Announcement

Collapse

Biblical Languages 301 Guidelines

This is where we come to delve into the biblical text. Theology is not our foremost thought, but we realize it is something that will be dealt with in nearly every conversation. Feel free to use the original languages to make your point (meaning Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic). This is an exegetical discussion area, so please limit topics to purely biblical ones.

This is not the section for debates between theists and atheists. While a theistic viewpoint is not required for discussion in this area, discussion does presuppose a respect for the integrity of the Biblical text (or the willingness to accept such a presupposition for discussion purposes) and a respect for the integrity of the faith of others and a lack of an agenda to undermine the faith of others.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Greek in 1 Cor 6:19

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Greek in 1 Cor 6:19

    Hello Greek experts,

    I need your help please, I'm preparing my lesson for Sunday morning Group (otherwise known as Sunday School). I'm making a point about the body of Christ. I want to show how Paul is continuing his image of from 1 Cor 3, and drawing a parallel where it's talking about the Body of Christ an in 1 Cor 6:12-20. However, In the Book "Misreading Scripture With Western Eyes" The authors say that 6:19 is frequently misunderstood. The quote from the book is :
    We typically understand the singulars and the plurals in this verse backwards. In the original Greek, the you is plural and temple is singular. Paul is saying, "All of you together are the singular temple for the Holy spirit"
    So, does this seem to reflect your understanding? When they say the "you" is plural, do they mean "your bodies" versus "your body"? I see some render the verse your body and others your bodies. Can you elaborate and/or corroborate?

    thanks!
    LJ
    "What has the Church gained if it is popular, but there is no conviction, no repentance, no power?" - A.W. Tozer

    "... there are two parties in Washington, the stupid party and the evil party, who occasionally get together and do something both stupid and evil, and this is called bipartisanship." - Everett Dirksen

  • #2
    I don't know Greek but I "know" ancient personalities to a limited degree. They always think of themselves as members of a group, not individuals that sometimes hang out with other people. This collectivist mindset would mean that they see God working His salvation through the church as a whole.
    Last edited by Manwë Súlimo; 07-12-2014, 04:45 AM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Right! And that's the exactly the point I'm emphasizing. How we here in the western church tend to read these passages as individualistic, but how we should be reading it as pertaining to the collective. But I just wanted some input on the Greek behind it.
      "What has the Church gained if it is popular, but there is no conviction, no repentance, no power?" - A.W. Tozer

      "... there are two parties in Washington, the stupid party and the evil party, who occasionally get together and do something both stupid and evil, and this is called bipartisanship." - Everett Dirksen

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Littlejoe View Post
        Hello Greek experts,

        I need your help please, I'm preparing my lesson for Sunday morning Group (otherwise known as Sunday School). I'm making a point about the body of Christ. I want to show how Paul is continuing his image of from 1 Cor 3, and drawing a parallel where it's talking about the Body of Christ an in 1 Cor 6:12-20. However, In the Book "Misreading Scripture With Western Eyes" The authors say that 6:19 is frequently misunderstood. The quote from the book is :
        We typically understand the singulars and the plurals in this verse backwards. In the original Greek, the you is plural and temple is singular. Paul is saying, "All of you together are the singular temple for the Holy spirit"
        So, does this seem to reflect your understanding? When they say the "you" is plural, do they mean "your bodies" versus "your body"? I see some render the verse your body and others your bodies. Can you elaborate and/or corroborate?

        thanks!
        LJ
        Paul is definitely using the body and the temple in the singular, but referring to you in the plural, ye as opposed to thou in older English, or yawl or you'all in the dialects of my people from Louisiana and Kentucky. There is a strong collective sense here, which can be seen also in 1 Cor 3,16-17 and 12,26-27 so it is indeed important that we are all together the Body of Christ and the Temple of God. I suspect Paul is speaking about temple prostitution in pagan religions and that any individual could be participating in such with ramifications for themselves individually as well as whole Body of Christ, but perhaps this was being practiced by a number of the Corinthian faithful or at least had been in the past. The translation 'your (plural) body' is more literal but in modern English (except in the Southern states) plural dimension cannot be expressed very easily and is lost. The other translation of 'your bodies' brings out the plural dimension, but less literally, and it diminishes the collective sense of the singular Body of Christ and the Temple of God. Some translate as the 'the body of you people' or something like that, which is about the best way I've seen of trying to retain both senses of the collective singular.

