Thank you -- and --- Greek?


#1

I wish to express sincere thanks for the citation from St. John Chrysostom; I quoted this passage in my book:

“But what we beseech is that ye would receive the benefit and not reject the gift. Be persuaded therefore by us, and “receive not the grace in vain.” For lest they should think that this of itself is “reconciliation,” believing on Him that calleth; he adds these words, requiting that earnestness which respects the life. For, for one who hath been freed from sins and made a friend to wallow in the former things, is to return again unto enmity, and to” receive the grace in vain,” in respect of the life. For from “the grace” we reap no benefit towards salvation, if we live impurely; nay, we are even harmed, having this greater aggravation even of our sins, in that after such knowledge and such a gift we have gone back to our former vices.”

Freed from sins and made a friend — reminding me of, “Greater love has no one than …to lay down his life for his friends; and you are My friends if you do what I command.

In no way can that refer to someone “never-saved”.

…“wallow in the former things”, "return again unto ENMITY". Even after such knowledge and such a gift to go back to former vices. In no way can that reflect "still saved’!

On Augustine, I stated that although he did espouse “Sovereign Predestined Salvation”, he also said that “no one can know if he’s really elected” (in spite of 1Jn5:11-13). Augustine erroneously perceived that saving-faith was a gift FROM God TO (certain) men, He even gave faith (but insufficient) to the unpredestined – my book discusses the real meanings of verses like Rom12:3, Eph2:8, 2Tim2:25 and others. (I will be delighted to discuss any of those or others here, if anyone wishes).

(…kind of appalling to perceive that God would give SOME faith to those He created to be wicked and to perish; impugning His character with “causality in sin”, and even casting Him as mean!)

:eek:

The concept of “Sovereign Predestined Salvation”, as such, did not really exist until the mid 1500’s. Chrysostom’s comment above is typical of most ECF’s.

RE “Greek” – if there are any Greek scholars here, I would be very grateful to pick a few brains. For instance – on John3:3, I couldn’t figure out the usage of “Horao” in King James (Textus Receptus), as opposed to “Eido” in NASB (Nestle). A website I found stated that “eido” is the aorist form of “horao”. But in the accepted Greek, John wrote “idein” (rather than “oida”). Oida conveying more “perceive/know”, while in all 39 occurrences of “idein” it always means “behold/experience”.

Therefore, “Unless one is born again he cannot BEHOLD/EXPERIENCE the kingdom of God.”

This repeats in verse 5 “unless one is born of water (flesh!) and (also!) born of the Spirit, he cannot ENTER the kingdom.”

And repeats in verse 6, “that which is born of flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.”

The whole dialog was to teach Nick that “yes we’re born of fleshly mothers, but we must also be born spiritually” — something Jesus rebuked Nick for being a teacher but not already knowing, verse 10!

So – anyone dispute “eido” as being aorist form of “horao”? And therefore the difference between KJV, and NASB?

Thanx in advance!

:slight_smile:


#2

He had to be thinking of Peter, in 2:2:20-22. “If after having FULL KNOWLEDGE (epignosis!) of the truth — far better to have never KNOWN (epiginosko!) the way of righteousness, than having known it to have turned away from the holy commandment!”

I betchya’ he was…


#3

I might could help you with a little bit of French Italian German Portuguese and English but I don’t really know Greek I’m sorry


#4

I’m gonna take a pass on the bulk of your post – it’s been a long day, and I’m beat. :wink:

But, I’m not sure I’m getting what you’re asserting. As I recall, both the TR and the NA28 have ἰδεῖν at John 3:3…

NA: ἀπεκρίθη Ἰησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ· ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω σοι, ἐὰν μή τις γεννηθῇ ἄνωθεν, οὐ δύναται ἰδεῖν τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ.

TR: ἀπεκρίθη ὁ Ἰησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω σοι ἐὰν μή τις γεννηθῇ ἄνωθεν οὐ δύναται ἰδεῖν τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ.

Perhaps I’m misunderstanding…?


#5

Bien, muchas gracias por su ayuda de todos modos…

Oh, wait — you didn’t say “Spanish”! :stuck_out_tongue:

I appreciate you anyway!

:hug1:


#6

I always made it a point not to learn Spanish because of so many other people that I know that speak it I do have some software on Koine Greek but I’m not sure I have any computer old enough to be able to use it. I know how to read and write Russian Cyrillic so learning the alphabet probably wouldn’t be that hard for me. Getting a little off-topic but there are people who know more about this stuff than I do I do have a study Bible with word study. I think that’s probably where I learned just what Little koine Greek I do now


#7

believe it or not that’s actually not that different from French when you write it out. French is my most recent language of study so that’s the one my brain connects to right now


#8

That’s fine – pleasant snoozes! :slight_smile:

But, I’m not sure I’m getting what you’re asserting. As I recall, both the TR and the NA28 have ἰδεῖν at John 3:3…

NA: ἀπεκρίθη Ἰησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ· ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω σοι, ἐὰν μή τις γεννηθῇ ἄνωθεν, οὐ δύναται ἰδεῖν τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ.

TR: ἀπεκρίθη ὁ Ἰησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω σοι ἐὰν μή τις γεννηθῇ ἄνωθεν οὐ δύναται ἰδεῖν τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ.

Perhaps I’m misunderstanding…?

Oops, I had it backwards. From here the Greek on NASB is listed as:

"ἀπεκρίθη Ἰησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω σοι ἐὰν μή τις γεννηθῇ ἄνωθεν οὐ δύναται** ἰδεῖν** τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ

Exactly as you said, “idein”. BUT – the Lexicon for that verse plainly says “ὁράω horaō”.

