Straight Outta Context
January 29, 2023
Apprentice Travis
[If] our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost,
in whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not...
2 Corinthians 4:3
in whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not...
2 Corinthians 4:3
introduction
Perhaps the most amusing aspect of modern Christian Biblical exegeses is when one party accuses another faction of offering an interpretation without considering the context, relevant verses, or ecclesiastical history. In plain English, this is “the pot calling the kettle black” and all modern Christians must take liberties with their version of the divinely inspired text, otherwise there would be no Biblical support for their opinions and they would “all speak the same thing” and would be “joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment” [1 Corinthians 1:10]. Martin Luther added the word “allein” to Romans 3:28, so that man is justified “by faith alone” and, although he justified adding the word because he believed the sentiment of the context necessitated it, the thought that faith alone is sufficient for the believer is not found in an unbiased reading of the Greek text and this additional word changes the meaning of the passage. Of course, by adding a word to the translation, it is reasonable to conclude that Luther did not consider the Greek text to be inerrant scripture, unlike modern Christians.
As near universal literacy is a recent result of progressive education, one can imagine the historical scenarios where the Pauline Epistles are read from a pulpit to the congregation and the words are accepted at face value. Oftentimes, vague phrases such as “the Scripture” and “as it is written” are found with more specific references, such as “was spoken by Esaias the prophet” and “was spoken by Jeremy the prophet”. The purposes of utilizing these types of phrases is to appeal to the authority both of the Old Testament, generally, and to suggest that the author who quotes from and explains these passages are also inspired by God, specifically; otherwise said, the expounders are prophets also.
In bygone days, the illiterate listeners would have no ability to verify these quotes and, even for the few who were literate, the curious researcher would be required to read a particular prophet until the particular passage is found. Therefore, until the age of printing with the advent of Bibles that offer cross references to other verses of scripture, it would be tedious and time consuming to verify that the passages exist. Tedium and misplaced esteem explain are the primary reasons why the collected works of the Church Father adorn many libraries worldwide, yet remain either misunderstood or, more likely, unread.
As near universal literacy is a recent result of progressive education, one can imagine the historical scenarios where the Pauline Epistles are read from a pulpit to the congregation and the words are accepted at face value. Oftentimes, vague phrases such as “the Scripture” and “as it is written” are found with more specific references, such as “was spoken by Esaias the prophet” and “was spoken by Jeremy the prophet”. The purposes of utilizing these types of phrases is to appeal to the authority both of the Old Testament, generally, and to suggest that the author who quotes from and explains these passages are also inspired by God, specifically; otherwise said, the expounders are prophets also.
In bygone days, the illiterate listeners would have no ability to verify these quotes and, even for the few who were literate, the curious researcher would be required to read a particular prophet until the particular passage is found. Therefore, until the age of printing with the advent of Bibles that offer cross references to other verses of scripture, it would be tedious and time consuming to verify that the passages exist. Tedium and misplaced esteem explain are the primary reasons why the collected works of the Church Father adorn many libraries worldwide, yet remain either misunderstood or, more likely, unread.
And I said unto them, “If ye think good, give me my price and, if not, forbear.” So they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver and the Lord said unto me, “Cast it unto the potter.” A goodly price that I was prised at of them and I took the thirty pieces of silver and cast them to the potter in the house of the Lord. Zechariah 11:12-13
Then was fulfilled what had been spoken through the prophet Jeremiah, “And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of the one on whom a price had been set, on whom some of the people of Israel had set a price,” Matthew 27:9
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers for Matthew 27:9:
This, as we have seen again and again (Matthew 1:23; Matthew 2:15-18; Matthew 4:15; Matthew 8:17; Matthew 12:18), was entirely compatible with the Evangelist's manner of dealing with prophecy. It was enough for him that the old words fitted into the facts, without asking, as we ask, whether they were originally meant to point to them. [bold added]
We quote the first example that Ellicott mentions, at it is the most revealing of “the Evangelist's manner of dealing with prophecy.”
Behold, a virgin shall be with child and shall bring forth a son and they shall call his name Emmanuel G1694, which being interpreted is, God with us. Matthew 1:23
This is the only usage of G1694 in the New Testament which is odd, since Matthew understands this passage from Isaiah as a Messianic prophecy, as no other Evangelist mentions the verse. The passage quotes Isaiah 7:14. The word ʿalmâ, H5959, is translated in the KJV as virgin (4), maid (2), and damsels (1). The Septuagint translates ʿalmâ by the Greek word parthenos, G3933, which is only translated by the KJV as virgin (14). Therefore, we know of the prophecy of the virgin birth only from the Greek translation.
We are uncertain as to the meaning of “they shall call his name Emmanuel”. The verb form is “Future Active Indicative- 3rd Person Plural” and two interpretations present themselves: either the parents will call him Emmanuel or others in the future will call him Emmanuel. In either case, neither transpired, as his parents named him Jesus and Christians also call him Jesus.
It is obvious that a woman, or a “maid”, or a “damsel” having a son named Emmanuel is not extraordinary and we suggest that the ancient translators from the Hebrew text to the Greek language also saw nothing remarkable about this passage. However, a virgin having a child is miraculous and certain detractors insist that ʿalmâ in this verse should be translated by any word other than “virgin”. However, the greater their insistence, the more insincere their efforts seem when one views the prophecy simply as a woman having a child.
Matthew quotes from Isaiah 7:14, where is the son is named Emmanuel, however, he writes Joseph “knew her not till she [Mary, v.20] had brought forth her firstborn son and he called his name JESUS” [Matthew 1:25]. An unbiased conclusion is that the Gospels do not relate the activities of the expected Messiah named Emmanuel, but focus on the teachings of Jesus and conclude with his death by the Romans for the crime of treason. Of course, Mary could call her son Emmanual, while Joseph calls him Jesus [Matthew 1:25; Luke 2:21].
The BlueLetterBible.com is referenced for selected words and, for ease of reading, the Biblical quotes have current punctuation. Individual words in quotation marks, but without references, are additional translations of the Hebrew or Greek word under consideration as found in the King James Bible version [KJV].
We are uncertain as to the meaning of “they shall call his name Emmanuel”. The verb form is “Future Active Indicative- 3rd Person Plural” and two interpretations present themselves: either the parents will call him Emmanuel or others in the future will call him Emmanuel. In either case, neither transpired, as his parents named him Jesus and Christians also call him Jesus.
It is obvious that a woman, or a “maid”, or a “damsel” having a son named Emmanuel is not extraordinary and we suggest that the ancient translators from the Hebrew text to the Greek language also saw nothing remarkable about this passage. However, a virgin having a child is miraculous and certain detractors insist that ʿalmâ in this verse should be translated by any word other than “virgin”. However, the greater their insistence, the more insincere their efforts seem when one views the prophecy simply as a woman having a child.
