel, saying, Not by might and not by power but by My spirit, said the LORD of Armies.

Historical Setting: Daniel F. O'Kennedy locates the historical setting for Zechariah sometime between the second and fourth year of Darius I, which possibly occurred circa 520-518 BCE. Hebrew Bible readers will recall that the Persian king Darius governed numerous areas by means of twenty satrapies or jurisdictional districts. He used satraps (governors) to administer these provinces: "Judah (Yehud in Aramaic) was part of the fifth satrapy called Abar Nahara. Yehud was ruled by a governor and consisted of a greatly reduced territory comprising Jerusalem and its environments" (O'Kennedy).

Conditions in sixth century BCE Judah apparently were less than favorable: the repatriated Jews were suffering economically, spiritually, and emotionally. So YHWH roused the prophets Haggai and Zechariah to initiate the rebuilding of Jerusalem's temple and to promote a spiritual revival in Judah. (See O'Kennedy). Along the way, the temple project would encounter much resistance from the surrounding peoples: this persecution is likely suggested by Zechariah 4:7-10.

Within the context of these events, Zerubbabel was appointed as governor of Judah and he led the Jews back to their homeland after the Babylonian Exile (Haggai 2:21). Haggai 1:1, 12, 14; 2:2 refers to him as the son of Shealtiel, but see 1 Chronicles 3:19. In any event, Zerubbabel was picked to oversee temple rebuilding in Judah; his name possibly means "seed of Babylon" or "scion of Babylon," but Zerubbabel also might have been known as Sheshbazzar, which could have been his royal court name.

The goal of this entry is not to give definitive answers to questions about Zerubbabel but rather to elucidate Zechariah 4:6: the aforementioned details simply provide a contextual setting for this important Bible verse.

Analysis of Zechariah 4:6: 

 וַיַּ֜עַן וַיֹּ֤אמֶר אֵלַי֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר זֶ֚ה דְּבַר־יְהוָ֔ה אֶל־זְרֻבָּבֶ֖ל לֵאמֹ֑ר לֹ֤א בְחַ֙יִל֙ וְלֹ֣א בְכֹ֔חַ כִּ֣י אִם־בְּרוּחִ֔י אָמַ֖ר יְהוָ֥ה צְבָאֹֽות׃

The speaker in 4:6 is the malak of the preceding verse, who acts as angelus interpres within Zechariah's prophetic work. Verse 6 is part of the night visions given to the prophet: it encompasses the fifth night vision in the series, and it's a response to Zechariah's inquiry. The angel or messenger now speaks these fateful words to the prophet, letting him know that YHWH (Jehovah) will be the ultimate source of the temple project.

Although an angel makes the utterance, what he speaks is debar-YHWH (the Word of Jehovah): the Most High God is the prophecy's absolute source (Zechariah 4:6-9; 6:9). Furthermore, these divine words were spoken to encourage both Zechariah and Zerubbabel: the former would stir the repatriated Jews to action while the latter would lead the rebuilding of Jehovah's temple in Jerusalem. Zerubbabel was appointed not only by humans, but by God (Haggai 2:20-23).

Jehovah's angel exclaims that the temple in Jerusalem will not be constructed by human strength, or might; the Hebrew term hayil potentially signifies effectual ability/power, an army or wealth (Boda, The Book of Zechariah). See 2 Samuel 23:20; Proverbs 31:10. Hayil "is never used in relation to God’s might, but it is not by definition ungodly (cf. Exod. 18:21, 25) and can be used for God’s purposes (Judg. 6:12; Isa. 60:5)." (Boda, The Book of Zechariah)

On the other hand, Bible writers use the word koah to describe God's creative activity, power conferred by God (Isaiah 40:29; Micah 3:8), God's governance of the world, and his dealings with ancient Israel. See the BDF entry for koach/koah.

George Klein writes: The next negative, “nor by power” (be-koah) indicates human resources in a more general sense (see Neh 4:10 where the same term describes the laborers' strength).311 The preposition be (NIV “by”) indicates agency or means.312 Together, the terms “might” and “power” form a hendiadys encompassing the panoply of human resources that one might marshal in order to effect God's will.

The point is that the temple would not be rebuilt by human strength or military might, but only through/by the ruah YHWH: the work would be accomplished by God's spirit operating on Zerubbabel, Joshua the priest, and the prophets.

Carol and Eric Meyers note the use of hendiadys in Zechariah 4:6 like Klein does: they point out that hayil "often means army or military force" (page 244). So the prophetic utterance strongly decries the use of human force or ingenuity; total dependence must be on the spirit of Jehovah: "God's 'spirit' is his involvement in and control over human events" (Meyers, ibid.). Jehovah's Witnesses describe God's ruah in this context as his "active force," which is distinguished from God's power. The holy spirit of God has been operative since the beginning of creation (Genesis 1:2; Psalm 33:6), and it would be the divine force that helped Judah to have a new temple despite malaise, opposition or interference from opposers:

"These memorable words have great resonance, but how do they follow from the vision of the golden lampstand? The golden lampstand, with its seven burning oil lamps, is to be a focal point in the Temple, its light a token of God’s radiant presence in His house, in the midst of His people. Thus the rebuilding of the Temple, in difficult material conditions and perhaps with some resistance from the Persian imperial power, will be consummated through God’s spirit, which is symbolized in the lampstand. The idea of imposing obstacles that are set as naught is spelled out in the next verse" (Alter, The Hebrew Bible).

References:

https://www.sots.ac.uk/wiki/zerubbabel/

O'Kennedy, Daniel F. : http://www.scielo.org.za/pdf/ote/v32n1/11.pdf

Insight on the Scriptures. Brooklyn, N.Y., U.S.A: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, International Bible Students Association, 1988. Print.