        Not sure if I'm explaining the Greek very clearly. Suffice it to say that Manwë is right. If I could find my Jerusalem Bible, I could tell you the JRR Tolkein approved translation.
        βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
        ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

        אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Littlejoe View Post
          Hello Greek experts,

          I need your help please, I'm preparing my lesson for Sunday morning Group (otherwise known as Sunday School). I'm making a point about the body of Christ. I want to show how Paul is continuing his image of from 1 Cor 3, and drawing a parallel where it's talking about the Body of Christ an in 1 Cor 6:12-20. However, In the Book "Misreading Scripture With Western Eyes" The authors say that 6:19 is frequently misunderstood. The quote from the book is :
          We typically understand the singulars and the plurals in this verse backwards. In the original Greek, the you is plural and temple is singular. Paul is saying, "All of you together are the singular temple for the Holy spirit"
          So, does this seem to reflect your understanding? When they say the "you" is plural, do they mean "your bodies" versus "your body"? I see some render the verse your body and others your bodies. Can you elaborate and/or corroborate?
          1 Cor 6:19 ἢ οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι τὸ σῶμα ὑμῶν ναὸς τοῦ ἐν ὑμῖν ἁγίου πνεύματός ἐστιν οὗ ἔχετε ἀπὸ θεοῦ, καὶ οὐκ ἐστὲ ἑαυτῶν; Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, which you have from God, and that you are not your own? (NRSV) Do you not realise that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you and whom you received from God? (NJB)

          A few randomly selected comments:
          Thiselton: "The corporate aspect of the community as the Spirit's temple in 3:16 receives a more individual application here, which arises in the context of the personal lifestyle at issue in this chapter.

          Conzelmann: "What was said in 3:16 of the community ... is here transferred to the individual".

          Bruce: "Cf. 3:16, where the statement that the community is a temple of God is similarly introduced; but here the reference is to the individual's body as the sanctuary of the indwelling Spirit."

          Morris: "Earlier he had referred to the church as a whole as God's temple (3:16), but here body is singular, so that each believer is a temple in which God dwells."

          Barrett: "Though the language at iii. 16f (...) is similar the thought is very different; there Paul thought of the community as the dwelling-place of the Spirit, whereas here, in closer agreement with the hellenistic parallels (for many examples see Weiss), he thinks of the individual. There is no inconsistency between the two ways of using the metaphor; both are correct, and each is used in an appropriate context. When the unity and purity of the church are at stake Paul recalls that the church is the shrine in which the Spirit dwells; when the unity and purity of the moral life of the individual are threatened, he recalls that the Spirit dwells in each Christian, who ought not therefore to defile the Spirit's shrine."

          Context, context, context.
          Last edited by John Reece; 07-12-2014, 02:24 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Thank you both for the information!

            Brother John, in vs 18, the context seems to indicate that sins are "outside the body", I read that as not our physical body, but the body of Christ, so to me the context doesn't entirely narrow to individual. I particularly like the way Barrett put it though!
            "What has the Church gained if it is popular, but there is no conviction, no repentance, no power?" - A.W. Tozer

            "... there are two parties in Washington, the stupid party and the evil party, who occasionally get together and do something both stupid and evil, and this is called bipartisanship." - Everett Dirksen

