PARABLES

Then what does the KJV refer to when it says "corn" or "brass"?

 

The please explain this verse: Simon, [son] of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee.

 

Nobody said otherwise. British English and American English are both examples of Modern English. And the English of the KJV is Modern English.

Nobody said it was.

 

Then what does the KJV refer to when it says "corn" or "brass"? </font>[/QUOTE]Be more specific, man, context always gives the right answer.

 

Good, then we're in agreement. There's nothing biblically wrong with a person using the NIV.

 

The please explain this verse: Simon, [son] of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. </font>[/QUOTE]Be specific. Do you want the contextual meaning of the word "lovest"? Or are you after a full exposition on why Peter was grieved that the Lord asked him a third time?

Fully mature love for Chrsit is exemplified by the holder of that love to be in total regard of the one loved, completely excluding oneself in the matter/ love for Christ:
Mark 12:30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.

Luke 10:27 And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.

Mark said it according to John 21:17, Luke included the love for one's neighbor as hinging directly on the love one has for Christ.

One cannot love his neighbor in the same manner as he loves Christ. Though his neighbor may go as far to die for him, that neighbor's blood will never wash him from his sin, so the level of sacrifice could never merit the same love.

Now on the part of the grieving of Peter?

Peter knew why he was so overly zealous at this point and it grieved him, because he knew Christ deserved all the pre-eminence. Peter's zeal was actually sin, though his desire was to please Jesus, his zeal was for self acclaim.

Peter affirmed this by saying again, Lord,thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee.

Jesus was telling Peter that his love needed maturing, indicated by the feeding of the lambs, then progressing to the feeding of sheep, then perfected by realization of He Who gets the glory for it and deserving of that level and sort of love.

Thanks for reminding me to look at the passage again with consideration. All within my King James Bible. God gave me another thought to maybe preach a message on this soon.

 

You really are missing out on the richness of Scripture here, as well as understanding the nuances between the "love's" used with Peter and Christ. I wonder what else those who refuse to look at the Greek are missing.

For more information: http://www.kingschapel.org/Love.htm

 

Amen, Granny!

 

"Most scholars teach the two different Greek words agape and phileo, mean two different things, or at the very least, two different types of love (such as, I love my wife and I love pizza). However, this does not bear itself out in the Greek New Testament. The simple fact is that these two words are used interchangeably, both meaning love. If phileo means friendship and not godly love, then why does Christ use it in Revelation 3:19? "As many as I love, I rebuke."

Read John 20:2. Is it agape or phileo? How about John 16:27? Is this agape or phileo? How about John 5:20 or 11:3,36? Reading the context of these passages and being told that agape means godly love one might think this is the Greek word used in these passages. However, the word phileo is used in all. Both words mean love and are used interchangeably."

 

You really are missing out on the richness of Scripture here, as well as understanding the nuances between the "love's" used with Peter and Christ. I wonder what else those who refuse to look at the Greek are missing.

For more information: http://www.kingschapel.org/Love.htm </font>[/QUOTE]Don't jump so fast, man, I asked if you wanted a full exposition and now you come back with this junk?

Ain't it funny you throw off on the KJB and then relate what the Greek says in English that is found in the definition of "love" in the first place.

Why does anyone need to go to the Greek to find what the English already says? That's like going from New York to Pittsburg , but first going to S.California to get there.

You know, "agape" and "phileo" are found in the English definiton? Hmmm?

 

Junk? Did you even read it?

Because there are two SPECIFIC meanings for each of the love. Why not find out which of the specific definitions God chose to use through the authors of the Bible?

You really can't believe this, can you? The English was translated FROM the Greek, not vice versa. How do we know if any translation is accurate unless we examine the original language? Seriously, this is one of the most asinine statememts I've seen on this board, and there are some characters here. I hope others see this and render the same verdict.

Agape and Phileo are mentioned in Webster's? Please cite.

 

O.K. man what part of Greece is Florida in now?

Oh! I get it, you speak English, then study Greek to tell us what the Greek says in English? The train is beginning to slow down now, so fast! get ahold of it!

Webster's 1828:

LOVE, v.t. luv. [L. libeo, lubeo. See Lief. The sense is probably to be prompt, free, willing, from leaning, advancing, or drawing forward.]

1. In a general sense to be pleased with; to regard with affection, on account of some qualities which excite pleasing sensations or desire of gratification. We love a friend, on account of some qualities which give us pleasure in his society. We love a man who has done us a favor; in which case, gratitude enters into the composition of our affection. We love our parents and our children, on account of their connection with us, and on account of many qualities which please us. We love to retire to a cool shade in summer. We love a warm room in winter. we love to hear an eloquent advocate. The christian loves his Bible. In short, we love whatever gives us pleasure and delight, whether animal or intellectual; and if our hearts are right, we love God above all things, as the sum of all excellence and all the attributes which can communicate happiness to intelligent beings. In other words, the christian loves God with the love of complacency in his attributes, the love of benevolence towards the interest of his kingdom, and the love of gratitude for favors received.

Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind -

Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. Matt. 22.

2. To have benevolence or good will for. John 3.

LOVE, n.

1. An affection of the mind excited by beauty and worth of any kind, or by the qualities of an object which communicate pleasure, sensual or intellectual. It is opposed to hatred. Love between the sexes, is a compound affection, consisting of esteem, benevolence, and animal desire. Love is excited by pleasing qualities of any kind, as by kindness, benevolence, charity, and by the qualities which render social intercourse agreeable. In the latter case, love is ardent friendship, or a strong attachment springing from good will and esteem, and the pleasure derived from the company, civilities and kindness of others.

Between certain natural relatives, love seems to be in some cases instinctive. Such is the love of a mother for her child, which manifests itself toward an infant, before any particular qualities in the child are unfolded. This affection is apparently as strong in irrational animals as in human beings.

We speak of the love of amusements, the love of books, the love of money, and the love of whatever contributes to our pleasure or supposed profit.

The love of God is the first duty of man, and this springs from just views of his attributes or excellencies of character, which afford the highest delight to the sanctified heart. Esteem and reverence constitute ingredients in this affection, and a fear of offending him is its inseparable effect.

2. Courtship; chiefly in the phrase, to make love, that is, to court; to woo; to solicit union in marriage.

3. Patriotism; the attachment one has to his native land; as the love of country.

4. Benevolence; good will.

God is love. 1John 4.

5. The object beloved.

The lover and the love of human kind.

6. A word of endearment.

Trust me, love.

7. Picturesque representation of love.

Such was his form as painters, when they show their utmost art, on naked loves bestow.

8. Lewdness.

He is not lolling on a lewd love-bed.

9. A thin silk stuff. Obs.

Love in idleness, a kind of violet.

Free of love, a plant of the genus Cercis.

Did'ja see it? May not be spelled "agape" or "phileo" but it's there!

Hint: English can define Koine Greek, but Koine Greek doesn't define English.

You guys have stumbled over this fact for at least, say, 130 years.

 

I know Greek, Latin, Hebrew, and English, so it's not just English that I know. It is definitely worthwhile to learn the Greek language, especially if you wish to be learned about the New Testament. There are nuances found in the Greek that are very difficult to explain in English, and are often unable to be translated smoothly in our language, as any language is.

So agape nor phileo doesn't appear, so you weren't being completely honest in your statement: "You know, "agape" and "phileo" are found in the English definiton?"

In fact, I didn't see the definition delineate between godly love and brotherly love. Then you have other types of love found in the Greek such as sturge.

Koine Greek defines itself. English provides translations, but not definitions.

How long have you held the position that the English is superior to the Greek? We haven't stumbled over anything - our position has been orthodox for twenty centuries.

Here's what is happening:

An ambassador is explaining to a Japanese delegate America's position on the trade industry. The translator does the best job that he can in making the translation but makes some specific words abstract. At this point, does the translator's Japanese become Truth, or would you rather trust what the ambassador originally said, if you were trying to uncover what was ACTUALLY said?

I would hope that all of us, even you, would select the English (original) version.

 

0157 bha ‘ahab aw-hab’ or bha ‘aheb aw-habe’

a primitive root; TWOT-29; v

AV-love 169, lover(s) 19, friend(s) 12, beloved 5, liketh 1, lovely 1, loving 1; 208

1) to love
1a) (Qal)
1a1) human love for another, includes family, and sexual
1a2) human appetite for objects such as food, drink, sleep, wisdom
1a3) human love for or to God
1a4) act of being a friend
1a4a) lover (participle)
1a4b) friend (participle)
1a5) God’s love toward man
1a5a) to individual men
1a5b) to people Israel
1a5c) to righteousness
1b) (Niphal)
1b1) lovely (participle)
1b2) loveable (participle)
1c) (Piel)
1c1) friends
1c2) lovers (fig. of adulterers)
2) to like

25 agapaw agapao ag-ap-ah’-o

perhaps from agan (much) [or cf 05689 bge]; TDNT-1:21,5; v

AV-love 135, beloved 7; 142

1) of persons
1a) to welcome, to entertain, to be fond of, to love dearly
2) of things
2a) to be well pleased, to be contented at or with a thing
5719 Tense-Present 5774 Tense-Present

The present tense represents a simple statement of fact
or reality viewed as occurring in actual time. In most cases
this corresponds directly with the English present tense.