Matthew quotes from Isaiah 7:14, where is the son is named Emmanuel, however, he writes Joseph “knew her not till she [Mary, v.20] had brought forth her firstborn son and he called his name JESUS” [Matthew 1:25]. An unbiased conclusion is that the Gospels do not relate the activities of the expected Messiah named Emmanuel, but focus on the teachings of Jesus and conclude with his death by the Romans for the crime of treason. Of course, Mary could call her son Emmanual, while Joseph calls him Jesus [Matthew 1:25; Luke 2:21].
The BlueLetterBible.com is referenced for selected words and, for ease of reading, the Biblical quotes have current punctuation. Individual words in quotation marks, but without references, are additional translations of the Hebrew or Greek word under consideration as found in the King James Bible version [KJV].
habakkuk 2:3-4
For the vision is yet for an appointed time, but at the end it shall speak and not lie. Though it tarry, wait for it, because it will surely come. It will not tarry. Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him, but the just shall live by his faith. Habakkuk 2:3-4
Habakkuk writes that if the vision is delayed, one must wait for it, as “it will surely come.” and adds that the prideful person, one who “is lifted up”, is not worthy, but the righteous will live by his faith that the vision of the Lord will come.
For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth: to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith. As it is written, “The just shall live by faith.” Romans 1:16-17
Saint Paul’s explanation that faith in the gospel of Christ is faith in the revelation of the “righteousness of God”. This faith in the gospel flows into the faith of God’s righteousness, “from faith to faith”, demonstrates, according to Saint Paul, that the just live by faith and not, presumably, by works or adherence to the laws of Israel. The faith in Saint Paul’s gospel of Christ cannot be equated to Habakkuk’s audience who wait, through their righteousness and faith, for the vision to be fulfilled.
It is uncertain if “the gospel of Christ”, generally, is synonymous with Saint Paul’s gospel, specifically.
It is uncertain if “the gospel of Christ”, generally, is synonymous with Saint Paul’s gospel, specifically.
In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.
Romans 2:16
Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, Romans 16:25
The mystery which was secret from the foundation of the world is revealed through Saint Paul’s gospel, as he teaches in an obscure manner and speaks “the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world [αἰώνων G165]... which none of the princes [ἀρχόντων G758] of this world [αἰῶνος G165] knew, for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory” [1 Corinthians 2:7-8].
The KJV translates Strong's G165 as: ever (71), world (38), never (with G3364, G1519, and G3588) (6), evermore (4), age (2), eternal (2), miscellaneous (5).
The KJV translates Strong's G758 as: ruler (22), prince (11), chief (2), magistrate (1), chief ruler (1).
The KJV translates Strong's G165 as: ever (71), world (38), never (with G3364, G1519, and G3588) (6), evermore (4), age (2), eternal (2), miscellaneous (5).
The KJV translates Strong's G758 as: ruler (22), prince (11), chief (2), magistrate (1), chief ruler (1).
Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross. [Christ, v.11] having spoiled [ἀπεκδυσάμενος G554] principalities [ἀρχὰς G746] and powers [ἐξουσίας G1849], he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it. Colossians 2:14-15
The KJV translates Strong's G554 as: spoil (1), put off (1).
The KJV translates Strong's G746 as: beginning (40), principality (8), corner (2), first (2), miscellaneous (6).
The KJV translates Strong's G1849 as: power (69), authority (29), right (2), liberty (1), jurisdiction (1), strength (1).
The mystery of this age was hidden from the powers from the beginning of the world and was hidden by Christ’s death. The handwritten ordinances given by angels which are “contrary to us” were (symbolically? allegorically?) nailed to the cross. Saint Paul adds that if the archons knew of this mystery, they would not have crucified Christ [1 Corinthians 2:8]. We suggest that the “god of this world [αἰῶνος]” should be included with the principalities and powers who are “spoiled” or “put off” [1 Corinthians 4:4].
The KJV translates Strong's G746 as: beginning (40), principality (8), corner (2), first (2), miscellaneous (6).
The KJV translates Strong's G1849 as: power (69), authority (29), right (2), liberty (1), jurisdiction (1), strength (1).
The mystery of this age was hidden from the powers from the beginning of the world and was hidden by Christ’s death. The handwritten ordinances given by angels which are “contrary to us” were (symbolically? allegorically?) nailed to the cross. Saint Paul adds that if the archons knew of this mystery, they would not have crucified Christ [1 Corinthians 2:8]. We suggest that the “god of this world [αἰῶνος]” should be included with the principalities and powers who are “spoiled” or “put off” [1 Corinthians 4:4].
Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel: 2 Timothy 2:9
Saint Paul reminds Timothy that Jesus Christ was “raised from the dead” “according to”, “after”, or “by” his gospel. Saint Paul’s comment could be interpreted that the other Apostles did not teach the touchstone of Christian faith, but, more likely, the other Apostles did not teach using allegories, which remain unexplained, to reveal mysteries of hidden wisdom [Galatians 4:24].
genesis 15:5-6
And he* [the Lord, Yᵊhōvâ, v.1] brought him** [Abram, v.3] forth abroad and said, “Look now toward heaven and tell the stars, if thou^ be able to number them.” and he* said unto him^^, “So shall thy seed be.” and he* believed in the Lord [Yᵊhōvâ] and he* counted it to him^^ for righteousness. Genesis 15:5-6
* 3rd Person Masculine Singular **Direct Object Marker
^2nd Person Masculine Singular ^^ Pronominal 3rd Person Masculine Singular
Verse six written unambiguously:
Abram believed in the Lord [Yᵊhōvâ] and the Lord counted it to Abram for righteousness.
However, the text can be interpreted as:
Abram believed in the Lord [Yᵊhōvâ] and Abram counted it to Lord for righteousness.
The KJV translates Strong's H6666 ṣᵊḏāqâ, a feminine noun, as: righteousness (128), justice (15), right (9), righteous acts (3), moderately (1), righteously (1).
Strong’s H6666 is derived from H6663.
The KJV translates Strong's H6663 ṣāḏaq, a verb, as: justify (23), righteous (10), just (3), justice (2), cleansed (1), clear ourselves (1), righteousness (1).
The Septuagint translates H6666 in verse six with G1343.
The KJV translates Strong's G1343 dikaiosynē, a feminine noun, as: righteousness (92).
^2nd Person Masculine Singular ^^ Pronominal 3rd Person Masculine Singular
Verse six written unambiguously:
Abram believed in the Lord [Yᵊhōvâ] and the Lord counted it to Abram for righteousness.
However, the text can be interpreted as:
Abram believed in the Lord [Yᵊhōvâ] and Abram counted it to Lord for righteousness.
The KJV translates Strong's H6666 ṣᵊḏāqâ, a feminine noun, as: righteousness (128), justice (15), right (9), righteous acts (3), moderately (1), righteously (1).
Strong’s H6666 is derived from H6663.
The KJV translates Strong's H6663 ṣāḏaq, a verb, as: justify (23), righteous (10), just (3), justice (2), cleansed (1), clear ourselves (1), righteousness (1).
The Septuagint translates H6666 in verse six with G1343.
