double-minded question

koreahog2005 · Oct 31, 2004

I think John 3:36 clarifies this. At the moment we believe, we have eternal life. If we refuse to believe, God's wrath abides on us. At the time we believe, we are eternally rooted in Christ. Notice A.T. Robertson's comment on John 3:36:

Hath eternal life (ecei zwhn aiwnion). Has it here and now and for eternity. That obeyeth not (o apeiqwn). "He that is disobedient to the Son." Jesus is the test of human life as Simeon said he would be (Luke 2:34). This verb does not occur again in John's Gospel.

Craigbythesea · Nov 1, 2004

I asked,

Why do you believe that Christians are firmly rooted in Jesus at the moment they are saved?

You replied,

I think John 3:36 clarifies this. At the moment we believe, we have eternal life. If we refuse to believe, God's wrath abides on us. At the time we believe, we are eternally rooted in Christ. Notice A.T. Robertson's comment on John 3:36:
quote:

Hath eternal life (ecei zwhn aiwnion). Has it here and now and for eternity. That obeyeth not (o apeiqwn). "He that is disobedient to the Son." Jesus is the test of human life as Simeon said he would be (Luke 2:34). This verb does not occur again in John's Gospel.

John 3:36 says,

"He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him."

This verse says absolutely nothing about being rooted in Jesus, let alone being “firmly rooted in Jesus at the moment we are saved.”

As for A. T. Robertson, he seems to be conveniently ignoring the part of John 3:36 that tells us who it is that has eternal life. Jesus said that it is he who is believing in the Son (Greek present participle). Therefore this verse offers no comfort at all to those who once believed but who have fallen into apostasy. There are NO verses in the Bible that teach that ANYONE who is not currently believing in Jesus has eternal life.

As for the Greek present participle apeitheo, on page 10 of volume VI of the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament we read that it is used in the Septuagint for various Hebrew words and that it was already “a significant theological term in as much as it denotes the sinful attitude of the people, which in the OT is essentially understood as disobedience against God.
“The NT adopts this usage. Is. 65:2 is quoted in R. 10:21.”

Therefore, in John3:36 we find that in the mind of Jesus, belief in Him includes obeying God. And, of course, we find belief and obedience linked together in other places in the New Testament.

There is another complication here that I do not believe that Robertson ever considered, but that many other scholars have considered, and that is that John 3:36 is almost for certain a translation into Greek from the Aramaic words that Jesus actually spoke, and in Aramaic the concept of eternal life if very different than the Hellenistic concept of eternal life. We need to go beyond the confines of a junior boys Sunday school class if we are going to even begin to explore what Jesus was saying in John 3:36, and Robertson scarcely does that on this verse. If you wish to further explore this verse, we can do so.

koreahog2005 · Nov 1, 2004

Craig, while discussing the word “rooted” in Ephesians 3:17-18 you said the following:

It only tells us that at some point in past time the Christians spoken of became firmly rooted in Jesus and that that condition or state was still in effect at the time of writing. It does NOT tell us if that rooting was gradual or instantaneous, nor when it began or came to be. And there are very many places in the New Testament where Christians are spoken of who are NOT firmly rooted in Jesus, at least not in accord with how I would use the expression, so I must conclude that being rooted in Jesus is something that is not realized in the life of every Christian and/or that being rooted in Jesus is a process that takes place over time and/or (as is highly probable) Paul is using at least some measure of hyperbole in using that expression. . . . The passive voice does NOT tell us that the causative force was God; it only tells us that the causative force was something other than the subject. I believe that Christians become firmly rooted in Jesus the same way that trees become firmly rooted in the ground (see my post immediately above). I believe this because both the Bible and personal observation support that belief.

You said that Christians do not cause themselves to be rooted in Christ. You also seemed to be saying that God does not cause Christians to be firmly rooted in Christ. I assume that you are saying that time is the factor that causes them to be firmly rooted rather than weakly rooted. Correct me if I am misunderstanding you. If you are correct about time being the primary factor, then that would mean that people who have been Christians a short period of time are far more likely to lose their salvation than people who have been Christians a long time and have grown deeper, more extensive root systems. I’m wondering why some Christians would make it for a longer period of time without losing their salvation in comparison with other Christians. Why wouldn’t all of them lose it after a short time? It seems to me that as time passes, more and more temptations will come, and there will be more and more opportunities for the Christian to willfully and conveniently stop believing/obeying and therefore lose his salvation as he succumbs to those temptations. (I don’t believe that a Christian can lose his salvation, but I’m trying to imagine the chain of events if such were possible.) I assume that you think that some Christians keep themselves from losing their salvation, and others do not. In contrast, I believe that God both saves and keeps us. Notice 1 John 5:18:

“We know that no one who is born of God sins; but He who was born of God keeps him and the evil one does not touch him.” (NASV)

Danny Akin, president of Southeastern Baptist Seminary, commented on verse 18:

John maintains that “anyone (lit., “everyone”) born of God does not continue to sin.” This means that there should be no exceptions to this general rule. Verse 18 reiterates the truths found in 3:6,9 that the believer does not continue in sin. . . . The use of the perfect participle (“born of God,” gegennemenos) suggests a permanent relationship begun in the past with continuing results from this new birth. One of these results is the God-given ability not to fall into long-term, habitual sinning. As Smalley asserts, “John is affirming, new conduct should follow from new birth. The reason why the child of God does not continue in sin is because “the one who was born of God keeps him safe.” The identity of “the one who was born of God” is not immediately clear. Some insist that it refers to the believer, since the same verb was used to characterize the believer earlier in this verse. Most scholars, however, believe that John is referring to Jesus Christ based on the following reasons: (1) John logically shifts from the perfect tense to the aorist tense (when referring to believers), referring to the birth of Jesus, a specific event in history. (2) If “the one who was born of God” refers to the believer, the text would need a reflexive pronoun (“the one who was born of God keeps himself safe”). (3) The idea of a believer being kept (or protected) by Jesus is found elsewhere in the New Testament (John 17:12; 1 Peter 1:5; Jude 24; Rev 3:10). It is therefore Christ’s protection of the believer that allows the believer to keep the commands of God (3:24; 5:3). . . . Stott comments, “The devil does not touch the Christian because the Son keeps him, and so because the Son keeps him, the Christian does not persist in sin.”

Akin, “1, 2, 3 John,” The New American Commentary, vol. 38, 2001, pages 211-212.

You used the term “firmly rooted,” and you said that the text does not tell us if the rooting was gradual or instantaneous. Let’s look again at the word “rooted” (Greek rhizoo ) in Ephesians 3:17. Here’s the definition from the KJV New Testament Greek Lexicon:

To cause to strike root, to strengthen with roots, to render firm, to fix, establish, cause a person or a thing to be thoroughly grounded.

http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/NewTestamentGreek/grk.cgi?number=4492

Here’s the definition from Bauer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament:

Cause to take root, mostly fig., fix firmly, put on a firm foundation (Hom. +) pass. Be or become firmly rooted or fixed.

Looking at these two definitions, perhaps we have two choices for interpreting “rooted” in Ephesians 3:17:

1. The Christian became firmly rooted due to the passage of time in a long process. The “rooting” is an incomplete process (the roots continue to grow), not a completed event.

2. The Christian became firmly rooted due to God’s putting him on a firm foundation in an instant. The “rooting” is a completed event, not a process.

I assume that you would vote for number one. I would vote for number two. Here’s why I would vote that way:

The word “rooted” is paired with the word “grounded” in Ephesians 3:17, both of which are perfect passive participles. The word “grounded” ( themelioo ) means “founded.” The founding of a thing is a completed event with continuing results, which is the essence of the perfect participle. It is also a passive participle in verse 17. Someone or something founded the Christian. Was it time? No, time cannot found a Christian. As I mentioned earlier, the same word ( themelioo ) is used to describe the house “founded” upon the rock. 1 Corinthians 3:11 describes Jesus as the foundation that is laid. The word “rooted” only occurs in Ephesians 3:17 and Colossians 2:7. Notice Colossians 2:7:

“Having been firmly rooted and now being built up in Him and established in your faith, just as you were instructed, and overflowing with gratitude.” (NASV)

The word translated as “established” is the Greek word bebaioo , which is better translated as “strengthened” or “made firm and stable” (which might have application to the double-minded man who is unstable in all his ways – our original topic on this thread). In Colossians 2:7, “rooted” is again (as in Ephesians 3:17) a perfect passive participle. Notice that they had been firmly rooted (a completed event with a continuing result), and now they are being built up and strengthened. “Built up” and “established” (“strengthened”) are both present participles. Thus, the firm rooting happened before the present spiritual growth. In your description of rooting, it seems to me that you were describing it as an ongoing spiritual growth process rather than a past event with continuing results. The Greek scholar A.T. Robertson commented on verse 7:

Rooted (errizwmenoi). Perfect passive participle of old verb rizow from riza, root. In N.T. only here and Ephesians 3:17. Paul changes the figure from walk to growing tree. Builded up in him (epoikodomoumenoi en autwi). Present passive participle (rooted to stay so) of epoikodomew, old verb, to build upon as in 1 Corinthians 3:10,12. The metaphor is changed again to a building as continually going up (present tense). Stablished (bebaioumenoi). Present passive participle of bebaiow, old verb from bebaioß (from bainw, baiw), to make firm or stable. In your faith (th pistei). Locative case, though the instrumental case, by your faith, makes good sense also. Even as ye were taught (kaqwß edidacqhte). First aorist passive indicative of didaskw, an allusion to parelabete in verse 1 Corinthians 6 and to emaqete in 1 Corinthians 1:7. In thanksgiving (en eucaristiai). Hence they had no occasion to yield to the blandishments of the Gnostic teachers.

http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/RobertsonsWordPictures/rwp.cgi?book=col&chapter=2&verse=7

Craig, in regard to John 3:36, you said the following:

This verse says absolutely nothing about being rooted in Jesus, let alone being “firmly rooted in Jesus at the moment we are saved.” As for A. T. Robertson, he seems to be conveniently ignoring the part of John 3:36 that tells us who it is that has eternal life. Jesus said that it is he who is believing in the Son (Greek present participle). Therefore this verse offers no comfort at all to those who once believed but who have fallen into apostasy.

I think I have proven that the “rooting” for Christians is a past event with a continuing result. Huber Drumwright (the late professor at Southwestern Baptist Seminary) said, “A perfect participle preserves the distinctive character of the perfect tense: the completeness of an action previously begun that has produced a result existing at the time referred to in the leading verb with which it is associated” (page 106). Drumwright described the perfect tense: “An action in past time has been completed and has produced a result, or a state, that has continued to the time present to the speaker” (page 100). James Brooks and Carlton Winbery described the perfect tense:

Perfective action implies a state of being which resulted from a past, completed action. The completed action has produced a permanent result. Such action may be illustrated by a dot and a line (. _______ ). . . . The perfect tense expresses perfective action. Perfective action involves a present state which has resulted from a past action. The present state is a continuing state; the past action is a completed action. Therefore the perfect combines linear and punctiliar action.