Hill, Andrew E. Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi: An Introduction and Commentary. Downers Grove, Illinois: IVP Academic, 2012. Print.

Klein, George. New American Commentary Vol. 21B: Zechariah (Kindle Locations 4848-4853). B&H Publishing. Kindle Edition.

Boda, Mark J. The Book of Zechariah. The New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2016.

Meyers, Carol L. and Meyers, Eric M. Haggai, Zechariah 1-8. AB 25B. New York: Doubleday, 1987.  

Alter, Robert. The Hebrew Bible. New York: WW Norton, 2018.

Paradise Restored to Mankind By Theocracy. New York: Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, 1972.

BDAG Greek-English Lexicon Entry for φῡλή ("Tribe")

φυλή, ῆς, ἡ (φῦλον ‘race, tribe, class’; Pind., Hdt.+).
① a subgroup of a nation characterized by a distinctive blood line, tribe, of the 12 tribes of Israel (Diod S 40, 3, 3 δώδεκα φυλαί of the ‘Judeans’; LXX; TestAbr A; cp. AscIs 3:2 τὰς ἐννέα ἥμισυ θυλάς; TestBenj 9:2; Demetr.: 722 Fgm. 6 Jac.; Jos., Ant. 11, 133) Hb 7:13; Rv 7:4; 1 Cl 43:2ab, 4; GJs 1:1; 6:3; AcPl Ha 8, 3. Certain tribes are mentioned by name: Ἀσήρ Lk 2:36. Βενιαμίν Ac 13:21; Ro 11:1; Phil 3:5. Ἰούδα Rv 5:5; cp. Hb 7:14; all the tribes Rv 7:5–8 (except that, according to ancient trad., Manasseh takes the place of Dan, since the latter is the tribe fr. which, because of Gen 49:17, the Antichrist is alleged to come [WBousset, D. Antichrist 1895, 112ff; s. Iren. 5, 30, 2; other reff. Charles, ICC Rv I 208f]). Of Mary ἦν τῆς φυλῆς τοῦ Δαυίδ GJs 10:1b; cp. vs. 1a. αἱ δώδεκα φυλαὶ τοῦ Ἰσραήλ Mt 19:28; Lk 22:30; cp. Rv 21:12; B 8:3ab; πᾶσαι αἱ φ. τοῦ λαοῦ GJs 24:3; in imagery Js 1:1; Hs 9, 17, 1f.

② a relatively large people group that forms a sociopolitical subgroup of the human race, nation, people (X., Cyr. 1, 2, 5; Dionys. Hal. 2, 7) πᾶσαι αἱ φυλαὶ τῆς γῆς (Gen 12:3; 28:14; Ezk 20:32) Mt 24:30; Rv 1:7; 1 Cl 10:3 (Gen 12:3). W. synonymous expressions (TestAsh 7:6 χώρα, φυλή, γλῶσσα) πάντα τὰ ἔθνη, φυλὰς καὶ γλώσσας 2 Cl 17:4; cp. Rv 5:9; 7:9; 11:9; 13:7; 14:6.—B. 1317. DELG s.v. φῦλον. M-M. TW.

[This excerpt does not violate fair use law for the USA, and it demonstrates that φῡλή applies to more than Israel in the GNT]

John Calvin Commentary Regarding Ephesians 4:30

And grieve not. As the Holy Spirit dwells in us, to him every part of our soul and of our body ought to be devoted. But if we give ourselves up to aught that is impure, we may be said to drive him away from making his abode with us; and, to express this still more familiarly, human affections, such as joy and grief, are ascribed to the Holy Spirit. Endeavour that the Holy Spirit may dwell cheerfully with you, as in a pleasant and joyful dwelling, and give him no occasion for grief. Some take a different view of it, that we grieve the Holy Spirit in others, when we offend by filthy language, or, in any other way, godly brethren, who are led by the Spirit of God. (Romans 8:14.) Whatever is contrary to godliness is not only disrelished by godly ears, but is no sooner heard than it produces in them deep grief and pain. But that Paul's meaning was different appears from what follows.

By whom ye are sealed. As God has sealed us by his Spirit, we grieve him when we do not follow his guidance, but pollute ourselves by wicked passions. No language can adequately express this solemn truth, that the Holy Spirit rejoices and is glad on our account, when we are obedient to him in all things, and neither think nor speak anything, but what is pure and holy; and, on the other hand, is grieved, when we admit anything into our minds that is unworthy of our calling. Now, let any man reflect what shocking wickedness there must be in grieving the Holy Spirit to such a degree as to compel him to withdraw from us. The same mode of speaking is used by the prophet Isaiah, but in a different sense; for he merely says, that they "vexed his Holy Spirit," (Isaiah 63:10.) in the same sense in which we are accustomed to speak of vexing the mind of a man. By whom ye are sealed. The Spirit of God is the seal, by which we are distinguished from the wicked, and which is impressed on our hearts as a sure evidence of adoption.

Harold Hoehner and Ephesians 4:30

Harold W. Hoehner (1935-2009) specialized in NT studies at Dallas Theological Seminary. More significant for me, he wrote one of the most detailed commentaries about Ephesians that I've ever read. For this entry, I want to discuss Hoehner's remarks about the textual issues surrounding Ephesians 4:30--as a reminder, SBLGNT has this reading for 4:30:

καὶ μὴ λυπεῖτε τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον τοῦ θεοῦ, ἐν ᾧ ἐσφραγίσθητε εἰς ἡμέραν ἀπολυτρώσεως.

