|
Lance and Bill - why don't you just get your own thing
going off list since you have such an "I love you,
you love my theology duet going on" and it appears that you can't include
those of us who do not share your great imaginary
vision (in the love fest) ... Lance can't resist the urge to be smart and
cute and both of you tend to talk down at rather than share with....those of us who do not measure up to your
standard of excellence as per Barth, Torrance, Polyani, Anasthasius et
al.... What a downer to come home from a wonderful and uplifting service at
Church - to this ... jt
Yes, indeed, "aspersions" is the word I was looking
for. Thanks. Bill
Judy:'dispersions'
might well apply to my character but, 'aspersions' might be the word sought
hereunder.
You are probably
right, Lance. Judy, I should not have cast dispersions upon your
character. You may very well be doing the best you are able with what you
have been given. No one should ask for more than that. My apologies, Bill
Bt says of Jt 'the
lengths you will travel to save face'. IMO nothing of the sort is going
on here. IMO whenever Jt speaks she does so from her heart, mind and, as
she sees it, under the tutelage of the Holy Spirit. IMO this is why,
Bill, MOST of your interaction with Jt, though well intended and, IMO,
superb in it's content, is 'time well wasted' (comedy channel
promo) I'm sorry about the run-on
sentences but I believe you catch my drift. If you don't then, ask for
clarification.
Judy charges > So you have determined to
change Matthew and Luke so that they line up with your interpretation
of Ekballo in Mark Bill?
It's not my interpretation which ought to
concern you, Judy. In your case, it is yours; in fact, the following
is a great case in point:
Judy writes >
What about these (same word) - is the meaning here
"forced and compelled" as well? - note they are sent
into not cast out of...
Matt 9:38 Pray ye therefore the Lord of the
harvest that he will send forth
laborers into his
harvest.
Matt 12:20 A bruised reed shall he not break
and smoking flax shall he not quench till he send
forth judgment..
Luke 10:2b Pray ye therefore the Lord of the
harvest, that he would send forth
laborers into his
harvest.
My, O my, the lengths you will travel to save face! Yup, they
were sent forth into something else, no doubt about it -- and with the
same word certain sailors, fearing
shipwreck, "cast out the wheat
into the sea." And so I ask you, what
does "forth" mean, here, if not OUT -- send "out" laborers into the
harvest, etc. "And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without
understanding? Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in
at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast
out into the
draught?" (Mat 15.16-17) --
Perhaps as good a place as any to end our conversation,
Bill
But you are not
Bill? You still want to believe that the Holy Spirit drives
even though there are two witnesses
against one (supposed)? No wonder things become so
complicated.... jt
Whatever, Judy. The truth
is, I don't look at it in terms of one
being "against" the other -- whether supposedly or
not. I told you this already.
But these words are in
opposition Bill (if you insist that "send forth" means doing
something under the force of compulsion), and this is not God's
way nor is it the way His Holy Spirit operates. When
Mary was chosen for the incarnation this was not forced upon her
without her consent; (see Luke 1:38) the angel waited for her to
accept.
Luke 4:1 says "And
Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost returned from Jordan, and was
led by the Spirit into the wilderness." Would you consider "sent forth
under the Spirit's
annointing?"
What I am doing is looking at
the words themselves and determining their range of usage,
then translating them in a way which preserves that usage without
pitting them against each other. Whether it is casting demons out of sinners, or
throwing heirs out of vineyards, the thrust of
ekballo places its activity and power in a source
other than its subject. The "send out"
of this word is therefore also in the power of another. In the case of this verse, it is in the power of the Holy Spirit; hence,
Jesus was "compelled" by the Spirit to
enter the wilderness.
What about these (same word) - is the
meaning here "forced and compelled" as well? - note they are
sent into not cast out
of...
Matt 9:38 Pray ye therefore the Lord of
the harvest that he will send
forth laborers
into his harvest.
Matt 12:20 A bruised reed shall he not
break and smoking flax shall he not quench till he
send forth
judgment..
Luke 10:2b Pray ye therefore the Lord of
the harvest, that he would send
forth laborers into
his harvest.
I wish you were able to see this.
Just because two of the Gospels use a different word, that in it
itself does not negate your responsibility as either
a translator or an interpreter of this word to honor its
definition and treat it accordingly.
jt: I understand Bill
(we are warned not to add or take away from what has been
written) so I treat this very seriously. However, I don't see
any wisdom in forcing Matthew and Luke to conform to Mark
since all three report on the same incident and were
inspired by the same Holy Spirit - and we also
have the Spirit to help us apprehend truth so that
we are not entirely beholden to Greek words.
If harmony is what you seek, you should nonetheless respect the thrust
of the more forceful ekballo and translate the others in a way that preserves its thrust, and you should do
this while staying within their common range of usage --
hence, the Spirit "brought" him to the wilderness.
jt: I'm wondering if
you have a basic underlying Calvinistic bent Bill because the root
of this conflict lies in the nature and character of
God
who allows us to be
tested but never compels or forces anything on us so that when we
are judged it will be for our own choices, not His.