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by robrecht View Post
              Paul is definitely using the body and the temple in the singular, but referring to you in the plural, ye as opposed to thou in older English, or yawl or you'all in the dialects of my people from Louisiana and Kentucky. There is a strong collective sense here, which can be seen also in 1 Cor 3,16-17 and 12,26-27 so it is indeed important that we are all together the Body of Christ and the Temple of God. I suspect Paul is speaking about temple prostitution in pagan religions and that any individual could be participating in such with ramifications for themselves individually as well as whole Body of Christ, but perhaps this was being practiced by a number of the Corinthian faithful or at least had been in the past. The translation 'your (plural) body' is more literal but in modern English (except in the Southern states) plural dimension cannot be expressed very easily and is lost. The other translation of 'your bodies' brings out the plural dimension, but less literally, and it diminishes the collective sense of the singular Body of Christ and the Temple of God. Some translate as the 'the body of you people' or something like that, which is about the best way I've seen of trying to retain both senses of the collective singular.

              Not sure if I'm explaining the Greek very clearly. Suffice it to say that Manwë is right. If I could find my Jerusalem Bible, I could tell you the JRR Tolkein approved translation.
              I hope you don't mind, but I am directly quoting the bolded part of your post!
              "What has the Church gained if it is popular, but there is no conviction, no repentance, no power?" - A.W. Tozer

              "... there are two parties in Washington, the stupid party and the evil party, who occasionally get together and do something both stupid and evil, and this is called bipartisanship." - Everett Dirksen

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Littlejoe View Post
                I hope you don't mind, but I am directly quoting the bolded part of your post!
                No, not at all, I'm honored to be quoted by a professor. Hope it does not become a source of prideful arrogance for me.
                βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                Comment


                • #9
                  Not to be contentious ― which I am not ― but simply to supply more information for consideration, the following is from Gordon Fee in his NICNT commentary (via Accordance):
                  [1 Cor 6]: 19–20 With yet another “Or do you not know that?” Paul gives theological justification for the prohibition of v. 18a and theological explanation of v. 18bc. At the same time the content of this question serves to reinforce and elaborate the theology of the body expressed in vv. 13–17. With the use of two images (temple and purchase of slaves = the Spirit and the cross) he reasserts that the body in its present existence belongs to God. Thus the body is included in the full redemptive work of Christ crucifixion, resurrection, and the present work of the Spirit. All of which leads to the final inferential imperative: They must therefore glorify God in their bodies, which of course in this context means no sexual immorality.

                  The tie to what has immediately preceded is achieved with the conjunction “or” (again omitted from the NIV). “The one who sins sexually sins against his own body,” he has just affirmed, by which he means his own body as it is “for the Lord.” “Or do you not know that your body[65] is a[66] temple of the Holy Spirit,[67] who is in you, whom you have received from God, and that you are not your own?” As in this translation, the final clause should be included in the question.[68] The two parts complement each other. The body is the present habitation of God’s Spirit, which means by implication that one belongs to the God whose Spirit dwells within. At the same time the second part results in a shift of metaphors, so that God’s proper ownership of the body is affirmed in terms of their being “bought at a price.” The emphasis, therefore, is especially on the body as “for the Lord” in the sense of being God’s rightful possession, which is evidenced both through the indwelling Spirit and the redemptive work of Christ. This, of course, stands in stark contrast to the pneumatics’ view that the body is destined for destruction and therefore has no present or eternal significance.

                  In referring to the body as the temple of the Spirit, Paul has taken the imagery that properly belongs to the church as a whole (cf. 3:16; 2 Cor. 6:16; Eph. 2:21–22) and applied it to the individual believer.[69] On the imagery itself, see on 3:16. The use of the possessives reflects something of the difference. The church through the Spirit is God’s temple in Corinth, in contrast to all the pagan temples and shrines. Through the phenomenon of the indwelling Spirit, Paul now images the body as the Spirit’s temple, emphasizing that it is the “place” of the Spirit’s dwelling in the individual believers’ lives. In the same way that the temple in Jerusalem “housed” the presence of the living God, so the Spirit of God is “housed” in the believer’s body. This is imagery pure and simple, in which the significance of the body for the present is being affirmed; it is not intended to be a statement of Christian anthropology, as though the body were the mere external casing of the spirit or Spirit.

