Comments on: Titus 2

By: TL

TL — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 16:00:59 +0000

I hit the button too quick.

The link perhaps is in the fact the letter is to Titus telling him how to choose elders, and then how to speak to the insubordinate, idle talkers and deceivers. Within that he is to be giving more instructions to those older, from whom he will be choosing elders. Something like that.

By: TL

TL — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 15:40:30 +0000

Does anyone see that the theme of Titus 2:1-6 has to do with the appointment of elders and their required behavior? Lin gave us that clue as did Don. It’s a short book and quite concise in its subject. One thing it brings together is that elders are to be those older as well as older in the Lord.

By: TL

TL — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 00:07:46 +0000

Hey Eric, another question.

So, do you think that believing either way about that section in John 21 leads one closer or further from God? After all isn’t that one of the primary points of all Scripture?

By: TL

TL — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 00:05:14 +0000

Yes, I think that is part of it, as is what Don said.

Anything else?

By: jlp_that's_me!

jlp_that's_me! — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 21:39:33 +0000

It sounds like Paul’s intention is to encourage people to act in a manner that will not cause negative things to be said about the gospel.

The theme appears to be “don’t do anything that would discredit the gospel”.

By: TL

TL — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 21:21:03 +0000

Well hey Eric. People who teach and preach from the KJV have been known to misunderstand huge amounts of texts and hence have indeed misled others. But you know some of the time both of them are right.

LOL

By: EricW

EricW — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 21:09:29 +0000

TL asks why did Darby translate it that way.

As I suggested earlier, he was working with a pre-papyri understanding of Koinê Greek. The distinctions between words that were true of Classical Greek cannot be assumed to hold during the Koinê period.

As for the ramifications: I think the ramifications for those who preach and teach from Darby are they could be led to misunderstand what the NT says, and hence mislead others.

By: TL

TL — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 20:56:20 +0000

So ….. now let’s take our thoughts to this verse. Why do you think Darby translated it this way. And what are the ramifications of the differences.

4that they may admonish the young women to be attached to [their] husbands, to be attached to [their] children

By: TL

TL — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 20:47:24 +0000

“But scholars of Greek have been pointing out to those who study the language that this supposed agapaô/phileô distinction in John 21 is likely a false or faulty one.”

Would those be the same scholars of Greek who try to claim there is no difference between hupotasso and hupotassomai, or between hupotassomai and hupakou?

Not all Greek scholars agree. And not all who know Greek are Greek scholars. And frankly not all who claim to be Grk. scholars are ones that I would trust. I do know a few Greek scholars though. Perhaps I should write them and see what they think!

Thanks for the dialogue. And I’ll check that link.

Aloha!

By: EricW

EricW — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 16:17:00 +0000

One person’s paper on the subject:

http://www.addtoyourlearning.com/articles/The%20Use%20of%20Agapao%20and%20Phileo%20in%20John%2021,2.pdf

TL:

I don’t totally exclude the idea that in John 21 there might be an intended difference by the author/speakers between agapaô and phileô, but it appears from reading the lexicons and the commentaries that those who insist on such a distinction have a harder job to do to prove their case than those who say that such a distinction is not there or is not intended or, if it is there, is unclear.