So — it’s me who is still misunderstanding? King James has “idein” in the Greek and “eido” in the lexicon…

I ask because Calvinists insist it is “oida-perceive”; therefore, God must ZAP a person with “borned-again” in order for him to understand salvation and be saved. Clearly, the intent was “idein” behold/get-there (same as “enter” in verse 5).

I was just wondering about the relationship between “horao” and “eido” — the second is aorist of the first? :confused:


#9

I had a college professor offer to teach Greek at no charge (as if I was “auditing”); really should have taken him up on it. :frowning:

believe it or not that’s actually not that different from French when you write it out. French is my most recent language of study so that’s the one my brain connects to right now

You must have a pretty high IQ…

Merci, et bonne nuit!


#10

idein is the 3rd person SINGULAR
eidon is 3rd person PLURAL
both aorist of horao (horao is present active indicative 1st person singular: I am seeing)

“he cannot recognize”
“they cannot recognize”
(aorist is a non-continuing action verb as opposed to “he cannot watch” or “they cannot watch” in an unending type watching)

I have not seen any of the texts using plural, but I don’t have access to all.

“Unless one is born again, he can’t notice that I am his King from Heaven, and he is my citizen and brother, no longer ‘of the world’ even though he is in the world”

I would stay away from the questions of predestination until mastering Aquinas’ questions on Predestination and The Book of Life in his Summa Theologica.
Predestination is only of a few, to guarantee the certainty of Christ’s saving work in our flesh. Grace, and the Book of Life, are for most.
It takes caution to avoid the mistake of thinking that
“the predestined” PLUS “the reprobate” EQUAL “100% of people”
The equation is actually:
“the predestined” PLUS “the reprobate” PLUS **“those to whom Grace appeals in the person of Christ and his Church” ** EQUAL “100% of people”


#11

Umm…no. 3rd singular would be εἶδε(ν), wouldn’t it?

ἰδεῖν would be the infinitive, so what we have is, “[he] is not able to see” (or “not able to behold”).

eidon is 3rd person PLURAL

I have not seen any of the texts using plural, but I don’t have access to all.

How about John 19:6?

ὅτε οὖν εἶδον αὐτὸν οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ οἱ ὑπηρέται
“when, therefore, the chief priests and the officers saw him”…


#12

I really appreciate your time and trouble.

Where does “oida” fit in?

I have not seen any of the texts using plural, but I don’t have access to all.

“Unless one is born again, he can’t notice that I am his King from Heaven, and he is my citizen and brother, no longer ‘of the world’ even though he is in the world”

Clearly it wasn’t intended “perceive/know” (the Calvinist claim)…

I would stay away from the questions of predestination until mastering Aquinas’ questions on Predestination and The Book of Life in his Summa Theologica.

Too late – my book has all three views of OSAS, then a chapter on “OSNAS” (Once Saved Not [necessarily] Always Saved). What I’ve done, is to write down all of the verses I’ve heard them use—in Calvinism I list fifty-five “secondaries”, and four “primary” (or founding) passages. The refutations away from Calvinistic understanding are bold and solid. I’ve posted some of the Secondaries, and at least one of the Primaries.

When every last verse thought to support a favorite doctrine (like Reformed Theology) is solidly shown not to fit that doctrine, and when many verses are clearly shown in opposition, there is little choice but to abandon the doctrine. Knowing that Catholics and Reformers go round and round, I hoped to contribute something of value here (useful in your future interactions with Calvinists).

Predestination is only of a few, to guarantee the certainty of Christ’s saving work in our flesh. Grace, and the Book of Life, are for most.

Reformed Theology only exists by stamping many times, “NOT REALLY”, over Scriptures. And re-defining terms— like “all”, becomes “not REALLY all but only some of all TYPES”.

“The grace of God has appeared bringing salvation to all men.” Titus2:11

Of course it means “all everyone”. Stronger in 1Tim2:1-4, even stronger in Rom5:17-19, and stronger still in Acts17:26-31. Deuteronomy 30:11-20 (really the whole chapter), with its connection to Rom10:6-10, completely oppose Sovereign Predestined Salvation. Deut30:12 is a foundational refutation of Monergism, the basis of RT!

It takes caution to avoid the mistake of thinking that
“the predestined” PLUS “the reprobate” EQUAL “100% of people”
The equation is actually:
“the predestined” PLUS “the reprobate” PLUS **“those to whom Grace appeals in the person of Christ and his Church” ** EQUAL “100% of people”

Where is anyone predestined to salvation? It’s just not there. As everyone here agreed in an earlier post, passages like Rom2:4-11 are absolute. God’s kindness leads to repentance, even those who stubbornly refuse to repent. And men store up wrath for THEMSELVES, because God is not partial. See Acts11:34-35 — Reformed Theology is the partiality that Peter blatantly said God is not!

John, thanks again for your thoughts; it’s so clear that Jn3:3 (one of the “Secondaries”!) merely repeats verse 5, “see” reflecting “enter/get-there”. I’m absolutely saving notes, and look forward to your thoughts on “oida”…


#13

Gorgias, thank you for your thoughts. Although Jesus spoke in Aramaic, John wrote in Greek; and it’s clear he used “idein”. Gone is the RT claim:

“you cannot perceive God’s kingdom unless He first BORNS-YOU-AGAIN” (zaps you with a regenerated heart, before you believe and turn to Him)…


You and John Martin cite Aquinas — didn’t he do the brilliant argument of holding up a pencil?

“What is this?”

We can go much farther today than then; wood, clay, graphite — carbon, oxygen, silicone, electrons, protons, up quark, down quark…

But his question still stands — “what is this?”

We have to admit, "we don’t really know; it is energy, somehow bound into solid form.

And Aquinas would say, “How do you know there is no GOD, when you don’t know what reality is?”

:slight_smile:


#14

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.