Some phrases which might be rendered as past tense in English
will often occur in the present tense in Greek. These are
termed "historical presents," and such occurrences dramatize
the event described as if the reader were there watching the
event occur. Some English translations render such historical
presents in the English past tense, while others permit the
tense to remain in the present.
Voice-Active5784 Voice-Active

The active voice represents the subject as the doer or
performer of the action. e.g., in the sentence, "The
boy hit the ball," the boy performs the action.
Mood - Indicative 5791 Mood-Indicative

The indicative mood is a simple statement of fact. If an
action really occurs or has occurred or will occur, it will be
rendered in the indicative mood.
Count-3014

5368 filew phileo fil-eh’-o

from 5384; TDNT-9:114,1262; v

AV-love 22, kiss 3; 25

1) to love
1a) to approve of
1b) to like
1c) sanction
1d) to treat affectionately or kindly, to welcome, befriend
2) to show signs of love
2a) to kiss
3) to be fond of doing
3a) be wont, use to do

5719 Tense-Present
Voice-Active
Mood - Indicative

You didn't say which dictionary. I thought it improprer to post all resources in one post so as to not take up so much space. I have 4 more at the touch of a button.

Your arguement is fruitless and arrogantly obnoxious to those of us who know better. And geuss what, all in perfect harmony with the King James Bible, that can't be said about the multitudes of contradictory mv's though. I suppose that is what you come up with when you use corrupt mss/alexandrian.

 

It's no wonder you're so confused, much learning doth make thee mad.

 

Please tell me that you see a difference between two two. If you do not, then you're eyes are, indeed, closed. And, again, your original quote was, "You know, "agape" and "phileo" are found in the English definiton." You're hvaing to go back and change some things, as you've done before.

"Know better?" How can you if you refuse to understand the basic principles of translation? If you, indeed, believe that the English supercedes the Greek, then you should do that which you despise - learn something.

Yeah, you know how the Bible over and over again encourages us to remain in ignorance. It appears that you are actually frightened of learning - is that perhaps because you are afraid that you may learn something that would cause you to abandon your presuppositions?

 

Except that you got it wrong. The context is this:

First, Jesus asks Peter, Do you love me unconditionally (agape)? Peter replies, I love you like a brother (phileo).

Second, Jesus asks Peter agin, Do you love me unconditionally (agape)? Peter replies, I love you like a brother (phileo).

Third, Jesus asks Peter, do you love me like a brother (phileo)? Peter completely misses the point, and gets frustrated, and tells Jesus "You know everything. You know I love you like a brother (phileo). Peter completely missed the fact that Jesus met Peter at his level. Peter had not yet comprehended the ability to love Jesus unconditionally, as God loves us. Peter never, in this passage, came up to Jesus' level. it was Jesus who came down to Peter's level.

 

I wonder, were your teachers as arrogant and lift up in pride?

I enjoy learning, you despise my learning because it doesn't agree with your boast.

Your "tools' are the tools of a trade, but your master is not a builder, but the destroyer.

Good day, not Godspeed.

 

Except that you got it wrong. The context is this:

First, Jesus asks Peter, Do you love me unconditionally (agape)? Peter replies, I love you like a brother (phileo).

Second, Jesus asks Peter agin, Do you love me unconditionally (agape)? Peter replies, I love you like a brother (phileo).

Third, Jesus asks Peter, do you love me like a brother (phileo)? Peter completely misses the point, and gets frustrated, and tells Jesus "You know everything. You know I love you like a brother (phileo). Peter completely missed the fact that Jesus met Peter at his level. Peter had not yet comprehended the ability to love Jesus unconditionally, as God loves us. Peter never, in this passage, came up to Jesus' level. it was Jesus who came down to Peter's level. </font>[/QUOTE]No, sir, Jesus is no respecter of persons, neither is he one to prevent the poor and needy. You've applied some rather strange dialogue concerning this passage, all contrary to the harmony of the Gospels and the Truth according to the Word of God, and that by the Greek yall claim as the rule and thumb of Bible interpetation.

 

What is prideful? Asking you to learn something? Isn't that what pastors and teachers do?

It is not that I despise your learning. It is that you are not looking in any of the correct places. As John pointed out, knowing the Greek DIRECTLY affects our understanding of the passage. You choose to remain in ignorance, becaue you believe that the English supercedes the Greek. Your hermeneutics don't match up to orthodoxy.

That's a violation of one of the Baptist Board rules, but I'll let it pass. The tools that I use are the Greek and Hebrew languages. Those are the ones that God chose to write the Bible in, so I would be very careful to intimate that those tools are from Satan. It's a very egregrious thing to say something like that about the Maker of the universe.