Hoehner contends that the coordinating conjunction καὶ links 4:30 with the preceding verse and its imperatival statement, πᾶς λόγος σαπρὸς ἐκ τοῦ στόματος ὑμῶν μὴ ἐκπορευέσθω. So he believes that the command to utter no unwholesome word and μὴ λυπεῖτε τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον τοῦ θεοῦ belong together conceptually. Like other commentators, Hoehner likewise reckons that since the holy spirit can be grieved, then the spirit of God must be personal (i.e., a divine person). He also invokes Isaiah 63:10 and other texts to support this position.

Next, Hoehner comes to ἐν ᾧ ἐσϕραγίσθητε εἰς ἡμέραν ἀπολυτρώσεως, which is rendered “by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.” While he realizes that  ἐν ᾧ could possibly be referring to the sphere in which Christian sealing occurs, Hoehner professes that the construction "more likely refers to the instrument with which we were sealed (cf. 1:13)." That is, he maintains that Paul is depicting the spirit as the divine instrument whereby Christians are sealed: this claim is similar to Wallace's thought about the dative being able to portray means (instrumentality) with personal agents.

William J. Larkin supplies these observations (Ephesians: A Handbook on the Greek Text, page 103):

ἐν ᾧ. Instrumental (congruent with the dative of means in 1:13; not location, contra Salmond, 348, or sphere of reference, contra Lenski, 584, both of which tie the Spirit more loosely to the verb’s action; see also 1:3 on ἐν Χριστῷ).

ἐσφραγίσθητε. Aor pass ind 2nd pl σφραγίζω. God the Father is the implied agent. On the meaning, see 1:13 on ἐσφραγίσθητε.

I can accept that Paul's use of ἐν ᾧ is instrumental here, but it still appears that theology primarily drives the rendering "by whom." If the relative clause is an example of instrumentality here, then why translate with "by whom"? I will attempt to demonstrate theology drives how translators render Ephesians 4:30 in a future entry.

Rotherham EB: "And be not grieving the Holy Spirit of God, wherewith ye have been sealed unto a day of redemption"

See Joshua M. Greever, "What Does It Mean To Grieve The Holy Spirit (Ephesians 4:30)?" JBTM 16:1 (Spring 2019) .

Korah: A Warning Example Against Pride and Overconfidence (Edited for This Blog)

The Cambridge English Dictionary defines the verb "beware"  in this way: "used to warn someone to be very careful about something or someone"

For instance, when we see a sign that says "beware of the dog," it alerts us to the fact that we need to proceed with caution or be careful (see Philippians 3:2 KJV).

Tonight we're discussing the need to beware of pride and overconfidence. Why is this warning necessary?

Please turn to Numbers 16:1-3

While the nation of Israel was heading toward the Promised Land, an acute  problem arose: Korah, the son of Izhar, started to murmur and by this action, he was able to influence others to rise up against Moses. Verse 3 reveals the attitude that Korah assumed: "We have had enough of you!" he exclaimed. Can you just sense the arrogance, pride and overconfidence that Korah displayed? He took it upon himself to oppose the prophet with whom Jehovah spoke face to face (Numbers 7:89; 12:8). Yet there was more:

As we continue with Numbers 16:8-10, note how Moses pleads with Korah and the accompanying rebels (Read)

Despite Moses' earnest pleas, pride caused Korah to forget the privileges he already had: he was a respected Levite who enjoyed many sacred duties. The Levites performed numerous services at Jehovah's tabernacle that facilitated true worship; they interceded for the nation of Israel and even carried the sacred Ark of the covenant through the wilderness. But pride got the better of Korah and made him lack appreciation for his sacred privileges (Hebrews 12:15-16). Hence, what were the consequences of his prideful actions?

Numbers 16:32, 35 (Read)--the results were disastrous. Because Korah and his followers dared to act in a priestly capacity, which was not rightfully theirs, Jehovah destroyed them. Korah and his followers were guilty of rebellious talk and they did not respect Jehovah's representative.

An important lesson for us is that no matter how long we've been serving Jehovah , no matter what our accomplishments and privileges are, we must be humble. Those with many years of experience and privileges especially need to be humble: all of must beware of pride and overconfidence.

Assessing the REV Note for Ephesians 4:30

I read the REV every now and again. For those interested in learning more, the REV website explains just what this Bible version tries to accomplish:

The Revised English Version® (REV®) is the New Testament version by Spirit & Truth Fellowship International®. We call it the REV because we are presenting a revised version of earlier English versions, primarily the American Standard Version of 1901 (ASV), which we have used as the base text for our work.

 For more information on the REV, see https://www.stfonline.org/rev

The purpose of this blog entry is to examine Ephesians 4:30 (REV) and to make some comments about the rendering of this text.

"And do not grieve the holy spirit of God with which you were sealed until the day of redemption."

I now want to focus on some aspects of the relative clause, "with which you were sealed . . ." The REV note informs us that this portion of Ephesians 4:30 grammatically could be translated “by whom you were sealed,” or “with which you were sealed.” However, REV maintains that one difficulty with using "by whom" is that ἐν ᾧ ἐσφραγίσθητε would then be a dative of agency. Yet, the REV claims that is an unlikely way for Greek to express agency.

The REV note for Ephesians 4:30 quotes Daniel Wallace (GGBB, page 164), who explains that Greek customarily expresses agency by employing ὑπὸ + the genitive case or διὰ + the genitive (see Acts 4:25); on the other hand, it does not seem that ἐν + the dative expresses agency: Wallace apparently calls such usage, rare or nonexistent in Greek (GGBB, page 373). So if ἐν + the dative does not express agency, then REV argues that Ephesians 4:30 is not saying that God (the Holy Spirit or supposed third "Person" of the Trinity) is the agent "by whom" Christians are sealed, but rather, one should opt for the translation “the holy spirit with which you were sealed,” thereby making the construction an instrumental dative "and that is quite common in the New Testament" (REV note). Furthermore, this bible contends that Holy Spirit refers to God whereas holy spirit (lower case) signifies the gift of God.

