2 Thessalonians 2:13

I find it interesting that Van likes the NASB for one part(for salvation vs to be saved), but then jumps to the ESV for the "first fruit" vs "from the beginning" part.

Oh really, so you do believe that it's "from the beginning" then?

 

First-fruit is footnoted in the NASB. God chose you as first-fruit for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth. This is a fairly straightforward sentence. The NASB translators translated it this way. My understanding of the verse is based on this translation. However, nothing brought forward by "experts" indicates there is anything wrong with my understanding.

 

Only the OP...

 

LOL, Archangel wrote the OP and used the ESV.

 

Yes he did. Very good. You get one point!
Now for the rest of your points, read the rest of it to see your error.

And actually, he was using the Greek most of the time.

 

Believe me—no “ad homenims” will hide your ignorance of the Greek language at this point! Good luck with the debate---b/c your eisegesis will never amount to their ability to demonstrate legitimate biblical exegesis!

 

I'm not really interested in the theology of this thread and the arguments on both sides. But I have to step in here because Van has gotten a bad rap. His analysis of the Greek has been attacked by those who should know better.

1. The burden of proof that a prepositional phrase is not adverbial is on the opposition. Prepositional phrases are adverbial. In fact, prepositions themselves started out as adverbs in classical Greek. Note A. T. Robertson: "PREPOSITIONAL PHRASES. These adjuncts have the substantial force of adverbs" (A Grammar of the Greek N. T. in the Light of Historical Research, p. 550). Again, Robertson quotes Giles twice on p. 301: "The preposition therefore is only an adverb specialized to define a case-usage," and "To quote Giles again, 'between adverbs and prepositions no distinct line can be drawn.'" Again, Daniel Wallace says, "Prepositions are, in some respects, extended adverbs.... There are exceptions to the adverbial force of prepositions. Some function at times adjectivally" (Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, pp. 356-357). But The Archangel has not shown us why the adjectival use is seen in 2 Thess. 2:13. Instead, he demands that Van prove why the prepositional phrase follows its normal usage!

2. The Archangel says,

He is mistaking translation for exegesis here. When you exegete a passage, you look at the meaning in the original. When you translate, you put the meaning in a different language. So you can translate the way he wants to if you are using dynamic equivalence, in which the form of the original is not important in getting the meaning into the "receptor language" (Nida's term), if the reader responds correctly.

On the other hand, in a literal method of translation (formal equivalence, essentially literal, optimal equivalence, my own method, etc.) The Archangel's rendering would be wrong, because we believe the form of the original has meaning that should be retained in the target language. So The Archangel's explanation of εἰς here is not exegesis but dynamic equivalence translation.

I could go on, but I'll stop. Several somebodies owe Van an apology. What are his credentials, you ask. What does it matter? He could be a novice at Greek or he could have a Ph. D. What matters is the truth. He was right in these two points if not others. (I've not thought through and examined the whole thread.)

 

John

I have been worried about and been praying for you and all over there.Knew you have been busy but still have worried because of your absence from the board.

Good hearing from you.

 

What Van said:

Next we encounter phrases, which modify or describe how his audience became chosen aliens. First it was according to the foreknowledge of God – God’s redemption plan was to choose believers for His own possession. Second they became chosen aliens by the sanctifying work of the Spirit. Here “sanctifying work” refers to God setting the person apart – spiritually in Christ – rather than the process of sanctification that occurs once a person is placed spiritually in Christ. And third, we have the phrase “to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood.

What Archangel said Van said:

"he insists that 1 Peter 1:1-2 says we are "chosen [verb] according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood"

He is assuming that "chosen" is a verb simply because the NASB renders it as such. In fact, "chosen" is an adjective.


I did not assume chosen was a verb, I said it was a adjective.
Here is what I said:

"Hi Archangel, my study does not rely on turning an adjective into a verb. If you read the post, you see I address how chosen aliens became that way as the heart of what Peter was saying."

All this was posted before he misrepresented my position.

 

I did not express correctly the first time. More correctly here is how I should have put it.

Verse 24 Jesus, V:25 Whom God (The Father) hath set forth [to be] a propitiation (mercy seat) through (the) faith (of Christ) in his blood, to declare his (God's) righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

My question is, does the Greek support this bearing in mind all that is stated?

That above is what brought about verse 21,22 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; Even the righteousness of God [which is] by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

There is a reason I underlined the above and will get back to it.

Peter said David speaking as a prophet said this of Christ. Ps 16:10 For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. Acts 2:31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ. It is all about the resurrection. Christ the firstfruits.

These passages are also about resurrection.
2 Cor. 4:14 Knowing that he which raised up the Lord Jesus shall raise up us also by Jesus, and shall present [us] with you. Verse 11 For we which live are alway delivered unto death for Jesus' sake, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our mortal flesh. This is the same resurrection David wrote about in Ps 16.

2 Cor. 4:13 We having the same spirit of faith, according as it is written, I believed, and therefore have I spoken; (Go and read Psalm 116 and Psalm 16 and ask is not David also speaking as the Christ concerning resurrection? Is this not the spirit of the faith of Christ being spoken of?)we also believe, and therefore speak;

Those that believe in Rom. 3 are given the earnest of the Spirit of faith brought by the righteousness of God.
2 Peter 1:1 to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ:

I am bound to prove that it is the faith of Christ. It is the faith of Jesus the Christ that brings the righteousness of God and by which we shall be saved. We are not called because we have faith. We have faith because we have been called/ chosen.

 

Let me see. The OP in the Understanding 1 Peter 1:1-2 was posted today, April 8 at 8:33 am. Archangel wrote I was using chosen as a verb when it is an adjective at 8:50 in that thread. I wrote that I was using "chosen aliens" and the phrases were describing how they came to be chosen.