As believers being led
by God's Spirit is what we are supposed to be about daily and it
is something one must do willingly just like Jesus our Master
who delighted to do the will of the Father. If the Holy
Spirit was going to do any strong arming surely it would have
been in the garden of
Gethsemane because He really did have a struggle with that
one..
The "mystery" is solved for me,
too. Bill
jt: So you have
determined to change Matthew and Luke so that they line up
with your interpretation of Ekballo in Mark Bill?
judyt
But you are not Bill? You still
want to believe that the Holy Spirit drives even though there
are two
witnesses against one (supposed)?
No wonder things become so complicated.... jt
Okay, Judy, it sounds as though you
are convinced. Bill
Are we now on the "same page"
Bill? When was Jesus ever "driven"
to do anything? judyt
Judy, your problem is not with
me. Yours is to reconcile two
very different words from Scripture: "drive" and "lead" -- get the picture?
Bill I've never had a problem
with scripture and you are the one who
insists that Jesus was literally "driven" to the
wilderness (from one gospel) when two
others use the word led.
As of yet you really haven't done much to "harmonize"
the two; all you have only insisted (contrary to
its definition) that "ekballo" doesn't really mean force
or drive out, expel, exclude, reject, or compel.
Actually it is three - and
the reason for this is because in my experience so
far God's Word has never been contradictory and I don't
believe that this is a
first....
I don't understand how you can feel justified in doing
this, but I often have difficulties making sense of the
things you say. I do agree with you that Mark had "a more
forceful style" than Luke -- he demonstrates this
throughout his Gospel -- but I would like to ask you
why the Holy Spirit would inspire him
to say that Jesus was driven (a word with
the thrust of being forced against one's
will) into the wilderness, if in fact
he was actually volitionally led there like Luke's Gospel
is translated to state? Please answer this question for
me, as I am very interested.
Both Matthew and Luke use the
word "led" Bill. IMO the problem comes from
trying to interpret scripture
solely by the use of Greek
words. Ekballo
does not only mean what you have
noted above, it is also used with the idea of
"sending forth" as in
ministry. Look at how this word is used elsewhere in the
gospels:
Matt 9:38 Pray ye therefore the
Lord of the harvest that he will send
forth laborers into his
harvest.
Matt 12:20 A bruised reed shall
he not break and smoking flax shall he not quench till he
send forth
judgment..
Luke 10:2b Pray ye therefore the
Lord of the harvest, that he would send
forth laborers into his
harvest.
Again, if what you are seeking to do is to harmonize
the two accounts, then the way to do it is to translate Luke's word "ageto" as
brought -- the Spirit brought him to the
wilderness. This word ageto can also be
translated to imply the use of force, such
as lead away, arrest, take into custody (see
Mar 13.11). And so, if it is harmony that you seek, then
it is Luke's word which needs to be
translated in a way which conveys the forceful tone of
Mark's ekballo -- not the other way
around: unless you can explain to me how one
can force a willing accomplice.
Bill
Once again Bill it is
three accounts - two of them say
"led", and one uses the word
Ekballo. To say this means "driven" would be against God's
nature and His Word. A&E were driven from the garden
in judgment but God does not ever drive or force
anyone to do His will; if we will not serve Him willingly,
he leaves us to our own devices. The prophet wrote about
Jesus "Lo I come in the volume of the book it is written
of me, I delight to do thy will, O my God; yea, they law
is within my heart" (Ps 40:7, Heb 10:7). Being
sent forth is something
one is in agreement with and
acts upon willingly (such as ministry teams and being led
by the Holy Spirit). Jesus sent forth the 12 as well
as the 70 - There is no record that he ever drove anyone
or forced them to do
anything. It is unfortunate that the translators did
not use "sent forth" rather than
"driveth". The mystery is
solved for me. judyt
This is a good example of the
principle that from the mouths of "two or more
witnesses" let every
word be established. I
was remiss in not doing more homework when we were
discussing this.
Both Luke and Matthew say
"Jesus was led" - only Mark uses the word "driven" in
the KJV. The
NASB translates it as
"impelled" and has a note saying that **this is because
of Mark's more
forceful style.
Are we now on the "same page"
Bill? When was Jesus ever "driven" to do
anything? They
couldn't even throw Him off the
brow of the cliff in their wrath? Noone
took His life and the
Prince of this World had
nothing in Him. judyt
Say Bill,
In my reading this a.m. I
note that Luke 4:1 says "And Jesus being full of
the Holy Ghost returned
from Jordan, and
was LED by the Spirit into
the wilderness" (Luke 4:1)
So what do you think?
Which is it that harmonizes
with the rest of scripture "being driven
or being led?"
|