As Wallace continues his discussion of how the GNT expresses agency, some other points he makes are that the only clear examples of datival agency occur with a perfect passive verb form (page 165). Wallace's remarks on pages 165-166 about the spirit of God illuminate his view of progressive revelation and GNT pneumatology: they are worthy of deep consideration.

What may we conclude from the REV note that discusses the relative clause in Ephesians 4:30? The REV is correct that Wallace thinks ἐν + the dative expressing agency is "a rare or nonexistent category, " but Wallace equally maintains this use of the Greek preposition ἐν likely conveys "the idea of means"; in other words, ἐν + the dative may express how a personal agent wields a non-personal instrument. Hence, Wallace contends that ἐν + the dative commonly occurs with persons in view although they may be conceived as impersonal (i.e., used as instruments by someone else). See GGBB, page 373. An example that Wallace gives is parents being used by God to discipline a child. In this case, the parents would be personal instruments of God or the means by which God disciplines the child: but since they're instruments, Wallace contends they are conceived as being impersonal.

Could this line of reasoning affect one's understanding and treatment of Ephesians 4:30? Might ἐν ᾧ ἐσφραγίσθητε be applied to a personal agent, who uses means to achieve a certain effect? I will post future entries dealing with this subject.

Addendum: Murray J. Harris believes that  ἐν + the dative expresses agency in Matthew 9:34 (ἐν τω̨̃ ἄρχοντι): he repeats this claim more than once in his work, Prepositions and Theology in the GNT. Mark Strauss similarly categorizes Mark 3:22 as a dative of agency: ἐν τῷ ἄρχοντι.

Defining Ablaut/Compensatory Lengthening

After reading books on ablaut and compensatory lengthening for a couple of days, I know why I decided not to become a linguist. My head is now spinning, but for your information, compensatory lengthening has been defined in the following ways:

https://www.yourdictionary.com/compensatory-lengthening:

"compensatory-lengthening. (linguistics) The lengthening of a vowel sound which occurs when a following consonant is lost, an extreme form of fusion exhibited for example by many non-rhotic British dialects of English, which drop the /ɹ/ from /ɑɹt/ but compensatorily lengthen the /ɑ/, resulting in /ɑːt/ ('art')."

https://www.laits.utexas.edu/phonology/turkish/turk_compens_length.html:

"In cases of compensatory lengthening, a vowel is lengthened following the deletion of a consonant or vowel that was present in the underlying representation. Compensatory lengthening (CL) is often recorded as a sound change from one stage of a language to another."

Dictionary.com:

"noun Grammar.

(in Indo-European languages) regular alternation in the internal phonological structure of a word element, especially alternation of a vowel, that is coordinated with a change in grammatical function or combination, as in English sing, sang, sung, song; apophony."

On the subject of Bill Mounce and ablaut, see https://jktauber.com/2019/11/21/mounce-on-ablaut-or-not/

Mounce defines ablaut as vowel length change, whether the change is quantitative or qualitative: his definition chiefly applies to ancient Greek.

Ephesians 4:30 (Grieve God's Spirit?)--In Progress

Greek: καὶ μὴ λυπεῖτε τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον τοῦ θεοῦ, ἐν ᾧ ἐσφραγίσθητε εἰς ἡμέραν ἀπολυτρώσεως.

ESV: "And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption."

NWT 2013: "Also, do not be grieving God’s holy spirit, with which you have been sealed for a day of releasing by ransom."

Questions sometimes arise concerning the way to understand and translate Ephesians 4:30: it seems that the verse is a clear proof of the holy spirit's (Holy Spirit's) deity. Trinitarians claim that this verse proves the holy spirit is God--fully God, but is that necessarily the case?

The language of grieving God's spirit (τὸπνεῦμα τὸἅγιον τοῦ θεοῦ) originates with the Hebrew Bible. See Isaiah 63:10. Paul also warns against quenching the spirit in 1 Thessalonians 4:8; 5:19.

While commenting on Ephesians 4:30, one website claims:

When we sin, the Holy Spirit experiences grief in a manner appropriate to His deity. He cannot stand the presence of sin and hates it when we, His dwelling place, entertain transgression (Hab. 1:13). Yet even though the reality of His grief proves the Spirit’s personhood, His grief is not exactly the same as ours.

So the writer asserts that the "Holy Spirit" is masculine (or portrayed as masculine) by using the pronouns "He" and "His." This language likewise suggests that the writer believes the spirit of God is a divine person; after all, the site refers to the spirit's "deity." The claim is that the "Holy Spirit" is God and the last part of the quote explicitly identifies God's pneuma as a person and being able to grieve the spirit apparently demonstrates divine personhood in this case.

However, does grieving the spirit necessarily mean the spirit is a person? Firstly, the Hebrew Bible makes an intimate nexus between YHWH (Jehovah) and the holy spirit. In the verse from Isaiah (63:10), the prophet speaks of making "God's spirit" (i.e., the spirit belonging to God) grieved or feel hurt (saddened). Saddening God's spirit could be analogous to making a person feel sad, yet that would not mean that the spirit of the person is equally a person or personal. The Bible uses "spirit" (pneuma) to signify the dominant mental attitude of someone, whether the person is happy, sad or angry. Compare Genesis 26:35. We would not usually identify someone's spirit with the person himself/herself.

Additionally, I've often wondered if Paul was using the language of grieving in a metaphorical sense, that is, was he saying that the spirit might be saddened in a figurative manner by Christian disobedience? In any event, we often speak of defying gravity. Yet gravity is obviously impersonal--however one defines it.

One other point that I hardly see mentioned in discussions of Ephesians 4:30: we have neuter terminology in ἐν ᾧ ἐσφραγίσθητε. Most translations choose to render the construction with a masculine language ("by whom") but NWT translates by using "with which . . ." Another rendition is by S.M. Baugh: "And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, in whom you were sealed for the day of redemption."