The KJV translates Strong's G1343 dikaiosynē, a feminine noun, as: righteousness (92).
And enter not into judgment with thy servant, for in thy sight shall no man living be justified H6663. Psalm 143:2
As no living man can be justified, Genesis 15:6 is correctly understood as Abram counting the Lord as being righteous, not the Lord reckoning Abram as righteous.
For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory, but not before God. For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God and it was counted unto him for righteousness. Romans 4:2-3
Genesis states that Abram believed “the Lord”, not God, which is an inaccurate quotation, and it is obvious that the “righteousness” of Genesis 15:6 is the Lord’s righteousness and not Abram’s righteousness.
Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator. Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one. Galatians 3:19-20
According to Saint Paul, the law was created to endure until “the seed” of the promise should come. Saint Paul teaches that the law was “commanded” or “appointed” by angels or “messengers”. These angels or messengers are many, but as Saint Paul notes, “God is one.” Therefore, the angels that “set in order” the law, being many, are not and cannot be God in Pauline theology.
We are now in the position to explain Saint Paul’s strange admonition that there is no reward for voluntarily worshiping angels in humility [Colossians 2:18]. “Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels…” is a disturbing statement and the thoughtful reader will attempt to understand who or what faction is worshiping angels and expects a reward or benefit. This passage is difficult to interpret [BibleHub.Com]:
We are now in the position to explain Saint Paul’s strange admonition that there is no reward for voluntarily worshiping angels in humility [Colossians 2:18]. “Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels…” is a disturbing statement and the thoughtful reader will attempt to understand who or what faction is worshiping angels and expects a reward or benefit. This passage is difficult to interpret [BibleHub.Com]:
Do not let anyone who delights in false humility and the worship of angels disqualify you. New International Version
Don’t let anyone condemn you by insisting on pious self-denial or the worship of angels, saying they have had visions about these things. New Living Translation Let no one disqualify you, delighting in humility and [the] worship of the angels… Berean Literal Bible- The word “the” is in italics in the original. Take care that no one keeps defrauding you of your prize by delighting in humility and the worship of the angels, taking his stand on visions he has seen… New American Standard Bible Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize by delighting in self-abasement and the worship of the angels, going into detail about visions he has seen… Legacy Standard Bible Let no one defraud you of your prize [your freedom in Christ and your salvation] by insisting on mock humility and the worship of angels, going into detail about visions [he claims] he has seen [to justify his authority]… Amplified Bible [brackets in the original] Let no one disqualify you, insisting on ascetic practices and the worship of angels, claiming access to a visionary realm… Holman Christian Standard Bible |
From these various attempts at translation, it is clear that someone has claimed to have a detailed vision that results in the worship, not of an angel, but of angels.
Since Saint Paul states that the angels gave the law, it follows that these angels who gave the Law are called by the singular noun “Jehovah” [H 3068]. This group of angels is also called the “Lord” in the Old Testament and, when not in the context of the Lord being either Jesus or God the Father, in the Pauline Epistles. This distinction between God and the Lord is the theological reason Saint Paul ascribes belief to Abraham regarding the promise of God, that is, the Father, not to the promise of the Lord, that is, Jehovah or the angels. In this example, Saint Paul is neither quoting nor paraphrasing the original passage, but is creating new proof texts. Abraham believed God’s promise which was received four hundred and thirty years before the giving or ordaining of the Law by the angels or Jehovah [Galatians 3:17].
Since Saint Paul states that the angels gave the law, it follows that these angels who gave the Law are called by the singular noun “Jehovah” [H 3068]. This group of angels is also called the “Lord” in the Old Testament and, when not in the context of the Lord being either Jesus or God the Father, in the Pauline Epistles. This distinction between God and the Lord is the theological reason Saint Paul ascribes belief to Abraham regarding the promise of God, that is, the Father, not to the promise of the Lord, that is, Jehovah or the angels. In this example, Saint Paul is neither quoting nor paraphrasing the original passage, but is creating new proof texts. Abraham believed God’s promise which was received four hundred and thirty years before the giving or ordaining of the Law by the angels or Jehovah [Galatians 3:17].
genesis 22:16-18
And [the angel*, v.15] said, “‘By myself have I sworn’, saith the Lord [Yᵊhōvâ], ‘for because thou hast done this thing and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son that in blessing H1288 I will bless H1288 thee and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed* as the stars of the heaven and as the sand which is upon the sea shore and thy seed* shall possess the gate of his enemies and in thy seed* shall all the nations of the earth be blessed H1288, because thou hast obeyed my voice.’” Genesis 22:16-18
*Common Masculine Singular Noun
The KJV translates Strong's H1288, bāraḵ, a verb, as: bless (302), salute (5), curse (4), blaspheme (2), blessing (2), praised (2), kneel down (2), congratulate (1), kneel (1), make to kneel (1), miscellaneous (8).
The angel tells Abraham what the Lord has sworn. The Lord does not speak to Abraham, although this is the typical interpretation of this revelation.
One aspect of the promise to Abraham is that his descendants will be as numerous as the stars of heaven and the sand that is on the shore. Therefore, within the context, “seed” is a plural noun.
The KJV translates Strong's H1288, bāraḵ, a verb, as: bless (302), salute (5), curse (4), blaspheme (2), blessing (2), praised (2), kneel down (2), congratulate (1), kneel (1), make to kneel (1), miscellaneous (8).
The angel tells Abraham what the Lord has sworn. The Lord does not speak to Abraham, although this is the typical interpretation of this revelation.
One aspect of the promise to Abraham is that his descendants will be as numerous as the stars of heaven and the sand that is on the shore. Therefore, within the context, “seed” is a plural noun.
Now to Abraham and his seed* were the promises made. He saith not, “And to seeds**”, as of many, but as of one, “And to thy seed*”, which is Christ. Galatians 3:16
*Dative Singular Neuter Noun σπέρματι ** Dative Plural Neuter σπέρμασιν
Saint Paul explains the seed of Genesis 22:16-18 as one, the future Christ, and not as the many offspring who will control the gates of his enemies.
Saint Paul explains the seed of Genesis 22:16-18 as one, the future Christ, and not as the many offspring who will control the gates of his enemies.
And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed* G4690 and heirs** according to the promise. Galatians 3:29
*Nominative Singular Neuter Noun σπέρμα **Nominative Plural Masculine Noun κληρονόμοι
The usage of of the conditional word “if” [“If ye be Christ’s”] is not a declaration [“You are Christ’s”] and this phrasing creates uncertainty as to whether the reader is or is not “Christ’s”, to say nothing of being Abraham’s seed.
Although Saint Paul explains that the seed of Abraham is singular, the seed being Christ, thirteen verses later, he now teaches that the Christian followers are the seed and the heirs, both are plurals, of Abraham [Galatians 3:16]. The exegesis of verse twenty nine explicitly contradicts the previous explanation of verse sixteen.
In conclusion to this part, Saint Paul allegorizes the promise to Abraham so it applies to the one seed, Jesus Christ, but he also explains the passage for it to include Gentiles that believe in Christ and who become heirs to the promise.
