Word Study, G5368, philo

[Van]

Not sure what you are driving at Gb93433, but let try to answer your assertions.

1) "Some meanings of words found in lexicons did not actually meaning any such thing in the original language." That may well be true, certainly there are translation choices not supported by any lexicon.
However "baptize" refers to immersion, such as to immerse a cloth in fluid to dye it.

2) Agreed, but context, as I have used it did refer to how it was used originally.

3) We all evaluate things according to our experience and reasoning. The liberal attack on communication using the rabbit warren of epistemology is overblown. How did you conclude bible study tools are so biased they cannot help us? What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

4) Lexicons make reference to both scriptural usage and usage as found in extra biblical writings.

 

[gb93433]

2) Agreed, but context, as I have used it did refer to how it was used originally.

How do you evaluate that? The only way I know to evaluate that is to read and study everything surrounding that time and place not just a dictionary meaning. For us to fully understand anything we must be able to place ourselves at that time and place. For example if we read a century old document written in America and sugar is mentioned probably most of us would assume sugar was cheap unless we knew that it was expensive and why. That kind of information will only come by studying the culture at that time.

3) We all evaluate things according to our experience and reasoning. How did you conclude bible study tools are so biased they cannot help us?

Each writer comes with biases and better or worse information than others. That information may be based on incomplete knowledge. It may also lack due to a lack of information. The information in one may be be better due to more information in later years than an older one. They may not help all that much depending on our own understanding. For example I was teaching a class on doctrine a few years ago and about 1/2 of the class were university students from China. During one of the classes we talked about the cost we may have to pay for being a Christian. One of the ladies said there was no way she wanted to become a Christian. I was surprised and did not know what to tell her. When a Chinese Christian explained what we were talking about she finally understood what Jesus taught. It took someone to bridge the cultural gap so she understood.

I am not saying tools cannot help us. I am saying that we must evaluate them and we need some kind of way to do that. Lexicons help about as much as a dictionary does. They give definitions and sometimes some explanation but they are often limited to some basic meanings. If for example someone were to study John 15:16 and do a word study on the word "choose" the lexicons would give a basic meaning but I have never seen any that reference the background of that verse as discipleship in the historical context of Judaism. Those men knew what it meant to be a disciple of a rabbi and so knew the meaning of what they heard.

In reference to forgiveness I have heard it taught that we are to forgive based on what is taught in [FONT=&quot]Matthew 6: 14-15. I could follow that up with the question of who forgives a murderer. [/FONT]Is there forgiveness for a murderer? What role did capital punishment play in society then? Does it still have a role today? A word study on forgiveness I do not believe will give those answers nor really give the bigger picture of God's hand in a society.

Word studies are limited and do not always give an accurate picture or definition any more than an English dictionary would give the meaning of the words die, pass away, and murder.

4) Lexicons make reference to both scriptural usage and usage as found in extra biblical writings.

Yes that is true but the meaning or usage is often debated too. Those kinds of discussions are often talked about on the B-Greek forum (http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek/forum/) One might ask about how a child learns a language. They learn by observing and listening to how words are used before they can read and write. The more we read a text in the original language the greater the exposure we have to how words are used and less of a need to use tools.

 

[Van]

Again, I am not sure what your point is. You seem to think Bible Word Studies are not beneficial, but you did not say that.

1) We always make decisions based on the information we have, and it is never perfectly correct or all encompassing.

2) You have addressed closing the gap between now and when scripture was written several times. We try to do it, but our results are never perfect.

3) You say word studies are limited, yet fail to address that the lack of word studies is more limited.

4) Debating a fact does not mean it is not a fact. I could say the earth was round, and someone would post, no Van you are wrong again, its a imperfect sphere.

5) Just because I could do a word study on aphiēmi and come to a better understanding of the word translated forgive, does not mean I would have an accurate understanding of the doctrine of forgiveness.
As you may know, scholars hold differing views on the subject.