David Bentley Hart (The New Testament):  "And do not grieve the Spirit, the
Holy One of God, by which you were sealed with a seal for a day when the
fee for liberation is paid."

The relative pronoun ᾧ is neuter, and τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον is too. (Compare 1 Corinthians 6:19; Ephesians 1:12-13; 2:21; 5:18.) So why do translations then render Ephesians 4:30 with a masculine term?

I did not find an explanation in S.M. Baugh's commentary for Ephesians; A.T. Robertson (Word Pictures) simply writes: "In whom (εν ωι — en hōi). Not 'in which.'” The Anchor Bible commentary on Ephesians makes some interesting observations, but does not address this grammatical issue.

Does context or theology affect how translations render Ephesians 4:30? Which rendering might best comport with the neuter noun phrase in the verse? On the other hand, I realize the difference between grammatical gender and other ways to define gender.

J.P. Heil (Ephesians, page 200):

"There is a subtle progression then from being sealed with the Holy Spirit (1:13) to being sealed within the realm of being in union with the Holy Spirit (4:30). The Holy Spirit 'in whom' (ἐν ᾧ) you were sealed recalls that the audience who have been sealed with the Holy Spirit are now living within the dynamic realm of being 'in the Spirit' (cf. 'in one Spirit' [ἐν ἑνὶ Πνεύματι, 2:18]; 'in the Spirit' [ἐν πνεύματι, 2:22; 3:5; 5:18; 6:18]). In other words, you have not only been sealed with the Holy Spirit (1:13), but in your union with the Holy Spirit you have been sealed for the day of redemption (4:30)."

2 Timothy 4:2 (Grammatical and Lexical Analysis)--Research in the Works

Contextual setting for the Second Letter to Timothy: There are many theories and proposals, but I submit that Paul was writing to the young overseer Timothy in this letter. The apostle potentially composed this missive between 62-64 CE while imprisoned in Rome for the second time: he speaks of death being imminent to which 2 Timothy 4:6-8 testifies. Timothy, a spiritual child to Paul, an overseer, and co-worker with the apostle evidently was in Ephesus when the letter was written: it is possible that he faced spiritual opponents, but it's less than certain who these Ephesian heretics were.

Greek (SBLGNT): κήρυξον τὸν λόγον, ἐπίστηθι εὐκαίρως ἀκαίρως, ἔλεγξον, ἐπιτίμησον, παρακάλεσον, ἐν πάσῃ μακροθυμίᾳ καὶ διδαχῇ.

NRSV: "proclaim the message; be persistent whether the time is favorable or unfavorable; convince, rebuke, and encourage, with the utmost patience in teaching."

Grammatical Parsing of 2 Timothy 4:2: κήρυξον τὸν λόγον: κήρυξον is the first aorist active imperative of κηρύσσω (see Robertson's WP).

τὸν λόγον is the direct object of the verb, so the phrase (determiner + noun) fittingly appears in the accusative case: the construction could be rendered "preach the message" or "preach the word." Mounce thinks the article is anaphoric and links τὸν λόγον with πᾶσα γραφὴ θεόπνευστος in 2 Timothy 3:16-17.

ἐπίστηθι εὐκαίρως ἀκαίρως:  ἐπίστηθι is aorist active imperative 2nd singular of ἐφίστημι.

Here we see the occurrence of two adverbs that both pun another Greek word (καιρός), and they combine to provide a rhetorical contrast ("favorable season, unfavorable season." NET Bible has "in season, out of season" in its footnote). Both adverbs modify ἐπίστηθι.

For ἔλεγξον, compare Matthew 18:15; Sirach 19:13-15. Louw-Nida has "rebuke" for this word: see semantic domain 33.417.

Another issue is whether εὐκαίρως ἀκαίρως are objective (pertaining to those heard by Timothy) or subjective (pertaining to Timothy himself).

ἔλεγξον, ἐπιτίμησον, παρακάλεσον: all three aorist verbs comprise a fivefold cluster with other imperatival verbs in 2 Timothy 4:2a-e. See Paul and the Ancient Letter Form, page 248, edited by Stanley Porter.

ἔλεγξον is the aorist active imperative 2nd singular of ἐλέγχω.
ἐπιτίμησον is the aorist active imperative 2nd singular of ἐπιτιμάω.

παρακάλεσον is the aorist active imperative 2nd singular of παρακαλέω.

The string of 2nd person singular aoristic forms indicates that Timothy is the addressee.

ἐν πάσῃ μακροθυμίᾳ καὶ διδαχῇ: ἐν πάσῃ is a prepositional phrase that modifies μακροθυμίᾳ καὶ διδαχῇ. The prepositional phrase describes the instrumentality or means by which something is done (i.e., "with all patience and teaching" or "with complete patience and teaching" as Bill Mounce renders the construction. Compare NWT 2013).

Expositor's Greek Testament: "ἐν πάσῃ μακροθυμίᾳ καὶ διδαχῇ: This qualifies each of the three preceding imperatives; and πάσῃ belongs to διδαχῇ as well as to μακρ., with the utmost patience and the most painstaking instruction."

Compare Titus 1:9. See the analysis in Bengel's Gnomon: he perceives significance in κήρυξον τὸν λόγον, ἐπίστηθι εὐκαίρως ἀκαίρως, ἔλεγξον, ἐπιτίμησον, παρακάλεσον being asyndetic. Notice the examples that Bengel also musters to elucidate the functionality of the adverbs εὐκαίρως ἀκαίρως.