                  The Spirit’s indwelling is the presupposition of the imagery, reinforced here by the two modifiers, “who is in you”[70] and “whom you have received[71] from God.” What Paul seems to be doing is taking over their own theological starting point, namely that they are “spiritual” because they have the Spirit, and redirecting it to include the sanctity of the body. The reality of the indwelling Spirit is now turned against them. They thought the presence of the Spirit meant a negation of the body; Paul argues the exact opposite: The presence of the Spirit in their present bodily existence is God’s affirmation of the body.

                  Paul moves easily from the fact that the Spirit is “from God” to his final point: Do you not know that the presence of God’s Spirit in you means that “you are not you own,” that is, that your bodies are not your own to do with as you wish in the matter of sexuality? This is the final punctuation of the original affirmation that the “body is for the Lord.” As evidence for this final assertion,[72] Paul shifts metaphors once more, this time to the slave market, imagery to which he will return in the concrete situation of the slave in 7:22. That passage makes it clear that the imagery here is that of slavery; the verb “bought”[73] with its accompanying genitive of quantity, “at a price,” places it squarely in the slave market.[74] In contrast to the use of this metaphor elsewhere in the NT, where redemption for freedom is in view (e.g., Gal. 3:13; 4:5; Rev. 5:9; 14:3), this passage images their new position as “slaves” of God, bought with a price to do his will.[75] Although some have argued otherwise,[76] the related usage in Galatians and especially the liturgical passage in Rev. 5:9 indicate that Paul has the cross in view, whereby at the “cost” of his life (“by your blood,” Rev. 5:9) Christ purchased us for God. His point here is that even the body is included in that purchase. Thus at the end of the argument he joins the cross to the resurrection, along with the present gift of the Spirit, as evidence that the “body is for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.”

                  The final imperative flows directly out of the argument from the two preceding images. The body is the shrine of the indwelling Spirit and is therefore not one’s own but God’s, who purchased it through the work of the cross. “Therefore[77] honor[78] God with[79] your body.” At the same time, it serves to bring the entire argument to its conclusion. This is the positive side of the imperative of v. 18a: “Flee from sexual immorality.” Because the body is God’s, one must not use it in illicit intercourse; instead, one must make it a chaste temple whereby to honor God.

                  The later addition of “and in your spirit, which are God’s”[80] may have been the result of early Christian liturgy, as Lightfoot (p. 218) suggests. Unfortunately, it also became Scripture to generations of Christians and had the net result of deflecting Paul’s point toward the position of the Corinthian pneumatics. Not that the addition is untrue; rather, it completely misses the concern of the present argument, which stands over against the Corinthian view that the body counts for nothing and therefore it does not matter what one does with it. To the contrary, Paul argues throughout, the body is included in the redemptive work of God and therefore may not be involved in sexual immorality.

                  Two points from this passage need to be emphasized in the contemporary church. First, in most Western cultures, where sexual mores have blatantly moved toward pagan standards, the doctrine of the sanctity of the body needs to be heard anew within the church. Sexual immorality is still sin, even though it has been justified under every conceivable rationalization. Those who take Scripture seriously are not prudes or legalists at this point; rather, they recognize that God has purchased us for higher things. Our bodies belong to God through the redemption of the cross; and they are destined for resurrection. Part of the reason why Christians flee sexual immorality is that their bodies are for the Lord, who is to be honored in the deeds of the body as well as in all other behavior and attitudes.

                  Second, this passage needs to be heard again and again over against every encroachment of Hellenistic dualism that would negate the body in favor of the soul. God made us whole people; and in Christ he has redeemed us wholly. In the Christian view there is no dichotomy between body and spirit that either indulges the body because it is irrelevant or punishes it so as to purify the spirit. This pagan view of physical existence finds its way into Christian theology in a number of subtle ways, including the penchant on the part of some to “save souls” while caring little for people’s material needs. The Christian creed, based on NT revelation, is not the immortality of the soul, but the resurrection of the body. That creed does not lead to crass materialism; rather, it affirms a holistic view of redemption that is predicated in part on the doctrine of creation both the physical and spiritual orders are good because God created them and in part on the doctrine of redemption, including the consummation the whole fallen order, including the body, has been redeemed in Christ and awaits its final redemption.
                  65. Gk. τὸ σῶμα ὑμῶν. For the grammar see Turner, Syntax, pp. 23–24; this reflects semitic preference for a distributive singular, where “something belonging to each person in a group of people is placed in the singular.” Cf. Rom. 8:23.