The usage of of the conditional word “if” [“If ye be Christ’s”] is not a declaration [“You are Christ’s”] and this phrasing creates uncertainty as to whether the reader is or is not “Christ’s”, to say nothing of being Abraham’s seed.
Although Saint Paul explains that the seed of Abraham is singular, the seed being Christ, thirteen verses later, he now teaches that the Christian followers are the seed and the heirs, both are plurals, of Abraham [Galatians 3:16]. The exegesis of verse twenty nine explicitly contradicts the previous explanation of verse sixteen.
In conclusion to this part, Saint Paul allegorizes the promise to Abraham so it applies to the one seed, Jesus Christ, but he also explains the passage for it to include Gentiles that believe in Christ and who become heirs to the promise.
Doth not even nature itself teach you that if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?
1 Corinthians 11:14
Even if Saint Paul only desired to know Jesus Christ crucified, he, as a Pharisee, must be knowledgeable of the Nazarene vow, wherein one of the stipulations is not cutting one’s hair [1 Corinthians 2:2, Acts 23:6, Number 6:5]. From 1 Corinthians 11:14, one is initially inclined to conclude that it is shameful to take a Nazarene vow, as one physical result is men having long hair. Based on historical depictions of Jesus, it seems that Saint Paul desires the reader to understand Jesus as being “dishonorable”, “vile”, “shameful”, or “reproachable” [G819].
For we have found this man [Paul, v.1] [a] pestilent G3061 [fellow] and a mover of sedition G4714 among all the Jews throughout the world and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes G3480 Acts 24:5
The KJV translates Strong's G3061 loimos, a masculine noun, as: pestilence (2), pestilent (1). λοιμός loimós, a plague (literally, the disease or figuratively, a pest). The editors of the KJV realized that Saint Paul is literally described by Tertullus as a disease and have, through their translation, tempered this section by describing Saint Paul as “[a] pestilent [fellow]” [Acts 24:1-2]. In the KJV, words in italic font indicate additional words not found in the original text.
The KJV translates Strong's G4714 stasis, a feminine noun, as: sedition (3), dissension (3), insurrection (1), uproar (1), standing (1).
The KJV translates Strong's G4414 prōtostatēs, a masculine noun, as: ringleader (1). πρωτοστάτης, πρωτοστατου, ὁ (πρῶτος and ἵστημι), properly, one who stands in the front rank, a front-rank man; hence, a leader, chief, champion.
The KJV translates Strong's G3480 nazōraios, a proper masculine noun, as: of Nazareth (13), Nazarene (2).
The KJV translates Strong's G4714 stasis, a feminine noun, as: sedition (3), dissension (3), insurrection (1), uproar (1), standing (1).
The KJV translates Strong's G4414 prōtostatēs, a masculine noun, as: ringleader (1). πρωτοστάτης, πρωτοστατου, ὁ (πρῶτος and ἵστημι), properly, one who stands in the front rank, a front-rank man; hence, a leader, chief, champion.
The KJV translates Strong's G3480 nazōraios, a proper masculine noun, as: of Nazareth (13), Nazarene (2).
And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene. G3480. Matthew 2:23
Here it will be enough to deal with St. Matthew’s reference to the name as in itself the fulfilment of a prophetic thought. He does not, as before, cite the words of any one prophet by name, but says generally that what he quotes had been spoken by or through the prophets. No such words are to be found in the Old Testament.
Ellicotts Commentary for English Readers [bold added]
The words here are not found in any of the books of the Old Testament, and there has been much difficulty in ascertaining the meaning of this passage. Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
[The] evangelist saw in that choice [Joseph moving his family to Nazareth] a fulfilment of prophecy. But what prophecy? The reference is vague, not to any particular prophet, but to the prophets in general. In no one place can any such statement be found.
Expositor's Greek Testament
Any reference to the Nazarite vow is out of the question, (1) because the two words are spelt differently, both in Greek and Hebrew, and (2) because our Lord’s life represented quite a different aspect of holiness from that of which the Nazarite vow was the expression.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
In part, Ellicott dismisses the possibility that the word Nazarene is derived from the Nazarite vow due to his opinion that Christ’s holiness is distinct from the expression of a Nazarite vow. Ellicott continues:
That [Nazarite] vow, as seen pre-eminently in the Baptist, represented the consecration which consists in separation from the world. The life of Christ manifested the higher form of consecration which is found in being in the world but not of it, mingling with the men and women who compose it, in order to purify and save.
It is uncertain how Ellicott could not understand the Baptist as being in the world, as he was not a hermit, but not of it. To deny that John the Baptist mingled with men and women suggests that he avoided contact with the people he was calling to repentance and would baptize. Ellicott distinguishes the work of John the Baptist from Christ, as the former does not “purify and save”.
[The] Hebrew צ (Tzade) is always rendered by the Greek Σ (Sigma), whereas the Greek Ζ (Zeta) universally corresponds to the Hebrew ז (Zayin), as it does also in the word Ναζωραῖος. This rule is universal, which no one can rightly oppose without bringing forward examples to the contrary. Bengel's Gnomon
Bengel [1687-1752] and Ellicott [1819-1905] are in agreement that the Nazarite vow is not the origin of the word Nazarene, with Bengel requiring philological “examples to the contrary”. Since Yours Truly is only an Apprentice, we readily accept this learned conclusion from professionals that the word “Nazarene” is not derived from the Nazarite vow. Yet, we are presented with the accusation that Saint Paul is the leader of the “sect of the Nazarenes”. Based on the authority of Bengel and Ellicott, the conclusion is that for unknown reasons the cosmopolitan Roman citizen Saint Paul is believed to be aligned with a group named after an obscure village in Galilee, not the expected group of zealous adherents of the law.
It is not unreasonable for a nascent religion to be described by their founder and it is reasonable that outsiders who are opposed to it would focus upon a defining odious aspect of the founder. If we follow the reasons offered by Bengel and Ellicott that Nazarene is not derived from Nazarite, then it must be concluded the prominent offensive feature of Jesus is not his name nor his anointing nor his teachings nor his behavior, but his obscure hometown of Nazareth, which is “nowhere mentioned in O. T. or Josephus”, [Expositor's Greek Testament]; not “Mentioned neither in the O. T. nor in Josephus.”, [Meyer's NT Commentary]; “not mentioned in the Old Testament or by Josephus.”, [Pulpit Commentary]; and is “mentioned neither in the Old Testament nor in Josephus, was probably so called from its insignificance”, [Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary].
Furthermore, we must accept that Pontius Pilate, in rare agreement with the Jewish leaders, focuses upon an obscure aspect of Jesus, his barely known hometown, together with the important, for legal purposes, charge of treason, that is, Jesus presenting himself as the King of the Jews when there is a Roman supported King of the Jews in Herod [Luke 23:7-8,11-12].