From Rogers and Rogers-κήρυξον aor. imp. act. κηρύσσω to proclaim as a herald, to preach (s. 1 Tim. 2:7). Not “begin to preach,” but “preach as your first priority” (GGBB, 721). ἐπίστηθι aor. imp. pass. ἐφίστημι to take one’s stand, to stand by, to be at hand. The word was also used in a military sense—to stay at one’s post—but here it means to be at one’s task and indicates that the Christian minister must always be on duty (Kelly; Guthrie).

Abbott-Smith: ἀκαίρως, adv. (< ἄκαιρος, unseasonable), [in LXX: Si 35 (32):4 *;]  out of season, unseasonably: opp. to εὐκαίρως (q.v.), II Ti 4:2 (cf. Cremer, 740; MM, VGT, s.v.). †

Linda Belleville (Cornerstone Biblical Commentary): Parakaleō [TG3870, ZG4151] is commonly used, with several possible meanings. The most likely meanings here are “exhort” (urge strongly to do something) or “comfort” (instill with courage or cheer). The context favors the former.

Donald Guthrie (The Pastoral Epistles): All these imperatives must be effected with great patience and careful instruction. The first denotes the manner and the second denotes the method which Timothy must adopt; makrothymia here translated ‘patience’ is a favourite Pauline expression, and is generally used of God’s forbearance. In Colossians 1:11 it is used, as here, of the Christian’s patience in trying circumstances.

Ceslas Spicq's Entry for φιλόστοργος in TLNT, Volume 3 (An Excerpt)

 

Verses Dealing with Christian Sympathy

1 Peter 3:8 (SBLGNT): Τὸ δὲ τέλος πάντες ὁμόφρονες, συμπαθεῖς, φιλάδελφοι, εὔσπλαγχνοι, ταπεινόφρονες,

Hebrews 2:16-18 (SBLGNT): οὐ γὰρ δήπου ἀγγέλων ἐπιλαμβάνεται, ἀλλὰ σπέρματος Ἀβραὰμ ἐπιλαμβάνεται. ὅθεν ὤφειλεν κατὰ πάντα τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς ὁμοιωθῆναι, ἵνα ἐλεήμων γένηται καὶ πιστὸς ἀρχιερεὺς τὰ πρὸς τὸν θεόν, εἰς τὸ ἱλάσκεσθαι τὰς ἁμαρτίας τοῦ λαοῦ· ἐν ᾧ γὰρ πέπονθεν αὐτὸς πειρασθείς, δύναται τοῖς πειραζομένοις βοηθῆσαι.

Hebrews 4:15 (SBLGNT): οὐ γὰρ ἔχομεν ἀρχιερέα μὴ δυνάμενον συμπαθῆσαι ταῖς ἀσθενείαις ἡμῶν, πεπειρασμένον δὲ κατὰ πάντα καθ’ ὁμοιότητα χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας.

Hebrews 5:1-4 (SBLGNT): Πᾶς γὰρ ἀρχιερεὺς ἐξ ἀνθρώπων λαμβανόμενος ὑπὲρ ἀνθρώπων καθίσταται τὰ πρὸς τὸν θεόν, ἵνα προσφέρῃ δῶρά τε καὶ θυσίας ὑπὲρ ἁμαρτιῶν, μετριοπαθεῖν δυνάμενος τοῖς ἀγνοοῦσι καὶ πλανωμένοις ἐπεὶ καὶ αὐτὸς περίκειται ἀσθένειαν, καὶ δι’ αὐτὴν ὀφείλει, καθὼς περὶ τοῦ λαοῦ, οὕτως καὶ περὶ αὑτοῦ προσφέρειν περὶ ἁμαρτιῶν. καὶ οὐχ ἑαυτῷ τις λαμβάνει τὴν τιμήν, ἀλλὰ καλούμενος ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ, καθώσπερ καὶ Ἀαρών.

From Augustine's Confessions (Book 11.XXIII.30)--Time As Extension

From Augustine's Confessions Book 11.XXIII.30

Let no man tell me, therefore, that the motions of the heavenly bodies constitute time. For when the sun stood still at the prayer of a certain man in order that he might gain his victory in battle, the sun stood still but time went on. For in as long a span of time as was sufficient the battle was fought and ended. I see, then, that time is a certain kind of extension. But do I see it, or do I only seem to? Thou, O Light and Truth, wilt show me.

See Joshua 10:12-14.

Christian Empathy?

One definition for empathy: "the action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts, and experience of another of either the past or present without having the feelings, thoughts, and experience fully communicated in an objectively explicit manner; also: the capacity for this" (Merriam-Webster)

Some people give this colloquial definition for empathy: the act of putting one's self in another person's shoes or walking a mile in the shoes of another.

Empathy is a good thing: right? What about having empathy for unbelievers (non-worshipers of Jehovah)? Is that ever allowed? Or should a Christian only empathize with his spiritual brothers and sisters?

Granted, Jehovah God empathized with his ancient people Israel (Isaiah 63:9; Zechariah 2:8). Yet, does that mean God does not feel empathy for those who don't serve Him, but who suffer daily? That is not the view of the biblical God: Jehovah reaches out to those who oppose Him and sin against the divine will (Romans 5:8). Furthermore, what does God (through the apostles) encourage His worshipers to do?

Besides weeping with those who weep and sharing in the joy of others (Romans 12:15), the apostle Paul exhorted first-century Christians to become imitators of God as beloved children and urged them to continue walking in love (Ephesians 5:1): empathy is an extension of Christian love (1 John 4:8).

So while Christians do not tolerate sin in their midst (Revelation 2:23), it is not sinful to feel empathy for those who weep--even for unbelieving ones who suffer (Matthew 5:43-45). Jehovah's Witnesses reach out to others with the good news of the Kingdom and they even provide material help to unbelievers at times, in imitation of their great God and Sovereign (Galatians 6:10). Moreover, we try to put ourselves in the place of others, to understand the pain they're feeling.