6) If a murderer was born anew, the sin of murder would be forgiven and remembered no more forever by God. This does not mean that the government ordained by God, could not convict and punish with death a murderer who has been forgiven by God. But this topic is far afield from the meanings of phileo.

 

[gb93433]

2)

3) You say word studies are limited, yet fail to address that the lack of word studies is more limited. As you may know, scholars hold differing views on the subject.

Reading and seeing how words are used is far better than doing word studies. Kids learn a language not by doing word studies but by observation and hearing words used in a given context. It is my position that too little time is spent on learning the language to the point of proficiency and too much time on word studies and helps. From what I can tell there is a move away from word studies and onto more reading and seeing how words are used in a given context.

Recently I read an article which stated that if someone starts by learning to read a language the speed at which they will be able to read will be very slow than if that person starts by learning to speak first.

The gentleman who runs the program at http://www.biblicallanguagecenter.com/ has been involved in teaching the languages by teaching his students to speak the language first much like how a child learns.

There are some very good discussions on these matters by some top people at http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek/forum/

 

[Van]

Sounds like you should start a thread on your view of word studies.

For example, "Reading and seeing how words are used" is word study.

The goal of word study is not to learn to speak the original language.

Word studies are for the purpose of increasing our understanding of the word of God.

Not sure if your quote #3 was intentionally not what I said, or an inadvertent conflation.

 

[gb93433]

The goal of word study is not to learn to speak the original language.

I am not saying never do word studies but I also believe that there is way too much emphasis on them as though they are the answers to our questions. Doing word studies will never allow one to pick up on phrases and how they differ but give the same meaning. There is a lot more to developing a theology from the text than just doing word studies.

Word studies are for the purpose of increasing our understanding of the word of God.

Imagine what would happen if one were to spend his time focused on words and never reading the Bible in its context. He would never learn scripture but only the meanings of words. People come to this country all the time knowing the meanings of English words but really do not know much of anything until they learn the language in its American context.

The goal is to interpret the text correctly and develop a theology from the text not do a word study and read the results back into the text to interpret it.

For example if you were to do a word study on the word "choose" and then read the results of your study back into John 15:16 you would have a completely false interpretation of that verse in terms of the word choose and your interpretation and historical picture of what Jesus said would be completely off by a mile.

While word studies can have some benefit I believe there is way too emphasis on them. If one is going to do a word study then they should study the particular word over time such as from the OT through the intertestamental period and on into the first and second century. For example the word for elder ceases before the NT is completed and it is replaced by another word. Yet we hear whole theologies based on the older word for elder and seldom is the newer word ever referred to.

There is so much more to developing a theology than by just doing word studies. I teach people to spend a lot more time using a concordance and see the context of how the word is used rather than using lexicons and dictionaries, theological works, etc. There is so much more to be gained from using a concordance to say investigate the word salvation and how Peter uses it and then how Paul uses it than to treat it like homogenized milk as though both Peter and Paul use that word the same way because they do not.

 

[Van]

I believe word studies are an important aid in Bible Study. Many Churches and Schools agree, as you can find several places where word study methods are presented.

Word studies can just as easily undermine effort where the text was manipulated to pour man-made doctrine into the text.

Of course word studies are not the only method of Bible study, just one of several tools to grow in our knowledge of the word of God.

No one said or suggest word studies could be used exclusively to develop theology.

Many folks here seem not to know how to use an exhaustive concordance, but as you may know, it is a very useful tool for study. For example, an exhaustive concordance tells us all of original language words that are translated into the same English word. And all the different English words used to translate the same original language word in all its forms.

Without a word study, how would one verify that Peter and Paul used the word "salvation" in different ways? Why not do a word study and demonstrate your claim?

 

[gb93433]

Many folks here seem not to know how to use an exhaustive concordance, but as you may know, it is a very useful tool for study. For example, an exhaustive concordance tells us all of original language words that are translated into the same English word. And all the different English words used to translate the same original language word in all its forms.