                  66. Probably “the temple,” another illustration of Colwell’s rule (see on 3:16).

                  67. On the possibility that this imagery is prompted by temple prostitution, see n. 39 above. Cf. Gundry, 76.

                  68. This is not demanded by the Greek text, but makes far better sense of it. See Findlay, 821; Barrett, 151.

                  69. Otherwise Kempthorne, “Incest,” pp. 572–73; see the refutation in Gundry, 76.

                  70. Gk. ἐν ὑμῖν; in contrast to 3:16 this is distributive, referring to the Spirit in the life of each of them.

                  71. The Greek has simply οὗ ἒχετε ἀπ θεοῦ (“which you have from God”), but since the emphasis here is not on “possession” but source, the addition “received” is legitimate.

                  72. The sentence has an explanatory γάρ, omitted in the NIV.

                  73. Gk. ἀγοράζω. On the use of this verb in slave “buying” see the discussion by W. Elert, “Redemptio ab hostibus,” ThLZ 72 (1947), 267; see also the discussion in Bartchy, 124, n. 450.

                  74. Otherwise, Deissmann, LAE, pp. 318–30, who argues that the imagery of sacral manumission of slaves, such as one finds at Delphi, is in view, thus emphasizing the “purchase for freedom” aspect of the metaphor. In this he has been followed by BAGD and others (e.g., Bailey, “Foundation,” pp. 33–34), but this has been thoroughly refuted by Elert (see the preceding note) and others. For a overview of the discussion, see Bartchy, 121–25; cf. Conzelmann, 113.

                  75. Cf. D. H. Field, NIDNTT I, 267–68.

                  76. E.g., Conzelmann, 113. While it is true that the metaphor “is not developed,” it is too restricting to assert further “that the metaphor should not be pressed.” It is not a question of “pressing” a metaphor, but of recognizing what is inherent in the use of the metaphor in the first place.

                  77. Gk. δή; used with the imperative to strike a note of urgency. Cf. R-P, 129, “be sure to glorify.”

                  78. Gk. δοξάζω.

                  79. Gk. ἐν; more likely Paul intends “in your body,” that is, in the personal activities of the body. Cf. Parry, 107 (“the ἐν perhaps not strictly instrumental, but to mark the sphere of action”); Findlay, 822.


                  ETA: Gordon Fee's commentary above ― confirming the comments of Thiselton, Conzelmann, Bruce, Morris, and Barrett ― presents the exegetical basis for the TNIV translation of 1 Cor 6:19-20 ― 19 "Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; 20 you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your bodies."
                  Last edited by John Reece; 07-19-2014, 10:17 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    The question arises, why does the passage say "your+ (plural) body(singular) is" rather than "your+ bodies are". Admittedly I have only a limited understanding of Koine, but I can't see any way to make this "the body of each", only "the body of all".

                    Never mind - "body of each" it is.
                    Last edited by tabibito; 07-13-2014, 11:29 AM.
                    sigpic1 Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                      The question arises, why does the passage say "your+ (plural) body(singular) is" rather than "your+ bodies are". Admittedly I have only a limited understanding of Koine, but I can't see any way to make this "the body of each", only "the body of all".