This is consistent with this quote from Archangel: Grammatically, these prepositional phrases are adjectival--since they are modifying the adjective "elect."

Then at 11:38, after I had objected to the misrepresentation at 9:21, Archangel posts this, "On a side-note. Van is using the NASB and is taking all his grammar from the English grammar in the NASB. In his discussions here and other places, he insists that 1 Peter 1:1-2 says we are "chosen [verb] according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood"

He is assuming that "chosen" is a verb simply because the NASB renders it as such. In fact, "chosen" is an adjective."

I did not lie or misrepresent anything as far as I can tell.

 

I know it is difficult to see a passage from a different perspective when you have become so accustom to reading it from your own perspective, so let's use an analogy to gain a different perspective:

Pretend with me that we live before the Civil War and we are all slave owners. We have been taught wrongly that black people are not real people, just property. We, therefore, have concluded that God has no place for them to be saved. In our minds, they are no different than animals. (Of course, this thinking is abhorrent, and rightly so, but many held to this belief in those days, so please stay with me on the point of the analogy)

Now, you, are a respected pastor in the community and all of your pastor friends and mentors believe as you do that blacks are not apart of God's covenant. In fact, you think they are not worthy of God's attention any more so than a dog. This is how you were raised to think as was everyone around you.

One day, God blinds you while walking down the road (like He did Paul) or speaks to you in a vivid dream (like He did Peter) and tells you that your views about black people are wrong and that God loves them and wants them to be a part of His covenant just like white people. At first your flesh objects saying, "What not those dirty slaves, surely not, you have only chosen us Lord." But God convinces you that his love for them is as real as his love for you and that it has ALWAYS been His plan from the very beginning to save the black people.

Then God calls you to preach to blacks and convince the whites that your ministry is really from God. Difficult job. Now, you can relate to Paul's dilemma with regard to the Gentiles.

Continuing in our analogy; you become know as the "preacher to the blacks" and you are not very popular at all. In fact, the whites argue that blacks aren't deserving of entrance into God's covenant and they beat you and even throw you in prison many times. But you argue, "God can show mercy on whom ever he wants!" And when you write to the black churches that you started you say things like, "I thank God that He has chosen you from the beginning," because people all around you keep telling them they have not been chosen by God. Even those whites who do believe you are trying to get the blacks to cover their dark skin or paint over it so they can become like the whites and you have to continually defend them.

I know this is just an analogy and all analogies fall short, but hopefully this one provides some perspective as to why Paul says some of the things he says. Such as, "I praise God that he has chosen you from the foundation of the world..." etc... We have to be careful not to confuse what God is choosing.

1. He chose Israel (i.e. the white people in the analogy) to receive God's revelation first

2. He chose the Remnant (white people who preached to the blacks) to take the message of reconciliation to the whole world...to your own people first (who are blinded) and then to the blacks, who will listen. (ref Acts 28:28)

3. He chose the whole world ("every creature") to receive the invitation to come to faith and repentance through Jesus Christ.

I believe Calvinists make the mistake of taking verses that are in reference to God's choice of these three things and misapply them to their view of the unconditional election and irresistible call of a select few to the neglect of all others.

 

John—I truly hope all is well (or at least as well as possible considering all that has recently taken place in Japan) & want you to know that we are truly praying for you & those around you during this time of hardship in your home land.
Although we’ve never interacted in a thread before, I’ve seen your posts & read your profile before this & although I didn’t always agree with your conclusions, I’ve always respected the time & effort you put into your thoughts. This being said, I think you misconstrue the purpose of those of us who are opposing Van in this thread. Maybe if you would have read the entire thread or his many past posts—you’d understand the concern of those who are writing against him. To begin with, you need to realize that this is not a Calvinist/Reformed attack on someone who simply won’t agree with a certain understanding of theology (ie won’t conform to the Reformed interpretation), but instead is a rebuke of an individual who comes awfully close to those described in Titus 1:10-11. It’s not that Van’s interpretation of 2 Thess 2:13 is not grammatically possible, it’s the fact that he insists on arguing with evidence that he honestly does not fully comprehend. By calling into question his knowledge of the original language, he is forced to begin to actually study the Greek for himself (and not just parrot an unnamed commentary) if he wants to reply with any counteraction that is at least half way feasible. I for one don’t have a problem with individuals who disagree with my own interpretation as long as they actually understand the terminology they are using to offset my own premise. The problem with Van is that he is a syncretism type thinker & doesn’t mind picking & choosing what he wants from opposing theological ideas & putting them together even if they contradict each other. Further, he will take Scripture out of context to prove points that are obviously nothing more than an attempt to gain some kind of personal acclaim for himself. Then when you show him the observable flaw in his theory, he either fails to give a rebuttal or tosses accusations of ad hom, instead of taking the time to think through his theories, polish them up, & conform them to Scripture. It is his very type that runs the risk of infusing heresy in the church, just for the sake of nonconformity. Just so he can say he is different & thinks for himself, when in reality he is nothing more than a classic example of someone who likes to hear himself talk—simply b/c he loves the sound of his own voice. Despite this situation---John—I will continue to pray for you & yours in Japan, & although we might not see eye-to-eye always theologically speaking—I have great respect for what you are doing with your service to Jesus Christ through your mission work & have nothing but the utmost admiration for you as an individual. God Bless!

 

And the character assassination attempts keep coming from Calvinists. I am getting a lesson in long suffering from my well meaning brothers and sisters.

2 Thessalonians 2:13 says God chose the Thessalonians for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith the truth.
Since 1 Peter 1:1-2 says the chosen aliens were chosen through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, then it is reasonable to accept
that God chooses people for salvation based on crediting the faith in the truth.