It is not unreasonable for a nascent religion to be described by their founder and it is reasonable that outsiders who are opposed to it would focus upon a defining odious aspect of the founder. If we follow the reasons offered by Bengel and Ellicott that Nazarene is not derived from Nazarite, then it must be concluded the prominent offensive feature of Jesus is not his name nor his anointing nor his teachings nor his behavior, but his obscure hometown of Nazareth, which is “nowhere mentioned in O. T. or Josephus”, [Expositor's Greek Testament]; not “Mentioned neither in the O. T. nor in Josephus.”, [Meyer's NT Commentary]; “not mentioned in the Old Testament or by Josephus.”, [Pulpit Commentary]; and is “mentioned neither in the Old Testament nor in Josephus, was probably so called from its insignificance”, [Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary].
Furthermore, we must accept that Pontius Pilate, in rare agreement with the Jewish leaders, focuses upon an obscure aspect of Jesus, his barely known hometown, together with the important, for legal purposes, charge of treason, that is, Jesus presenting himself as the King of the Jews when there is a Roman supported King of the Jews in Herod [Luke 23:7-8,11-12].
And Pilate wrote a title... JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS. John 19:19
And set up over his head... THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS. Matthew 26:37
And a superscription also was written over him... THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS. Luke 23:38
And the superscription of his accusation was written over, THE KING OF THE JEWS. Mark 15:26
The crowds at the crucifixion would readily understand the connection between Jesus proclaiming himself the “King of the Jews” and his subsequent execution by the Romans. However, there would be no relationship or importance with portraying Jesus as being from Nazareth and his punishment.
As the fourth Gospel is the only description of Ἰησοῦς ὁ Ναζωραῖος, we note that the KJV translation is not consistent between ὁ Ναζωραῖος, “of Nazareth”, and ὁ βασιλεὺς, “the King”. Of course, “Jesus of Nazareth of the King of the Jews” is nonsensical, while “Jesus the Nazarene the King of the Jews” is understandable. The wording of “the Nazarene” could be interpreted as being from a city or it could be interpreted as being a member of in a sect of “Nazarenes” who are zealots toward the Law. The latter opinion is against the learned opinions of Bengel and Ellicott. The only ancient occurrence of Nazareth as a city is found on twelve occasions in the New Testament, not in either the Old Testament or in Josephus.
The significance of Josephus regarding the preparations and progress of the Jewish war cannot be overstated, as he was in charge of the defenses of Galilee during the initial confrontations with the Romans and he mentions multiple cities and towns, but not Nazareth. Caution must be employed when relying upon Josephus, as he is a biased historian who abandoned his obligations to his countrymen and assisted the Roman General Titus during the campaign against Jerusalem and, after the war, become a Flavian.
Only the Beloved Disciple records Ἰησοῦς ὁ Ναζωραῖος on the title and this may detail may be explained by the fact that he was the only disciple at the cross [John 19:26]. In the resurrection account, the Beloved Disciple reaches Jesus’ tomb first, but does not enter [John 20:4-5]. Only after Simon Peter enters the tomb does the Beloved Disciple follow [John 20:8]. This episode seems strange, as the reader would expect the Beloved Disciple to enter the tomb as soon as he reached it. However, individuals who are under a Nazarite vow cannot be under the same roof as a corpse [Numbers 6:6]. It is possible that the Beloved Disciple was a priest, as they, too, are to avoid corpses [Leviticus 21:1]. After Jesus’ arrest, he was followed by another disciple who was known by the High Priest and went into the High Priest’s palace [John 18:15]. Therefore, a reasonable conclusion is that either the Beloved Disciple had taken a Nazarite vow or he was a member of the priesthood.
As the fourth Gospel is the only description of Ἰησοῦς ὁ Ναζωραῖος, we note that the KJV translation is not consistent between ὁ Ναζωραῖος, “of Nazareth”, and ὁ βασιλεὺς, “the King”. Of course, “Jesus of Nazareth of the King of the Jews” is nonsensical, while “Jesus the Nazarene the King of the Jews” is understandable. The wording of “the Nazarene” could be interpreted as being from a city or it could be interpreted as being a member of in a sect of “Nazarenes” who are zealots toward the Law. The latter opinion is against the learned opinions of Bengel and Ellicott. The only ancient occurrence of Nazareth as a city is found on twelve occasions in the New Testament, not in either the Old Testament or in Josephus.
The significance of Josephus regarding the preparations and progress of the Jewish war cannot be overstated, as he was in charge of the defenses of Galilee during the initial confrontations with the Romans and he mentions multiple cities and towns, but not Nazareth. Caution must be employed when relying upon Josephus, as he is a biased historian who abandoned his obligations to his countrymen and assisted the Roman General Titus during the campaign against Jerusalem and, after the war, become a Flavian.
Only the Beloved Disciple records Ἰησοῦς ὁ Ναζωραῖος on the title and this may detail may be explained by the fact that he was the only disciple at the cross [John 19:26]. In the resurrection account, the Beloved Disciple reaches Jesus’ tomb first, but does not enter [John 20:4-5]. Only after Simon Peter enters the tomb does the Beloved Disciple follow [John 20:8]. This episode seems strange, as the reader would expect the Beloved Disciple to enter the tomb as soon as he reached it. However, individuals who are under a Nazarite vow cannot be under the same roof as a corpse [Numbers 6:6]. It is possible that the Beloved Disciple was a priest, as they, too, are to avoid corpses [Leviticus 21:1]. After Jesus’ arrest, he was followed by another disciple who was known by the High Priest and went into the High Priest’s palace [John 18:15]. Therefore, a reasonable conclusion is that either the Beloved Disciple had taken a Nazarite vow or he was a member of the priesthood.