Brooks and Winbery, Syntax of New Testament Greek (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1979), pages 83, 104.

Curtis Vaughan and Virtus Gideon also commented on the perfect tense:

The perfect tense, which Moulton (Introduction, p. 40) calls the most important of the Greek tenses from an exegetical point of view, represents a completed state or condition from the standpoint of present time. Thus there is a double emphasis in the perfect tense: present time resulting from past action. In this respect it may be said to combine in itself both the present and the aorist. That is to say, it is both linear and punctiliar. There is no exact parallel to the tense in English.

Vaughan and Gideon, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1979), page 149.

(The word “punctiliar” refers to a point in time.)

The “completeness of an action,” “permanent result,” and “punctiliar action” conflict with your view of an incomplete process that is not always permanent. Before the rooting we had no roots. I think both of us would agree that the rooting could not have occurred before we became Christians. You are arguing that it is a long, possibly impermanent process that starts at the time we become Christians. I am arguing that the rooting is a completed event that occurred at the point in time that we became Christians. It would make no sense for this completed event to have occurred either before or after we became Christians. God saved us, and that completed event has a continuing result. John 3:36 tells us that “he who believes in the Son has eternal life.” The Christian has eternal life at the moment he has true belief. If he could possibly stop believing in Christ and thus lose his spiritual life, then it would not be eternal life. Rather, it would be temporary life. Apparently some people read the phrase as “the promise of eternal life.” That’s not what the verse says.

Craigbythesea · Nov 1, 2004

You said that Christians do not cause themselves to be rooted in Christ.

No sir, I did not say that. I wrote:

The passive voice does NOT tell us that the causative force was God; it only tells us that the causative force was something other than the subject.

This statement applies only to the grammatical construction; the theological implications of it are another matter. We can take up this latter issue in more detail later.

You also seemed to be saying that God does not cause Christians to be firmly rooted in Christ.

No, upon careful reading it does not seem to say that. I wrote:

The passive voice does NOT tell us that the causative force was God; it only tells us that the causative force was something other than the subject.

In other words, the passive voice does not tell us that the causative force was or was not God it; ONLY tells us that the causative force was something other than the subject.

I assume that you are saying that time is the factor that causes them to be firmly rooted rather than weakly rooted. Correct me if I am misunderstanding you.

You are misunderstanding me. I am saying that the factors which cause Christians to be firmly rooted exercise their force over a period of time. Time does not cause a tree to become firmly rooted; the tree’s environment causes the tree to be firmly rooted over a period of time.

I must now go about some other business, but I expect to return at a later hour to this present conversation and address the rest of your post. Thank you for your patience.

Craigbythesea · Nov 2, 2004

If you are correct about time being the primary factor, then that would mean that people who have been Christians a short period of time are far more likely to lose their salvation than people who have been Christians a long time and have grown deeper, more extensive root systems. I’m wondering why some Christians would make it for a longer period of time without losing their salvation in comparison with other Christians. Why wouldn’t all of them lose it after a short time? It seems to me that as time passes, more and more temptations will come, and there will be more and more opportunities for the Christian to willfully and conveniently stop believing/obeying and therefore lose his salvation as he succumbs to those temptations. (I don’t believe that a Christian can lose his salvation, but I’m trying to imagine the chain of events if such were possible.)

As I wrote in my previous post, I do not believe that time is a causative factor in Christians becoming firmly rooted, therefore these arguments against a belief that I also reject are irrelevant to what I do believe.

I assume that you think that some Christians keep themselves from losing their salvation, and others do not. In contrast, I believe that God both saves and keeps us. Notice 1 John 5:18:

“We know that no one who is born of God sins; but He who was born of God keeps him and the evil one does not touch him.” (NASV)

This verse is indeed an interesting verse, for it says that N O O

NE who is born of God sins, and we have here a perfect passive participle! And in the second part of the verse we find an aorist passive participle! And of course a born-again Christian who is free from sin is holy and cannot be touched by Satan who is unclean. Needless to say, we do not hear this verse preached very often in Baptist pulpits!

Craigbythesea · Nov 2, 2004

The identity of “the one who was born of God” is not immediately clear. Some insist that it refers to the believer, since the same verb was used to characterize the believer earlier in this verse. Most scholars, however, believe that John is referring to Jesus Christ

I agree that John is referring to Jesus. The less a Christian sins, the more he will experience the keeping (present indicative) power of Jesus. Those Christians who are totally surrendered to Jesus and are free from sin experience the full and complete keeping power of Jesus. Jesus does not force Christians to be obedient to him, but he does keep those who do obey him.

Craigbythesea · Nov 2, 2004

The word “rooted” is paired with the word “grounded” in Ephesians 3:17, both of which are perfect passive participles. The word “grounded” ( themelioo ) means “founded.” The founding of a thing is a completed event with continuing results, which is the essence of the perfect participle. It is also a passive participle in verse 17. Someone or something founded the Christian. Was it time? No, time cannot found a Christian. As I mentioned earlier, the same word ( themelioo ) is used to describe the house “founded” upon the rock. 1 Corinthians 3:11 describes Jesus as the foundation that is laid. The word “rooted” only occurs in Ephesians 3:17 and Colossians 2:7. Notice Colossians 2:7:

The very same grammatical, theological, and practical principles that apply to the word “rooted” apply also to the word “grounded/founded.” Hint: Even houses with the best foundation are built one stone at a time.