I am assuming by your statement that you are unable to read the text but rather a translation of the text. Is that correct?

Without a word study, how would one verify that Peter and Paul used the word "salvation" in different ways? Why not do a word study and demonstrate your claim?

By reading the text one will notice the different tenses used just like one would read an original document written in English.

 

[Van]

No need to assume, I know nothing of Greek.

If you go to some interlinears, they provide parsing information, i.e. voice, number, tense, etc.

So your point was that Peter and Paul sometimes used the word translated as salvation in differing tenses? Not much meat there.

 

[gb93433]

No need to assume, I know nothing of Greek.

I think we are on a slightly different page. I assumed we were talking about doing word studies in the original language and not from an English text.

So your point was that Peter and Paul sometimes used the word translated as salvation in differing tenses? Not much meat there.

No, when you read the Greek text you will notice that Peter uses salvation in the future tense, and Paul uses it in past, present, and future. So to come to a conclusion about salvation from a word study originating from an English translation can be confusing if you try and read the results of your word study back into Peter.

 

[Van]

Well, yes we need to know what my word studies are. Did I not identify they were studies of Greek words, i.e. in this thread G5368, phileo?"

If both Paul and Peter used a Greek word translated "salvation" referring to the future aspect of salvation, how is derived from tense. Do you think the noun was in a future tense? The idea that the future aspect of our salvation at the second coming is in view comes from context.

A word study of "salvation" would not be confusing if all the usages are considered contextually.

I am sure you are familiar with the three aspects of Salvation, (1) positional sanctification, (2) progressive sanctification, and (3) ultimate sanctification. If we are born anew, then "positional sanctification" is a past event, God placed us spiritually in Christ. This saved us from the penalty of sin, i.e. death. Now that we are born anew, we are undergoing progressive sanctification where we strive to become more like Christ and to serve Christ as His ambassadors. This process sets us free the power of sin in our lives, and live more fully for Christ. Finally, the future aspect of salvation refers to Christ's second coming where we are raised in glorified bodies, or changed in the twinkling of an eye, and meet Jesus in the air. This sets us free from the presence of sin in our bodies, because our mortal corrupt flesh is exchanged for our glorified body.

 

[gb93433]

If both Paul and Peter used a Greek word translated "salvation" referring to the future aspect of salvation, how is derived from tense. Do you think the noun was in a future tense? The idea that the future aspect of our salvation at the second coming is in view comes from context.

If you are trying to interpret passages Peter wrote you cannot assume all three tenses of the word for salvation. Peter only wrote in the future tense.

Maybe I am missing your point so could you point out how word studies would help or give answers to correctly interpret James 5:14-15, "Is anyone among you sick? Then he must call for the elders of the church and they are to pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord; and the prayer offered in faith will restore the one who is sick, and the Lord will raise him up, and if he has committed sins, they will be forgiven him."

 

[Van]

He Gb93433, I did not assume any tense inflected grammatically in the noun. Peter was addressing the future aspect of salvation based on context, and that is one of the meanings of the Greek word.

Did I say or suggest word studies, by themselves, are the be all and end all of bible study? Nope.

Why do many churches and schools teach word study? Because many scholars and teachers think the effort is rewarding.

If you want to present your study of James 5:14-15 in a separate thread, I am sure it would be enlightening.

This thread addresses the meanings of phileo, and indirectly agapeo.
Have any questions on the topic?

 

[gb93433]

Why do many churches and schools teach word study? Because many scholars and teachers think the effort is rewarding.

Who are the scholars you are thinking about? This was a matter discussed on the forum at B-Greek. A number of those who participate at that forum read ancient Greek texts with ease. So you may want to get some extra input from them and see if you can teach them form some of your wisdom.

This thread addresses the meanings of phileo, and indirectly agapeo.

My reading of the text shows how they overlap at times. That does not require a word study but to be able to read the text.