[Nicodemus to the Pharisees], “Doth our law judge any man, before it hear him and know what he doeth?” They answered and said unto him, “Art thou also of Galilee? Search and look, for out of Galilee ariseth no prophet.” John 7:50-52
G3480 proper masculine noun Ναζωραῖος derived from G3478
15 Total Occurrences
Ναζωραῖον — 3 occurrences; Accusative Singular Masculine
15 Total Occurrences
Ναζωραῖον — 3 occurrences; Accusative Singular Masculine
Ἰησοῦν τὸν Ναζωραῖον Jesus of Nazareth John 18:5
Ἰησοῦν τὸν Ναζωραῖον Jesus of Nazareth John 18:7
Ἰησοῦν τὸν Ναζωραῖον Jesus of Nazareth Acts 2:22
Ἰησοῦν τὸν Ναζωραῖον Jesus of Nazareth John 18:7
Ἰησοῦν τὸν Ναζωραῖον Jesus of Nazareth Acts 2:22
Ναζωραίου — 5 occurrences; Genitive Singular Masculine
Ἰησοῦ τοῦ Ναζωραίου Jesus of Nazareth Matthew 26:71
Ἰησοῦ τοῦ Ναζωραίου Jesus of Nazareth Luke 24:19
Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ Ναζωραίου Jesus Christ of Nazareth Acts 3:6
Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ Ναζωραίου Jesus Christ of Nazareth Acts 4:10
Ἰησοῦ τοῦ Ναζωραίου Jesus of Nazareth Acts 26:9
Ἰησοῦ τοῦ Ναζωραίου Jesus of Nazareth Luke 24:19
Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ Ναζωραίου Jesus Christ of Nazareth Acts 3:6
Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ Ναζωραίου Jesus Christ of Nazareth Acts 4:10
Ἰησοῦ τοῦ Ναζωραίου Jesus of Nazareth Acts 26:9
Ναζωραίων — 1 occurrence; Genitive Plural Masculine
τῶν Ναζωραίων of the Nazarenes Acts 24:5
Ναζωραῖος — 6 occurrences; Nominative Singular Masculine
Ναζωραῖος κληθήσεται He shall be called a Nazarene. Matthew 2:23
Ἰησοῦς ὁ Ναζωραῖος Jesus of Nazareth Mark 10:47
Ἰησοῦς ὁ Ναζωραῖος Jesus of Nazareth Luke 18:37
Ἰησοῦς ὁ Ναζωραῖος Jesus of Nazareth John 19:19
Ἰησοῦς ὁ Ναζωραῖος Jesus of Nazareth Acts 6:14
Ἰησοῦς ὁ Ναζωραῖος Jesus of Nazareth Acts 22:8
Ἰησοῦς ὁ Ναζωραῖος Jesus of Nazareth Mark 10:47
Ἰησοῦς ὁ Ναζωραῖος Jesus of Nazareth Luke 18:37
Ἰησοῦς ὁ Ναζωραῖος Jesus of Nazareth John 19:19
Ἰησοῦς ὁ Ναζωραῖος Jesus of Nazareth Acts 6:14
Ἰησοῦς ὁ Ναζωραῖος Jesus of Nazareth Acts 22:8
G3479 adjective Ναζαρηνός derived from G3478
4 Total Occurrences
4 Total Occurrences
Ναζαρηνοῦ — 1 occurrence; Genitive Singular Masculine
τοῦ Ναζαρηνοῦ Ἰησοῦ Jesus of Nazareth. Mark 14:67
Ναζαρηνὸν — 1 occurrence; Accusative Singular Masculine
Ἰησοῦν ζητεῖτε τὸν Ναζαρηνὸν Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth Mark 16:6
Ἰησοῦ Ναζαρηνέ Jesus of Nazareth Mark 1:24
Ἰησοῦ Ναζαρηνέ Jesus of Nazareth Luke 4:34
Ἰησοῦ Ναζαρηνέ Jesus of Nazareth Luke 4:34
G3478 proper locative noun Ναζαρά
12 Total Occurrences
Ναζαρὲτ— 12 occurrences; Indeclinable Proper Noun
Sometimes [found as a variant and] spelled as Ναζαρέτ
12 Total Occurrences
Ναζαρὲτ— 12 occurrences; Indeclinable Proper Noun
Sometimes [found as a variant and] spelled as Ναζαρέτ
πόλιν λεγομένην Ναζαρέτ a city called Nazareth Matthew 2:23
καὶ καταλιπὼν τὴν Ναζαρὲτ And leaving Nazareth Matthew 4:13
Ἰησοῦς ὁ προφήτης ὁ ἀπὸ Ναζαρὲτ Jesus the prophet of Nazareth Matthew 21:11
ἦλθεν Ἰησοῦς ἀπὸ Ναζαρὲτ Jesus came from Nazareth Mark 1:9
πόλιν τῆς Γαλιλαίας ᾗ ὄνομα Ναζαρὲτ a city of Galilee, named Nazareth Luke 1:26
ἐκ πόλεως Ναζαρὲτ out of the city of Nazareth Luke 2:4
πόλιν αὑτῶν Ναζαρέτ their city of Nazareth Luke 2:39
ἦλθεν εἰς Ναζαρέτ came to Nazareth Luke 2:51
εἰς τὴν Ναζαρέτ to Nazareth Luke 4:16
Ἰησοῦν τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ Ἰωσὴφ τὸν ἀπὸ Ναζαρέτ Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph. John 1:45
Ἐκ Ναζαρὲτ from Nazareth John 1:46
Ἰησοῦν τὸν ἀπὸ Ναζαρέτ Jesus of Nazareth Acts 10:38
All explicit mentions that Nazareth is a city:
καὶ καταλιπὼν τὴν Ναζαρὲτ And leaving Nazareth Matthew 4:13
Ἰησοῦς ὁ προφήτης ὁ ἀπὸ Ναζαρὲτ Jesus the prophet of Nazareth Matthew 21:11
ἦλθεν Ἰησοῦς ἀπὸ Ναζαρὲτ Jesus came from Nazareth Mark 1:9
πόλιν τῆς Γαλιλαίας ᾗ ὄνομα Ναζαρὲτ a city of Galilee, named Nazareth Luke 1:26
ἐκ πόλεως Ναζαρὲτ out of the city of Nazareth Luke 2:4
πόλιν αὑτῶν Ναζαρέτ their city of Nazareth Luke 2:39
ἦλθεν εἰς Ναζαρέτ came to Nazareth Luke 2:51
εἰς τὴν Ναζαρέτ to Nazareth Luke 4:16
Ἰησοῦν τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ Ἰωσὴφ τὸν ἀπὸ Ναζαρέτ Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph. John 1:45
Ἐκ Ναζαρὲτ from Nazareth John 1:46
Ἰησοῦν τὸν ἀπὸ Ναζαρέτ Jesus of Nazareth Acts 10:38
All explicit mentions that Nazareth is a city:
And he [Joseph, v.19] came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth… Matthew 2:23
a city of Galilee, named Nazareth Luke 1:26 out of the city of Nazareth Luke 2:4 their city of Nazareth Luke 2:39 |
All mentions that suggest Nazareth is a city:
And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee...
Mark 1:9 And he went down with them and came to Nazareth... Luke 2:51 And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up… Luke 4:16 And Nathanael said unto him, “Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth?” John 1:46 |
The proper locative noun Ναζαρά never occurs in the New Testament, only the variant Ναζαρέτ is found. We are uncertain as to why Strong’s Concordance regards all twelve occurrences of Ναζαρὲτ in the New Testament as variants, as it would seem that this spelling would be the standard and Ναζαρά would be a variant, especially since the Gospels are products of the first century, that is, the first recordings of the town.
discussion
The Gentle Reader may reach several conclusions from the preceding inferences and determinations, however, there are two conclusions that are pertinent to our inquiry. Firstly, it is evident Saint Paul applies Old Testament passages out of context and, secondly, he relies upon the reader’s ignorance of the laws of Israel to successfully promote his views. The reason for Saint Paul’s failure to convert the Jewish population may be due more to their knowledge of their law and prophecies and less with their often depicted unreasonable obstinacy.