I have watched the building of several high-rise buildings and before even one steel girder is put into place a VERY deep hole is dug to accommodate a very massive foundation. These buildings are not built overnight—the general contractor spends many weeks laying the foundation and grounding the building. And he doesn’t do it alone. There are many subcontractors and very many workers. And neither does a Christian become firmly rooted in Jesus overnight. The general contractor (God/Jesus) spends a great deal of time laying the foundation and grounding the young Christian, and there are many subcontractors and very many workers involved in the process. If Christians did become firmly rooted instantaneously upon their belief in Christ, we would have a perfect Church without one spot or wrinkle, but that is simply not the way it is.

michelle · Nov 2, 2004

--------------------------------------------------
The passive voice does NOT tell us that the causative force was God; it only tells us that the causative force was something other than the subject.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In other words, the passive voice does not tell us that the causative force was or was not God it; ONLY tells us that the causative force was something other than the subject.
--------------------------------------------------

It might do you well Craig, to listen to the Holy Spirit of God, and let HIM teach you, rather than rely upon textual critisism of this sort. Really, I have never seen anyone approach the scriptures in such an absolutely unbelieveble manner. Listen to God, and not your OWN MIND.

love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

michelle · Nov 2, 2004

--------------------------------------------------
Jesus does not force Christians to be obedient to him, but he does keep those who do obey him.
--------------------------------------------------

Jesus Keeps ALL who are saved, and they willingly obey him. Those who do not are not really saved. If one has been saved, they have been given to know and love God, and will willingly obey him from love and faith to which is the fear of the Lord, NOT because they feel they have to, as the rest of the world, as this would be boasting in one's own works for salvation. If one truly loves someone, and they desire something of that person, the person never begrudgingly does things to please that person. Their desire is to always do those things pleasing to that loved one. Maybe you should stop approaching everything with a textual critical eye, and approach it rather with understanding of, and with an eye of love. Then maybe you will understand much better. God's love is better, and far different than the love that is in this world.

love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

koreahog2005 · Nov 2, 2004

Craig, in response to my citation of 1 John 5:18 you said:

This verse is indeed an interesting verse, for it says that NNE who is born of God sins, and we have here a perfect passive participle! And in the second part of the verse we find an aorist passive participle! And of course a born-again Christian who is free from sin is holy and cannot be touched by Satan who is unclean. Needless to say, we do not hear this verse preached very often in Baptist pulpits!

I think you are assuming that the verse means that the Christian will not sin at all. That’s not what it is saying. The Greek word for “sins” is a present, active, indicative verb. The Greek present tense almost always refers to continuous, linear action. Thus, as Danny Akin said about the verse, the sinning refers to long-term, habitual sinning. Robertson also pointed this out:

Sinneth not (ouc amartanei). Lineal present active indicative, "does not keep on sinning," as he has already shown in 1 John 3:4-10.

http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/RobertsonsWordPictures/rwp.cgi?book=1jo&chapter=5&verse=18

In response to my discussion of “rooted” and “grounded” in Ephesians 3:17, you said the following:

The very same grammatical, theological, and practical principles that apply to the word “rooted” apply also to the word “grounded/founded.” Hint: Even houses with the best foundation are built one stone at a time. I have watched the building of several high-rise buildings and before even one steel girder is put into place a VERY deep hole is dug to accommodate a very massive foundation. These buildings are not built overnight—the general contractor spends many weeks laying the foundation and grounding the building. And he doesn’t do it alone. There are many subcontractors and very many workers. And neither does a Christian become firmly rooted in Jesus overnight. The general contractor (God/Jesus) spends a great deal of time laying the foundation and grounding the young Christian, and there are many subcontractors and very many workers involved in the process. If Christians did become firmly rooted instantaneously upon their belief in Christ, we would have a perfect Church without one spot or wrinkle, but that is simply not the way it is.

I don’t think you can ignore the grammatical description of the perfect tense. It describes a punctiliar, point of time, completed event that produces a permanent result, a dot followed by a long line (. _________ ). I have seen modern buildings constructed. They do take a long time. I think it did not take very long to lay the stones for the foundation of an ancient home. It could be considered an event rather than a long process. Notice the following description of a house and wall in Jericho:

They used stones to build the foundation, and the rest of the building was built of sun-dried bricks. Its shape was similar to the iron used for cauterising animals. So the brick was rectangular in shape with sharpened edges. The floor formed was of a mud layer topped by a layer of lime, followed by soft lime dyed red or light blue. Then it was polished to acquire a new lustre. . . . But then came a time in which they woke up from their heedlessness because the latest wall, dating back to that period reveals quick ill-contructed repairs on the remains of a wall previously constructed. The foundation stones appear as if they had been hurriedly dropped and with no organization.

http://www.crystalinks.com/jericho.html

It sounds to me that most of the building time was taken after the foundation was laid. It’s bedtime in South Korea.

gb93433 · Nov 2, 2004

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:
And, while serving as the senior pastor of an inner-city church, I encountered some of those “very old trees that for very many years had been firmly rooted in good ground,” but who had become uprooted by a radical change in their circumstances .