Of course, like any other quality, it's possible for empathy to become distorted. One could begin to make empathy the criterion for what's ultimately good or start to tolerate gross sins against Jehovah God as a result of "empathy." However, the misuse of empathy no more vitiates this fine quality than the misuse of love vitiates that quality. Therefore, it seems that Christians should be empathetic and sympathetic as directed by the scriptures.

See https://www.christianitytoday.com/scot-mcknight/2021/march/empathy-is-virtue.html

A Brief Introduction to Latin Conjunctions

This blog entry constitutes an all too brief introduction to Latin conjunctions. As I work my way through this post, you will likely see a connection between Latin and Greek conjunctions.

Definition of conjunction: "In grammar, a connective or connecting word; an indeclinable word which serves to unite sentences or the clauses of a sentence and words, joining two or more simple sentences into one compound one, and continuing it at the pleasure of the writer or speaker" (American Dictionary of the English Language by Webster, 1828).

Conjunctions may function coordinately or subordinately. What follows below represents only a portion of what there is to be known about Latin conjunctions.

I. Types of Conjunctions and Their Functions:

1. Copulative-particles that join words or sentences together. According to A Grammar of the Latin Language (Karl G. Zumpt):

Conjunctions may be divided, in reference to their signification, into the following classes :

1. These are copulative : et, ac, atque, que enclitic, neque or nec containing a negation which belongs to the verb, and (the two negatives destroying each other) nec or neque non equivalent to et. Both the words for “also’ belong to this class, etiam and quoque, with the adverbial item and itidem. As these particles connect things which are to be considered jointly, so the disjunctives those which are to be considered singly.  

See Section LXIII of Zumpt.

δέ in Greek is copulative and adversative: but the two uses are not always clearly to be distinguished (Smyth, sec. 2834).

"καί is both a copulative conjunction (and) connecting words, clauses, or sentences; and an adverb meaning also, even" (Smyth, sec. 2868). See also sec. 2903 of Smyth.

2. Disjunctive-As noted above, disjunctive conjunctions/particles connect things which are meant to be considered singly. Bennett's New Latin Grammar provides this information:

Disjunctive Conjunctions indicate an alternative.

1.

a) aut must be used when the alternatives are mutually exclusive; as,—

cita mors venit aut victōria laeta, (either) swift death or glad victory comes.

b) vel, -ve (enclitic) imply a choice between the alternatives; as,—

quī aethēr vel caelum nōminātur, which is called aether or heaven.

See sec. 342 of Bennett. Disjunctive particles may be used correlatively as well (e.g., vel . . . vel, aut . . . aut, and sive . . . sive)

Smyth (sec. 2856): "Disjunctive ἤ (Epic ἠέ) or (uel, aut); and repeated: ἢ . . . ἤ either . . . or (uel . . . uel, aut . . . aut) to connect the two members more closely."

Another example of correlatives used disjunctively is "neve . . . neve" (neither . . . nor)

3. Inferential-Conjunctions that express a deductive relationship between words (e.g., therefore). Latin expresses this idea by the use of such words as ergo, itaque, igitur, ideo, idcirco, proinde, proptera, and more. See Grammar of the Latin Language by Leonhard Schmitz (page 157).

Greek has inferential particles; for example, ἄρα, οὖν

4. Adversative-"implying a connection of words, but a contrast in thought: as, sed, but" (Allen and Greenough's New Latin Grammar, 223a).

Other Latin adversatives are autem, verum, at, tamen, and enim (inter alia).

II. Clarification of Terms Commonly Used in Latin Grammar:

A. Asyndeton-The Greek word ἀσύνδετον can signify a construction "not bound together." The Roman historian Tacitus employs asyndeton (zero conjunction) in order to move a story along quickly and to aid the memory of his audience. As David A. Black likewise points out, a noted example of this rhetorical device reportedly comes from Julius Caesar: Veni, vidi, vici ("I came, I saw, I conquered").

The Apostle Paul uses asyndeton in Romans 1:29-32, but I find 1 Corinthians 13:7 particularly easy to remember because of the stylistic device used there. For more information on asyndeton and its opposing device, polysyndeton, see D.A. Black's Linguistics for Students of NT Greek, p. 134.

B. Enclitic-The way that "enclitic" is being used here, it means "an enclitic word, as Latin que 'and' in arma virumque, “arms and the man.”

The enclitic -que may remind you of the famed controversy between the western and eastern church over the filioque clause. This example illustrates how Latin enclitics function.

Used adjectivally, the word can be defined thus:

(used of a word) "closely connected in pronunciation with the preceding word and not having an independent accent or phonological status."

See https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/enclitic

Dissertation by Aleksander Roman Michalak About "Angelic Warriors" (Open Access Link)

See http://www.tara.tcd.ie/handle/2262/78102

Citation:

Aleksander Roman Michalak, "Conceptions of warlike angels in literature of the late Second Temple period", [thesis], Trinity College (Dublin, Ireland). Department of Religions and Theology, 2011, pp 372.

Torah: Its Meaning and Textual Usage

What does the word "Torah/torah" mean? How is this Hebrew word employed in academic circles and religious textbooks? Moreover, how does the Bible use the term?

1) Definition: The Holman Bible Dictionary gives this definition for torah-"The Hebrew term most frequently translated 'law' in the Old Testament is torah , used more than 200 times. The central idea of torah is that of instruction received from a superior authority on how to live. Torah in the Old Testament came to mean the way of life for faithful Israelites. The Torah is more than just “laws”; it includes the story of God's dealing with humankind and with Israel.