Of course, the allegations that Saint Paul was not truly as he presented himself must have existed during his lifetime, as he denies that he lies. We conclude that there must have been sufficient and sustained accusations and it is of interest that he was compelled to respond to these unnamed imputations, not once, but on three occasions, to widely separated audiences: the Romans, the Corinthians, the Galatians, and to Timothy.
Of course, the allegations that Saint Paul was not truly as he presented himself must have existed during his lifetime, as he denies that he lies. We conclude that there must have been sufficient and sustained accusations and it is of interest that he was compelled to respond to these unnamed imputations, not once, but on three occasions, to widely separated audiences: the Romans, the Corinthians, the Galatians, and to Timothy.
I say the truth in Christ, I lie G5574 not, my conscience also bearing me witness… Romans 9:1
The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ... knoweth that I lie G5574 not. 2 Corinthians 11:31
Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie G5574 not. Galatians 1:20
Whereunto I am ordained a preacher and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ and lie G5574 not)... 1 Timothy 2:7
The KJV translates Strong's G5574 pseudomai, a verb, as: lie (11), falsely (1).
Saint Paul declares to the Galatians that he does not lie to them in his letter, “the things which I write unto you”. This unexpectedly precise statement holds three unstated possibilities: [1] he misled them in speech; [2] he lied to other churches in his letters; [3] he misled other churches in person.
When writing to Timothy, Saint Paul writes that he is not lying and the unaware reader of the letter might conclude that Timothy is not familiar with Saint Paul, as he twice states, within a few verses, to Timothy that he is an Apostle [1 Timothy 1:1, 2:7]. We cannot explain why Saint Paul would emphasize his Apostleship to his long term acquaintance and fellow servant Timothy, unless, of course, there were sustained contentions that Saint Paul was not an Apostle, but that he only claimed to be an Apostle. The rhetoric may have become so pronounced that Saint Paul was obligated to write to Timothy, otherwise, the reader who is familiar with the New Testament is confronted with Saint Paul making an obvious statement.
Jesus’ complete statements from the three versions of his encounter with Saint Paul on the road to Damascus:
Saint Paul declares to the Galatians that he does not lie to them in his letter, “the things which I write unto you”. This unexpectedly precise statement holds three unstated possibilities: [1] he misled them in speech; [2] he lied to other churches in his letters; [3] he misled other churches in person.
When writing to Timothy, Saint Paul writes that he is not lying and the unaware reader of the letter might conclude that Timothy is not familiar with Saint Paul, as he twice states, within a few verses, to Timothy that he is an Apostle [1 Timothy 1:1, 2:7]. We cannot explain why Saint Paul would emphasize his Apostleship to his long term acquaintance and fellow servant Timothy, unless, of course, there were sustained contentions that Saint Paul was not an Apostle, but that he only claimed to be an Apostle. The rhetoric may have become so pronounced that Saint Paul was obligated to write to Timothy, otherwise, the reader who is familiar with the New Testament is confronted with Saint Paul making an obvious statement.
Jesus’ complete statements from the three versions of his encounter with Saint Paul on the road to Damascus:
I am Jesus whom thou persecutest. It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. Arise and go into the city and it shall be told thee what thou must do. Acts 9:5-6
I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom thou persecutest. Arise and go into Damascus and there it shall be told thee of all things which are appointed for thee to do. Acts 22:8, 10
I am Jesus whom thou persecutest. but rise and stand upon thy feet, for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee. Delivering thee from the people and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee. To open their eyes and to turn them from darkness to light and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.
Acts 26:15-18
In the first and second version of the encounter, Saint Paul will be told what do after reaching Damascus, however, by the third account, the mandate from Christ is extensive and includes converting the Gentiles “from the power of Satan unto God” and, for those who have “faith that is in me”, sanctification is offered. It seems that Saint Paul is unaware that Satan does God’s bidding, as he presents Satan being antagonistic to God, “from darkness to light” [Job 1:12, 2:6]. While there is universal agreement that “Satan” means “accuser”, no consensus exists as to whether Satan accuses man or accuses God.
In the third version of the vision present to King Agrippa, Jesus expressly sends Saint Paul to the Gentiles, however, earlier in Acts 13:46, after multiple challenges of attempting to convert the Jewish population, Saint Paul decides to turn to the Gentiles. Of course, even in the extended third account to King Agrippa, Saint Paul is not made an Apostle by Jesus, but only a minister, that is, “an under-oarsman, i.e. (generally) subordinate (assistant, sexton, constable)”.
In Galatians 2:13, Saint Paul writes that Barnabas was influenced by the doers of the law; as “the other Jews dissembled likewise with him, insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.” Barnabas accompanied Saint Paul throughout the book of Acts, yet Saint Paul wants the reader to accept that after extensive time engaged in evangelizing the Gentiles that Barnabas did not understand Saint Paul’s teachings and, under influence from the Jewish faction, Barnabas conformed to their expectations. As Barnabas was appointed by the Apostles, one could successfully argue that his Apostolic succession was never in doubt, unlike Saint Paul’s Apostolic claim, [Acts 4:36].
In the third version of the vision present to King Agrippa, Jesus expressly sends Saint Paul to the Gentiles, however, earlier in Acts 13:46, after multiple challenges of attempting to convert the Jewish population, Saint Paul decides to turn to the Gentiles. Of course, even in the extended third account to King Agrippa, Saint Paul is not made an Apostle by Jesus, but only a minister, that is, “an under-oarsman, i.e. (generally) subordinate (assistant, sexton, constable)”.
In Galatians 2:13, Saint Paul writes that Barnabas was influenced by the doers of the law; as “the other Jews dissembled likewise with him, insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.” Barnabas accompanied Saint Paul throughout the book of Acts, yet Saint Paul wants the reader to accept that after extensive time engaged in evangelizing the Gentiles that Barnabas did not understand Saint Paul’s teachings and, under influence from the Jewish faction, Barnabas conformed to their expectations. As Barnabas was appointed by the Apostles, one could successfully argue that his Apostolic succession was never in doubt, unlike Saint Paul’s Apostolic claim, [Acts 4:36].
Saint Paul delivers Hymenaeus and Alexander to Satan. 1 Timothy 1:20
Demas forsakes Saint Paul, while Crescens goes to Galatia and Titus travels to Dalmatia. Titus and Crescens are not described as forsaking Saint Paul. 2 Timothy 4:10 The coppersmith Alexander did much (unenumerated) evil to Saint Paul. 2 Timothy 4:14 Hymenaeus and Philetus disregard at least one aspect of Saint Paul’s theology, as they “subvert” the faith of some by teaching the heresy or opinion that the resurrection is past. 2 Timothy 2:17 According to Saint Paul, he sends Tychius to Ephesus. 2 Timothy 4:12 Only Luke remains with Saint Paul. 2 Timothy 4:11 |
In the second letter of Timothy, Saint Paul does not write that either his self absorbed behavior or his disregard for others has alienated his associates, but the listing of names, some with specific grievances, who are no longer with him can be interpreted as the final remarks of a bitter man condemned to death who, in the vernacular, is “getting the last word in” [2 Timothy 4:6-7]. One wonders how “much evil” the coppersmith Alexander could inflict, when compared to the power of a political magistrate or a religious authority, upon Saint Paul. Demasas, Crescens, Titus, and Tychius are elsewhere and only Luke, the author of Acts, has stayed with him.