What you have seen is not an absolute. I have seen very young Christians have more strength than a number of those older who appear strong. But also we do not know the eternality of their walk with God. What you may have seen was just a particular point in time. The Bible extends more grace to the righteous than that.

Eccl. 7:20, "Indeed, there is not a righteous man on earth who continually does good and who never sins."

Prov. 24:16, "For a righteous man falls seven times, and rises again, but the wicked stumble in time of calamity."

michelle · Nov 2, 2004

--------------------------------------------------
What you have seen is not an absolute. I have seen very young Christians have more strength than a number of those older who appear strong. But also we do not know the eternality of their walk with God. What you may have seen was just a particular point in time. The Bible extends more grace to the righteous than that.
--------------------------------------------------

Amen!!!gb. Hey, we finally agree on something? Go figure.

love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

Craigbythesea · Nov 2, 2004

I don’t think you can ignore the grammatical description of the perfect tense. It describes a punctiliar, point of time, completed event that produces a permanent result, a dot followed by a long line (. _________ ).

I have not ignored any of this, and I have written, very many times, in agreement with this (except for the punctiliar aspect of the action—it may or may not be punctiliar). However, as we have seen, in both Eph. 3:17 and Col. 2:7 we are not dealing with the perfect tense—we are dealing with passive perfect participles. Nonetheless we are dealing with past action (not necessarily punctiliar) that is either continuing (obviously not punctiliar) or having a continued effect of some kind on the subject.

High-rise buildings may take more than a year to complete, a house built out of stone blocks, however, could be built in much less time—but even houses are not built instantaneously.

But the analogy of a tree is much better because a tree is a living thing with real roots. You may not be aware of this, but I was a biologist in my earlier years, and my specialty was the evolution of vascular plants. I still have a plant collection of about 1,500 plants, including trees, and I know a little bit about plants and their roots and the factors that determine the quality and extent of the root system of trees.

Today, my specialties are New Testament exegesis and translation theory. Therefore I know a little bit about both Greek and English grammar as well as trees and roots. Healthy Redwood trees, as huge and tall as they all, NEVER fall over unless they are subjected to a radical change in their environment because they have been firmly rooted due to ecological circumstances over a lengthy period of time. Notice that I have used here the English passive perfect participle to describe the roots of these trees. The use of the passive perfect participle does not even remotely suggest that the firm rooting of these trees took place instantaneously upon the germination of the seed from which they grew. It only tells of that the rooting of these trees began in past time and has continued to the present time.

Eph. 3:14. For this reason I bow my knees before the Father,
15. from whom every family in heaven and on earth derives its name,
16. that He would grant you, according to the riches of His glory, to be strengthened with power through His Spirit in the inner man,
17. so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith; and that you, being rooted and grounded in love,
18. may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth,
19. and to know the love of Christ which surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled up to all the fullness of God. (NASB, 1995)

Col. 2:6. Therefore as you have received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in Him,
7. having been firmly rooted and now being built up in Him and established in your faith, just as you were instructed, and overflowing with gratitude. (NASB, 1995)

Craigbythesea · Nov 2, 2004

Old Testament:

Eccl. 7:20, "Indeed, there is not a righteous man on earth who continually does good and who never sins."

Prov. 24:16, "For a righteous man falls seven times, and rises again, but the wicked stumble in time of calamity."

New Testament:

John 5:14. Afterward Jesus findeth him in the temple, and said unto him, Behold, thou art made whole: sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee.

John 8:11. She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

koreahog2005 · Nov 3, 2004

Craig, you said the following:

I have not ignored any of this, and I have written, very many times, in agreement with this (except for the punctiliar aspect of the action—it may or may not be punctiliar). However, as we have seen, in both Eph. 3:17 and Col. 2:7 we are not dealing with the perfect tense—we are dealing with passive perfect participles. Nonetheless we are dealing with past action (not necessarily punctiliar) that is either continuing (obviously not punctiliar) or having a continued effect of some kind on the subject.

The perfect passive participle still describes a punctiliar (point in time), completed event with a permanent result, a dot followed by a long line (. _________ ). The action is clearly completed action, but it has a permanent result. Notice the following quotes:

From Huber Drumwright:

A perfect participle preserves the distinctive character of the perfect tense: the completeness of an action previously begun that has produced a result existing at the time referred to in the leading verb with which it is associated.

Drumwright, An Introduction to New Testament Greek (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1980), page 106.

From Spiros Zodhiates (a Greek guy born on the island of Cyprus):

The perfect participle stresses the state brought about by the finished results of the action.

Zodhiates, The Complete Word Study New Testament (Chattanooga, TN: AMG Publishers, 1991), page 868.

Here are some other examples of the perfect passive participle:

1 Timothy 2:8 – “Remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, descendant of David, according to my gospel.” (“risen” is a past action with a permanent result)

Galatians 3:1 – “You foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified?” (“crucified” is a past action with a permanent result)

Galatians 3:15 – “Brethren, I speak in terms of human relations; even though it is only a man’s covenant, yet when it has been ratified, no one sets it aside or adds conditions to it.” (“ratified” is a past action with a permanent result)

Galatians 3:17 – “What I am saying is this: the Law, which came four hundred and thirty years later, does not invalidate a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to nullify the promise.” (“ratified” is a past action with a permanent result)

A quote on Ephesians 3:17 from Phil Newton, pastor of South Woods Baptist Church, Memphis, TN, Sept. 5, 1999:

“Having been firmly rooted” is a perfect passive participle in the Greek. What that means is that it refers to a foundation which is forever laid, never to be repeated, never to be found inadequate. The passive voice reminds us that we did not lay the foundation of our Christian lives, but it was accomplished by the Lord himself.

http://www.southwoodsbc.org/sermons/col2b.htm

I think Psalm 1:3a is another good verse to examine at this point:

“And he will be like a tree firmly planted by streams of water.”