                      Never mind - "body of each" it is.
                      Excerpt from post #9 above:
                      65. Gk. τὸ σῶμα ὑμῶν. For the grammar see Turner, Syntax, pp. 23–24; this reflects semitic preference for a distributive singular, where “something belonging to each person in a group of people is placed in the singular.” Cf. Rom. 8:23 [NRSV: 8:23 and not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the first fruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly while we wait for adoption, the redemption of our bodies. οὐ μόνον δέ, ἀλλὰ καὶ αὐτοὶ τὴν ἀπαρχὴν τοῦ πνεύματος ἔχοντες, ἡμεῖς καὶ αὐτοὶ ἐν ἑαυτοῖς στενάζομεν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπεκδεχόμενοι, τὴν ἀπολύτρωσιν τοῦ σώματος (singular 'body') ἡμῶν.]

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by John Reece View Post
                        [size=4][font=times new roman]Not to be contentious ― which I am not ― but simply to supply more information for consideration ...
                        Hi, John. Thank you for all the quotes from commentaries. There is no question in my mind that the individual sense of sin is primary here, but I also think that our communal participation in the singular Body of Christ is never far from Paul's mind. Sin is individualistic; it separates us from others, and therefore it also has an affect on others, quite apart from the fact that sin is typically sin against others. Both sin and repentance also have a communal dimension. Do you agree?

                        Like the Body of Christ, Paul does not merely see us individually as a bodily temple of the Spirit, but it is also a collective image, eg, in 2 Cor 6,16:

                        τίς δὲ συγκατάθεσις ναῷ θεοῦ μετὰ εἰδώλων; ἡμεῖς γὰρ ναὸς θεοῦ ἐσμεν ζῶντος, καθὼς εἶπεν ὁ θεὸς ὅτι ἐνοικήσω ἐν αὐτοῖς καὶ ἐμπεριπατήσω καὶ ἔσομαι αὐτῶν θεὸς καὶ αὐτοὶ ἔσονταί μου λαός.


                        John knows the Greek like the back of his hand, but for others, I will provide the NRSV translation; note the interplay of plurals (idols, we, them, their, they, people) and singularity of God, his Temple, his people:
                        What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; as God said, "I will live in them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

                        We are called to union with God, which also implies unity with each other. There is only one God; he has only one Temple.
                        Last edited by robrecht; 07-13-2014, 12:27 PM.
                        βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                        ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                        אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          The idea of the people of God as the Temple of God was not original to Paul. Aside from his or other OT allusions, it can also be found more explicitly in Qumran, eg, in the Manual of Discipline (1QS 8,5-9) where a hoped for community of twelve laymen and 3 priests were spoken of as the true holy house (ie, temple) of Israel (בית קודש לישראל), the holy of holies (קודש קודשים), the true house of perfect ones in Israel (בית תמים ואמת בישראל).
                          βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                          ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                          אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by robrecht View Post
                            There is no question in my mind that the individual sense of sin is primary here...
                            Which is the point of difference between all you have posted in this thread (up to your belated acknowledgement in the post to which I am now responding) and the point of all the best exegetical commentators, none of which ― nor do I ― differ from you re Paul's strong belief in "The idea of the people of God as the Temple of God"; it's just that within the immediate context of 1 Cor 6:19, Paul focused on individual behavior ― which he was well able to do without denying the larger truth that was not his immediate focus in the text in question.

                            P.S.: see ETA here.
                            Last edited by John Reece; 07-19-2014, 10:32 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by John Reece View Post
                              Which is the point of difference between all you have posted in this thread (up to your belated acknowledgement in the post to which I am now responding) and the point of all the best exegetical commentators, none of which ― nor do I ― differ with you re Paul's strong belief in "The idea of the people of God as the Temple of God"; it's just that within the immediate context of 1 Cor 6:19, Paul focused on individual behavior ― which he was well able to do without denying the larger truth that was not his immediate focus in the text in question.
                              I tried to acknowledge this in my first post: "... I suspect Paul is speaking about temple prostitution in pagan religions and that any individual could be participating in such with ramifications for themselves individually as well as whole Body of Christ ... "
                              βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                              ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                              אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by DesertBerean, 11-02-2020, 02:57 PM
                              4 responses
                              36 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post DesertBerean  
                              Working...
                              X