 

[Van]

1) Who are those who say word studies are not helpful in growing in our understanding of the word of God. (a) Greektim, someone who has studied Greek, and (b) Gb93433, someone who has studied Greek.

2) We can certainly find (internet search) those that point out word studies can be poorly done, or agenda driven, and therefore not edifying.
But that does not mean well done word studies to not open up the word of God, giving us new or expanded insights into God"s word.

3) One view is the meanings of phileo and agapeo overlap, but another is both separate meanings can be applied to the same to the same person, i.e. Jesus could agapeo and phileo John.

 

[gb93433]

But that does not mean well done word studies to not open up the word of God, giving us new or expanded insights into God"s word.

Language is the door to a culture. Words in a language have a historical and cultural background. Much more is accomplished by studying the historical background of the books of the Bible especially the first five books than most anything else. Once that is done most of the words in a text will have been explained because those words have a historical background in that specific culture. For example when Jesus said to those He called "Come follow Me" and they immediately followed Him was said in a historical context they already understood. They immediately followed him because they already understood discipleship under a rabbi.

 

[Van]

I bet your point is not that language is only a door to culture and not to communication, flawed as it may be.

No one said words do not have a historical, cultural background.

And I bet you are not saying that word meanings cannot be derived by study of how they are used in biblical and non-biblical usages.

The bible gives a different answer as to why they followed Jesus, they we believers in God (Yahweh) and were looking for His promised Messiah.

It is perfectly ok to consider a cultural bias that colors a word or phrase or idiomatic expression, but we should draw our understanding from what it says, rather than from reading between the lines.

Here is a link to one Bible Teacher's view of how to do a word study:
http://www.yoyomaster.com/ministry.file/wordstudy.html

 

[gb93433]

I bet your point is not that language is only a door to culture and not to communication, flawed as it may be.

I am not sure what your point is.

The bible gives a different answer as to why they followed Jesus, they we believers in God (Yahweh) and were looking for His promised Messiah.

What does this have to do with word studies?

It is perfectly ok to consider a cultural bias that colors a word or phrase or idiomatic expression, but we should draw our understanding from what it says, rather than from reading between the lines.

When I tell my wife "I love you" that has a very different meaning than when I tell my daughter the same words. So meanings are more than just words on a page. Like I asked earlier explain the meaning of the text found in James 5:14-15 using word studies. You could do a study of every word in those verses and still miss the interpretation by a mile because the correct interpretation lies not in the words on the page (what is says) but rather in what it does not say that gives the correct meaning to what it does say in its context.

 

[Van]

1) My point is that language is a door to communication.
2) You brought up "come follow me" and I was addressing your assessment.
3) No one has said or suggested that context is not used to discern the shade of meaning intended. It is!
4) I asked you to explain James 5:14-15 and thus far you have not done so. No one said or suggested word studies will always bring about the correct understanding of a passage. As I said, it is but one of many tools.
5) I totally reject as nonsense the assertion we should get the meaning of scripture by reading between the lines.

the correct interpretation lies not in the words on the page (what is says) but rather in what it does not say that gives the correct meaning to what it does say in its context.

God's inspired words convey the message, rather than something not said. Reading between the lines I could say the Bible teaches God put invisible pink elephants in orbit around Mars. After all he put everything in heaven. And he deals with the invisible.

 

[gb93433]

God's inspired words convey the message, rather than something not said. Reading between the lines I could say the Bible teaches God put invisible pink elephants in orbit around Mars. After all he put everything in heaven. And he deals with the invisible.

Those words are not void of a historical and literary context. Why do you think Proverbs, etc. is called poetry? It is certainly not American poetry. If one tried to understand Proverbs as they would normally approach American poetry they would not see what Proverbs truly is. Anyone reading a few verses would notice there is no rhyme. It is the context we must understand to correctly understand the message and interpret correctly.

That is not any more reading between the lines than you would when listening to someone talk in English.