The verb “plant” used in verse 3 is “shathal” in Hebrew, which can also mean “transplant.” To “root” can mean to “plant.” Remember that I earlier gave Bauer’s definition for the verb “root”:

Cause to take root, mostly fig., fix firmly, put on a firm foundation (Hom. +) pass. Be or become firmly rooted or fixed.

The verb “shathal” is also found in Jeremiah 17:8a, which describes the man who trusts in the Lord:

“For he will be like a tree planted by the water.”

Craigbythesea · Nov 3, 2004

The perfect passive participle still describes a punctiliar (point in time), completed event with a permanent result, a dot followed by a long line (. _________ ). The action is clearly completed action, but it has a permanent result. Notice the following quotes:

From Huber Drumwright:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A perfect participle preserves the distinctive character of the perfect tense: the completeness of an action previously begun that has produced a result existing at the time referred to in the leading verb with which it is associated.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Sir:

Your quote from Huber Drumwright refutes your claim that “The perfect passive participle still describes a punctiliar (point in time), completed event with a permanent result, a dot followed by a long line (. _________ ). Drumwright describes the action as having previously begun. Action which has begun, previously or otherwise, is NOT punctiliar action; it is linear action. See Robertson, pp. 909-910; Dana & Mantey, pp. 229-230.

koreahog2005 · Nov 3, 2004

I disagree. The action that was previously begun was also completed. The example I gave of the crucifixion in my post immediately preceding this one is a case in point. The crucifixion lasted a few hours, but we consider it an event, not a long, incomplete process. The same thing can be said for a football game. The game may last several hours, but we consider it to be an event because it comes to an end. The crucifixion began, and it was completed. It has a permanent result. Your concept of roots growing is quite different. There is no completion of the process you describe and no permanent result. Linear action is incomplete. Perfect action is complete (punctiliar) with a lasting result. Some more quotes:

The aorist may be represented by a dot (.), the present by a line (_________), and the perfect by the combination of the two (.________).

Dana & Mantey, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, p. 179.

This verb tense has the element of “punctiliar action.” This fancy word in reality means nothing more than a “punctuation” or “punctuation mark” in the succession of time. Can you see the similarity between punctiliar and punctuation? Whenever we place a question mark, a period, and a comma as we write, we insert one mark with our pens in the sequence of time and go on with our writing. This one single event jotted down in one moment of time, is called punctiliar action. I call the use of the aorist tense, “punctuation in time.” The crucifixion, the death, the burial, the resurrection, ascension, and the sitting down to reign of Jesus Christ in heavenly places, were all historical punctuation marks in the universe’s timetable. Nothing can be added to them, and nothing can be taken away from them.

http://www.christianindiantv.homestead.com/files/OurpositioninChristtwo.htm

The perfect tense has no equivalent in English. Saying "I have walked" or "I have been chastised" only gets close to the Greek form. The perfect is the tense of completed action. This tense really expresses three ideas: an action in progress, its coming to a point of culmination, its existing as a completed result. As Ray Summers states in his Essentials of New Testament Greek, "...it implies a process but looks upon the process as having reached a sinsummation and existing as a completed state."

Biblical Example: 2 John 1:1 - "have known"

Common Example: "It is written" - with the idea that "it has been written and stands written."
Graphic Representation of the Perfect Tense:

. ------>

http://www.nbsc2000.org/bibleStudy/Int_steps2_perf.html

AORIST TENSE. This is the classic punctiliar action. It sees action as a whole, taking place in a point in time. . . .
PERFECT TENSE. This tense is like the aorist in that it also sees the action as taking place in a point in time. The difference is that the perfect also emphasizes continuing results. It denotes completed action in the past with finished results in the present.

http://www.angelfire.com/nt/theology/greekverbs.html

Perfect Tense
The basic thought of the perfect tense is that the progress of an action has been completed and the results of the action are continuing on, in full effect. In other words, the progress of the action has reached its culmination and the finished results are now in existence. Unlike the English perfect, which indicates a completed past action, the Greek perfect tense indicates the continuation and present state of a completed past action.

For example, Galatians 2:20 should be translated "I am in a present state of having been crucified with Christ," indicating that not only was I crucified with Christ in the past, but I am existing now in that present condition.
"...having been rooted and grounded in love," Eph 3:17

http://www.ntgreek.org/learn_nt_greek/verbs1.htm

We can see this difference in our English. To blink the eye is punctiliar, to live linear. Hence it is not enough to learn the force of voice, tense and mode. The real meaning of the verb root has to be considered. In a broad general way the Greek tenses were developed to make plainer the root idea of verbs so that almost any verb might be used either as punctiliar, linear or state of completion.

A.T. Robertson, Short Grammar, p. 287, section 394.

