Thanks, John. But you'd better leave your
Robertson's at HOME! It might get misplaced along the way.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2005 10:14
PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Original
Sin
Biil
------------ never tire of offering your opinion on these
matters. A very beneficial post. Your lexical
aides are interesting. When we get together, I will bring my
1935 A.T, Robertson Greek grammar --- we
can stand above the book, holding lite candles and hum or something
!! Cool.
JD
In a message dated
2/11/2005 7:44:57 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
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
|