Hymenaeus and Philetus ignore Saint Paul’s teaching on the resurrection and, while it is possible that Christ has appeared to them, as he appeared to Saint Paul, revealing that the resurrection is past, we cannot expect this speculative encounter to be recorded by Saint Paul. Of course, Saint Paul has preempted further divine revelations: “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. … If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed” [Galatians 1:8-9].
Not only does Saint Paul presents himself under various titles in his letters, he teaches different ideas to the seven churches. Due to these conflicting teachings to distinct audiences, it can be readily understood how he could be accused of being a liar when, in fact, he changes his message according to the reader’s ability and alters his teaching according to the circumstances.
Hymenaeus and Philetus ignore Saint Paul’s teaching on the resurrection and, while it is possible that Christ has appeared to them, as he appeared to Saint Paul, revealing that the resurrection is past, we cannot expect this speculative encounter to be recorded by Saint Paul. Of course, Saint Paul has preempted further divine revelations: “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. … If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed” [Galatians 1:8-9].
Not only does Saint Paul presents himself under various titles in his letters, he teaches different ideas to the seven churches. Due to these conflicting teachings to distinct audiences, it can be readily understood how he could be accused of being a liar when, in fact, he changes his message according to the reader’s ability and alters his teaching according to the circumstances.
“a servant of Jesus Christ, called [to be] an apostle”, Romans
δοῦλος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ κλητὸς ἀπόστολος
-words in brackets are not in the Greek.
There is a significant difference between being “called an apostle” and “called to be an apostle.”
“called [to be] an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God”, 1 Corinthians;
κλητὸς ἀπόστολος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διὰ θελήματος θεοῦ
-words in brackets are not in the Greek.
“an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God”, 2 Corinthians
ἀπόστολος διὰ θελήματος θεοῦ
“an apostle…by Jesus Christ”, Galatians
ἀπόστολος… διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ
“an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God”, Ephesians
Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διὰ θελήματος θεοῦ
“the servants of Jesus Christ”, Philippians
δοῦλοι Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ
“an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God”, Colossians
Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διὰ θελήματος θεοῦ
no identifying characteristics, 1 Thessalonians
no identifying characteristics, 2 Thessalonians
“an apostle of Jesus Christ”, 1 Timothy
ἀπόστολος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ
“an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God”, 2 Timothy
ἀπόστολος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διὰ θελήματος θεοῦ
“a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ”, Titus
δοῦλος θεοῦ ἀπόστολος δὲ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ
“a prisoner of Jesus Christ”, Philemon
δέσμιος Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ
δοῦλος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ κλητὸς ἀπόστολος
-words in brackets are not in the Greek.
There is a significant difference between being “called an apostle” and “called to be an apostle.”
“called [to be] an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God”, 1 Corinthians;
κλητὸς ἀπόστολος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διὰ θελήματος θεοῦ
-words in brackets are not in the Greek.
“an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God”, 2 Corinthians
ἀπόστολος διὰ θελήματος θεοῦ
“an apostle…by Jesus Christ”, Galatians
ἀπόστολος… διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ
“an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God”, Ephesians
Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διὰ θελήματος θεοῦ
“the servants of Jesus Christ”, Philippians
δοῦλοι Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ
“an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God”, Colossians
Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διὰ θελήματος θεοῦ
no identifying characteristics, 1 Thessalonians
no identifying characteristics, 2 Thessalonians
“an apostle of Jesus Christ”, 1 Timothy
ἀπόστολος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ
“an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God”, 2 Timothy
ἀπόστολος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διὰ θελήματος θεοῦ
“a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ”, Titus
δοῦλος θεοῦ ἀπόστολος δὲ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ
“a prisoner of Jesus Christ”, Philemon
δέσμιος Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ
From the introductions of the letters alone, without regard to their divergent content, it is evident that Saint Paul did not foresee that his letters sent to far flung churches would, in the fullness of time, be collated, considered inerrant, and receive endless commentaries.
Of course, it is beyond the scope of this essay to enumerate the various contradictions among the seven intended audiences of Saint Paul’s letters, that is, the Corinthians [15,508 total words], the Romans [9,462 words], the Galatians [3,084 words], the Ephesians [3,022 words], the Thessalonians [2,859 total words], the Philippians [2,183 words], and the Colossians [1,979 words].
Of course, it is beyond the scope of this essay to enumerate the various contradictions among the seven intended audiences of Saint Paul’s letters, that is, the Corinthians [15,508 total words], the Romans [9,462 words], the Galatians [3,084 words], the Ephesians [3,022 words], the Thessalonians [2,859 total words], the Philippians [2,183 words], and the Colossians [1,979 words].
conclusion
In conclusion, the taking of words or phrases out of their context by Saint Paul does not disqualify him from either being a prophet, an inspired teacher, or being a proponent of the Gospel, a proclaimer of the will of God.
Even in the unlikely scenario that Saint Paul does not understand the mission of Christ and completely misrepresents Christ in all of his epistles, the Gentle Reader can find comfort in knowing that the basis of the Gospel does not rely upon the Bible, but upon the Church, as both the Good News and the Church existed before the creation of the Bible, otherwise said, no Biblical character had a Bible.
Even in the unlikely scenario that Saint Paul does not understand the mission of Christ and completely misrepresents Christ in all of his epistles, the Gentle Reader can find comfort in knowing that the basis of the Gospel does not rely upon the Bible, but upon the Church, as both the Good News and the Church existed before the creation of the Bible, otherwise said, no Biblical character had a Bible.
The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached. And because of this I rejoice. New International Version
Whether their motives are false or genuine, the message about Christ is being preached either way, so I rejoice. New Living Translation Only that in every way, whether in pretext or in truth, Christ is proclaimed. And in this I rejoice. Berean Literal Bible So long as in every way, whether in pretense [for self-promotion] or in all honesty [to spread the truth], Christ is being preached; and in this I rejoice. Amplified Bible, [brackets in the original] Just that in every way, whether out of false motives or true, Christ is proclaimed. And in this I rejoice. Holman Christian Standard Bible All that matters is that people are telling about Christ, whether they are sincere or not. This is what makes me glad. Contemporary English Version Dum omni modo sive per occasionem sive per veritatem Christus annuntietur et in hoc gaudeo Vulgate Bible πλὴν παντὶ τρόπῳ εἴτε προφάσει εἴτε ἀληθείᾳ Χριστὸς καταγγέλλεται καὶ ἐν τούτῳ χαίρω Textus Receptus |
By presenting his Gospel upon a rhetorical foundation consisting of unexplained allegories supporting questionable exegeses to an unsuspecting audience, all the while appearing in a plastic guise, Saint Paul remains in character, for
“I am all things to all men that I might, by all means, save some.”
A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.
James 1:8
A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.
James 1:8