Craigbythesea · Nov 3, 2004

You are still confusing the perfect tense with perfect participles, but even your insistence that the perfect tense necessarily includes punctiliar action is contrary to fact. A. T. Robertson distinguishes between the many kinds of perfects in the New Testament. The kind of perfect that you are writing about is what Robertson calls the punctiliar-durative, but there are also the durative perfect where the punctiliar force is dropped, and the durative-punctiliar where the durative action precedes the punctiliar action. Additionally Robertson discusses the “Present Perfect of Broken Continuity,” the “Dramatic Historical Present Perfect,” the “Gnomic Present Perfect,” the “Perfect in Indirect Discourse, the “Futuristic Present Perfect,” the “‘Aoristic’ Present Perfect,” the “Periphrastic Perfect,” and the “Present as Perfect.”

One class of durative perfects, where the punctiliar force is dropped, is called by Robertson the “The Intensive Present Perfect.” James Moulton calls these durative perfects “Perfects with present force.” Robertson writes, “They are perfecta praesentia. In reality they are perfects where the punctiliar force is dropped and only the durative remains (cf. past perfect).”

A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research. pp. 894-903.

koreahog2005 · Nov 4, 2004

Craig, my resources are limited because I’m not near a theological library, but I have not found any evidence that Robertson, Moulton, or any other Greek scholars consider the perfect passive participles in Ephesians 3:17 to be purely durative (non-punctiliar) perfects. The non-punctiliar perfect is clearly an exception to the general understanding about perfects. Notice the following quote uses the phrase “generally understood”:

Subsequent grammarians and comparative philologists followed suit in abandoning a time-based model in favour of what eventually came to be termed an Aktionsart -based model. The time element, however, did not disappear, but was relegated to a subordinate position. From the Aktionsart perspective, the perfect tense-form was generally understood as expressing a completed action, incorporating both the punctiliar force of the aorist and the durative force of the present, although the emphasis in a given situation may be on either one of the forces.

http://www.bsw.org/?l=72081&a=Art01.html

Clearly the non-punctiliar perfect that you describe emphasizes the durative force.

Here are some quotes from Robertson about the general perfect and the intensive present perfect where he lists some examples:

The perfect is both punctiliar and durative. The aorist (punctiliar)
represents an action as finished, the linear present as durative, but the
perfect presents a completed state or condition. When the action was
completed the perfect tense does not say. It is still complete at the time
of the use of the tense by speaker or writer. . . .

The Intensive Present Perfect. Moulton calls these 'Perfects with Present
Force.' They are Perfecta Praesentia. In reality they are perfects where
the punctiliar force is dropped and only the durative remains. These
almost purely durative perfects in the N. T. may be illustrated by eoika
(Jas. 1:6); anewga (2 Cor. 6:11); oida (Mt. 6:8); esthka (Rev. 3:20);
enesthka (2 Th. 2:2); pepoitha (Ph. 2:24); kekragen (Jo. 1:15)

From “A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research”
by A. T. Robertson.

Let’s examine each of the verses he mentions and his comments on each verse:

James 1:6 – “But let him ask in faith without any doubting, for the one who doubts is like the surf of the sea driven and tossed by the wind.” (NASV)

Is like (eoiken). Second perfect active indicative with the linear force alone from eikw to be like.

http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/RobertsonsWordPictures/rwp.cgi?book=jas&chapter=1&verse=6

This verb (“is like”) is only found here and in James 1:23. It can also be translated as “resemble.”

2 Corinthians 6:11 – “Our mouth has spoken freely to you, O Corinthians, our heart is opened wide.” (The NASV has a side note that the first phrase is literally, “ is open to you.”)

Our mouth is open unto you (to stoma hmwn anewigen proß umaß). Second perfect active indicative of anoigw and intransitive, stand open. He has kept back nothing in his portrayal of the glory of the ministry as the picture of the open mouth shows.

http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/RobertsonsWordPictures/rwp.cgi?book=2co&chapter=6&verse=11

Matthew 6:8 – “Therefore do not be like them; for your Father knows what you need, before you ask Him.”

(No entry from Robertson)
In the verse “oida” is the word for “know.”

Revelation 3:20 – “Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him, and will dine with him, and he with Me.”

I stand at the door (esthka epi thn quran). Perfect active of isthmi (intransitive). Picture of the Lord's advent as in Matthew 24:33; James 5:9, but true also of the individual response to Christ's call (Luke 12:36) as shown in Holman Hunt's great picture. Some see a use also of Song of Solomon 5:2.

http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/RobertsonsWordPictures/rwp.cgi?book=re&chapter=3&verse=20

2 Thessalonians 2:2 – “That you may not be quickly shaken from your composure or be disturbed either by a spirit or a message or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come .”

But evidently some one claimed to have a private epistle from Paul which supported the view that Jesus was coming at once, as that the day of the Lord is now present (wß oti enesthken h hmera tou kuriou). Perfect active indicative of enisthmi, old verb, to place in, but intransitive in this tense to stand in or at or near. So "is imminent" (Lightfoot). The verb is common in the papyri. In 1 Corinthians 3:22; Romans 8:38 we have a contrast between ta enestwta, the things present, and ta mellonta, the things future (to come).

http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/RobertsonsWordPictures/rwp.cgi?book=2th&chapter=2&verse=2

Philippians 2:24 – “And I trust in the Lord that I myself also shall be coming shortly.”

