Re: [TruthTalk] Original Sin

[Judy Taylor]

On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 22:54:21 -0700 "Bill Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Never mind, Judy, I found it. Your statement is the opinion of a preacher named Dr. DeHaan of the Radio Bible Class, but he doesn't give his sources either. It seems like he should have told you (and by extension us) of the obscurity of his definition for this word.   jt: To me it no longer matters about DeHaan and the meaning of this Greek Word.  If I were writing about the subject today I would not even bother with all that and I'm not even sure that I like the "Original Sin" subject line since so many equate this with the RCC and Augustine or whoever it was who came up with the term.   Do you find it ironic Bill that we get into this controversy over whether or not Jesus was born with the old Adamic sin and death taint on him (like us) on the one hand and then argue over whether or not he was "Emmanuel" (God with us) - on the other which is the same as saying that God (Emmanuel) has now taken on Satan's nature along with the rest of fallen humanity?  There is a whole lot more involved in this than a few Greek words and a pile of Lexicons.   When we discussed this earlier I was writing to DavidM who for some reason also believed (back then anyway) that Jesus was the same as us in every way except that he never acted out to actually commit a sin - a notion which I found and still find abhorrent. I had DeHaan's book about the blood here at the time and this was (as you note) his argument. However, since then I have done some homework on my own about the subject.   All it takes is Heb 13:8 to shoot that notion in the foot - think about it "Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, today, and forever." Yesterday he was the second member of the Godhead.  God is a spirit (Jn 4:24).  So what part of Jesus the man was "Emmanuel" God with us?  In what way is this comparable to the fallen Adamic race?                   He wrote: "In Hebrews 2:14 we read: 'Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, He also Himself likewise took part of the same.' JT  > Heb 2:14 says "forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood he also himself likewise took part of the same....."   He wrote: You will notice that the 'children', that is, the human children, are said to be partakers of flesh and blood, and then, speaking of Jesus, this verse says that He Himself likewise 'took part of the same.'   JT  > In this verse the "children" that is, the human children are said to be partakers of flesh and blood, and then speaking of Jesus, this verse says that He himself likewise took part of the same.    He wrote: The word 'took part' as applying to Christ is an entirely different word from 'partakers' as applied to the children.   JT > The word "took part" as applying to Christ is an entirely different word from "partakers" as applied to the children.   He wrote: In the margin of my Bible, I read that the word translated 'took part' implies 'taking part in something outside one's self.'   JT > The word translated "took part" implies "taking part in something outside one's self"    He wrote: The Greek word for partakers in 'koynoncho' and means 'to share fully,' so that all of Adam's children share fully in Adam's flesh and blood.   JT > The Greek word for parkakers is KOYNOHENO and means to "share fully" so that all of Adam's children share fully in Adam's flesh and blood.   He wrote: When we read that Jesus 'took part of the same' the word is 'metecho' which means 'to take part but not all.' The children take both flesh and blood of Adam but Christ took only part, that is, the flesh part, whereas the blood was the result of supernatural conception."   JT  >  When we read that JESUS "took part of the same" the word is METECHO which means "to take part but not all" The children take both flesh and blood of Adam but Christ took only part, that is, the flesh part, whereas the blood was the result of supernatural conception....    I wonder what Bible this DeHaan uses? Do you have any idea? That would be interesting to know.    Bill   ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Taylor To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Friday, February 11, 2005 8:39 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Original Sin As it relates to the current discussion on the human nature of our Lord, Judy wrote   >   Jesus partook of human flesh without partaking of the effect of Adam's blood.  Heb 2:14 says "forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood he also himself likewise took part of the same....."   In this verse the "children" that is, the human children are said to be partakers of flesh and blood, and then speaking of Jesus, this verse says that He himself likewise took part of the same.  The word "took part" as applying to Christ is an entirely different word from "partakers" as applied to the children.  The word translated "took part" implies "taking part in something outside one's self"  The Greek word for parkakers is KOYNOHENO and means to "share fully" so that all of Adam's children share fully in Adam's flesh and blood.   When we read that JESUS "took part of the same" the word is METECHO which means "to take part but not all" The children take both flesh and blood of Adam but Christ took only part, that is, the flesh part, whereas the blood was the result of supernatural conception....   Hi, Judy. I realize that the above statement was made sometime ago, but since we are back on the subject of Jesus' humanity, and since I didn't bring it up at the time, I thought I would go ahead and ask you a couple questions now. I am wondering, do you have the source for the above quotation, where you say that metecho means "'to take part but not all'"? If so, I would be interested in knowing who or what it is. Did this come from a lexicon or is it from someone's commentary, like Dake perhaps, or is it something else? I know now that you do not like to add words to Scripture, like saying that "likeness" means "similar" and stuff like that, and so I thought I should just ask you where you got this, as none of my lexicons or other linguistic helps draw that same distinction. The following is a sampling of what I have on this word: Friberg Lexicon:    metecho -- (have a) share in, participate in, partake of, w. the sharing always resulting fr. choosing to participate. Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words:    metecho -- to partake of, share in (meta, with, echo, to have), akin to ... in Heb. 2.14, the KJV "took part of" is awkward; Christ "partook of" flesh and blood, R.V. UBS Lexicon:    metecho -- share in (something) ... Louw-Nida Lexicon:    metecho -- (a) share in ... Liddell-Scott Lexicon:       metecho -- to partake of, enjoy a share of, share in, take part in; to partake of ; to be members of ; to partake of something in common w. another BAGD Lexicon:     metecho -- to have a part or share in something; share, have a share, participate ... "He shared the same things, i.e., flesh and blood -- Hb. 2:14." Reinecker & Rogers, Linguistic Key to the Greek New Testament: "The _expression_ 'flesh and blood' was the Hebrew designation for 'men' or 'human beings.' ... Meteschen aorist, active, indicative of metecho -- to have, to participate in, to share. The aorist tense points to the historic event of the Incarnation when the Son of God assumed this same human nature and thus himself became truly man and accordingly one with mankind" (670). Do you see what I mean about your definition being distinctly different than these? If you still have it, I would also like to know your source for the following statement, too: "The word translated 'took part' implies 'taking part in something outside one's self.'" Is this from the same source as your other quote? Do you think, in accordance with Reinecker and Rogers, that this "taking part in something outside of one's self" could perhaps have something to do with the fact that the eternal/divine Logos became a human being? Surely that was something outside of his former self. As per Friberg, there he chose to partake of something that he was not prior to the Incarnation, namely, flesh and blood.  What does your source say? Our discussion put me in mind of this verse: "For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though He was rich, yet for your sakes He became poor, that you through His poverty might become rich" (II Cor 8.9). Anyway, I'll talk to you later, Bill