See https://www.studylight.org/dictionaries/eng/hbd/l/law-ten-commandments-torah.html


2) How Scholars and Judaic Practitioners Use the Word: Torah sometimes refers to the first five books of the Hebrew Bible (the Pentateuch). But it may refer to law in general, to the oral torah, and to the entirety of Scripture and tradition. 

Mark Rooker illustrates one way "torah" may be used:

"The Ten Commandments have been viewed within Judaism as the essence of the Torah. Many have noted that all 613 laws of the Torah correspond to the 613 letters of the Ten Commandments in Exod 20, hence the Decalogue appears to represent the embodiment of all laws and statutes of the Pentateuch. Since the first century BC, the Ten Commandments have been regarded as a summary of biblical law or as headings for all its categories."

See Rooker, Mark. The Ten Commandments: Ethics for the Twenty-First Century (New American Commentary Studies in Bible and Theology) (Kindle Locations 326-330). B&H Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

Also see https://brill.com/view/book/edcoll/9789047410737/BP000010.xml

Compare https://fosterheologicalreflections.blogspot.com/2020/07/defining-torah.html

3) The Biblical use of Torah:

Genesis 26:5; Exodus 12:49; 13:9; 16:4, 28; 18:16, 20; 24:12; Leviticus 6:9, 14, 25; 7:1; Ezra 7:6, 10 (et passim).

Israel's Unique God (Paul Rainbow Excerpt)

 

Word Study on Philostorgos (Part III)--Romans 12:10

Rogers and Rogers: φιλόστοργος authentically loving, tenderly devoted, full of tenderness (TLNT; TDNT). It denotes the delicate affections mutually rendered by those who cherish one another w. natural affection, as the innate love of a mother, or as the love between a man and wife, or as parents and children, brothers and sisters (Godet; TLNT; NDIEC, 2:100-103; 3:40-43; 4:136).

Douglas Moo: After introducing all the exhortations in vv. 9–21 with a call for sincere love, Paul now narrows his focus, admonishing Christians to be “devoted” (philostorgoi) to one another in “brotherly love” (philadelphia). Both key terms in this exhortation, which share the philo- stem, convey the sense of family relationships.¹⁸⁸ Paul reflects the early Christian understanding of the church as an extended family, whose members, bound together in intimate fellowship, should exhibit toward one another a heartfelt and consistent concern.

John D. Harvey: Τῇ φιλαδελφίᾳ (dat. sg. fem. of φιλαδελφία, -ας, ἡ, “brotherly love”) is the first of three datives of reference (Moo 777 n. 32); εἰς + accusative denotes relationship (“toward one another”; cf. Harris 93; Moo 782); the adjective φιλόστοργοι (nom. pl. masc. of φιλόστοργος, -ον, “devoted”) is “virtually a participle” (Moule 156). Both the noun and the adjective are “family words” denoting belongingness that transcends natural or ethnic bonds (Dunn 741).

James Dunn: τῇ φιλαδελφίᾳ εἰς ἀλλήλους φιλόστοργοι, “in brotherly love showing family affection to one another.” Both φιλ- words denote the love which is characteristically expected in a family: φιλαδελφία, love for brother or sister; φιλοστοργία, typically, love of parent for child (as almost always in Philo, Abr. 168, 198; Mos. 1.150; Spec. Leg. 2.240; Virt. 91, 128, 192; Praem. 158; cf. Legat. 36), but also of other family ties. In some contrast the Christian usage extends well beyond the immediate bonds of family (φιλαδελφία—1 Thess 4:9; Heb 13:1; 1 Pet 1:22 [cf. 3:8]; 2 Pet 1:7; 1 Clem 47.5; 48.1; φιλόστοργος—only here in the NT). But here too (as with ἀγάπη in 12:9) the transition should not be exaggerated. ἀδελφός was more broadly used for members of a religious association (see on 1:13; and further Lagrange); and φιλάδελφος could also denote a wider fraternal concern, for which love for brother was the pattern (as in 2 Macc 15:14; and note its frequent use as a title for kings, particularly the Ptolemies—see LSJ). Likewise more generalized uses of φιλόστοργος are well enough attested, where the type of family affection can be understood as capable of being extended fittingly to such as country or king or a pet animal (e.g.,  Polybius 16.17.8; Josephus, Ant. 4.135; LSJ; Spicq, 500–505; NDIEC 2:100–  103; 3:41–42). Michel notes the reputation the Essenes had for loving one  another (Josephus, War 2.119; borne out, e.g., by 1QS 1.9-10; 5.25; 10.26; CD  6.20–21). Nevertheless, the Christian use of these typically family words  does rather stand out in its consistency, and the combination of both words  underscores the point. This too is part of the redefinition of boundaries in  which Paul engages—a sense of family belongingness which transcended  immediate family ties and did not depend on natural or ethnic bonds. The organic imagery of the interrelatedness of the body requires to be supplemented by the emotional bond of family affection (“your feelings of deep  affection for one another”—NJB). 

Thomas R. Schreiner: The first command in verse 10 brings to the forefront the family affection that should characterize the people of God. The word φιλόστοργοι (philostorgoi, loving dearly) denotes warm, familial love (so Aasgaard 2004: 173), as does the term φιλαδελφίᾳ (philadelphia, brotherly and sisterly love).9 The word φιλαδελφίᾳ is only used in about ten instances before Paul, and Paul may have been the first to use it metaphorically (Aasgaard 2004: 151). Paul conceives of the church as a family that is akin to one’s biological family, for all are united to Christ as brothers and sisters (cf. 1 Tim. 5:1–2).10 Thus warm affection should course among the members of the body.

Word Study on φιλόστοργος (Part II)--Moulton and Milligan

Moulton-Milligan:

Titus 2:13 (Jerome Quinn Remarks)

 

Barry Bandstra Handbook on Genesis: Comment on Genesis 1:1 (Page 43)