In the Lord (en Kuriwi). Not a perfunctory use of this phrase. Paul's whole life is centred in Christ (Galatians 2:20).

http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/RobertsonsWordPictures/rwp.cgi?book=php&chapter=2&verse=24

Robertson did not comment directly on “trust” above, but I think the same word is used in a similar way in 2 Thessalonians 3:4. Notice Robertson’s comment:

And we have confidence (pepoiqomen). Second perfect indicative of peiqw, to persuade, intransitive in this tense, we are in a state of trust.

http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/RobertsonsWordPictures/rwp.cgi?book=2th&chapter=3&verse=4

John 1:15 – “John bore witness of Him, and cried out , saying, ‘This was He of whom I said, “He who comes after me has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me.” ’ ”

Crieth (kekragen). Second perfect active indicative of krazw, old verb for loud crying, repeated in dramatic form again for emphasis recalling the wonderful Voice in the wilderness which the Beloved Disciple can still hear echoing through the years.

http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/RobertsonsWordPictures/rwp.cgi?book=joh&chapter=1&verse=15

The above examples cited by Robertson do indeed emphasize durative force from the past, but in each case we can see why the punctiliar aspect was absent:

James 1:6 – It’s tough to point out one particular event where a person begins doubting and being like the surf driven by the wind.

2 Corinthians 6:11 – There was not just one time that their mouths were open to them, so there was not just one event.

Matthew 6:8 – There was no beginning to God’s infinite knowledge. He has always known everything.

Revelation 3:20 – There was not just one time when Jesus was standing at the door of the elect.

2 Thessalonians 2:2 – The coming had not actually occurred, and different people had different opinions about when it occurred, so there was no single, imaginary event.

Philippians 2:24 – The word “trust” (peitho) as a perfect form (pepoitha) can be translated as “have confidence.” It takes time for humans to gain confidence. In Matthew 27:43 the perfect form is used to describe Jesus’ confidence in His Father, which had no beginning and was not the result of an event.

John 1:15 – It’s tough to point out just one event where John was crying out while preparing the way for the Lord. Robertson emphasized the continuing result of John’s crying out.

In your conception of “rooted” and “grounded” in Ephesians 3:17, there is no continuing result from being rooted and grounded (founded). No result in your scheme is possible because the rooting and grounding (founding) are still taking place rather than being seen as past action with a continuing result. “Rhizoo” plainly means to “root in” because “ek-rhizoo” means to “root up” (“pluck up”) — Matthew 13:29; Matthew 15:13; Luke 17:6; Jude 12). These words describe events, not long processes. Even the intensive perfects can have a continuing result. Notice what Brooks and Winbery said:

Intensive Perfect

Remember that the perfect conveys the idea of a present state resulting from a past action. This use of the perfect emphasizes the present state of being, the continuing result, the finished product, the fact that a thing is. Some grammarians call this the perfect of existing state. This use approaches the meaning of the present tense. The punctiliar force has been greatly reduced; the linear element is much in ascendency.

Brooks and Winbery, Syntax of New Testament Greek, 1979, page 104.

Obviously, when we talk about God’s knowledge, as in Matthew 6:8, this tense is very appropriate. Brooks and Winbery cited some of the same examples as Robertson: James 1:6; 2 Corinthians 6:11; Revelation 3:20; Philippians 2:24.

Vaughan and Gideon also discussed the intensive perfect:

Intensive—The perfect may be used with the force of an emphatic present. Burton explains that in this construction “the attention is directed wholly to the present resulting state, the past action . . . being left out of thought,” (p. 37). Moulton calls these “Perfects with Present Force.” Their usage is confined for the most part to a few verbs which use the perfect in this sense only, e.g., pepoitha, memnemai, estheka, tethneka. Dana and Mantey, who do not limit the intensive perfect to this narrow range of verbs, explain that “this is the emphatic method . . . of expressing a fact or condition. It is the strong way of saying that a thing is” (p. 202).

Vaughan and Gideon, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament, 1979, page 150.

Again, I don’t see any evidence that the intensive perfect’s non-punctiliar aspect applies to Ephesians 3:17. Notice that Vaughan and Gideon said that the intensive perfect tense’s usage is confined to a few verbs.

Craigbythesea · Nov 4, 2004

Col. 2:7. having been firmly rooted and now being built up in Him and established in your faith, just as you were instructed, and overflowing with gratitude.

The Greek perfect passive participle translated here “having been firmly rooted” is the Greek word errizomenoi from the verb rhizoo, the cognate noun of which is riza, “root.” From this we get in English the word “rhizome.”

Paul commonly used word pictures from both sports and nature to express the concepts that he was teaching. Both Paul and his readers knew that trees do not magically appear full-grown with fully developed root systems. The word choice and its context in Col. 2:7 therefore demand that we see in his expression its durative rather than its punctiliar quality. And not only its durative quality, but its living, growing quality, all the way from its germination to it maturity.

Eph. 3:17. so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith; and that you, being rooted and grounded in love,

The Greek word translated here “being rooted” is exactly the same Greek word, including its inflectional form. The very same facts that pertain to the use of the word in Col. 2:7 apply here as well as in Eph. 3:17.

Robertson shows several examples that demonstrate that the durative or punctiliar quality of Greek verbs is often dependent upon the nature of the word (no pun intended). And in both Col. 2:7 and Eph. 3:17 Paul is using a word picture from nature to express a spiritual concept. Indeed, Robert himself writes concerning Col. 2:7, “Paul changes the figure from walk to growing tree.”

A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, vol. iv, p. 489.

double-minded question

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Active Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member